453 files changed, 31841 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/22457-0.txt b/22457-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3b181bd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,7635 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Verbalist, by Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: 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.
+
+Author: Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+Release Date: August 30, 2007 [EBook #22457]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                                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.
+
+                          [Illustration]
+
+                             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_.
+
+CHEAP. The dictionaries define this adjective as meaning, bearing a low
+price, or to be had at a low price; but nowadays good usage makes it
+mean that a thing may be had, or has been sold, at a bargain. Hence, in
+order to make sure of being understood, it is better to say
+_low-priced_, when one means low-priced, than to use the word _cheap_.
+What is low-priced, as everybody knows, is often _dear_, and what is
+high-priced is often _cheap_. A diamond necklace might be _cheap_ at
+ten thousand dollars, and a pinchbeck necklace dear at ten dollars.
+
+CHERUBIM. The Hebrew plural of _cherub_. "We are authorized," says Dr.
+Campbell, "both by use and analogy, to say either _cherubs_ and
+_seraphs_, according to the English idiom, or _cherubim_ and _seraphim_,
+according to the Oriental. The former suits better the familiar, the
+latter the solemn, style. As the words _cherubim_ and _seraphim_ are
+plural, the terms _cherubims_ and _seraphims_, as expressing the plural,
+are quite improper."--"Philosophy of Rhetoric."
+
+CITIZEN. This word properly means one who has certain political rights;
+when, therefore, it is used, as it often is, to designate persons who
+may be aliens, it, to say the least, betrays a want of care in the
+selection of words. "Several _citizens_ were injured by the explosion."
+Here some other word--_persons_, for example--should be used.
+
+CLEVER. In this country the word _clever_ is most improperly used in the
+sense of good-natured, well-disposed, good-hearted. It is properly used
+in the sense in which we are wont most inelegantly to use the word
+_smart_, though it is a less colloquial term, and is of wider
+application. In England the phrase "a _clever_ man" is the equivalent of
+the French phrase, "_un homme d'esprit_." The word is properly used in
+the following sentences: "Every work of Archbishop Whately must be an
+object of interest to the admirers of _clever_ reasoning"; "Cobbett's
+letter ... very _clever_, but very mischievous"; "Bonaparte was
+certainly as _clever_ a man as ever lived."
+
+CLIMAX. A clause, a sentence, a paragraph, or any literary composition
+whatsoever, is said to end with a _climax_ when, by an artistic
+arrangement, the more effective is made to follow the less effective in
+regular gradation. Any great departure from the order of ascending
+strength is called an _anti-climax_. Here are some examples of climax:
+
+"Give all diligence; add to your faith, virtue; and to virtue,
+knowledge; and to knowledge, temperance; and to temperance, patience;
+and to patience, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to
+brotherly kindness, charity."
+
+"What is every year of a wise man's life but a criticism on the past!
+Those whose life is the shortest live long enough to laugh at one half
+of it; the boy despises the infant, the man the boy, the sage both, and
+the Christian all."
+
+"What a piece of work is man! how noble in reason! how infinite in
+faculties! in form and moving, how express and admirable! in action, how
+like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god!"
+
+CO. The prefix _co_ should be used only when the word to which it is
+joined begins with a vowel, as in _co-eval_, _co-incident_,
+_co-operate_, etc. _Con_ is used when the word begins with a consonant,
+as in _con-temporary_, _con-junction_, etc. _Co-partner_ is an exception
+to the rule.
+
+COMMENCE. The Britons use or misuse this word in a manner peculiar to
+themselves. They say, for example, "commenced merchant," "commenced
+actor," "commenced politician," and so on. Dr. Hall tells us that
+_commence_ has been employed in the sense of "begin to be," "become,"
+"set up as," by first-class writers, for more than two centuries.
+Careful speakers make small use of _commence_ in any sense; they prefer
+to use its Saxon equivalent, _begin_. See, also, BEGIN.
+
+COMPARISON. When only two objects are compared, the comparative and not
+the superlative degree should be used; thus, "Mary is the _older_ of the
+two"; "John is the _stronger_ of the two"; "Brown is the _richer_ of
+the two, and the _richest_ man in the city"; "Which is the _more_
+desirable, health or wealth?" "Which is the _most_ desirable, health,
+wealth, or genius?"
+
+    "Of two such lessons, why forget
+    The _nobler_ and the _manlier_ one?"
+
+COMPLETED. This word is often incorrectly used for _finished_. That is
+_complete_ which lacks nothing; that is _finished_ which has had all
+done to it that was intended. The builder of a house may _finish_ it and
+yet leave it very _incomplete_.
+
+CONDIGN. It is safe to say that most of those who use this word do not
+know its meaning, which is, suitable, deserved, merited, proper. "His
+endeavors shall not lack _condign_ praise"; i. e., his endeavors shall
+not lack _proper_ or their _merited_ praise. "A villain _condignly_
+punished" is a villain punished _according to his deserts_. To use
+_condign_ in the sense of _severe_ is just as incorrect as it would be
+to use _deserved_ or _merited_ in the sense of _severe_.
+
+CONFIRMED INVALID. This phrase is a convenient mode of expressing the
+idea it conveys, but it is difficult to defend, inasmuch as _confirmed_
+means strengthened, established.
+
+CONSEQUENCE. This word is sometimes used instead of _importance_ or
+_moment_; as, "They were all persons of more or less _consequence_":
+read, "of more or less _importance_." "It is a matter of no
+_consequence_": read, "of no _moment_."
+
+CONSIDER. "This word," says Mr. Richard Grant White, in his "Words and
+Their Uses," "is perverted from its true meaning by most of those who
+use it." _Consider_ means, to meditate, to deliberate, to reflect, to
+revolve in the mind; and yet it is made to do service for _think_,
+_suppose_, and _regard_. Thus: "I _consider_ his course very
+unjustifiable"; "I have always _considered_ it my duty," etc.; "I
+_consider_ him as being the cleverest man of my acquaintance."
