Chapter M (1)

~mad~: Used for “angry” by the careless or the indifferent. A colloquialism not in vogue among persons who use refined diction. _Mad_ may, however, be used correctly to designate a condition of overmastering emotion, intense excitement, or infatuation due to grief, terror, or jealousy; as _mad_ with grief; _mad_ with terror. Formerly used correctly as a synonym for “angry” it is now used only colloquially in this sense. _Mad_, in the present day, denotes a species of insanity.

~main guy~: A vulgar phrase derived from circus cant in which it designates the chief guy-rope as of a tent. It is commonly used to designate the manager of an establishment, or the person in charge of an undertaking.

~make~: Often used incorrectly for “earn.” Do not say “How much does he _make_ a week?” Say, rather, “How much does he _earn_ a week?”

~man~. Compare GENT.

~manifest~. Compare APPARENT.

~manner born, to the~: A phrase often incorrectly written _to the manor_ from a faulty knowledge of its meaning--familiar with something from birth, or born to the use or manner of the thing or subject referred to.

~marine~, ~maritime~, ~naval~, ~nautical~: There are distinctions among these words. _Marine_ and _maritime_, from the Latin _mare_, the sea, signify belonging to the sea; _naval_, from the Latin _navis_, a ship, signifies belonging to a ship; _nautical_ from the Latin _nauta_, a sailor, signifies belonging to a sailor or to the sailor’s pursuit, navigation. A _maritime_ nation must be well supplied with _marine_ stores, must have a large _naval_ force and be skilled in matters _nautical_.

~marry~: Now used correctly of both acceptance in marriage and union in matrimony: formerly condemned as incorrect.

~masses~: The _masses_, in the sense of the common people, the great body of the people, exclusive of the wealthy or privileged, has so entered into popular speech that the expression is now beyond criticism, although exception has been taken to it, on the ground that the subject of the mass should be specifically named. The _masses_ of what?

~matinee~ from the French _matin_, morning, is strictly a morning reception; and to talk of an “afternoon _matinée_” is therefore, if not a solecism, a contradiction in terms. Still nowadays the word is used to mean an _afternoon_ rather than a _morning_ reception, or entertainment.

~me~: “It is _I_,” never “It is _me_.” And so with all personal pronouns following the verb _to be_ and in apposition with its subject. The same form of error is constantly made in such phrases as “She is better looking than _me_,” where, if the elliptical verb were supplied, the correct construction would readily be seen to be “She is better looking than _I_ (am).”

~mean~: A word often erroneously used. Its generic meaning is “common” and therefrom it has been accepted as meaning “of humble origin, of low rank or quality, of inferior character or grade” and is used in England as a synonym for “miserly in expenditure, stingy.” In the United States it is commonly misused as a substitute for “ill-tempered; disagreeable.”

~mean~. Compare INTEND.

~means~: As _means_ or _some means_ covers “any means,” it is pleonastic to write “_by some means or another_.” For the same reason _some means or other_ may be condemned; its only excuse is that “other” refers not to “means” but qualifies the word “procedure” (understood). If this form of speech is desired, the correct utterance would be _one mean or another_.

~memoranda~ should never be used as a singular. It is the plural of _memorandum_ and the distinction should always be observed in speech or writing.

~me~ or ~my going~: Erroneous combinations sometimes used by persons careless with their diction. Do not say “Instead of _me_ (or _my_) _going_ to London I went to Bermuda”; say, rather, “Instead of going....” Here “me” and “my” are redundant.

~merely~: Sometimes misused for _simply_. _Merely_ implies no addition; _simply_, no admixture or complication; _e. g._, “The boys were there _merely_ as spectators; it is _simply_ incredible that they should have so disgraced themselves”; “It is _simply_ water.”

~midst~: The STANDARD DICTIONARY has the following: “In our, your, or their _midst_, in the _midst_ of us, you, or them: a form pronounced analogically irreproachable by Fitzedward Hall, in _Modern English_ p. 50, but objected to by some authorities.” Dr. William Mathews is one of these. In his work on “Words: their Use and Abuse,” he asks “Would any one say ‘In our middle?’... The possessive pronoun can properly be used only to indicate possession or appurtenance.”

~mighty~ used as a synonym for _very_, _exceedingly_, or _extraordinarily_ is colloquial but borders on the vulgar. “_Mighty_ fine,” “A _mighty_ shame,” “_Mighty_ doubtful” are phrases to be avoided.

~misspell~: Do not write this word _mispell_. Its component parts are _mis_ + _spell_, and it retains the double _s_.

~mistakable~: Although formerly correctly _mistakeable_ this word does not now retain the “e” after the “k”--an evidence of spelling reform along lines of least resistance due probably to phonology.

~mistaken~: Originally _mistake_ meant “to take amiss, misconceive, or misunderstand,” and on this account some persons claim that _you are mistaken_ means “you are misunderstood”; and that when this observation is made it expresses precisely the reverse of the meaning that the speaker desires to convey. According to them to tell a man he is _mistaken_, that is, misunderstood, is a very different thing from telling him that he mistakes or personally misunderstands.

The STANDARD DICTIONARY treating this word says: The anomalous use of _mistaken_ has naturally attracted the attention of speech-reformers; we ought to mean, “You are misapprehended or misunderstood,” they tell us, when we say “You are _mistaken_,” and if we mean “You are in error,” we ought to say so. But suppose the alleged misuse of _mistaken_ gives rise to no misunderstanding whatever--that everybody, high or low, throughout the English-speaking world, knows what is meant when one says “You are _mistaken_”--in that case, to let alone seems to be wisdom. The corruption, if it be one, has the sanction not only of universal employment, but of antiquity.

~mitten~: An obsolete substitute for glove now revived as a colloquialism in the phrase ~to get the mitten~, that is “to get the glove with the hand withdrawn: said of a rejected suitor for a lady’s hand.” An allied phrase is ~to give the mitten to~. None of these is used in polite society.

~moment~, ~minute~: These words are not exactly synonymous. A _moment_ is an infinitesimal part of time; as, “in a _moment_, in the twinkling of an eye” (I Cor. XV. 52). A _minute_ is the sixtieth part of an hour. One does not take a _minute_ to wink the eye.

~monetary~. Compare FINANCIAL.

