Chapter I: Part 1

THE
VERBALIST:

_A MANUAL_
DEVOTED
TO BRIEF DISCUSSIONS OF THE RIGHT AND THE
WRONG USE OF WORDS
AND
TO SOME OTHER MATTERS OF INTEREST TO THOSE WHO
WOULD SPEAK AND WRITE WITH PROPRIETY.

BY
ALFRED AYRES.

We remain shackled by timidity till we have learned to speak with propriety.--JOHNSON.

As a man is known by his company, so a man's company may be known by his manner of expressing himself.--SWIFT.

NEW YORK:
D. APPLETON AND COMPANY,
1, 3, AND 5 BOND STREET.
1887.

COPYRIGHT BY
D. APPLETON AND COMPANY,
1881

Transcriber's Note

Minor typographical errors have been corrected without note. Archaic
spellings have been retained as printed.

PREFATORY NOTE.

The title-page sufficiently sets forth the end this little book is intended to serve.

For convenience' sake I have arranged in alphabetical order the subjects treated of, and for economy's sake I have kept in mind that "he that uses many words for the explaining of any subject doth, like the cuttle-fish, hide himself in his own ink."

The curious inquirer who sets himself to look for the learning in the book is advised that he will best find it in such works as George P. Marsh's "Lectures on the English Language," Fitzedward Hall's "Recent Exemplifications of False Philology," and "Modern English," Richard Grant White's "Words and Their Uses," Edward S. Gould's "Good English," William Mathews' "Words: their Use and Abuse," Dean Alford's "The Queen's English," George Washington Moon's "Bad English," and "The Dean's English," Blank's "Vulgarisms and Other Errors of Speech," Alexander Bain's "English Composition and Rhetoric," Bain's "Higher English Grammar," Bain's "Composition Grammar," Quackenbos' "Composition and Rhetoric," John Nichol's "English Composition," William Cobbett's "English Grammar," Peter Bullions' "English Grammar," Goold Brown's "Grammar of English Grammars," Graham's "English Synonymes," Crabb's "English Synonymes," Bigelow's "Handbook of Punctuation," and other kindred works.

Suggestions and criticisms are solicited, with the view of profiting by them in future editions.

If "The Verbalist" receive as kindly a welcome as its companion volume, "The Orthoëpist," has received, I shall be content.

A. A.
NEW YORK, _October_, 1881.

Eschew fine words as you would rouge.--HARE.

Cant is properly a double-distilled lie; the second power of a
lie.--CARLYLE.

If a gentleman be to study any language, it ought to be that of his
own country.--LOCKE.

In language the unknown is generally taken for the
magnificent.--RICHARD GRANT WHITE.

He who has a superlative for everything, wants a measure for the
great or small.--LAVATER.

Inaccurate writing is generally the expression of inaccurate
thinking.--RICHARD GRANT WHITE.

To acquire a few tongues is the labor of a few years; but to be
eloquent in one is the labor of a life.--ANONYMOUS.

Words and thoughts are so inseparably connected that an artist in
words is necessarily an artist in thoughts.-WILSON FLAGG.

It is an invariable maxim that words which add nothing to the sense
or to the clearness must diminish the force of the
expression.--CAMPBELL.

Propriety of thought and propriety of diction are commonly found
together. Obscurity of expression generally springs from confusion
of ideas.--MACAULAY.

He who writes badly thinks badly. Confusedness in words can proceed
from nothing but confusedness in the thoughts which give rise to
them.--COBBETT.

THE VERBALIST.

A--AN. The second form of the indefinite article is used for the sake of euphony only. Herein everybody agrees, but what everybody does not agree in is, that it is euphonious to use _an_ before a word beginning with an aspirated _h_, when the accented syllable of the word is the second. For myself, so long as I continue to aspirate the _h's_ in such words as _heroic_, _harangue_, and _historical_, I shall continue to use _a_ before them; and when I adopt the Cockney mode of pronouncing such words, then I shall use _an_ before them. To my ear it is just as euphonious to say, "I will crop off from the top of his young twigs a tender one, and will plant it upon _an_ high mountain and eminent," as it is to say _an_ harangue, _an_ heroic, or _an_ historical. _An_ is well enough before the doubtful British aspiration, but before the distinct American aspiration it is wholly out of place. The reply will perhaps be, "But these _h's_ are silent; the change of accent from the first syllable to the second neutralizes their aspiration." However true this may be in England, it is not at all true in America; hence we Americans should use _a_ and not _an_ before such _h's_ until we decide to ape the Cockney mode of pronouncing them.

Errors are not unfrequently made by omitting to repeat the article in a sentence. It should always be repeated when a noun or an adjective referring to a distinct thing is introduced; take, for example, the sentence, "He has a black and white horse." If two horses are meant, it is clear that it should be, "He has a black and _a_ white horse." See THE.

ABILITY--CAPACITY. The distinctions between these two words are not always observed by those who use them. "_Capacity_ is the power of receiving and retaining knowledge with facility; _ability_ is the power of applying knowledge to practical purposes. Both these faculties are requisite to form a great character: capacity to conceive, and ability to execute designs. Capacity is shown in quickness of apprehension. Ability supposes something done; something by which the mental power is exercised in executing, or performing, what has been perceived by the capacity."--Graham's "English Synonymes."

ABORTIVE. An outlandish use of this word may be occasionally met with, especially in the newspapers. "A lad was yesterday caught in the act of _abortively_ appropriating a pair of shoes." That is abortive that is untimely, that has not been borne its full time, that is immature. We often hear _abortion_ used in the sense of failure, but never by those that study to express themselves in chaste English.

ABOVE. There is little authority for using this word as an adjective. Instead of, "the _above_ statement," say, "the _foregoing_ statement." _Above_ is also used very inelegantly for _more than_; as, "above a mile," "above a thousand"; also, for _beyond_; as, "above his strength."

ACCIDENT. See CASUALTY.

ACCORD. "He [the Secretary of the Treasury] was shown through the building, and the information he desired was _accorded_ him."--Reporters' English.