+
+CONTEMPTIBLE. This word is sometimes used for _contemptuous_. An old
+story says that a man once said to Dr. Parr, "Sir, I have a
+_contemptible_ opinion of you." "That does not surprise me," returned
+the Doctor; "all your opinions are _contemptible_." What is worthless or
+weak is _contemptible_. Despicable is a word that expresses a still more
+intense degree of the contemptible. A traitor is a _despicable_
+character, while a poltroon is only _contemptible_.
+
+CONTINUALLY. See PERPETUALLY.
+
+CONTINUE ON. The _on_ in this phrase is generally superfluous. "We
+continued on our way" is idiomatic English, and is more euphonious than
+the sentence would be without the particle. The meaning is, "We
+continued to travel _on_ our way." In such sentences, however, as
+"Continue _on_," "He continued to read _on_," "The fever continued _on_
+for some hours," and the like, the _on_ generally serves no purpose.
+
+CONVERSATIONIST. This word is to be preferred to _conversationalist_.
+Mr. Richard Grant White says that _conversationalist_ and
+_agriculturalist_ are inadmissible. On the other hand, Dr. Fitzedward
+Hall says: "As for _conversationist_ and _conversationalist_,
+_agriculturist_ and _agriculturalist_, as all are alike legitimate
+formations, it is for convention to decide which we are to prefer."
+
+CONVOKE--CONVENE. At one time and another there has been some discussion
+with regard to the correct use of these two words. According to Crabb,
+"There is nothing imperative on the part of those that _assemble_, or
+_convene_, and nothing binding on those _assembled_, or _convened_: one
+_assembles_, or _convenes_, by invitation or request; one attends to the
+notice or not, at pleasure. _Convoke_, on the other hand, is _an act of
+authority_; it is the call of one who has the authority to give the
+call; it is heeded by those who feel themselves bound to attend."
+Properly, then, President Arthur _convokes_, not _convenes_, the Senate.
+
+CORPOREAL--CORPORAL. These adjectives, though regarded as synonyms, are
+not used indiscriminately. _Corporal_ is used in reference to the body,
+or animal frame, in its proper sense; _corporeal_, to the animal
+substance in an extended sense--opposed to spiritual. _Corporal_
+punishment; _corporeal_ or _material_ form or substance.
+
+    "That to _corporeal_ substances could add
+    Speed most spiritual."--Milton.
+
+    "What seemed _corporal_
+    Melted as breath into the wind."--Shakespeare.
+
+COUPLE. In its primitive signification, this word does not mean simply
+two, but two that are united by some bond; such as, for example, the tie
+that unites the sexes. It has, however, been so long used to mean two of
+a kind considered together, that in this sense it may be deemed
+permissible, though the substitution of the word _two_ for it would
+often materially improve the diction.
+
+COURAGE. See BRAVERY.
+
+CRIME--VICE--SIN. The confusion that exists in the use of these words is
+due largely to an imperfect understanding of their respective meanings.
+_Crime_ is the violation of the law of a state; hence, as the laws of
+states differ, what is crime in one state may not be crime in another.
+_Vice_ is a course of wrong-doing, and is not modified either by
+country, religion, or condition. As for _sin_, it is very difficult to
+define what it is, as what is sinful in the eyes of one man may not be
+sinful in the eyes of another; what is sinful in the eyes of a Jew may
+not be sinful in the eyes of a Christian; and what is sinful in the eyes
+of a Christian of one country may not be sinful in the eyes of a
+Christian of another country. In the days of slavery, to harbor a
+runaway slave was a _crime_, but it was, in the eyes of most people,
+neither a _vice_ nor a _sin_.
+
+CRUSHED OUT. "The rebellion was finally _crushed out_." Out of what? We
+may _crush_ the life out of a man, or _crush_ a man to death, and
+_crush_, not _crush out_, a rebellion.
+
+CULTURED. This word is said to be a product of Boston--an excellent
+place for anybody or anything to come from. Many persons object to its
+use on the ground that there can be no such participial adjective,
+because there is no verb in use from which to form it. We have in use
+the substantive _culture_, but, though the dictionaries recognize the
+verb _to culture_, we do not use it. Be this objection valid or be it
+not, _cultured_ having but two syllables, while its synonym _cultivated_
+has four, it is likely to find favor with those who employ short words
+when they convey their meaning as well as long ones. Other adjectives of
+this kind are, moneyed, whiskered, slippered, lettered, talented,
+cottaged, lilied, anguished, gifted, and so forth.
+
+CURIOUS. This word is often used instead of _strange_ or _remarkable_.
+"A _curious_ fact": better, "a _remarkable_ fact." "A _curious_
+proceeding": better, "a _strange_ proceeding."
+
+DANGEROUS. "He is pretty sick, but not _dangerous_." Dangerous people
+are generally most dangerous when they are most vigorous. Say, rather,
+"He is sick, but not _in danger_."
+
+DEAREST. "A gentleman once began a letter to his bride thus: 'My
+_dearest_ Maria.' The lady replied: 'My dear John, I beg that you will
+mend either your morals or your grammar. You call me your "_dearest_
+Maria"; am I to understand that you have other Marias'?"--Moon's "Bad
+English."
+
+DECEIVING. "You are _deceiving_ me." Not unfrequently _deceiving_ is
+used when the speaker means _trying to deceive_. It is when we do not
+suspect deception that we are deceived.
+
+DECIMATE. This word, meaning as it properly does to tithe, to take the
+tenth part, is hardly permissible in the sense in which it is used in
+such sentences as, "The regiment held its position, though terribly
+_decimated_ by the enemy's artillery." "Though terribly _tithed_" would
+be equally correct.
+
+DEMEAN. This word is sometimes erroneously used in the sense of _to
+debase_, _to disgrace_, _to humble_. It is a reflexive verb, and its
+true meaning is _to behave_, _to carry_, _to conduct_; as, "He _demeans
+himself_ in a gentlemanly manner," i. e., He _behaves_, or _carries_, or
+_conducts_, himself in a gentlemanly manner.
+
+DENUDE. "The vulture," says Brande, "has some part of the head and
+sometimes of the neck _denuded_ of feathers." Most birds might be
+_denuded_ of the feathers on their heads; not so, however, the vulture,
+for his head is always featherless. A thing can not be _denuded_ of what
+it does not have. Denuding a vulture's head and neck of the feathers is
+like _denuding_ an eel of its scales.