~moneys~, not ~monies~, although often so (improperly) spelt. The rule is clear. Words ending in _y_ necessarily have as their penultimate letter either a vowel or a consonant. If a vowel the plural is formed by adding _s_; if a consonant by changing the _y_ into _ies_. Thus, _boy_, _boys_; _baby_, _babies_.

~money to burn~: A slang phrase used to denote possession of ample means.

~more~: Superlatives are often used, though improperly in a comparison of two. “He is the _more_ promising pupil of the two”--not _most_. Certain scrupulously careful writers, as Augustine Birrell, will even write “the _more_ part,” instead of the customary “the _most_ part”; and this usage, though possibly pedantic, is in other respects to be commended.

~more strictly correct~: A pleonasm. A correct statement may for the sake of emphasis be qualified as _strictly correct_. If “more strictly correct” is good grammar then “most strictly correct” would be also. Both sentences are erroneous.

~more than probable~: That which is _probable_ is likely to happen, but that which is _more than probable_ is almost sure to happen. To object to “more than probable,” as some persons do, one would have to show that “probable” was absolute and incapable of degrees of comparison, whence of course it is a matter of common observation that some things are highly probable, while others are barely so. That a lover of truth will speak the truth is highly probable, whereas that a confirmed liar will do so is so little probable that the probabilities are on the other side.

~’most~: Often used colloquially but incorrectly for “almost”; an inexcusable and unwarranted abbreviation. Do not say “my work is _most_ done”; say rather, “... is _almost_ done.” _Most_ is used occasionally and correctly for “very”--a use that some writers condemn as incorrect but which is sanctioned by literary usage. Shakespeare says: “So, Sir, heartily well met, and _most_ glad of your company.”--_Coriolanus_, iv. 3.

~most~ is well used as a superlative. _Most_ perfect, thorough, intense, complete, extraordinary, are in common use and have the support of literary usage.

Frederic Johnston says: “Concerning the phrase ‘most perfect’ some question might be raised. ‘Perfect’ means, literally, ‘made through, to the end,’ ‘utterly finished,’ therefore, of supreme excellence. In that case, ‘more’ and ‘most’ perfect are meaningless. We are to remember, however, that the literal is not always the true meaning of a word. Thus ‘melancholy’ does not mean full of ‘black bile,’ but ‘gloomy’ for any reason. Moreover, it has of late been pointed out by the best authorities that the true sense of a word is not what it _ought_ to mean, but what it _does_ mean, in the mouths and ears of the upper half of the people. And there can be little doubt that ‘perfect,’ in this case, merely expresses great rather than supreme excellence. We may even say, further, that the word in its original sense could not be used without a qualifying word (as ‘nearly perfect’ for example) in a world in which nothing is utterly free from defect. To go about saying that things are ‘nearly perfect’ would be gross pedantry.”

* * * * *

For the sanction of literary usage see the quotations:

“It would be strange, doubtless, to call this the best of Burns’s
writings: we mean to say, only, that it seems to us the _most
perfect_ of its kind as a piece of poetical composition strictly so
called.”--CARLYLE, _Essay on Burns_, referring to his poem “The Jolly
Beggars.”

“Our battle is more full of names than yours,
Our men _more perfect_ in the use of arms.”
--SHAKESPEARE, _2 Hen. IV_. iv. 1.

“_Most perfect_ goodness.”--_Cymbeline_ i. 7.

~mought~: Although recorded by the dictionaries as the imperfect of “may” and often used for _might_, the use is one which does sufficient violence to euphony to be characterized as undesirable.

~muchly~: Although formerly in vogue is now obsolete and stigmatized as slang, and as such to be avoided.

~mug~; A vulgar characterization for the human face.

~murderous~ should not be used for “dangerous” or “deadly.”

~music~. See CHIN.

~Mussulman~: The plural of this word is formed by adding _s_--Mussulmans _not_ Mussul_men_. Here the word “man” is no component part of _Mussulman_.

~mutual~, ~common~: These words are often confounded and have been so by writers of correct English. _Mutual_ implies interchange; _common_ belonging to more than two persons. Before the middle of the eighteenth century, _mutual_ had two meanings: “joint” or “common,” and “reciprocal.” When Dr. Samuel Johnson published his great dictionary he gave it but one meaning, that of _reciprocal_, and, his authority as a scholar having grown so great, this meaning became considered the only one which might be correctly given to the word. “_Mutual_,” says Crabb, “supposes a sameness in condition at the same time; _reciprocal_ supposes an alternation or succession of returns.” Thus we properly speak of “our _common_ country, _mutual_ affection, _reciprocal_ obligations.” While _mutual_ applies to the acts and opinions of persons, and therefore to what is personal, it is not applicable to persons. Macaulay condemned the phrase “_mutual_ friend” as a low vulgarism. A “_common_ friend” is certainly more accurate but unfortunately carries with it the disagreeable idea of inferiority, and probably for this reason is seldom or never used. There is authority of such prolific writers as Scott and Dickens for “_mutual_ friend,” but the rapidity with which they wrote their books may suggest that they paid little heed to such refinements of language as did Macaulay. Yet centuries of English literature authorize the employment of _mutual_ in the sense of _joint_ or _common_. On the other hand, the very strong disapproval with which this and like uses of _mutual_ are regarded by many writers of good taste may not unreasonably be considered as sufficient ground for avoiding _mutual friend_ and kindred expressions. “_Mutual_ friends,” says Phelps, “would not be accurate” meaning that two persons are friends each to the other.

~my~. Compare ME.

~myself~: An emphatic pronoun sometimes misused for “I” or “me”; as, “The property was willed to my wife and _myself_.” For “myself” substitute “to me” and the sentence is correct. “Myself” is used correctly with a reflexive verb, that is, one whose object, expressed or implied, denotes the same person or thing as the subject; _e. g._, “I will control _myself_.”

N

~nasty~: This word should not be applied to that which is merely “disagreeable,” as _nasty_ weather, for strong terms should not be robbed of their significance by being applied to conditions which could only be referred to in such terms by exaggeration. A pigsty is properly termed _nasty_, as there filth finds its habitat, and an obscene book is _nasty_ as morally foul.

~naught~. Compare OUGHT under AUGHT.