"The heroes prayed, and Pallas from the skies
_Accords_ their vow."--Pope.

The goddess of wisdom, when she granted the prayers of her worshipers, may be said to have _accorded_; not so, however, when the clerks of our Sub-Treasury answer the inquiries of their chief.

ACCUSE. See BLAME IT ON.

ACQUAINTANCE. See FRIEND.

AD. This abbreviation for the word _advertisement_ is very justly considered a gross vulgarism. It is doubtful whether it is permissible under any circumstances.

ADAPT--DRAMATIZE. In speaking and in writing of stage matters, these words are often misused. To _adapt_ a play is to modify its construction with the view of improving its form for representation. Plays translated from one language into another are usually more or less _adapted_; i. e., altered to suit the taste of the public before which the translation is to be represented. To _dramatize_ is to change the form of a story from the narrative to the dramatic; i. e., to make a drama out of a story. In the first instance, the product of the playwright's labor is called an _adaptation_; in the second, a _dramatization_.

ADJECTIVES. "Very often adjectives stand where adverbs might be expected; as, 'drink _deep_,' 'this looks _strange_,' 'standing _erect_.'

"We have also examples of one adjective qualifying another adjective; as, '_wide_ open,' '_red_ hot,' 'the _pale_ blue sky.' Sometimes the corresponding adverb is used, but with a different meaning; as, 'I found the way _easy_--_easily_'; 'it appears _clear_--_clearly_.' Although there is a propriety in the employment of the adjective in certain instances, yet such forms as '_indifferent_ well,' '_extreme_ bad,' are grammatical errors. 'He was interrogated _relative_ to that circumstance,' should be _relatively_, or _in relation to_. It is not unusual to say, 'I would have done it _independent_ of that circumstance,' but _independently_ is the proper construction.

"The employment of adjectives for adverbs is accounted for by the following considerations:

"(1.) In the classical languages the neuter adjective may be used as an adverb, and the analogy would appear to have been extended to English.

"(2.) In the oldest English the adverb was regularly formed from the adjective by adding 'e,' as 'soft, soft_e_,' and the dropping of the 'e' left the adverb in the adjective form; thus, '_clæne_,' adverb, became 'clean,' and appears in the phrase '_clean_ gone'; '_fæste_, fast,' 'to stick _fast_.' By a false analogy, many adjectives that never formed adverbs in _-e_ were freely used as adverbs in the age of Elizabeth: 'Thou didst it _excellent_,' '_equal_ (for _equally_) good,' '_excellent_ well.' This gives precedent for such errors as those mentioned above.

"(3.) There are cases where the subject is qualified rather than the verb, as with verbs of incomplete predication, 'being,' 'seeming,' 'arriving,' etc. In 'the matter seems _clear_,' 'clear' is part of the predicate of 'matter.' 'They arrived _safe_': 'safe' does not qualify 'arrived,' but goes with it to complete the predicate. So, 'he sat _silent_,' 'he stood _firm_.' 'It comes _beautiful_' and 'it comes _beautifully_' have different meanings. This explanation applies especially to the use of participles as adverbs, as in Southey's lines on Lodore; the participial epithets applied there, although appearing to modify 'came,' are really additional predications about 'the water,' in elegantly shortened form. 'The church stood _gleaming_ through the trees': 'gleaming' is a shortened predicate of 'church'; and the full form would be, 'the church stood _and gleamed_.' The participle retains its force as such, while acting the part of a coördinating adjective, complement to 'stood'; 'stood gleaming' is little more than 'gleamed.' The feeling of adverbial force in 'gleaming' arises from the subordinate participial form joined with a verb, 'stood,' that seems capable of predicating by itself. '_Passing_ strange' is elliptical: 'passing (surpassing) _what is_ strange.'"--Bain.

"The comparative adjectives _wiser_, _better_, _larger_, etc., and the contrasting adjectives _different_, _other_, etc., are often so placed as to render the construction of the sentence awkward; as, 'That is a much _better_ statement of the case _than_ yours,' instead of, 'That statement of the case is much _better than_ yours'; 'Yours is a _larger_ plot of ground _than_ John's,' instead of, 'Your plot of ground is _larger than_ John's'; 'This is a _different_ course of proceeding _from_ what I expected,' instead of, 'This course of proceeding is _different from_ what I expected'; 'I could take no _other_ method of silencing him _than_ the one I took,' instead of, 'I could take no method of silencing him _other than_ the one I took.'"--Gould's "Good English," p. 69.

ADMINISTER. "Carson died from blows _administered_ by policeman Johnson."--"New York Times." If policeman Johnson was as barbarous as is this use of the verb _to administer_, it is to be hoped that he was hanged. Governments, oaths, medicine, affairs--such as the affairs of the state--are _administered_, but not blows: _they_ are _dealt_.

ADOPT. This word is often used instead of _to decide upon_, and of _to take_; thus, "The measures _adopted_ [by Parliament], as the result of this inquiry, will be productive of good." Better, "The measures _decided upon_," etc. Instead of, "What course shall you _adopt_ to get your pay?" say, "What course shall you _take_," etc. _Adopt_ is properly used in a sentence like this: "The course (or measures) proposed by Mr. Blank was _adopted_ by the committee." That is, what was Blank's was _adopted_ by the committee--a correct use of the word, as _to adopt_, means, to assume as one's own.

_Adopt_ is sometimes so misused that its meaning is inverted. "Wanted to adopt," in the heading of advertisements, not unfrequently is intended to mean that the advertiser wishes to be _relieved_ of the care of a child, not that he wishes to _assume_ the care of one.

AGGRAVATE. This word is often used when the speaker means to provoke, irritate, or anger. Thus, "It _aggravates_ [provokes] me to be continually found fault with"; "He is easily _aggravated_ [irritated]." To _aggravate_ means to make worse, to heighten. We therefore very properly speak of _aggravating_ circumstances. To say of a person that he is _aggravated_ is as incorrect as to say that he is _palliated_.