+
+DEPRECATE. Strangely enough, this word is often used in the sense of
+disapprove, censure, condemn; as, "He _deprecates_ the whole
+proceeding"; "Your course, from first to last, is universally
+_deprecated_." But, according to the authorities, the word really means,
+to endeavor to avert by prayer; to pray exemption or deliverance from;
+to beg off; to entreat; to urge against.
+
+"Daniel kneeled upon his knees to _deprecate_ the captivity of his
+people."--Hewyt.
+
+DESPITE. This word is often incorrectly preceded by _in_ and followed by
+_of_; thus, "_In_ despite _of_ all our efforts to detain him, he set
+out"; which should be, "Despite all our efforts," etc., or "_In spite
+of_ all our efforts," etc.
+
+DETERMINED. See BOUND.
+
+DICTION. This is a general term, and is applicable to a single sentence
+or to a connected composition. _Bad diction_ may be due to errors in
+grammar, to a confused disposition of words, or to an improper use of
+words. _Diction_, to be good, requires to be only correct and clear. Of
+excellent examples of bad diction there are very many in a little work
+by Dr. L. T. Townsend, Professor of Sacred Rhetoric in Boston
+University, the first volume of which has lately come under my notice.
+The first ten lines of Dr. Townsend's preface are:
+
+"The leading genius[1] of the People's College at Chautauqua Lake, with
+a [the?] view of providing for his course[2] a text-book, asked for the
+publication of the following laws and principles of speech.[3]
+
+"The author, not seeing sufficient reason[4] for withholding what had
+been of much practical benefit[5] to himself, consented.[6]
+
+"The subject-matter herein contained is an outgrowth from[7] occasional
+instructions[8] given[9] while occupying the chair[10] of Sacred
+Rhetoric."
+
+1. The phrase _leading genius_ is badly chosen. Founder, projector,
+head, organizer, principal, or president--some one of these terms would
+probably have been appropriate. 2. What course? Race-course, course of
+ethics, æsthetics, rhetoric, or what?[3] 3. "The following laws and
+principles of speech." And how came these laws and principles in
+existence? Who made them? We are to infer, it would seem, that Professor
+Townsend made them, and that the world would have had to go without the
+laws that govern language and the principles on which language is formed
+had it pleased Professor Townsend to withhold them. 4. "_Sufficient_
+reason"! Then there were reasons why Professor Townsend ought to have
+kept these good things all to himself; only, they were not _sufficient_.
+5. "Practical benefit"! Is there _any_ such thing as impractical
+benefit? Are not all benefits practical? and, if they are, what purpose
+does the epithet _practical_ serve? 6. Consented to what? It is easy to
+see that the Doctor means _acceded to the request_, but he is a long way
+from saying so. The object writers usually have in view is to convey
+thought, not to set their readers to guessing. 7. _The outgrowth of_
+would be English. 8. "Occasional instructions"! Very vague, and well
+calculated to set the reader to guessing again. 9. Given to whom? 10.
+"_The_ chair." The definite article made it necessary for the writer to
+specify what particular chair of Sacred Rhetoric he meant.
+
+These ten lines are a fair specimen of the diction of the entire volume.
+
+Page 131. "To render a _given ambiguous or_ unintelligible sentence
+transparent, the following suggestions are recommended." The words in
+italics are unnecessary, since what is ambiguous is unintelligible. Then
+who has ever heard of _recommending suggestions_?
+
+Dr. Townsend speaks of _mastering a subject before publishing it_.
+Publishing a subject?
+
+Page 133. "Violations of simplicity, whatever the type, show either that
+_the mind of_ the writer is tainted with affectation, or _else_ that _an
+effort is making_ to conceal _conscious_ poverty of _sentiment_ under
+loftiness of expression." Here is an example of a kind of sentence that
+can be mended in only one way--by rewriting, which might be done thus:
+Violations of simplicity, whatever the type, show either that the writer
+is tainted with affectation, or that he is making an effort to conceal
+poverty of thought under loftiness of expression.
+
+Page 143. "This _quality_ is fully _stated_ and recommended," etc. Who
+has ever heard of _stating a quality_?
+
+On page 145 Dr. Townsend says: "A person can not read a single book of
+poor style without having his own style vitiated." _A book of poor
+style_ is an awkward expression, to say the least. _A single
+badly-written book_ would have been unobjectionable.
+
+Page 160. "The presented picture produces instantly a definite effect."
+Why this unusual disposition of words? Why not say, in accordance with
+the idiom of the language, "The picture presented instantly produces,"
+etc.?
+
+Page 161. "The boy studies ... geography and hates everything connected
+with the sea and land." Why _the_ boy? As there are few things besides
+seals and turtles that are connected with the sea _and_ land, the boy in
+question has few things to hate.
+
+On page 175, Dr. Townsend heads a chapter thus: "_Art_ of acquiring
+_Skill_ in the use of Poetic Speech." This reminds one of the man who
+tried to lift himself over a fence by taking hold of the seat of his
+breeches. "_How_ to acquire skill" is probably what is meant.
+
+On page 232, "Jeremy Taylor is among the best models of long sentences
+which are both clear and logical." Jeremy Taylor is a clear and logical
+long sentence?! True, our learned rhetorician says so, but he doesn't
+mean it. He means, "In Jeremy Taylor we find some of the best examples
+of long sentences which are at once clear and logical."
+
+Since the foregoing was written, the second volume of Professor
+Townsend's "Art of Speech" has been published. In the brief preface to
+this volume we find this characteristic sentence: "The author has felt
+that _clergymen_ more than _those_ of other professions will study this
+treatise." The antecedent of the relative _those_ being _clergymen_, the
+sentence, it will be perceived, says: "The author has felt that
+_clergymen_ more than _clergymen of other professions_ will study this
+treatise." Comment on such "art" as Professor Townsend's is not
+necessary.
+
+I find several noteworthy examples of bad diction in an article in a
+recent number of an Australian magazine. The following are some of them:
+"_Large capital_ always manages to make _itself_ master of the
+situation; it is the small capitalist and the small landholder that
+would suffer," etc. Should be, "_The large capitalist ... himself_,"
+etc. Again: "The small farmer would ... be despoiled ... of the meager
+profit which _strenuous_ labor had conquered from the _reluctant_ soil."
