Quote:
Originally Posted by Carl Copeland
- “you wert thou”—The subject is “you,” so the verb should be “were,” regardless of period.
|
I dunno. "wert" is second person singular, so would have been used with "thou", and the point being made, I think, is that "thou" has become "you". You who I now call "you", I would have called "thou". So my take is that the N has substituted the modern "you" and kept the archaic verb, intentionally mixing modern and archaic for effect. For me, that works.
But, a different issue: should it be "wert" or "wast"?
Many online sources give "wert" as subjunctive and "wast" for the indicative. This seems to be the case for Shakespeare and the King James Bible (
which is usefully searchable by word), at least:
Thus Romeo says:
"Thou wast never with me for anything ..."
Ezequiel, King James Bible:
"Thou wast perfect in thy ways ..."
Whereas Falstaff, using the subjunctive, says
"I would thou wert a man's tailor ..."
ditto Job, King James Bible:
"If thou wert pure and upright ..."
So, maybe it should be "When you wast thou" rather than "wert"?
That said, no doubt exceptions to the above occurred at different times and in different regional dialects. Still, I guess that raises the question: Exactly when and where is the N wishing to have born? Or maybe that doesn't matter. Maybe any inaccuracies (assuming this even is one) are permissible on the grounds that they'd bear out the poem's conceit that he wasn't!
-Matt