~need~, ~needs~: As an adverb _need_ is now obsolete; _needs_ means “necessarily.” Do not say “as _need_ he must,” say, rather, “as _needs_ he must.”

~neglect~, ~negligence~: The meanings of these words are sometimes confused. _Neglect_ is the act of failing to perform something, as a duty or task, to leave undone; _negligence_ is the _habitual_ omission of that which should be done. _Negligence_ is a trait of character while _neglect_ may result from preoccupation. Fernald in “Synonyms, Antonyms, and Prepositions,” says: “_Neglect_ is transitive, _negligence_ is intransitive; we speak of _neglect_ of his books, friends, or duties, in which case we could not use _negligence_.”

~negociate~, ~negotiate~: The first, now obsolete, was the spelling formerly in vogue; the second is the correct spelling of to-day.

~neither~, ~either~: For “none” and “any one,” is not the best usage; “That he [Shakespeare] wrote the plays which bear his name we know; but ... we do not know the years ... in which _either_ (correctly, _any one_) of them was first performed”; “Peasant, yeoman, artisan, tradesman, and gentleman could then be distinguished from one another almost as far as they could be seen. Except in cases of unusual audacity, _neither_ (correctly, _no one_, or _none_) presumed to wear the dress of his betters.”

~neither~, ~nor~: In considering these words the STANDARD DICTIONARY says: “As disjunctive correlatives, each accompanied by a singular nominative, often incorrectly followed by a plural verb form; as, ‘_neither_ he _nor_ I _were_ (correctly _was_) there.’” _Neither_, that is, _not either_, means not the one nor the other of two. “Through diligence he attained a position which he _neither_ aspired to _nor_ coveted”--the proper correlative to use here is _nor_.

~nerve~: A slang term sometimes used as a substitute for “impudence,” “over-assurance” or “independence,” any one of which is preferable.

~never~, ~not~: While literary authority sanctions the use of _never_ for _not_ in cases where a lapse of considerable time is thought of, as, “I shall be there--_never_ fear” (for _do not_ fear now, or at any time in the interim, that I shall disappoint you), it does not justify its use in a sentence where the time referred to is momentary or short. The emphatic use of this adverb in the sense of not a single one, not at all, is perfectly good, as instanced by Coleridge--“And _never_ a saint took pity on my soul in agony.” But the usage will not sanction an extension to things which, from their very nature, could take place--as, say, death--but once. Thus, do not say “Robert Fulton _never_ invented the steamboat”; say, rather, “Robert Fulton _did not_ invent the steamboat.” “Paul Jones _was never_ born in the United States” is incorrect. Say “... _was not_ born in the United States.” Do not say “I met him to-day but he _never_ mentioned the subject.” Say, rather “... but he _did not_ mention the subject.”

~never so~: Often misused for _ever so_ from which it should be carefully discriminated. _Never so_ means “to an extent or degree beyond the actual or conceivable; no matter how.” In common use _ever so_, meaning no more than “very” or “exceedingly,” is often confounded with and used for _never so_.

~never mean~: A common slip of the tongue in such phrases as “I _never mean_ to” which is frequently used when “I _mean never_ to” is intended. Compare DON’T.

~nibs~: A vulgar title given usually satirically, to a person in authority; as “His _nibs_ sailed to-day”: a term to avoid.

~nice~: This word has undergone a peculiar transformation in sense. Derived from the Latin _nescius_, ignorant, and originally meaning “ignorant, silly weak,” it has now come to signify “characterized by discrimination and judgment, acute, discerning; as, a _nice_ criticism.” The word has, however, also been used colloquially in the sense of “pleasing, jolly, or socially agreeable; as, a _nice_ girl,” and the use has been condemned but is too well established to be abandoned.

~nicely~ as a colloquialism for “very well”--as “He is doing _nicely_”--should be avoided.

~nifty~: A vulgarism for “stylish.”

~nightly~, ~nocturnal~: These words do not have the same signification. The one means night by night, the other happening at night. A man has _nightly_ sleep in which he suffers from _nocturnal_ dreams.

~no~: According to critics _no_ never properly qualifies a verb, that is, it should never be substituted for “not.” But the practise has literary sanction.

~no~: Often used for “any” by the illiterate. Do not say “We didn’t see _no_ flats”; say, rather, “We did not see _any_ flats.”

~nobby~: A vulgar synonym for “having an elegant or flashy appearance; showy; stylish”: haberdasher’s cant. Compare NIFTY.

~nohow~: A vulgarism for “in no way” or “by no means.” If after a negative, say “in any way,” “by any means,” “at all.” “I don’t believe in them _nohow_” should be “I don’t believe in them _in the least_,” or “_at all_.”

~nominate~: Distinguish from “denominate,” which is now only an obsolete sense of the word. To _nominate_ is to designate or specify; as, “Is it so _nominated_ in the bond?” whereas to “denominate” is to give a name or epithet to. Washington was _nominated_ president, but was _denominated_ “Father of his country.”

~nominatives~: The coupling of singular and plural. What number, singular or plural, shall the verb take. It couples two sentences--one on either side--the one having a singular nominative and the other a plural. As to which sentence shall be first and which second, there is commonly but little compulsion: it is a matter of choice. But should this choice affect the verb?--“The wages of sin _is_ death.” “Death _is_ the wages of sin.” It is merely a matter of taste in forceful diction which nominative shall precede. Yet which is to govern the number of the verb? “What we seek _is_ riches”; “Riches _are_ what we seek”--Probably these two forms of one idea best illustrate the better usage, which appears to be that the verb is dependent upon the nominative which precedes. In explanation of the scriptural phrase, it may be stated that although the prevailing rule with the translators of the Bible appears to have been to use plural verbs when either nominative was plural (that is, in all such cases), still “Death,” being here that upon which special emphasis is laid and to which attention is particularly drawn, is permitted to govern the verb.

~no more~: Often incorrectly used for “_any_ more.” Do not say “I don’t want to see you _no more_”; but “I don’t want to see you _any more_,” or “_again_.”