AGRICULTURIST. This word is to be preferred to _agriculturalist_. See CONVERSATIONIST.

ALIKE. This word is often most bunglingly coupled with _both_. Thus, "These bonnets are both alike," or, worse still, if possible, "both just alike." This reminds one of the story of Sam and Jem, who were very like each other, especially Sam.

ALL. See UNIVERSAL.

ALL OVER. "The disease spread _all over_ the country." It is more logical and more emphatic to say, "The disease spread _over all_ the country."

ALLEGORY. An elaborated metaphor is called an _allegory_; both are figurative representations, the words used signifying something beyond their literal meaning. Thus, in the eightieth Psalm, the Jews are represented under the symbol of a vine:

"Thou hast brought a vine out of Egypt: thou hast cast out the heathen, and planted it. Thou preparedst room before it, and didst cause it to take deep root, and it filled the land. The hills were covered with the shadow of it, and the boughs thereof were like the goodly cedars. She sent out her boughs unto the sea, and her branches unto the river. Why hast thou then broken down her hedges, so that all they which pass by the way do pluck her? The boar out of the wood doth waste it, and the wild beast of the field doth devour it."

An allegory is sometimes so extended that it makes a volume; as in the case of Swift's "Tale of a Tub," Arbuthnot's "John Bull," Bunyan's "Pilgrim's Progress," etc. Fables and parables are short allegories.

ALLOW. This word is frequently misused in the West and South, where it is made to do service for _assert_ or _to be of opinion_. Thus, "He _allows_ that he has the finest horse in the country."

ALLUDE. The treatment this word has received is to be specially regretted, as its misuse has well-nigh robbed it of its true meaning, which is, to intimate delicately, to refer to without mentioning directly. _Allude_ is now very rarely used in any other sense than that of to speak of, to mention, to name, which is a long way from being its legitimate signification. This degradation is doubtless a direct outcome of untutored desire to be fine and to use big words.

ALONE. This word is often improperly used for _only_. That is _alone_ which is unaccompanied; that is _only_ of which there is no other. "Virtue _alone_ makes us happy," means that virtue unaided suffices to make us happy; "Virtue _only_ makes us happy," means that nothing else can do it--that that, and that only (not alone), can do it. "This means of communication is employed by man _alone_." Dr. Quackenbos should have written, "By man _only_". See also ONLY.

AMATEUR--NOVICE. There is much confusion in the use of these two words, although they are entirely distinct from each other in meaning. An _amateur_ is one versed in, or a lover and practicer of, any particular pursuit, art, or science, but _not_ engaged in it professionally. A _novice_ is one who is new or inexperienced in any art or business--a beginner, a tyro. A professional actor, then, who is new and unskilled in his art, is a _novice_ and not an _amateur_. An amateur may be an artist of great experience and extraordinary skill.

AMELIORATE. "The health of the Empress of Germany is greatly _ameliorated_." Why not say _improved_?

AMONG. See BETWEEN.

AMOUNT OF PERFECTION. The observant reader of periodical literature often notes forms of expression which are perhaps best characterized by the word _bizarre_. Of these queer locutions, _amount of perfection_ is a very good example. Mr. G. F. Watts, in the "Nineteenth Century," says, "An _amount of perfection_ has been reached which I was by no means prepared for." What Mr. Watts meant to say was, doubtless, that a _degree of excellence_ had been reached. There are not a few who, in their prepossession for everything transatlantic, seem to be of opinion that the English language is generally better written in England than it is in America. Those who think so are counseled to examine the diction of some of the most noted English critics and essayists, beginning, if they will, with Matthew Arnold.

AND. Few vulgarisms are more common than the use of _and_ for _to_. Examples: "Come _and_ see me before you go"; "Try _and_ do what you can for him"; "Go _and_ see your brother, if you can." In such sentences as these, the proper particle to use is clearly _to_ and not _and_.

_And_ is sometimes improperly used instead of _or_; thus, "It is obvious that a language like the Greek _and_ Latin" (language?), etc., should be, "a language like the Greek _or the_ Latin" (language), etc. There is no such thing as a Greek and Latin language.

ANSWER--REPLY. These two words should not be used indiscriminately. An _answer_ is given to a question; a _reply_, to an assertion. When we are addressed, we _answer_; when we are accused, we _reply_. We _answer_ letters, and _reply_ to any arguments, statements, or accusations they may contain. Crabb is in error in saying that _replies_ "are used in personal discourse only." _Replies_, as well as _answers_, are written. We very properly write, "I have now, I believe, _answered_ all your questions and _replied_ to all your arguments." A _rejoinder_ is made to a _reply_. "Who goes there?" he cried; and, receiving no _answer_, he fired. "The advocate _replied_ to the charges made against his client."

ANTICIPATE. Lovers of big words have a fondness for making this verb do duty for _expect_. _Anticipate_ is derived from two Latin words meaning _before_ and _to take_, and, when properly used, means, to take beforehand; to go before so as to preclude another; to get the start or ahead of; to enjoy, possess, or suffer, in expectation; to foretaste. It is, therefore, misused in such sentences as, "Her death is hourly _anticipated_"; "By this means it is _anticipated_ that the time from Europe will be lessened two days."

ANTITHESIS. A phrase that opposes contraries is called an _antithesis_.

"I see a chief who leads my chosen sons,
All armed with points, _antitheses_, and puns."

The following are examples:

"Though gentle, yet not dull;
Strong, without rage; without o'erflowing, full."

"Contrasted faults through all their manners reign;
Though poor, luxurious; though submissive, vain;
Though grave, yet trifling; zealous, yet untrue;
And e'en in penance planning sins anew."

The following is an excellent example of _personification_ and _antithesis_ combined:

"Talent convinces; Genius but excites:
That tasks the reason; this the soul delights.
Talent from sober judgment takes its birth,
And reconciles the pinion to the earth;
Genius unsettles with desires the mind,
Contented not till earth be left behind."

