> > It is very old, traceable to the early 1300's as in THE
> > ROMANCES OF SIR GUY OF WARWICK, "Thou liest amidward and
> > therefore have thou maugreth (shown ill will)."
[snip other interpretations]
> (Note "thou maugrest" seems more likely than "thou maugreth"; but the
> expression is in keeping with Chaucer's "maugre" meaning "despite".)
If it was a verb and if it was in the present tense, yeah. But there's
an auxiliary in there, "have," so if it's a verb, I'd expect it to be
a participle. Maybe it's more of a noun, like "a threatening position"
or "a display of ill will," perhaps.
Now, why the "have thou" is not "hast thou" I don't know, except that
Middle English verbs were not standardized and quite variable. Maybe
it's a sort of conditional, because of the "therefore." Some of our
participants may know.
"Malgre" (can't do accents on this machine) is still "in spite" in
French.

Signature
Best -- Donna Richoux
Mike Lyle - 31 Dec 2003 19:10 GMT
>
> > > It is very old, traceable to the early 1300's as in THE
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> an auxiliary in there, "have," so if it's a verb, I'd expect it to be
> a participle.
A good point: very bad reading on my part. I blame the varifocals, of
course.
> Maybe it's more of a noun, like "a threatening position"
> or "a display of ill will," perhaps.
You're right on the money: OED1 glosses *maugre* "a state of being
regarded with ill-will", and has a 1290 quotation of the very phrase:
"...þou haue maugre", preceded by a list of alternative spellings
including "maugreþ".
> Now, why the "have thou" is not "hast thou" I don't know, except that
> Middle English verbs were not standardized and quite variable.
I fancy the apparent discrepancies may often have involved subtlety
rather than non-standardization.
[...]
Mike.