~none~: Although etymologically equivalent to _not_ (a single) _one_ this word is commonly used as a singular under a mistaken idea that it can not be used correctly as a plural, but many writers of standard English have used it as a plural. The STANDARD DICTIONARY authorizes the use of the word both as a singular and plural according to the meaning of the context. Where the singular or the plural equally expresses the sense, the plural is commonly used and is justified by the highest authority. “Did you buy melons?” “There _were none_ in the market.” “Did you bring me a letter?” “There _was none_ in your box.” “_None_ of the three cases _have_ been received” is correct. In illustrating this point the STANDARD DICTIONARY gives the following quotation: “Mind says one, soul says another, brain or matter says a third, but none of these _are_ right.” And says, “In the preceding quotation the ‘are,’ altho ungrammatical, connects ‘right’ with any one of the persons named--not with any one of the things named. If _is_ be substituted for ‘are,’ ‘right’ may be as reasonably connected with ‘mind,’ ‘soul,’ or ‘brain’ as with the persons (or classes of persons) spoken of.” _None_ used with a plural verb is found repeatedly in such English classics as the works of Bacon and Shakespeare, as well as in the Authorized Version of the Bible.

~nor~, ~or~: Discriminate carefully between these words when using them after _no_ and _not_. In such a sentence as “He has _no_ cash _or_ credit,” the word “credit” is used as an alternative for “cash,” and merely, though perhaps redundantly, to amplify the thought. But if one says “He has _no_ cash _nor_ credit” the meaning is very different, and implies he is without both, “credit” being here considered as an additional asset. In more involved statements the distinction may be of great importance. “Will _or_ disposition,” “power _or_ faculty,” may be but pairs of synonyms. The locution “will _nor_ disposition” “power _nor_ faculty,” distinguishes the two members of a pair as different.

~not~. Compare NEVER.

~notable~: Discriminate carefully between the different meanings of this word. A _no'table_ event is an event worthy of note; a _not'able_ woman is one who exercises care or skill or is prudent as in housewifery.

~noted~. Compare NOTORIOUS.

~nothing like~: Not to be used adverbially for _not nearly_. Do not say “He was _nothing like_ as handsome as his brother,” but “He was _not nearly_ so handsome,” etc.

~nothing to nobody~: An ungrammatical phrase used for “no one’s business.” Say, rather, “not anything to any one.”

~not on your life~: A vulgar phrase for “not by any means.”

~notorious~ is so commonly applied to that which is unfavorably known to the general public, as a _notorious_ crime, just as _noted_ is applied to that which is favorably distinguished, as a _noted_ speech, that it is well not to confound the expressions, but to reserve their use for their own several functions. However, the rule is not invariably followed; for the following expression by Spencer, on “Education” is good. “It is _notorious_ that the mind like the body, can not assimilate beyond a certain rate.”

~no use~: Often incorrectly used for “_of_ no use.” Do not say “It’s _no use_ to discuss it with you,” say, rather, “It is _of no use_ to discuss it.”

~novice~. Compare AMATEUR.

~number~ should not be used with such words as _innumerable_ and _numerous_, which themselves contain the idea of _number_ (Latin _numerus_). Say “A _countless_ number,” not “an _innumerable_ number.”

~numerous~: Often misused for _many_. Do not say “_numerous_ cattle were in pasture”; say, rather, “_Many_ cattle were in pasture.”

~nutty~: Used in the sense “lacking in intelligence,” this word is a vulgarism to be avoided.

O

~obnoxious~: Formerly this word meant “liable, amenable, subject,” but the meaning is sometimes forgotten in the more recently acquired sense, “odious, hurtful.” This difference is beautifully illustrated by a question propounded to Dean Alford--“Which of these two is right, ‘Death is _obnoxious_ to man’ or ‘Men are _obnoxious_ to death?’” Death, or the idea of death, is certainly distasteful to most men, but, this notwithstanding, all men are subject to death.

~observance~: Distinguish from ~observation~. Though the act of observing is signified by both, it is, as regards _observance_, in the sense of holding sacred, whereas, so far as _observation_ is concerned it is in the sense of making examination or careful note. Thus there is an _observance_ of the law, but an _observation_ of the works of nature.

~occupancy~, ~occupation~: The word _occupancy_ differs only slightly from _occupation_ in meaning. The first refers rather to the state or fact of possession, while the second carries with it an idea of the rights or results of such _occupancy_. The right or legal fact of _occupancy_ entitles a person to _occupation_ at will. One may speak of the _occupancy_ of a domain and the _occupation_, not occupancy, of a region by troops.

~occur~, ~take place~: These terms are not always synonymous. _Occurrences_ are due to chance or accident but things _take place_ by arrangement. Compare TRANSPIRE.

~of~: That the force of this word is not fully understood is proved by the fact that many ministers choose to omit it from the title of Scriptural books. Dean Alford in referring to the habit of announcing “The Book Genesis” instead of “The Book _of_ Genesis,” says, “This simply betrays the ignorance of the meaning of the preposition _of_. It is used to denote authorship, as the Book _of_ Daniel; to denote subject matter, as the first Book _of_ Kings; and as a note of apposition signifying _which is called_, as the Book _of_ Genesis.... The pedant, who ignores _of_ in the reading-desk must however, to be consistent, omit it elsewhere: I left the city London, and passed through County Kent, leaving realm England at town Dover.” _Of_ is also frequently misused for _from_. Nothing but custom can justify the common form of receipt, “Received _of_...”.

~of any~: Sometimes used incorrectly for _of all_; as, “This is the finest _of any_ I have seen”; say, rather, “finer _than any other_,” or “finest _of all_.”

~off of~: The preposition _off_, when noting origin and used in the sense of _from_ is frequently followed most ungrammatically by _of_. No well educated person would say “I got these eggs _off of_ Farmer Jones,” nor would they “buy a steak _off of_ the butcher” but “of” or “from” him. _Off_ should not be used of a person, where _from_ would suffice. You take a book _from_, not _off_, your friend; who may take it _off_ a shelf. You do not even, in correct speech, take a contagious disease _off_ him, as though it were something visible and tangible, and were bodily removed from his person.

~official~: A term sometimes used incorrectly for ~officer~. An _official_ is one holding public office or performing duties of a public nature; usually he is a subordinate officer; an _officer_ is one who holds an office _by election or appointment_, especially a civil office, as under a government, municipality, or the like.

~of the name of~. Compare BY THE NAME OF.

~older~, ~oldest~: These terms are, according to best usage, applied only to persons belonging to different families or to things, as, Lincoln was _older_ than Hay; this book is the _oldest_ in the library. Compare ELDER, ELDEST.