In the following extract from Johnson's "Life of Pope," individual peculiarities are contrasted by means of antitheses:

"Of genius--that power which constitutes a poet; that quality without which judgment is cold, and knowledge is inert; that energy which collects, combines, amplifies, and animates--the superiority must, with some hesitation, be allowed to Dryden. It is not to be inferred that of this poetical vigor Pope had only a little, because Dryden had more; for every other writer, since Milton, must give place to Pope; and even of Dryden it must be said that, if he has brighter paragraphs, he has not better poems. Dryden's performances were always hasty, either excited by some external occasion or extorted by domestic necessity; he composed without consideration and published without correction. What his mind could supply at call or gather in one excursion was all that he sought and all that he gave. The dilatory caution of Pope enabled him to condense his sentiments, to multiply his images, and to accumulate all that study might produce or chance might supply. If the flights of Dryden, therefore, are higher, Pope continues longer on the wing. If of Dryden's fire the blaze is brighter, of Pope's the heat is more regular and constant. Dryden often surpasses expectation, and Pope never falls below it. Dryden is read with frequent astonishment, and Pope with perpetual delight. Dryden's page is a natural field, rising into inequalities, and diversified by the varied exuberance of abundant vegetation; Pope's is a velvet lawn, shaven by the scythe, and leveled by the roller."

There are forms of antithesis in which the contrast is only of a secondary kind.

ANY. This word is sometimes made to do service for _at all_. We say properly, "She is not _any_ better"; but we can not properly say, "She does not see _any_," meaning that she is blind.

ANYBODY ELSE. "Public School Teachers are informed that _anybody else's_ is correct."--"New York Times," Sunday, July 31, 1881. An English writer says: "In such phrases as anybody else, and the like, _else_ is often put in the possessive case; as, 'anybody else's servant'; and some grammarians defend this use of the possessive case, arguing that _somebody else_ is a compound noun." It is better grammar and more euphonious to consider _else_ as being an adjective, and to form the possessive by adding the apostrophe and _s_ to the word that _else_ qualifies; thus, anybody's else, nobody's else, somebody's else.

ANYHOW. "An exceedingly vulgar phrase," says Professor Mathews, in his "Words: Their Use and Abuse." "Its use, _in any manner_, by one who professes to write and speak the English tongue with purity, is unpardonable." Professor Mathews seems to have a special dislike for this colloquialism. It is recognized by the lexicographers, and I think is generally accounted, even by the careful, permissible in conversation, though incompatible with dignified diction.

ANXIETY OF MIND. See EQUANIMITY OF MIND.

APOSTROPHE. Turning from the person or persons to whom a discourse is addressed and appealing to some person or thing absent, constitutes what, in rhetoric, is called the _apostrophe_. The following are some examples:

"O gentle sleep,
Nature's soft nurse, how have I frighted thee,
That thou no more wilt weigh my eyelids down,
And steep my senses in forgetfulness?"
"Sail on, thou lone imperial bird
Of quenchless eye and tireless wing!"

"Help, angels, make assay!
Bow, stubborn knees! and heart with strings of steel,
Be soft as sinews of the new-born babe:
All may yet be well!"

APPEAR. See SEEM.

APPRECIATE. If any word in the language has cause to complain of ill-treatment, this one has. _Appreciate_ means, to estimate _justly_--to set the _true_ value on men or things, their worth, beauty, or advantages of any sort whatsoever. Thus, an overestimate is no more _appreciation_ than is an underestimate; hence it follows that such expressions as, "I appreciate it, or her, or him, _highly_," can not be correct. We _value_, or _prize_, things highly, not _appreciate_ them highly. This word is also very improperly made to do service for _rise_, or _increase_, in value; thus, "Land _appreciates_ rapidly in the West." Dr. L. T. Townsend blunders in the use of _appreciate_ in his "Art of Speech," vol. i, p. 142, thus: "The laws of harmony ... may allow copiousness ... in parts of a discourse ... in order that the condensation of other parts may be the _more highly appreciated_."

APPREHEND--COMPREHEND. The English often use the first of these two words where we use the second. Both express an effort of the thinking faculty; but to _apprehend_ is simply to take an idea into the mind--it is the mind's first effort--while to _comprehend_ is _fully to understand_. We are dull or quick of _apprehension_. Children _apprehend_ much that they do not _comprehend_. Trench says: "We _apprehend_ many truths which we do not _comprehend_." "_Apprehend_," says Crabb, "expresses the weakest kind of belief, the having [of] the least idea of the presence of a thing."

APT. Often misused for _likely_, and sometimes for _liable_. "What is he _apt_ to be doing?" "Where shall I be _apt_ to find him?" "If properly directed, it will be _apt_ to reach me." In such sentences as these, _likely_ is the proper word to use. "If you go there, you will be _apt_ to get into trouble." Here either _likely_ or _liable_ is the proper word, according to the thought the speaker would convey.

ARCTICS. See RUBBERS.

ARTIST. Of late years this word has been appropriated by the members of so many crafts, that it has well-nigh been despoiled of its meaning. Your cook, your barber, your tailor, your boot-maker, and so on to satiety, are all _artists_. Painters, sculptors, architects, actors, and singers, nowadays, generally prefer being thus called, rather than to be spoken of as _artists_.

AS. "Not _as_ I know": read, "not _that_ I know." "This is not _as_ good as the last": read, "not _so_ good." "It may be complete _so_ far as the specification is concerned": correctly, "_as_ far as."

_As_, preceded by _such_ or by _same_, has the force of a relative applying to persons or to things. "He offered me the _same_ conditions _as_ he offered you." "The same conditions _that_" would be equally proper. See, also, LIKE.

ASCRIBE. See IMPUTE.

AT. Things are sold _by_, not _at_, auction. "The scene is more beautiful _at_ night than by day": say, "_by_ night."

AT ALL. "It is not strange, for my uncle is King of Denmark." Had Shakespeare written, "It is not _at all_ strange," it is clear that his diction would have been much less forcible. "I do not wish for any _at all_"; "I saw no one _at all_"; "If he had any desire _at all_ to see me, he would come where I am." The _at all_ in sentences like these is superfluous. Yet there are instances in which the phrase is certainly a very convenient one, and seems to be unobjectionable. It is much used, and by good writers.