+Not only are the epithets in italics superfluous, and consequently
+weakening in their effect, but idiom does not permit _strenuous_ to be
+used to qualify _labor_: _hard_ labor and _strenuous_ effort. Again:
+"Capital has always the choice _of_ a large field." Should be, "the
+choice _offered by_ a large field." Again: "Should capital be withdrawn,
+tenements would soon prove insufficient." Should be, "_the number of_
+tenements would," etc. Again: "Men of wealth, therefore, would find
+their Fifth Avenue mansions and their summer villas a little more
+burdened with taxes, but with this increase happily balanced by the
+exemption of their bonds and mortgages, their plate and furniture." The
+thought here is so simple that we easily divine it; but, if we look at
+the sentence at all carefully, we find that, though we supply the
+ellipses in the most charitable manner possible, the sentence really
+says: "Men would find their mansions more burdened, but would find them
+with this increased burden happily balanced by the exemption," etc. The
+sentence should have been framed somewhat in this wise: "Men ... would
+find their ... mansions ... more burdened with taxes, but this increase
+in the taxes on their real estate would be happily balanced by the
+exemption from taxation of their bonds, mortgages, plate, and
+furniture." Again: "Men generally ... would be inclined to laugh at the
+idea of intrusting the modern politician with such gigantic
+opportunities for enriching his favorites." We do not _intrust_ one
+another with _opportunities_. _To enrich_ would better the diction.
+Again: "The value of land that has accrued from labor is not ... a just
+object for confiscation." Correctly: "The value of land that has
+_resulted_ from labor is not _justly_ ... an object _of_ confiscation."
+_Accrue_ is properly used more in the sense of _spontaneous growth_.
+Again: "If the state attempts to confiscate this increase by means of
+taxes, either rentals will increase correspondingly, or such a check
+will be put upon _the_ growth _of each place_ and _all the_ enterprises
+_connected with it_ that greater injury would be done than if things had
+been left untouched." We have here, it will be observed, a confusion of
+moods; the sentence begins in the indicative and ends in the
+conditional. The words in italics are worse than superfluous. Rewritten:
+"If the state _should_ attempt to confiscate this increase by means of
+taxes, either rentals _would_ increase correspondingly, or such a check
+_would_ be put upon growth and enterprise that greater injury would,"
+etc. Again: "The _theory_ that land ... is a _boon_ of Nature, to which
+every person has an inalienable right equal to every other person, is
+not new." The words _theory_ and _boon_ are here misused. A _theory_ is
+a system of suppositions. The things man receives from Nature are
+_gifts_, not _boons_: the gift of reason, the gift of speech, etc. The
+sentence should be: "The _declaration_ (or _assertion_) that land ... is
+a _gift_ of Nature, to which every person has an inalienable right equal
+to _that of any_ other person, is not new." Or, more simply and quite as
+forcibly: "... to which one person has an inalienable right equal to
+that of another, is not new." Or, more simply still, and more forcibly:
+"... to which one _man_ has as good a right as another, is not new." By
+substituting the word _man_ for _person_, we have a word of one syllable
+that expresses, in this connection, all that the longer word expresses.
+The fewer the syllables, if the thought be fully expressed, the more
+vigorous the diction. Inalienability being foreign to the discussion,
+the long word _inalienable_ only encumbers the sentence.
+
+"We have thus[1] passed in review[2] the changes and improvements[3]
+which the revision contains[4] in the First Epistle to the Corinthians.
+It has[5] not, indeed,[6] been possible to refer to[7] them all; but so
+many illustrations[8] have been given in[9] the several classes
+described that the reader will have[10] a satisfactory[11] survey of the
+whole subject. Whatever may be said of other portions[12] of the New
+Testament, we think it will be generally admitted that in this Epistle
+the changes have improved the old[13] translation. They are such as[14]
+make the English version[15] conform more completely[16] to the Greek
+original. If this be[17] true, the revisers have done a good work for
+the Church.[18] If it be true[19] with regard to all the New Testament
+books, the work which they have done will remain[20] a blessing to the
+readers of those books for[21] generations to come. But the blessing
+will be only in the clearer presentation of the Divine truth, and,
+therefore, it will be only to the glory of God."
+
+This astonishingly slipshod bit of composition is from the pen of the
+Rev. Dr. Timothy Dwight. If the learned Professor of Divinity in Yale
+College deemed it worth while to give a little thought to manner as well
+as to matter, it is probable that his diction would be very different
+from what it is; and, if he were to give a few minutes to the making of
+verbal corrections in the foregoing paragraph, he would, perhaps, do
+something like this: 1, change _thus_ to _now_; 2, write _some of_ the
+changes; 3, strike out _and improvements_; 4, for _contains changes_
+substitute some other form of expression; 5, instead of _has been_,
+write _was_; 6, strike out _indeed_; 7, instead of _refer to_, write
+_cite_; 8, change _illustrations_ to _examples_; 9, instead of _in_,
+write _of_; 10, instead of _the reader will have_, write _the reader
+will be able to get_; 11, change _satisfactory_ to _tolerable_; 12,
+change _portions_ to _parts_; 13, not talk of the _old_ translation, as
+we have no new one; 14, strike out as superfluous the words _are such
+as_; 15, change _version_ to _text_; 16, substitute _nearly_ for
+_completely_, which does not admit of comparison; 17, substitute the
+indicative for the conditional; 18, end sentence with the word _work_;
+19, introduce _also_ after _be_; 20, instead of _remain_, in the sense
+of _be_, use _be_; 21, introduce _the_ after _for_. As for the last
+sentence, it reminds one of Mendelssohn's "Songs without Words," though
+here we have, instead of a song and no words, words and no song, or
+rather no meaning. As is often true of cant, we have here simply a
+syntactical arrangement of words signifying--nothing.