~on~ is frequently used where _in_ would be preferable. Fitz-Greene Halleck once said to a friend, “Why do people persist in saying _on_ Broadway? Might they not as well say Our Father, who art _on_ Heaven?”

~once in a way~ (~or while~): A colloquialism for “now and then,” better expressed by a single word, as _occasionally_.

~one~: Used sometimes as in writing narrative instead of “I,” “he,” or “a.” Bain (“Higher Eng. Grammar”) says: “_One_ should be followed by _one_ and not by _he_ (nor for that matter by _I_ or _a_); as, ‘What _one_ sees or feels, _one_ can not be sure that _one_ sees or feels.’” To begin with _one_ and to continue with any one of the substitutes suggested would not only be incorrect but would confuse the reader.

~one another~. Compare EACH OTHER.

~one-horse~: A slang term for “second rate”; implying “of inferior capacity, quality or resources.”

~only~: This word, whose correct position depends upon the intention of the author, is often misplaced. The examples of the uses of _only_ here given will serve to illustrate correct usage. “_Only_ his father spoke to him”; here _only_ means that of all persons who might have spoken, but one, his father, spoke to him. “His father _only_ spoke to him” implies that his father “only _spoke_” and did not scold him, which, perhaps, he might have felt his duty called upon him to do. “His father spoke _only_ to him” means that, of all the persons present, his father chose to speak to him alone, but this sentence may perhaps be more lucidly expressed “His father spoke to him _only_.”

~on the level~. See under LEVEL.

~on the street~. Compare IN THE STREET; ON.

~onto~: A word meaning “upon the top of,” avoided by purists as colloquial or vulgar. Condemned by Phelps as a vulgarism but now gradually growing in popularity. Inasmuch as its form is analogous to _into_, _unto_, _upon_, all of which are sanctioned by best usage, Phelps’s condemnation is perhaps a little premature. The word has been objected to by some critics as redundant or needless. “Considered as a new word (it is in reality a revival of an old form), it conforms to the two main neoteristic canons by which the admissibility of new words is to be decided. (See HALL, _Modern English_, pp. 171, 173.) It obeys the analogy of _in to_ = _into_. It may also be held to supply an antecedent blank, as may be shown by examples. It never should be employed where _on_ is sufficient; but simple _on_ after verbs of motion may be wholly ambiguous, so that _on to_, meaning ‘to or toward and _on_,’ may become necessary to clear up the ambiguity. ‘The boy fell _on_ the roof’ may mean that he fell while _on_ the roof, or that he fell, as from the chimney-top or some overlooking window, _to_ the roof so as to be _on_ it; but if we say ‘The boy fell _on to_ the roof,’ there is no doubt that the latter is the meaning. The canons for deciding the eligibility of new words appear therefore to claim for _on to_ the right to struggle for continued existence and general acceptance.” So says Dr. I. K. Funk in the STANDARD DICTIONARY.

~O~, _Oh_: Although often used indiscriminately it is generally conceded that “O” is used to express exclamation or direct address while “oh” is used to express the emotion of joy, pain, sorrow, or surprise. See the examples.

“O Mary, go and call the cattle home.”
“O God, whose thunder shakes the skies.”

“Oh! say, can you see by the dawn’s early light”--
“Oh! why should the spirit of mortal be proud?”

~open up~ is properly used to signify “explore; discover; as, to _open up_ a new country,” but not so in the sense of “introduce; as, to _open up_ a subject.” Here the word _up_ is superfluous; but in this, as in the majority of cases where _open up_ is used, it would be better to substitute a more specific term. See UP.

~opinion~ is sometimes more than an _impression_, being a conclusion or judgment held with confidence, though falling short of positive knowledge. The word should therefore not be used interchangeably with _idea_, which may be a mere conception, with or without foundation for its belief. One may have an _idea_ of enjoyment, but hold an _opinion_ on the result of a campaign.

~or~. Compare IF; NOR.

~oral~ should be differentiated from ~verbal~. The former applies to what is spoken by mouth, whereas the latter indicates that which has been reduced to words.

~orate~: A term to avoid when “speak, declaim, harangue,” or a like word will express what is intended. It may, however, be fittingly used meaning “to play the orator, talk windily in round periods”: it meets the canon of “supplying an antecedent blank,” and is a legitimate word, especially in humorous or contemptuous use.

~ordinance~, ~ordnance~: These words have no relation in common. An _ordinance_ is a regulation ordained by some one in authority as a “municipal _ordinance_.” _Ordnance_ is artillery, especially heavy guns, cannon of all kinds, mortars, howitzers, etc.

~ornery~: A barbarous dialectism for “ordinary” which can not be too severely condemned.

~other~: This word is often improperly omitted from general comparisons; for instance, “All men are better than he” obviously should be “All _other_ men,” etc., as the person excepted of necessity belongs to the class embraced by “all men.”

~other~, ~otherwise~: When these words introduce a clause of comparison they should be followed by the conjunction _than_, instead of which the words _but_ and _except_ are often erroneously introduced. _Than_ is indeed the conjunction of simple comparison, and should be used after adjectives in the comparative degree. In better usage _else_ is also followed by _than_, unless the word is introduced, as frequently, without appreciably adding effect to the sentence; as, “She did nothing (_else_) _but_ weep,” though even here the introduction of the unnecessary word would make _than_ the preferable sequence. “He knew no _other_ course _than_ this”--not _but_ or _except_. “It can not operate _otherwise than_ for good”--not _but_. “No _quicker_ did he climb the rope _than_ (not _but_) back he fell.”

~ought~. Compare AUGHT.

~ought~, ~hadn’t~. See HAD OUGHT.

~out of sight~: An intense vulgarism for “superb.”

~over and above~, if redundant, is an undesirable expression. Avoid the addition of words to a sentence that fail to add to the sense. “_Over and above_ his debts illness had now to be provided for.” It were better to say “In _addition_ to his debts,” etc.

~over~, ~across~: _Over_ is sometimes misused for “across.” Do not say “go _over_ the bridge” when you mean _across_ it.