AT BEST. Instead of _at best_ and _at worst_, we should say at _the_ best and at _the_ worst.

AT LAST. See AT LENGTH.

AT LEAST. This adverbial phrase is often misplaced. "'The Romans understood liberty _at least_ as well as we.' This must be interpreted to mean, 'The Romans understood liberty _as well as we_ understand liberty.' The intended meaning is, 'that whatever things the Romans failed to understand, they understood _liberty_.' To express this meaning we might put it thus: 'The Romans understood _at least_ liberty as well as we _do_'; 'liberty, _at least_, the Romans understood as well as we do.' 'A tear, _at least_, is due to the unhappy'; '_at least_ a tear is due to the unhappy'; 'a tear is due _at least_ to the unhappy'; 'a tear is due to the unhappy _at least_'--all express different meanings. 'This can not, _often at least_, be done'; 'this can not be done _often, at least_.' (1. 'It often happens that this can not be done.' 2. 'It does not often happen that this can be done.') So, 'man is _always_ capable of laughing'; 'man is capable of laughing _always_.'"--Bain.

AT LENGTH. This phrase is often used instead of _at last_. "_At length_ we managed to get away": read, "_at last_." "_At length_ we heard from him." To hear from any one _at length_ is to hear fully; i. e., in detail.

AUTHORESS. With regard to the use of this and certain other words of like formation, Mr. Gould, in his "Good English," says: "_Poet_ means simply a person who writes poetry; and _author_, in the sense under consideration, a person who writes poetry or prose--not a _man_ who writes, but a _person_ who writes. Nothing in either word indicates sex; and everybody knows that the functions of both poets and authors are common to both sexes. Hence, _authoress_ and _poetess_ are superfluous. And they are superfluous, also, in another respect--that they are very rarely used, indeed they hardly _can_ be used, independently of the _name_ of the writer, as Mrs., or Miss, or a female Christian name. They are, besides, philological absurdities, because they are fabricated on the false assumption that their primaries indicate _men_. They are, moreover, liable to the charge of affectation and prettiness, to say nothing of pedantic pretension to accuracy.

"If the _ess_ is to be permitted, there is no reason for excluding it from _any_ noun that indicates a person; and the next editions of our dictionaries may be made complete by the addition of _writress_, _officeress_, _manageress_, _superintendentess_, _secretaryess_, _treasureress_, _walkeress_, _talkeress_, and so on to the end of the vocabulary."

AVOCATION. See VOCATION.

BAD COLD. Inasmuch as colds are never _good_, why say a _bad_ cold? We may talk about _slight_ colds and _severe_ colds, but not about _bad_ colds.

BAGGAGE. See LUGGAGE.

BALANCE. This word is very frequently and very erroneously used in the sense of _rest_, _remainder_. It properly means _the excess of one thing over another_, and in this sense and in no other should it be used. Hence it is improper to talk about the _balance_ of the edition, of the evening, of the money, of the toasts, of the men, etc. In such cases we should say the _rest_ or the _remainder_.

BARBARISM. Defined as an offense against good usage, by the use of an improper word, i. e., a word that is antiquated or improperly formed. _Preventative_, _enthuse_, _agriculturalist_, _donate_, etc., are barbarisms. See also SOLECISM.

BEEN TO. We not unfrequently hear a superfluous _to_ tacked to a sentence; thus, "Where have you been _to_?"

BEG. We often see letters begin with the words, "I _beg_ to acknowledge the receipt of your favor," etc. We should write, "I _beg leave_ to acknowledge," etc. No one would say, "I beg to tell you," instead of, "I beg _leave_ to tell you."

BEGIN--COMMENCE. These words have the same meaning; careful speakers, however, generally prefer to use the former. Indeed, there is rarely any good reason for giving the preference to the latter. See also COMMENCE.

BEING BUILT. See IS BEING BUILT.

BELONGINGS. An old idiomatic expression now coming into use again.

BESIDE--BESIDES. In the later unabridged editions of Webster's dictionary we find the following remarks concerning the use of these two words: "_Beside_ and _besides_, whether used as prepositions or adverbs, have been considered synonymous from an early period of our literature, and have been freely interchanged by our best writers. There is, however, a tendency in present usage to make the following distinction between them: 1. That _beside_ be used only and always as a preposition, with the original meaning _by the side of_; as, to sit _beside_ a fountain; or with the closely allied meaning _aside from_, or _out of_; as, this is _beside_ our present purpose: 'Paul, thou art _beside_ thyself.' The adverbial sense to be wholly transferred to the cognate word. 2. That _besides_, as a preposition, take the remaining sense, _in addition to_; as, _besides_ all this; _besides_ the consideration here offered: 'There was a famine in the land _besides_ the first famine.' And that it also take the adverbial sense of _moreover_, _beyond_, etc., which had been divided between the words; as, _besides_, there are other considerations which belong to this case."

BEST. See AT BEST.

BETWEEN. This word is often misused for _among_; thus, "The word _fellow_, however much in use it may be _between_ men, sounds very objectionable from the lips of women."--"London Queen." Should be, "_among_ men." _Between_ is used in reference to two things, parties, or persons; _among_, in reference to a greater number. "Castor and Pollux with one soul _between_ them." "You have _among_ you many a purchased slave."

BLAME IT ON. Here is a gross vulgarism which we sometimes hear from persons of considerable culture. They use it in the sense of _accuse_ or _suspect_; thus, "He _blames it on_ his brother," meaning that he _accuses_ or _suspects_ his brother of having done it, or of being at fault for it.

BOGUS. A colloquial term incompatible with dignified diction.

BOTH. We sometimes hear such absurd sentences as, "They _both_ resemble each other very much"; "They are _both_ alike"; "They _both_ met in the street." _Both_ is likewise redundant in the following sentence: "It performs at the same time the offices _both_ of the nominative and objective cases."