+
+If Professor Dwight were of those who, in common with the Addisons and
+Macaulays and Newmans, think it worth while to give some attention to
+diction, the thought conveyed in the paragraph under consideration
+would, perhaps, have been expressed somewhat in this wise:
+
+"We have now passed in review some of the changes that, in the revision,
+have been made in the First Epistle to the Corinthians. It was not
+possible to cite them all, but a sufficient number of examples of the
+several classes described have been given to enable the reader to get a
+tolerable survey of the whole subject. Whatever may be said of the other
+parts of the New Testament, we think it will be generally admitted that
+in this Epistle the changes have improved the translation. They make the
+English text conform more nearly to the Greek. This being true, the
+revisers have done a good work; and, if it be also true with regard to
+all the New Testament books, the work which they have done will be a
+blessing to the readers of these books for the generations to come."
+
+DIE WITH. Man and brute die _of_, and not _with_, fevers, consumption,
+the plague, pneumonia, old age, and so on.
+
+DIFFER. Writers differ _from_ one another in opinion with regard to the
+particle we should use with this verb. Some say they differ _with_,
+others that they differ _from_, their neighbors in opinion. The weight
+of authority is on the side of always using _from_, though A may differ
+_with_ C from D in opinion with regard, say, to the size of the fixed
+stars. "I differ, as to this matter, _from_ Bishop Lowth."--Cobbett.
+_Different to_ is heard sometimes instead of _different from_.
+
+DIRECTLY. The Britons have a way of using this word in the sense of
+_when_, _as soon as_. This is quite foreign to its true meaning, which
+is immediately, at once, straightway. They say, for example,
+"_Directly_ he reached the city, he went to his brother's." "Directly he
+[the saint] was dead, the Arabs sent his woolen shirt to the
+sovereign."--"London News." Dr. Hall says of its use in the sense of _as
+soon as_: "But, after all, it may simply anticipate on the English of
+the future."
+
+DIRT. This word means filth or anything that renders foul and unclean,
+and means nothing else. It is often improperly used for earth or loam,
+and sometimes even for sand or gravel. We not unfrequently hear of a
+_dirt_ road when an unpaved road is meant.
+
+DISCOMMODE. This word is rarely used; _incommode_ is accounted the
+better form.
+
+DISREMEMBER. This is a word vulgarly used in the sense of _forget_. It
+is said to be more frequently heard in the South than in the North.
+
+DISTINGUISH. This verb is sometimes improperly used for _discriminate_.
+We _distinguish_ by means of the senses as well as of the understanding;
+we _discriminate_ by means of the understanding only. "It is difficult,
+in some cases, to _distinguish between_," etc.: should be, "It is
+difficult, in some cases, to _discriminate between_," etc. We
+_distinguish_ one thing _from another_, and _discriminate between_ two
+or more things.
+
+DOCK--WHARF. The first of these words is often improperly used for the
+second. Of docks there are several kinds: a _naval dock_ is a place for
+the keeping of naval stores, timber, and materials for ship-building; a
+_dry dock_ is a place where vessels are drawn out of the water for
+repairs; a _wet dock_ is a place where vessels are kept afloat at a
+certain level while they are loaded and unloaded; a _sectional dock_ is
+a contrivance for raising vessels out of the water on a series of
+air-tight boxes. A _dock_, then, is a place into which things are
+received; hence, a man might fall _into_ a dock, but could no more fall
+_off_ a dock than he could fall off a hole. A _wharf_ is a sort of quay
+built by the side of the water. A similar structure built at a right
+angle with the shore is generally called a _pier_. Vessels lie at
+_wharves_ and _piers_, not at _docks_.
+
+DONATE. This word, which is defined as meaning to give, to contribute,
+is looked upon by most champions of good English as being an
+abomination. _Donation_ is also little used by careful writers.
+"_Donate_," says Mr. Gould, "may be dismissed with this remark: so long
+as its place is occupied by _give_, _bestow_, _grant_, _present_, etc.,
+it is not needed; and it should be unceremoniously bowed out, or thrust
+out, of the seat into which it has, temporarily, intruded."
+
+DONE. This past participle is often very inelegantly, if not improperly,
+used thus: "He did not cry out as some have _done_ against it," which
+should read, "He did not cry out as some have against it"; i. e., "as
+some _have cried out_ against it."
+
+"Done is frequently a very great offender against grammar," says
+Cobbett. "_To do_ is the _act of doing_. We see people write, 'I _did_
+not speak yesterday so well as I wished to have _done_.' Now, what is
+meant by the writer? He means to say that he _did_ not speak so well as
+he then _wished_, or was wishing, _to speak_. Therefore, the sentence
+should be, 'I did not speak yesterday so well as I wished _to do_.' That
+is to say, 'so well as I wished to do it'; that is to say, to do or to
+perform _the act of speaking_.
+
+"Take great care not to be too free in your use of the verb _to do_ in
+any of its times or modes. It is a nice little handy word, and, like our
+oppressed _it_, it is made use of very often when the writer is at a
+_loss_ for what to put down. _To do_ is to _act_, and therefore it never
+can, in any of its parts, supply the place of a _neuter_ verb. 'How do
+you do?' Here _do_ refers to the _state_, and is essentially passive or
+neuter. Yet, to employ it for this purpose is very common. Dr. Blair, in
+his 23d Lecture, says: 'It is somewhat unfortunate that this Number of
+the "Spectator" did not _end_, as it might have _done_, with the former
+beautiful period.' That is to say, _done it_. And then we ask, Done
+what? Not the _act of ending_, because in this case there is _no action_
+at all. The verb means _to come to an end_, _to cease_, _not to go any
+further_. This same verb _to end_ is sometimes an active verb: 'I _end_
+my sentence'; _then_ the verb _to do_ may supply its place; as, 'I have
+not ended my sentence so well as I might have _done_'; that is, done
+_it_; that is, done, or performed, the _act of ending_. But the Number
+of the 'Spectator' was no _actor_; it was expected to _perform_ nothing;
+it was, by the Doctor, wished to have _ceased_ to proceed. 'Did not
+_end_ as it very well might have ended....' This would have been
+correct; but the Doctor wished to avoid the _repetition_, and thus he
+fell into bad grammar. 'Mr. Speaker, I do not _feel_ so well satisfied
+as I should have _done_ if the Right Honorable Gentleman had explained
+the matter more fully.' To _feel_ satisfied is--when the satisfaction is
+to arise from conviction produced by fact or reasoning--a senseless
+expression; and to supply its place, when it is, as in this case, a
+neuter verb, by _to do_, is as senseless. Done _what_? Done _the act of
+feeling_! 'I do not _feel_ so well satisfied as I should have _done_, or
+_executed_, or _performed_ the _act of feeling_'! What incomprehensible
+words!"