~overflowed~: The banks of a river may be _overflowed_; they should never be spoken of as _overflown_. There is no verb to _overfly_, but there is one to _overflow_ the participles of which are _overflowed_, _overflowing_. The termination--_flown_ used commonly by the illiterate is the past participle of _fly_. Although _flown_ originally meant “flooded” the word in the sense is now obsolete.

~over~, ~not over~: Opposed by some writers when used as equivalent to _more than_, _not more than_, but defensible as having a tinge of metaphor suggestive of overflowing quantity or overtopping height and having the support of literary usage.

~overshoes~. Compare RUBBERS.

~over with~: Avoid as incorrect all such sentences as, “When the game was _over with_, we enjoyed a cold collation.” Here the word “with” is redundant.

~owing~. Compare DUE.

~own~: Some critics object to the use of this word in the sense of _confess_, but it is sanctioned by literary usage and dates from the seventeenth century. ~To own up~, or ~to~, in the sense of “to make a full confession” or “to admit unreservedly when challenged” is a colloquialism.

P

~pack~: A word sometimes misapplied especially in speaking of a number of persons; as, “the whole _pack_.” It is correctly used when applied to dogs or wolves, hence, from the latter application, also to any band of men leagued together for evil purposes; as, “a _pack_ of thieves”: sometimes, also, correctly styled a _gang_.

~pain~. Compare PANE.

~pair~: Great care should be exercised in applying modifying adjectives to this word. Thus one may say “a new _pair_ of trousers;” “a new _pair_ of scissors;” but not “a new _pair_ of shoes.” There is a distinction in the use--“a new pair” as applied to gloves or shoes implies exchange of one pair for another; here, “a _different_ pair” would be preferred. In general, say, rather, “a _pair_ of new shoes”; “a _pair_ of new gloves.” This word remains _pair_ in the plural when it is preceded by a number: otherwise it takes the _s_. “Two _pair_ of gloves,” but “many _pairs_ of trousers.”

~pane~: Sometimes confused with ~pain~. The first designates “a piece, division or compartment, most commonly a plate of window glass”; the second denotes “a distressing or disagreeable emotion.” The spellings of the two words should never be confused, but occasionally are.

~pants~: A vulgarism or tailor’s cant for _pantaloons_ meaning _trousers_ which should be the word used by preference.

~paradox~: Commonly used incorrectly in the phrase “a seeming paradox,”--a thing that does not exist, a paradox being a statement that seems to be at variance with common sense. A statement may, however, be characterized as _paradoxical_.

~paraphernalia~, from the Greek _para_, beyond, + _phero_, bring, is properly applied to the personal articles, as jewelry, reserved to a wife over and above her dower or marriage portion, and should not be used in the sense of finery or regalia. Yet the application is common but savors of grandiloquence. The finery and regalia are not, or should not be, “over and above,” but should be as of right or of good taste. Compare OVER AND ABOVE.

~pare~, ~pair~: Words the spellings of which are sometimes confused. _Pare_, to remove the outer covering from is from the Latin _paro_ and means “prepare”; _pair_, designating two persons or things, is from the Latin _par_, which means “equal.” See PAIR.

~parenthesis~: The phrase _in parenthesis_ includes both signs, and an expression placed between these signs is therefore said to be “in parenthesis.” _Parentheses_ refers only to two or more sets of parenthetical expressions. Due care should be exercised in using this word.

~parson~: Although a good word used to designate “the clergyman of a parish,” _parson_ is often used contemptuously, and from this use has acquired a sense that detracts from the dignity of the office; therefore, is one to be avoided. Do not say “Our _parson_ is a popular man”; say, rather, “Our _minister_....”

~partake~ should never be used as a synonym for “eat” or “drink.” One may _partake of_ a meal with other persons, that is, share it with them, but one does not partake a meal by one’s self.

~partially~ should not be used for “partly,” as, having the meaning “with unjust favoritism” it may be misunderstood.

~party~, ~person~: Except in legal terminology, _person_ is preferable; _party_ means, in general, an entertainment. In the legal sense, _party_ is a person (or body of persons collectively) who (or which) takes a certain specified part in a legal transaction, as “A. B., the party of the first part.” From this application of the term, the word has been loosely extended to mean _person_. Do not say “A certain _party_,” etc., but “A certain _person_”; party in such a connection is a vulgarism.

~pathos~. Compare BATHOS.

~patrons~ should not be used for “customers.” A _patron_ is one who fosters a person or thing; a _customer_ is one who deals regularly at one establishment.

~peach~: Used in the sense of “beauty,” possibly from the delicate and downy skin of the fruit, is a playful though undesirable expression used commonly by young men and boys, especially in referring to women; as, “Isn’t she a peach!” Lexicographers do not recognize this usage of the word.

~peculiarly impressive~: A phrase heard sometimes for “singularly” or “strikingly impressive”; but the word is from the Latin _peculiaris_, “one’s own,” and it is in this respect that the individuality enters the case. What belongs exclusively to a person is _peculiarly_ his; and the sense of remarkable, as from singularity, intensity, or exceptionality, is better expressed by the word of this class best adapted to the case.

~pecuniary~. Compare FINANCIAL.

~peel~ should not be confused with ~peal~. The first designates “rind”; the second, “ring.”

~pell-mell~: This word etymologically implies a crowd and confusion and is not applied to an individual. Thus, “He rushed out _pell-mell_” should be “He rushed out hastily and excitedly.”

~penny~: In the plural this word is either _pennies_ or _pence_. In the one case it means a number of individual coins; in the second case it signifies a specific sum of money.

~people~: Where individual persons, or a number of such, are intended, this word should be discarded in favor of _persons_; as, “most _persons_ are of this opinion.” People means _persons_ collectively; as “_People_ say.”

~per~: This is a Latin preposition, correctly joined only with Latin words; as, _per centum_, abbreviated _per cent._; _per diem_; _per annum_. _Per head_ and _per person_, _per year_, _per day_ are common commercial locutions; use preferably the English forms _a_ head, _a_ person, _a_ year, _a_ day. If you must use a Latin phrase be sure you use all Latin.

~perfectly killing~: An inane expression used commonly by women for “in stylish attire,” and also, “intensely comic” or “absurd.” Compare SPLENDID.

~perform~ does not mean ~play~. One _performs_ music _on_ a piano or _plays the_ piano, but does not _perform_ the piano. To perform _on_ the piano would rather indicate “to strum” upon it or (if you like) _play upon_ or _play with_ it than to _play it_.