BOUND. The use of this word in the sense of _determined_ is not only inelegant but indefensible. "I am _bound_ to have it," should be, "I am _determined_ to have it."

BRAVERY--COURAGE. The careless often use these two words as though they were interchangeable. _Bravery_ is inborn, is instinctive; _courage_ is the product of reason, calculation. There is much merit in being courageous, little merit in being brave. Men who are simply _brave_ are careless, while the courageous man is always cautious. _Bravery_ often degenerates into temerity. _Moral courage_ is that firmness of principle which enables a man to do what he deems to be his duty, although his action may subject him to adverse criticism. True _moral courage_ is one of the rarest and most admirable of virtues.

Alfred the Great, in resisting the attacks of the Danes, displayed _bravery_; in entering their camp as a spy, he displayed _courage_.

BRING--FETCH--CARRY. The indiscriminate use of these three words is very common. To _bring_ is to convey to or toward--a simple act; to _fetch_ means to _go_ and bring--a compound act; to _carry_ often implies motion from the speaker, and is followed by _away_ or _off_, and thus is opposed to _bring_ and _fetch_. Yet one hears such expressions as, "Go to Mrs. D.'s and _bring_ her this bundle; and here, you may _fetch_ her this book also." We use the words correctly thus: "_Fetch_, or _go bring_, me an apple from the cellar"; "When you come home _bring_ some lemons"; "_Carry_ this book home with you."

BRITISH AGAINST AMERICAN ENGLISH. "The most important peculiarity of American English is a laxity, irregularity, and confusion in the use of particles. The same thing is, indeed, observable in England, but not to the same extent, though some gross departures from idiomatic propriety, such as _different to_ for _different from_, are common in England, which none but very ignorant persons would be guilty of in America.... In the tenses of the verbs, I am inclined to think that well-educated Americans conform more closely to grammatical propriety than the corresponding class in England.... In general, I think we may say that, in point of naked syntactical accuracy, the English of America is not at all inferior to that of England; but we do not discriminate so precisely in the meaning of words, nor do we habitually, in either conversation or in writing, express ourselves so gracefully, or employ so classic a diction, as the English. Our taste in language is less fastidious, and our licenses and inaccuracies are more frequently of a character indicative of want of refinement and elegant culture than those we hear in educated society in England."--George P. Marsh.

BRITISH AGAINST AMERICAN ORTHOËPY. "The causes of the differences in pronunciation [between the English and the Americans] are partly physical, and therefore difficult, if not impossible, to resist; and partly owing to a difference of circumstances. Of this latter class of influences, the universality of reading in America is the most obvious and important. The most marked difference is, perhaps, in the length or prosodical quantity of the vowels; and both of the causes I have mentioned concur to produce this effect. We are said to drawl our words by protracting the vowels and giving them a more diphthongal sound than the English. Now, an Englishman who reads will habitually utter his vowels more fully and distinctly than his countryman who does not; and, upon the same principle, a nation of readers, like the Americans, will pronounce more deliberately and clearly than a people so large a proportion of whom are unable to read, as in England. From our universal habit of reading, there results not only a greater distinctness of articulation, but a strong tendency to assimilate the spoken to the written language. Thus, Americans incline to give to every syllable of a written word a distinct enunciation; and the popular habit is to say _dic-tion-ar-y_, _mil-it-ar-y_, with a secondary accent on the penultimate, instead of sinking the third syllable, as is so common in England. There is, no doubt, something disagreeably stiff in an anxious and affected conformity to the very letter of orthography; and to those accustomed to a more hurried utterance we may seem to drawl, when we are only giving a full expression to letters which, though etymologically important, the English habitually slur over, sputtering out, as a Swedish satirist says, one half of the word, and swallowing the other. The tendency to make the long vowels diphthongal is noticed by foreigners as a peculiarity of the orthoëpy of our language; and this tendency will, of course, be strengthened by any cause which produces greater slowness and fullness of articulation. Besides the influence of the habit of reading, there is some reason to think that climate is affecting our articulation. In spite of the coldness of our winters, our flora shows that the climate of even our Northern States belongs, upon the whole, to a more southern type than that of England. In southern latitudes, at least within the temperate zone, articulation is generally much more distinct than in the northern regions. Witness the pronunciation of Spanish, Italian, Turkish, as compared with English, Danish, and German. Participating, then, in the physical influences of a southern climate, we have contracted something of the more distinct articulation that belongs to a dry atmosphere and a clear sky. And this view of the case is confirmed by the fact that the inhabitants of the Southern States incline, like the people of southern Europe, to throw the accent toward the end of the word, and thus, like all nations that use that accentuation, bring out all the syllables. This we observe very commonly in the comparative Northern and Southern pronunciation of proper names. I might exemplify by citing familiar instances; but, lest that should seem invidious, it may suffice to say that, not to mention more important changes, many a Northern member of Congress goes to Washington a _dactyl_ or a _trochee_, and comes home an _amphibrach_ or an _iambus_. Why or how external physical causes, as climate and modes of life, should affect pronunciation, we can not say; but it is evident that material influences of some sort are producing a change in our bodily constitution, and we are fast acquiring a distinct national Anglo-American type. That the delicate organs of articulation should participate in such tendencies is altogether natural; and the operation of the causes which give rise to them is palpable even in our handwriting, which, if not uniform with itself, is generally, nevertheless, so unlike common English script as to be readily distinguished from it.

"To the joint operation, then, of these two causes--universal reading and climatic influences--we must ascribe our habit of dwelling upon vowel and diphthongal sounds, or of drawling, if that term is insisted upon.... But it is often noticed by foreigners as both making us more readily understood by them when speaking our own tongue, and as connected with a flexibility of organ, which enables us to acquire a better pronunciation of other languages than is usual with Englishmen. In any case, as, in spite of the old adage, speech is given us that we may make ourselves understood, our drawling, however prolonged, is preferable to the nauseous, foggy, mumbling thickness of articulation which characterizes the cockney, and is not unfrequently affected by Englishmen of a better class."--George P. Marsh.