+
+DON'T. Everybody knows that _don't_ is a contraction of _do not_, and
+that _doesn't_ is a contraction of _does not_; and yet _nearly_
+everybody is guilty of using _don't_ when he should use _doesn't_. "So
+you _don't_ go; John _doesn't_ either, I hear."
+
+DOUBLE GENITIVE. An anecdote of Mr. Lincoln--an anecdote of Mr.
+Lincoln's. We see at a glance that these two phrases are very different
+in meaning. So, also, a portrait of Brown--a portrait of Brown's. No
+precise rule has ever been given to guide us in our choice between these
+two forms of the possessive case. Sometimes it is not material which
+form is employed; where, however, it is material--and it generally
+is--we must consider the thought we wish to express, and rely on our
+discrimination.
+
+DRAMATIZE. See ADAPT.
+
+DRAWING-ROOM. See PARLOR.
+
+DRESS--GOWN. Within the memory of many persons the outer garment worn by
+women was properly called a _gown_ by everybody, instead of being
+improperly called a _dress_, as it now is by nearly everybody.
+
+DRIVE. See RIDE.
+
+DUE--OWING. These two words, though close synonyms, should not be used
+indiscriminately. The mistake usually made is in using _due_ instead of
+_owing_. That is _due_ which ought to be paid as a debt; that is _owing_
+which is to be referred to as a source. "It was _owing_ to his exertions
+that the scheme succeeded." "It was _owing_ to your negligence that the
+accident happened." "A certain respect is _due_ to men's prejudices."
+"This was _owing_ to an indifference to the pleasures of life." "It is
+_due_ to the public that I should tell all I know of the matter."
+
+EACH OTHER. "Their great authors address themselves, not to their
+country, but to _each other_."--Buckle. _Each other_ is properly applied
+to two only; _one another_ must be used when the number considered
+exceeds two. Buckle should have written _one another_ and not _each
+other_, unless he meant to intimate that the Germans had only two great
+authors, which is not probable.
+
+EAT. Grammarians differ very widely with regard to the conjugation of
+this verb; there is no doubt, however, that from every point of view the
+preferable forms for the preterite and past participle are respectively
+_ate_ and _eaten_. To refined ears the other forms smack of vulgarity,
+although supported by good authority. "I _ate_ an apple." "I have
+_eaten_ dinner." "John _ate_ supper with me." "As soon as you have
+_eaten_ breakfast we will set out."
+
+EDITORIAL. The use of this adjective as a substantive is said to be an
+Americanism.
+
+EDUCATION. This is one of the most misused of words. A man may be well
+acquainted with the contents of text-books, and yet be a person of
+little _education_; on the other hand, a man may be a person of good
+education, and yet know little of the contents of text-books. Abraham
+Lincoln and Edwin Forrest knew comparatively little of what is generally
+learned in schools; still they were men of culture, men of _education_.
+A man may have ever so much book-knowledge and still be a boor; but a
+man can not be a person of good education and not be--so far as manner
+is concerned--a gentleman. _Education_, then, is a whole of which
+Instruction and Breeding are the parts. The man or the woman--even in
+this democratic country of ours--who _deserves_ the title of gentleman
+or lady is always a person of education; i. e., he or she has a
+sufficient acquaintance with books and with the usages of social
+intercourse to acquit himself or herself creditably in the society of
+cultivated people. Not moral worth, nor learning, nor wealth, nor all
+three combined, can unaided make a gentleman, for with all three a man
+might be _uneducated_--i. e., coarse, unbred, unschooled in those things
+which alone make men welcome in the society of the refined.
+
+EFFECTUATE. This word, together with _ratiocinate_ and _eventuate_, is
+said to be a great favorite with the rural members of the Arkansas
+legislature.
+
+EFFLUVIUM. The plural of this word is _effluvia_. It is a common error
+with those who have no knowledge of Latin to speak of "a disagreeable
+effluvia," which is as incorrect as it would be to talk about "a
+disagreeable vapors."
+
+EFFORT WITHOUT EFFECT. "Some writers deal in expletives to a degree that
+tires the ear and offends the understanding. With them everything is
+_excessively_, or _immensely_, or _extremely_, or _vastly_, or
+_surprisingly_, or _wonderfully_, or _abundantly_, or the like. The
+notion of such writers is that these words give _strength_ to what they
+are saying. This is a great error. Strength must be found in the
+_thought_, or it will never be found in the _words_. Big-sounding words,
+without thoughts corresponding, are effort without effect."--William
+Cobbett. See FORCIBLE-FEEBLE.
+
+EGOIST. "One of a class of philosophers who professed to be sure of
+nothing but their own existence."--Reid.
+
+EGOTIST. "One who talks much of himself."
+
+"A tribe of _egotists_ for whom I have always had a mortal
+aversion."--"Spectator."
+
+EITHER. This word means, strictly, the _one_ or the _other_ of two.
+Unlike _both_, which means two taken collectively, _either_, like
+_each_, may mean _two considered separately_; but in this sense _each_
+is the better word to use. "Give me _either_ of them" means, Give me the
+one or the other of two. "He has a farm on _either_ side of the river"
+would mean that he has two farms, one on each (or either) side of the
+river. "He has a farm on _both_ sides of the river" would mean that his
+farm lies partly on the one side of the river and partly on the other.
+The use of _either_ in the sense of _each_, though biblical and
+defensible, may be accounted little if any better than an affectation.
+_Neither_ is the negative of _either_. _Either_ is responded to by
+_or_, _neither_ by _nor_; as, "_either_ this _or_ that," "_neither_ this
+_nor_ that." _Either_ and _neither_ should not--strictly--be used in
+relation to more than two objects. But, though both _either_ and
+_neither_ are strictly applicable to two only, they have been for a very
+long time used in relation to more than two by many good writers; and,
+as it is often convenient so to use them, it seems probable that the
+custom will prevail. When more than two things are referred to, _any_
+and _none_ should be used instead of _either_ and _neither_; as, "_any_
+of the three," not, "_either_ of the three"; "_none_ of the four," not,
+"_neither_ of the four."