~perform~. Compare ASSUME.

~permit~. Compare ALLOW.

~perpetually~; Distinguish from _continually_. There is a difference between that which is done unceasingly and that which merely takes place constantly.

~person~. Compare PARTY.

~personalty~ is sometimes considered to mean articles of personal adornment. It does not. It is a legal term, now in contradistinction to _realty_, and includes therefore all movables, as money; personal property of any kind whatever, as household goods; chattels real and personal; things movable as distinguished from _realty_ or landed property in any form.

~persons~. Compare PEOPLE.

~perspicacity~, ~perspicuity~; Terms often confused. _Perspicacity_ is “acuteness, clear-sightedness or penetration”; _perspicuity_ is “clearness of expression or style, lucidity”; and is applied to speech and writing.

~persuade~, ~convince~: That which _persuades_, leads or attracts (Latin _suadeo_, advise), that which _convinces_, binds (Latin _vinco_, conquer). A person when _convinced_ that he is wrong is _persuaded_, by justice or interest, to amend his ways.

~peruse~ should not be used when the simple _read_ is meant. The former implies to read with care and attention and is almost synonymous with _scan_, which is to examine with critical care and in detail. A person is more likely to _read_ than to _scan_ or _peruse_ the Bible.

~petition~, ~partition~: Sometimes pronounced as if they were homophones, but they are not. Exercise care in their use. A _petition_ is a request, a _partition_ is that which separates anything into distinct parts.

~phenomenon~ is the singular of _phenomena_, and the distinction should be observed in speech. Avoid as incorrect such locution as “A remarkable phenomena.”

~piece, a~: A provincial vulgarism used in such phrases as “We went along the road _a piece_”; “he followed me _a piece_,” etc.

~pike~: A vulgarism used as a verb for “to move away rapidly,” and as a noun, contemptuously, for “a shiftless class of persons.”

~pillar~, ~pillow~: Discriminate carefully between these words. A _pillar_ is a firm, upright, separate support; a _pillow_ is a head-rest. Note the difference in the spellings.

~pile-in~: Slang for “get to work.”

~pipe-off~: A vulgarism for to “take in at a glance.”

~pity~, ~sympathy~: Not synonymous terms. _Pity_ awakens a feeling of grief or sorrow in one for the distress of another; _sympathy_ is a feeling kindred with that of another for his state or condition. _Sympathy_ implies a degree of equality which _pity_ does not. We may _pity_ one whom we disdain but we can not _sympathize_ with him.

~place~: Used objectively without a preposition, or even adverbially, a provincialism common in parts of the United States; as, “She is always wanting _to go places_”; “Can’t I _go any place_ (correctly _anywhere_)?” “I must _go some place_ (_somewhere_)”; “I can’t find it _any place_.” Such forms are solecisms.

~place~, ~plaice~: Homophones, so care should be exercised in their use and spelling. A _place_ is a particular point or portion of space; a _plaice_ is a fish.

~plank~: Used usually with “down” this term is commonly employed by persons careless of their diction for “pay out” or “lay down”: said especially of money, and a term to be avoided.

~plead~, ~pleaded~ or ~pled~, ~pleading~: The spelling of _pled_ for the past is not warranted, and is a colloquialism. Careful speakers use _pleaded_.

~pleasure~ is distinguished from _happiness_, although in common conversation the terms are frequently used as if they were synonymous. “By _happiness_,” says Hamilton, “is meant the complement of all the _pleasures_ of which we are susceptible.” Crabb says, “_Happiness_ comprehends that aggregate of _pleasurable_ sensations which we derive from external objects”: it is “a condition in which _pleasure_ predominates over pain or evil; a continued experience of _pleasures_ and joys.” “_Pleasure_ is the accompaniment of the moderate and suitable activity of some organ or faculty of the mind.”

~plentiful~. Compare BOUNTIFUL.

~plenty~: The colloquialism by which _plenty_, which is a noun, is treated as an adjective or adverb is altogether inadmissible. In such cases _plentiful_ and _plentifully_ should be used. “We have _plenty of_ money.” “Cash is _plentiful_.” “We are _plentifully_ supplied”--not “We have _plenty_ enough cash.”

~plunk~: A vulgarism for a silver dollar.

~polite~, ~civil~, ~polished~: _Civil_, from the Latin _civilis_, from _civis_, a citizen, denotes that which is becoming to a citizen. _Polite_ is the Latin _politus_, participle of _polio_, polish. Civility is therefore negative, the mere absence of rudeness, whereas politeness is the positive evidence of good breeding. A _polite_ man is naturally so, but a _polished_ man is one who has, by art, acquired the smoothness which comes of having had the rough edges rubbed off. _Polite_ denotes a quality; _polished_ denotes a state.

~politics~ is a singular word of plural form. “His hobby _is politics_”--not “_Politics are_ his hobby.”

~polity~ and ~policy~ both come from the Latin _politica_, (Gr. _politeia_, polity, _polis_, city); but they must not be confounded. “_Polity_ is the permanent system of government of a state, a church, or a society; _policy_ is the method of management with reference to the attainment of certain ends. The national _polity_ of the United States is republican; each administration has a _policy_ of its own.”

~pore~: Compare POUR.

~possessive case, the~: A very unnecessary difficulty appears to be felt, even by educated men, in the use of the apostrophe in the possessive case. It is placed immediately after the noun under consideration. If, for instance, you are talking of a lady and refer to her glove, you say “the _lady’s_ glove”--then the apostrophe should immediately follow the noun in question; viz., _lady_, in the singular. If, however, there are two ladies or more, you say “the _ladies’_ gloves,” and the apostrophe should follow _ladies_; that is, _lady_, in the plural. In like manner, you write “the _boy’s_ father,” or “the _boys’_ father,” when referring to one or to two or more boys, respectively. “The _man’s_ hat,” “the _men’s_ hats,” with the apostrophe following the noun _man_ or _men_, will note the possessive in the singular and plural for the noun _man_.