BRYANT'S PROHIBITED WORDS. See INDEX EXPURGATORIUS.

BUT. This word is misused in various ways. "I do not doubt _but_ he will be here": read, doubt _that_. "I should not wonder _but_": read, _if_. "I have no doubt _but_ that he will go": suppress _but_. "I do not doubt _but_ that it is true": suppress _but_. "There can be no doubt _but_ that the burglary is the work of professional cracksmen."--"New York Herald." Doubt _that_, and not _but that_. "A careful canvass leaves no doubt _but_ that the nomination," etc.: suppress _but_. "There is no reasonable doubt _but_ that it is all it professes to be": suppress _but_. "The mind no sooner entertains any proposition _but_ it presently hastens," etc.: read, _than_. "No other resource _but_ this was allowed him": read, _than_.

BY. See AT.

CALCULATE. This word means to ascertain by computation, to reckon, to estimate; and, say some of the purists, it never means anything else when properly used. _If this is true_, we can not say a thing is _calculated_ to do harm, but must, if we are ambitious to have our English irreproachable, choose some other form of expression, or at least some other word, _likely_ or _apt_, for example. Cobbett, however, says, "That, to Her, whose great example is so well _calculated_ to inspire," etc.; and, "The first two of the three sentences are well enough _calculated_ for ushering," etc. _Calculate_ is sometimes vulgarly used for _intend_, _purpose_, _expect_; as, "He _calculates_ to get off to-morrow."

CALIBER. This word is sometimes used very absurdly; as, "Brown's Essays are of a much higher _caliber_ than Smith's." It is plain that the proper word to use here is _order_.

CANT. _Cant_ is a kind of affectation; affectation is an effort to sail under false colors; an effort to sail under false colors is a kind of falsehood; and falsehood is a term of Latin origin which we often use instead of the stronger Saxon term LYING!

"Who is not familiar," writes Dr. William Matthews, "with scores of pet phrases and cant terms which are repeated at this day apparently without a thought of their meaning? Who ever attended a missionary meeting without hearing 'the Macedonian cry,' and an account of some 'little interest' and 'fields white for the harvest'? Who is not weary of the ding-dong of 'our Zion,' and the solecism of 'in our midst'; and who does not long for a verbal millennium when Christians shall no longer 'feel to take' and 'grant to give'?"

"How much I regret," says Coleridge, "that so many religious persons of the present day think it necessary to adopt a certain cant of manner and phraseology [and of tone of voice] as a token to each other [one another]! They _improve_ this and that text, and they must do so and so in a prayerful way; and so on."

CAPACITY. See ABILITY.

CAPTION. This word is often used for _heading_, but, thus used, it is condemned by careful writers. The true meaning of _caption_ is a seizure, an arrest. It does not come from a Latin word meaning _a head_, but from a Latin word meaning _to seize_.

CARET. Cobbett writes of the caret to his son: "The last thing I shall mention under this head is the _caret_ [^], which is used to point upward to a part which has been omitted, and which is inserted between the line where the caret is placed and the line above it. Things should be called by their right names, and this should be called the _blunder-mark_. I would have you, my dear James, scorn the use of the thing. _Think_ before you write; let it be your custom to _write correctly_ and in _a plain hand_. Be careful that neatness, grammar, and sense prevail when you write to a blacksmith about shoeing a horse as when you write on the most important subjects. Habit is powerful in all cases; but its power in this case is truly wonderful. When you write, bear constantly in mind that some one is to _read_ and to _understand_ what you write. This will make your handwriting and also your meaning _plain_. Far, I hope, from my dear James will be the ridiculous, the contemptible affectation of writing in a slovenly or illegible hand, or that of signing his name otherwise than in plain letters."

CARRY. See BRING.

CASE. Many persons of considerable culture continually make mistakes in conversation in the use of the cases, and we sometimes meet with gross errors of this kind in the writings of authors of repute. Witness the following: "And everybody is to know him except _I_."--George Merideth in "The Tragic Comedies," Eng. ed., vol. i, p. 33. "Let's you and _I_ go": say, _me_. We can not say, Let _I_ go. Properly, Let's go, i. e., let us go, or, let you and _me_ go. "He is as good as _me_": say, as _I_. "She is as tall as _him_": say, as _he_. "You are older than _me_": say, than _I_. "Nobody said so but _he_": say, but _him_. "Every one can master a grief but _he_ that hath it": correctly, but _him_. "John went out with James and _I_": say, and _me_. "You are stronger than _him_": say, than _he_. "Between you and _I_": say, and _me_. "Between you and _they_": say, and _them_. "He gave it to John and _I_": say, and _me_. "You told John and _I_": say, and _me_. "He sat between him and _I_": say, and _me_. "He expects to see you and _I_": say, and _me_. "You were a dunce to do it. Who? _me_?" say, _I_. Supply the ellipsis, and we should have, Who? _me_ a dunce to do it? "Where are you going? Who? _me_?" say, _I_. We can't say, _me_ going. "_Who_ do you mean?" say, _whom_. "Was it _them_?" say, _they_. "If I _was him_, I would do it": say, _were he_. "If I _was her_, I would not go": say, _were she_. "Was it _him_?" say, _he_. "Was it _her_?" say, _she_. "For the benefit of those _whom_ he thought were his friends": say, _who_. This error is not easy to detect on account of the parenthetical words that follow it. If we drop them, the mistake is very apparent; thus, "For the benefit of those _whom_ were his friends."

"On the supposition," says Bain, "that the interrogative _who_ has _whom_ for its objective, the following are errors: '_who_ do you take me to be?' '_who_ should I meet the other day?' '_who_ is it by?' '_who_ did you give it to?' '_who_ to?' '_who_ for?' But, considering that these expressions _occur with the best writers and speakers_, that they _are more energetic_ than the other form, and that they _lead to no ambiguity_, it may be doubted whether grammarians have not exceeded their province in condemning them."