+
+EITHER ALTERNATIVE. The word _alternative_ means a choice offered
+between two things. An _alternative writ_, for example, offers the
+_alternative_ of choosing between the doing of a specified act or of
+showing cause why it is not done. Such propositions, therefore, as, "You
+are at liberty to choose _either_ alternative," "_Two_ alternatives are
+presented to me," "_Several_ alternatives presented themselves," and the
+like, are not correct English. The word is correctly used thus: "I am
+confronted with a hard _alternative_: I must either denounce a friend or
+betray my trust." We rarely hear the word _alternate_ or any of its
+derivatives correctly pronounced.
+
+ELDER. See OLDER.
+
+ELEGANT. Professor Proctor says: "If you say to an American, 'This is a
+fine morning,' he is likely to reply, 'It is an _elegant_ morning,' or
+perhaps oftener by using simply the word _elegant_. This is not a
+pleasing use of the word." This is not American English, Professor, but
+popinjay English.
+
+ELLIPSIS. The omission of a word or of words necessary to complete the
+grammatical construction, but not necessary to make the meaning clear,
+is called an _ellipsis_. We almost always, whether in speaking or in
+writing, leave out some of the words necessary to the _full_ expression
+of our meaning. For example, in dating a letter to-day, we should write,
+"New York, August 25, 1881," which would be, if fully written out, "I am
+now writing in the city of New York; this is the twenty-fifth day of
+August, and this month is in the one thousand eight hundred and
+eighty-first year of the Christian era." "I am going to Wallack's"
+means, "I am going to Wallack's _theatre_." "I shall spend the summer at
+my aunt's"; i. e., at my aunt's _house_.
+
+By supplying the _ellipses_ we can often discover the errors in a
+sentence, if there are any.
+
+ENJOY BAD HEALTH. As no one has ever been known to _enjoy_ bad health,
+it is better to employ some other form of expression than this. Say, for
+example, he is in _feeble_, or _delicate_, health.
+
+ENTHUSE. This is a word that is occasionally heard in conversation, and
+is sometimes met with in print; but it has not as yet made its
+appearance in the dictionaries. What its ultimate fate will be, of
+course, no one can tell; for the present, however, it is studiously
+shunned by those who are at all careful in the selection of their
+language. It is said to be most used in the South. The writer has never
+seen it anywhere in the North but in the columns of the "Boston
+Congregationalist."
+
+EPIGRAM. "The word _epigram_ signified originally an inscription on a
+monument. It next came to mean a short poem containing some single
+thought pointedly expressed, the subjects being very various--amatory,
+convivial, moral, eulogistic, satirical, humorous, etc. Of the various
+devices for brevity and point employed in such compositions, especially
+in modern times, the most frequent is a play upon words.... In the
+_epigram_ the mind is roused by a conflict or contradiction between the
+form of the language and the meaning really conveyed."--Bain.
+
+Some examples are:
+
+"When you have nothing to say, say it."
+
+"We can not see the wood for the trees"; that is, we can not get a
+general view because we are so engrossed with the details.
+
+"Verbosity is cured by a large vocabulary"; that is, he who commands a
+large vocabulary is able to select words that will give his meaning
+tersely.
+
+"By indignities men come to dignities."
+
+"Some people are too foolish to commit follies."
+
+"He went to his imagination for his facts, and to his memory for his
+tropes."
+
+EPITHET. Many persons use this word who are in error with regard to its
+meaning; they think that to "apply epithets" to a person is to vilify
+and insult him. Not at all. An _epithet_ is a word that expresses a
+quality, good or bad; a term that expresses an attribute. "All
+_adjectives_ are _epithets_, but all _epithets_ are not _adjectives_,"
+says Crabb; "thus, in Virgil's Pater Æneas, the _pater_ is an _epithet_,
+but not an _adjective_." _Epithet_ is the technical term of the
+rhetorician; _adjective_, that of the grammarian.
+
+EQUALLY AS WELL. A redundant form of expression, as any one will see who
+for a moment considers it. _As well_, or _equally well_, expresses quite
+as much as _equally as well_.
+
+EQUANIMITY OF MIND. This phrase is tautological, and expresses no more
+than does _equanimity_ (literally, "equalmindedness") alone; hence, _of
+mind_ is superfluous, and consequently inelegant. _Anxiety of mind_ is a
+scarcely less redundant form of expression. _A capricious mind_ is in
+the same category.
+
+ERRATUM. Plural, _errata_.
+
+ESQUIRE. An esquire was originally the shield-bearer of a knight. It is
+much, and, in the opinion of some, rather absurdly, used in this
+country. Mr. Richard Grant White says on the subject of its use: "I have
+yet to discover what a man means when he addresses a letter to John
+Dash, _Esqr._" He means no more nor less than when he writes _Mr._
+(master). The use of _Esq._ is quite as prevalent in England as in
+America, and has little more meaning there than here. It simply belongs
+to our stock of courteous epithets.
+
+EUPHEMISM. A description which describes in inoffensive language that
+which is of itself offensive, or a figure which uses agreeable
+phraseology when the literal would be offensive, is called a
+_euphemism_.
+
+EVENTUATE. See EFFECTUATE.
+
+EVERLASTINGLY. This adverb is misused in the South in a manner that is
+very apt to excite the risibility of one to whom the peculiar misuse is
+new. The writer recently visited the upper part of New York with a
+distinguished Southern poet and journalist. It was the gentleman's first
+ride over an elevated road. When we were fairly under way, in admiration
+of the rate of speed at which the cars were moving, he exclaimed, "Well,
+they do just _everlastingly_ shoot along, don't they!"
+
+EVERY. This word, which means simply each or all taken separately, is of
+late years frequently made, by slipshod speakers, to do duty for
+perfect, entire, great, or all possible. Thus we have such expressions
+as _every_ pains, _every_ confidence, _every_ praise, _every_ charity,
+and so on. We also have such diction as, "_Every one_ has this in
+common"; meaning, "_All of us_ have this in common."
