anachronism watch

[Laurence Horn]

I am trying out an audiobook of _A Death at Pemberley_, a recent sequel to _Pride and Prejudice_ by that redoubtable dean of English mystery writers P. D. James.  The book is set in 1803, five years after Darcy has wed Elizabeth Bennet, and the narrative is clearly intended to be very much in the style of Austen. It succeeds to some extent, but it's always interesting to pick up on and then confirm apparent anachronisms of usage or style.  One I just wondered about early on was the use of "in touch"; Elizabeth was explaining to Col. Fitzwilliam, Darcy's friend, that neither she nor Darcy had been "in touch with" George Wickham, Elizabeth's reprobate brother-in-law.  It appears from the entry in the OED that "in touch" meaning 'in communication' was not attested until the last decade or so of the 19th century and even then, to judge from the cites (at TOUCH 16d), in a more abstract sense of being in or out of touch with public opinion, popular feeling, or such, not used the w!
 ay Elizabeth uses it above.  I'm waiting to see if James employs what are clear instances of Janeisms:  "Did not you think so?", "an husband", "my father" (when speaking to one's sibling), and so on; so far, there's nothing in the new book that would be out of place in formal usage in our own century.

LH

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org