We often think of grammar as a fixed set of rules: periods go at the end of sentences, subjects must agree with verbs, and double negatives are a big no-no. But what if one of the greatest writers in the English language didn’t play by those rules? What if William Shakespeare—the Bard himself—broke more grammar rules than you ever have, and still managed to produce some of the most celebrated works in literary history?
The truth is, Shakespeare did bend, twist, and at times seemingly ignore the grammar conventions of his day. Yet he did so with such creativity and intention that his “rule-breaking” helped expand and enrich the English language. In this article, we’ll explore how Shakespeare challenged grammatical norms—and what that tells us about the flexibility, evolution, and artistry of English grammar.
Let’s time-travel to Elizabethan England and unpack how a grammar rebel helped shape modern English.
Grammar in Shakespeare’s Time: Not What You Think
Before accusing Shakespeare of breaking rules, it’s important to realize this: the rules weren’t all set yet.
In the late 1500s and early 1600s, English was a wild and evolving language. There were no formal grammar handbooks, no standardized spelling, and no dictionaries (the first comprehensive English dictionary was published in 1755 by Samuel Johnson—long after Shakespeare’s death).
This means:
- Writers often made up their own rules.
- Spellings varied from one region (or writer) to another.
- Word order and punctuation were far more flexible than today.
So when we say Shakespeare broke grammar rules, what we really mean is: he defied emerging conventions—and in doing so, shaped the ones that came after him.
Word Order Wizardry: Reversing the Norm
Today, English follows a relatively strict word order:
- Subject → Verb → Object
“The king loves his daughter.”
But Shakespeare frequently rearranged this structure for poetic effect or emphasis:
- “His daughter the king loves.”
- “Loves the king his daughter.”
These inversions weren’t just for fun—they allowed Shakespeare to:
- Fit lines into iambic pentameter (the poetic rhythm he often used).
- Emphasize particular words by placing them first or last.
- Maintain rhyme or dramatic effect.
In modern writing, such inversions would often be flagged as awkward or grammatically incorrect—but in Shakespeare’s world, they were a signature of stylistic genius.
Inventing Words and Morphology Mayhem
Shakespeare didn’t just bend grammar—he reshaped the language itself. He is credited with coining or popularizing over 1,700 words and phrases we still use today, such as:
- lonely
- bedroom
- majestic
- cold-blooded
- gossip
- swagger
How did he do it?
- By turning nouns into verbs:
“He out-herods Herod” (from Hamlet) - By adding prefixes and suffixes creatively:
“unsex me here” (from Macbeth)
Today, English teachers might correct a student who uses a noun as a verb (“Let me Google that”)—but Shakespeare did it centuries ago, and we now consider many of those innovations part of standard English.
Punctuation: Wild and Free
Shakespeare’s punctuation would drive today’s editors crazy. He used:
- Commas where we wouldn’t,
- Question marks and exclamations creatively,
- And inconsistent punctuation even within the same play.
But again, context matters. In the early modern period:
- Punctuation was used more to indicate pauses or rhythm in speech than to define sentence structure.
- The printing process was messy, and many punctuation choices were made by typesetters, not the authors themselves.
So if a modern reader sees a long, comma-filled sentence and thinks, “Shakespeare broke punctuation rules,” it’s more accurate to say that punctuation just wasn’t standardized—and was used for different purposes than today.
Subject-Verb Agreement (Or Lack Thereof)
One modern grammar rule is that verbs must agree in number with their subjects:
But in Shakespeare’s writing, you’ll sometimes see:
- “There is two of us.”
- “The sounds do greet me.” (even when “sounds” is treated as singular)
Why?
- Collective nouns were treated more loosely.
- Poetic meter often took precedence over strict agreement.
- The language was transitioning from older forms of English (like Middle English), so verb endings were more fluid.
In short, what looks like a mistake to us was likely a deliberate rhythmical or stylistic choice back then.
Double Negatives: Expressive, Not Wrong
Today, double negatives like “I don’t know nothing” are considered incorrect in standard English. But in Shakespeare’s time, double negatives were used for emphasis, not confusion.
Consider this line from Richard III:
- “I never was nor never will be.”
Here, the repetition of “never” intensifies the point—it’s an emphatic denial, not a logical contradiction.
This style survives today in some dialects and song lyrics:
- “I can’t get no satisfaction” — The Rolling Stones
- “Ain’t no sunshine when she’s gone” — Bill Withers
Shakespeare’s use of double negatives wasn’t a mistake—it was emotional amplification.
Gender-Bending Grammar
Shakespeare often switched gender roles and pronouns in clever and theatrical ways. In Twelfth Night, the character Viola disguises herself as a man, leading to complex pronoun use and identity confusion.
Modern grammar prizes consistency:
- He = him = his
- She = her = hers
But Shakespeare played with these to reflect character psychology, disguise, and dramatic irony.
This playful fluidity also shows that grammar—especially pronouns—is deeply connected to identity, something we’re seeing again in modern conversations around gender and language.
Ellipses, Fragments, and Sentence Breaks
In Shakespeare’s plays, characters often trail off mid-sentence or speak in fragments:
- “To be, or not to be…”
- “If it were done when ’tis done…”
- “O, that this too too solid flesh would melt…”
In a modern English class, sentence fragments are often marked incorrect. But in drama and dialogue, they’re essential for:
- Capturing natural speech
- Revealing character emotion or uncertainty
- Maintaining poetic rhythm
Shakespeare embraced these breaks to reflect real human thought—disordered, emotional, incomplete.
So… Did He Really “Break” the Rules?
Not exactly.
When we accuse Shakespeare of breaking grammar rules, we have to remember:
- Many rules we follow today didn’t exist then.
- His choices were often intentional, driven by art, rhythm, and meaning.
- His writing helped create and normalize many of the structures we now consider standard.
So rather than calling him a rule-breaker, it’s more accurate to say:
Shakespeare was a rule-maker in the making.
Modern Takeaways for Writers and Learners
So what can we learn from all this?
- Grammar is flexible. Understanding the rules is important—but so is knowing when and why to bend them.
- Creativity matters. Shakespeare didn’t fear experimentation. You shouldn’t either.
- Context is king. What’s correct in a formal essay might not be right for a poem, a play, or a tweet.
- Language evolves. Shakespeare’s “mistakes” helped build the grammar we learn today. The language you use today will shape the English of tomorrow.
Final Thoughts
Did Shakespeare break more grammar rules than you? Technically, yes. But that’s what made him Shakespeare.
His writing wasn’t about following grammar—it was about creating meaning, emotion, rhythm, and drama. And through that fearless creativity, he didn’t just change English literature—he changed the English language itself.
So the next time someone tells you there’s only one “right” way to use grammar, just smile and say:
“Well, Shakespeare did it differently.”
And that might just be the most powerful grammatical defense in history.