Note 19 — WORDS.
Reading edition
Thou, in the Polite, and even in the Familiar Style, is disused, and the Plural You is employed instead of it: we say You have, not Thou hast. Tho’ in this case we apply You to a single Person, yet the Verb too must agree with it in the Plural Number: it must necessarily be You have, not You hast. You was, the Second Person Plural of the Pronoun placed in agreement with the First or Third Person Singular of the Verb, is an enormous Solecism: and yet Authors of the first rank have inadvertently fallen into it. “Knowing that you was my old master’s good friend.” Addison, Spect. No 517. “Would to God you was within her reach.” Lord Bolingbroke to Swift, Letter 46. “If you was here.” Ditto, Letter 47. “I am just now as well, as when you was here.” Pope to Swift, P. S. to Letter 56. On the contrary the Solemn Style admits not of You for a Single Person. This hath led Mr. Pope into a great impropriety in the beginning of his Messiah:
“O Thou my voice inspire Who touch’d Isaiah’s hallow’d lips with fire!”
The Solemnity of the Style would not admit of You for Thou in the Pronoun; nor the measure of the Verse touchedst, or didst touch, in the Verb; as it indispensably ought to be, in the one, or the other of these two forms: You who touched; or Thou who touchedst, or didst touch. Again:
“Just of thy word, in every thought sincere, Who knew no wish but what the world might hear.” Pope, Epitaph.
It ought to be your in the first line, or knewest in the second.