I am reading the Master and COmmander series of books by Patrick O’Brian, presently on book #15.  Mr. O’Brian wrote in 19th century style.  In Book 14, "The Nutmeg of Consolation" I see in several passages he uses "shou’d" in the context of "should".  This is the first I’ve seen this word written like a contraction and thought perhaps its origins are from two words.  A search of the dictionaries I could find on the web found nothing but a Google search give numerous instances in  literature where the word is used in this manner.

During my search I found AGORA and felt this may be the place to ask my question.  Is shou’d dirived from a contraction of several words?

Keith

AHD:

shall
(click to hear the word) (shl)
aux.v. past tense should
(shd)

  1. Used before a verb in the infinitive to show:
        1. Something that will take place or exist in the future: We shall arrive tomorrow.
        2. Something, such as an order, promise, requirement, or obligation: You shall leave now. He shall answer for his misdeeds. The penalty shall not exceed two years in prison.
        3. The will to do something or have something take place: I shall go out if I feel like it.
        4. Something that is inevitable: That day shall come.
  2. Archaic
        1. To be able to.
        2. To have to; must.

[Middle English schal, from Old English sceal; see skel-2 in Indo-European roots.]

Sitran

Thank you for your replies, KatyBr and Sitran.

Do you think the apostrophe is there to form a contraction of two words or just to replace the "l".  If the latter, it doesn’t shorten the word at all: there’s not much difference between them as far was "work" is concerned.  As KatyBr said, if this were the case, one would think "shu’d" would (wou’d or wo’d?) better serve the purpose.

Was this a common way of writing the word in the 19th century?  I don’t recall ever seeing it this way before finding it in The Nutmeg of Consolation but then I’m not by any means a scholar of literature from that period.

Keith

Perhaps I shou’d have posted this in the Etymology group.  Would it be in order to repost there now that this discussion has already begun here?

Keith

I was thinking about this "shou’d" last night and I suspect it is part of system indicating a certain dialect.

Images of Cumbria

Sitran

Perhaps in the period this was set it was normal to pronounce the L in should. The apostrophe may indicate that the speaker dropped the L in his/her speech.

J.

Ne’er ye fear, we’re all more’n ‘appy t’ post ‘r tuppence worf…

-Tim