The nearest approach to a difficulty is where a plural ends with an “s” or a sibilant sound; but here the rule is still the same--place the apostrophe after the noun referred to, that is, the plural, though for the sake of smoothness and euphony, omit the succeeding (or rather non-succeeding) “s.” Thus, “the _boss’s_ desk” in the singular, “the _bosses’_ desks,” in the plural. When the singular ends in “s,” the possessive “s” is usually retained, excepting where the noun has three or more syllables and the word following commences with this letter. Thus, Charles’s uncle; Burns’s poems; Burns’s stanza; Damocles’ sword. The possessive “s” is also generally omitted before “sake”--as, “For conscience’ _sake_” (conscience having the “s” sound); “for Jesus’ _sake_.”

In speaking of a firm, where the partners constitute but one object of contemplation, the apostrophe is used but once--after the complete object of contemplation, that is, after the title or firm name; as, “Jones and Robinson’s store.” If Jones and Robinson, instead of being in partnership had independent businesses you would speak of “Jones’s and Robinson’s stores”--this being no exception to, but merely an exemplification of, the rule that the apostrophe immediately follows the noun or name (or firm name) under consideration.

Occasionally, the possessive appears in double form, the substantive being preceded by _of_ and followed by the apostrophe with _s_. This occurs, however, only in idiomatic phrases, as, “He was a friend of my father’s,” which is equivalent to “He was one of my father’s friends” or “He was a friend of (the number of) my father’s (friends),” when it may be supposed that the person spoken of possesses more than one object of the kind referred to, this double form of possessive is properly used. “It was a fault of my friend to be loquacious” would signify the one particular weakness of my friend: “It was a fault of my friend’s to be loquacious,” that is, “of my friend’s faults,” would signify that this was one of various faults.

The apostrophe is not used with the possessive personal pronouns. Write “yours (_not_ your’s) truly.” Compare ’S.

~post~: A colloquialism, generally undesirable, for _inform_. It is derived from the bookkeeping signification of the term, where it means that the ledger is supplied, by transfer, with the information contained in the books of original entry.

~pour~, ~pore~: Exercise care in using these homophones. The first is of Celtic origin and means “to cause to flow, as a liquid, in a continuous stream”; whereas _pore_ is from the Middle English _poren_, and means “to gaze or ponder with close and continued application, as in reading or studying.”

~power~: In the sense of “a great number or quantity,” this word is an undesirable colloquialism that has gained ground especially in rural districts. One may say of a man “He was a _power_ among the people,” but not “A _power_ of people heard him.”

~practical~: Do not confound with ~practicable~. The former means “that can be put into practise or rendered applicable for use; as, _practical_ knowledge”; whereas the latter is perhaps best expressed by the synonym “feasible.” _Practical_ has a general application, being governed by actual use and experience; as, _practical_ statesmanship or wisdom: _practicable_, on the contrary, is particular, and signifies the suitability of the particular thing named to the desired end. Thus one may know a _practical_ man but not a _practicable_ one.

~pray~, ~prey~: Exercise care in using these homophones. Etymologically they are distinct. _Pray_ is from Old French _praier_, to ask; while _prey_ is from Old French _preier_, booty, probably from the Latin _prœhendo_, to seize. Note the difference in spelling.

~precedent~, ~president~: Although almost homophones these terms have widely different meanings. A _precedent_ is something that has occurred before in time and is considered as an established rule or an authorized example; a _president_ is the head of a nation, society, or the like.

~predicate~, ~predict~: Though these words are both derived from the same Latin source, the one must not be used for the other. To _predict_ is to foretell, whereas to _predicate_ is to proclaim as inherent. In United States usage _predicate_, with _on_ or _upon_, is sometimes treated as synonymous with _establish_; as, “On what do you _predicate_ the assertion?”

~prefer~: The act or thing preferred should never be followed by _than_. _Prefer_ is properly followed by the preposition _to_, or occasionally by _above_ or _before_. Thus do not say “I _prefer_ to talk than to dance,” but “I _prefer_ talking _to_ dancing.”

~preferable~: If the preference is stated in terms, as “This is _preferable_ to that,” the word is followed by the preposition _to_--never by _than_. The preference may, however, be implied; as, “This is _preferable_.”

~prejudice~: Sometimes erroneously used for “prepossess” or “predispose.” A _prepossession_ is always favorable, a _prejudice_ always unfavorable, unless the contrary is expressly stated. _Predispose_ means “to dispose or incline beforehand.” Therefore, we should not say that a person is _prejudiced_ in any one’s favor but that he is _prepossessed_ or _predisposed_.

~preposition~: “The part of speech or particle that denotes the relation of an object to an action or thing; so called because it is usually placed before its object.” The correct use of these little words is often puzzling to persons of education. For the purpose of their guidance the following partial list is given. A comprehensive work on the subject of their correct use is “English Synonyms, Antonyms and Prepositions,” by Dr. James C. Fernald.

accord _with_ (neuter)

accord _to_ (active)

accused _of_ crime

acquit persons _of_

adapted _to_ or _between_

adapted _to_ a thing _for_ a purpose

affinity _to_ or _between_

agreeable _to_

agree _with_ persons, _to_ things, _among_ ourselves

amuse _with_, _at_, _in_

angry _with_ (a person) _at_ (a thing)

anxious _for_, _about_, sometimes _on_

attend _to_ (listen)

attend _upon_ (wait)

averse _from_, when describing an act or state.

averse _to_, when describing feeling

bestow _upon_

boast _of_

call _on_

change _for_

compliance _with_

confer _on_ (give), _with_ (converse)

confide _in_, when intransitive

confide it _to_, when transitive

conform _to_

conformable _to_

consonant _to_, sometimes _with_

convenient _to_ or _for_

conversant _with_ persons; _in_ or _of_ affairs; _about_ subjects

correspond _with_ (by letter), _to_ (similar things)

dependent _on_, _upon_

derogate _from_

derogatory _to_ a person or thing

die _of_ or _by_

differ _from_ or _with_

difference _with_ a person

difference _between_ things

difficulty _in_

diminution _of_

disappointed _of_ a purpose; and _in_ a matter if it fails to meet
our expectations.

disapprove _of_

discouragement _to_

dissent _from_

distinguished _for_, _from_, sometimes _by_

eager _in_

entertain _by_ (a person), _with_ (a thing)

exception is taken _to_ statements; sometimes _against_

expert _at_ or _in_

fall _under_

free _from_

frightened _at_

glad _of_ something gained, and _of_ or _at_ what befalls another