Cobbett, in writing of the pronouns, says: "When the relatives are placed in the sentence at a distance from their antecedents or verbs or prepositions, the ear gives us no assistance. '_Who_, of all the men in the world, do you think I _saw_ to-day?' '_Who_, for the sake of numerous services, the office was given to.' In both these cases it should be _whom_. Bring the verb in the first and the preposition in the second case closer to the relative, as, _who I saw_, _to who the office was given_, and you see the error at once. But take care! '_Whom_, of all the men in the world, do you think, _was_ chosen to be sent as an ambassador?' '_Whom_, for the sake of his numerous services, _had_ an office of honor bestowed upon him.' These are nominative cases, and ought to have _who_; that is to say, _who was chosen_, _who had an office_."

"Most grammarians," says Dr. Bain, in his "Higher English Grammar," "have laid down this rule: 'The verb _to be_ has the same case after as before it.' Macaulay censures the following as a solecism: 'It was _him_ that Horace Walpole called a man who never made a bad figure but as an author.' Thackeray similarly adverts to the same deviation from the rule: '"Is that _him_?" said the lady in _questionable grammar_.' But, notwithstanding this," continues Dr. Bain, "we certainly hear in the actual speech of all classes of society such expressions as 'it was _me_,' 'it was _him_,' 'it was _her_,' more frequently than the prescribed form.[1] 'This shy creature, my brother says, is _me_'; 'were it _me_, I'd show him the difference.'--Clarissa Harlowe. 'It is not _me_[2] you are in love with.'--Addison. 'If there is one character more base than another, it is _him_ who,' etc.--Sydney Smith. 'If I were _him_'; 'if I had been _her_,' etc. The authority of good writers is strong on the side of objective forms. There is also the analogy of the French language; for while 'I am here' is _je suis ici_, the answer to 'who is there?' is _moi_ (me); and _c'est moi_ (it is _me_) is the legitimate phrase--never _c'est je_ (it is I)."

But _moi_, according to all French grammarians, is very often in the nominative case. _Moi_ is in the nominative case when used in reply to "Who is there?" and also in the phrase "C'est moi," which makes "It is _I_" the correct translation of the phrase, and not "It is _me_." The French equivalent of "I! I am here," is "Moi! je suis ici." The Frenchman uses _moi_ in the nominative case when _je_ would be inharmonious. Euphony with him is a matter of more importance than grammatical correctness. Bescherelle gives many examples of _moi_ in the nominative. Here are two of them: "Mon avocat et moi sommes de cet avis. Qui veut aller avec lui? Moi." If we use such phraseology as "It is _me_," we must do as the French do--consider _me_ as being in the nominative case, and offer _euphony_ as our reason for thus using it.

When shall we put nouns (or pronouns) preceding verbal, or participial, nouns, as they are called by some grammarians--infinitives in _ing_, as they are called by others--in the possessive case?

"'I am surprised at _John's_ (or _his_, _your_, etc.) _refusing_ to go.' 'I am surprised at _John_ (or _him_, _you_, etc.) _refusing_ to go.' [In the latter sentence _refusing_ is a participle.] The latter construction is not so common with pronouns as with nouns, especially with such nouns as do not readily take the possessive form. 'They prevented _him going_ forward': better, 'They prevented _his going_ forward.' 'He was dismissed without any _reason being_ assigned.' 'The boy died through his _clothes being_ burned.' 'We hear little of any _connection being_ kept up between the two nations.' 'The men rowed vigorously for fear of the _tide turning_ against us.' _But most examples of the construction without the possessive form are_ OBVIOUSLY DUE TO MERE SLOVENLINESS.... 'In case of _your being_ absent': here _being_ is an infinitive [verbal, or participial, noun] qualified by the possessive _your_. 'In case of _you being_ present': here _being_ would have to be construed as a participle. _The possessive construction is, in this case, the primitive and regular construction_; THE OTHER IS A MERE LAPSE. The difficulty of adhering to the possessive form occurs when the subject is not a person: 'It does not seem safe to rely on the rule of _demand_ creating supply': in strictness, '_Demand's_ creating supply.' 'A petition was presented against the _license being_ granted.' But for the awkwardness of extending the possessive to impersonal subjects, it would be right to say, 'against the _license's being_ granted.' 'He had conducted the ball without any _complaint being_ urged against him.' The possessive would be suitable, but undesirable and unnecessary."--Professor Alexander Bain.

"Though the _ordinary_ syntax of the possessive case is sufficiently plain and easy, there is, perhaps, among all the puzzling and disputable points of grammar, nothing more difficult of decision than are some questions that occur respecting the right management of this case. The observations that have been made show that possessives before participles are seldom to be approved. The following example is manifestly inconsistent with itself; and, _in my opinion, the three possessives are all wrong_: 'The kitchen, too, now begins to give dreadful note of preparation; not from _armorers_ accomplishing the knights, but from the _shopmaid's_ chopping force-meat, the _apprentice's_ cleaning knives, and the _journeyman's_ receiving a practical lesson in the art of waiting at table.' 'The daily instances of _men's_ dying around us.' Say rather, 'Of _men_ dying around us.' The leading word in sense ought not to be made the adjunct in construction."--Goold Brown.

CASUALTY. This word is often heard with the incorrect addition of a syllable, _casuality_, which is not recognized by the lexicographers. Some writers object to the word casualty, and always use its synonym _accident_.

CELEBRITY. "A number of _celebrities_ witnessed the first representation." This word is frequently used, especially in the newspapers, as a concrete term; but it would be better to use it in its abstract sense only, and in sentences like the one above to say _distinguished persons_.

CHARACTER--REPUTATION. These two words are not synonyms, though often used as such. _Character_ means the sum of distinguishing qualities. "Actions, looks, words, steps, form the alphabet by which you may spell characters."--Lavater. _Reputation_ means the estimation in which one is held. One's reputation, then, is what is thought of one's character; consequently, one may have a good reputation and a bad character, or a good character and a bad reputation. Calumny may injure _reputation_, but not _character_. Sir Peter does not leave his _character_ behind him, but his _reputation_--his _good name_.