+
+EVERY-DAY LATIN. _A fortiori_: with stronger reason. _A posteriori_:
+from the effect to the cause. _A priori_: from the cause to the effect.
+_Bona fide_: in good faith; in reality. _Certiorari_: to be made more
+certain. _Ceteris paribus_: other circumstances being equal. _De facto_:
+in fact; in reality. _De jure_: in right; in law. _Ecce homo_: behold
+the man. _Ergo_: therefore. _Et cetera_: and the rest; and so on.
+_Excerpta_: extracts. _Exempli gratia_: by way of example; abbreviated,
+_e. g._, and _ex. gr._ _Ex officio_: by virtue of his office. _Ex
+parte_: on one side; an _ex parte_ statement is a statement on one side
+only. _Ibidem_: in the same place; abbreviated, _ibid._ _Idem_: the
+same. _Id est_: that is; abbreviated, _i. e._ _Imprimis_: in the first
+place. _In statu quo_: in the former state; just as it was. _In statu
+quo ante bellum_: in the same state as before the war. _In transitu_: in
+passing. _Index expurgatorius_: a purifying index. _In extremis_: at the
+point of death. _In memoriam_: in memory. _Ipse dixit_: on his sole
+assertion. _Item_: also. _Labor omnia vincit_: labor overcomes every
+difficulty. _Locus sigilli_: the place of the seal. _Multum in parvo_:
+much in little. _Mutatis mutandis_: after making the necessary changes.
+_Ne plus ultra_: nothing beyond; the utmost point. _Nolens volens_:
+willing or unwilling. _Nota bene_: mark well; take particular notice.
+_Omnes_: all. _O tempora, O mores!_ O the times and the manners! _Otium
+cum dignitate_: ease with dignity. _Otium sine dignitate_: ease without
+dignity. _Particeps criminis_: an accomplice. _Peccavi_: I have sinned.
+_Per se_: by itself. _Prima facie_: on the first view or appearance; at
+first sight. _Pro bono publico_: for the public good. _Quid nunc_: what
+now? _Quid pro quo_: one thing for another; an equivalent. _Quondam_:
+formerly. _Rara avis_: a rare bird; a prodigy. _Resurgam_: I shall rise
+again. _Seriatim_: in order. _Sine die_: without specifying any
+particular day; to an indefinite time. _Sine qua non_: an indispensable
+condition. _Sui generis_: of its own kind. _Vade mecum_: go with me.
+_Verbatim_: word by word. _Versus_: against. _Vale_: fare-well. _Via_:
+by the way of. _Vice_: in the place of. _Vide_: see. _Vi et armis_: by
+main force. _Viva voce_: orally; by word of mouth. _Vox populi, vox
+Dei_: the voice of the people is the voice of God.
+
+EVIDENCE--TESTIMONY. These words, though differing widely in meaning,
+are often used indiscriminately by careless speakers. _Evidence_ is that
+which _tends_ to convince; _testimony_ is that which is _intended_ to
+convince. In a judicial investigation, for example, there might be a
+great deal of _testimony_--a great deal of _testifying_--and very little
+_evidence_; and the _evidence_ might be quite the reverse of the
+_testimony_. See PROOF.
+
+EXAGGERATION. "Weak minds, feeble writers and speakers delight in
+_superlatives_." See EFFORT WITHOUT EFFECT.
+
+EXCEPT. "No one need apply _except_ he is thoroughly familiar with the
+business," should be, "No one need apply _unless_," etc.
+
+EXCESSIVELY. That class of persons who are never content with any form
+of expression that falls short of the superlative, frequently use
+_excessively_ when _exceedingly_ or even the little word _very_ would
+serve their turn better. They say, for example, that the weather is
+_excessively hot_, when they should content themselves with saying
+simply that the weather is _very warm_, or, if the word suits them
+better, _hot_. Intemperance in the use of language is as much to be
+censured as intemperance in anything else; like intemperance in other
+things, its effect is vulgarizing.
+
+EXECUTE. This word means to follow out to the end, to carry into effect,
+to accomplish, to fulfill, to perform; as, to execute an order, to
+execute a purpose. And the dictionaries and almost universal usage say
+that it also means to put to death in conformity with a judicial
+sentence; as, to execute a criminal. Some of our careful speakers,
+however, maintain that the use of the word in this sense is
+indefensible. They say that _laws_ and _sentences_ are executed, but not
+_criminals_, and that their execution only rarely results in the death
+of the persons upon whom they are executed. In the hanging of a
+criminal, it is, then, not the criminal who is executed, but the law and
+the sentence. The criminal is _hanged_.
+
+EXPECT. This verb always has reference to what is to come, never to what
+is past. We can not _expect_ backward. Instead, therefore, of saying, "I
+_expect_, you thought I would come to see you yesterday," we should say,
+"I _suppose_," etc.
+
+EXPERIENCE. "We _experience_ great difficulty in getting him to take his
+medicine." The word _have_ ought to be big enough, in a sentence like
+this, for anybody. "We _experienced_ great hardships." Better, "We
+_suffered_."
+
+EXTEND. This verb, the primary meaning of which is to stretch out, is
+used, especially by lovers of big words, in connections where to give,
+to show, or to offer would be preferable. For example, it is certainly
+better to say, "They _showed_ me every courtesy," than "They _extended_
+every courtesy to me." See EVERY.
+
+FALSE GRAMMAR. Some examples of false grammar will show what every one
+is the better for knowing: that in literature nothing should be taken on
+trust; that errors of grammar even are found where we should least
+expect them. "I do not know whether the imputation _were_ just or
+not."--Emerson. "I proceeded to inquire if the 'extract' ... _were_ a
+veritable quotation."--Emerson. Should be _was_ in both cases. "How
+_sweet_ the moonlight sleeps!"--Townsend, "Art of Speech," vol. i, p.
+114. Should be _sweetly_. "There is no question _but_ these arts ...
+will greatly aid him," etc.--Ibid., p. 130. Should be _that_. "Nearly
+all who have been distinguished in literature or oratory have made ...
+the generous confession that their attainments _have been_ reached
+through patient and laborious industry. They have declared that speaking
+and writing, though once difficult for them, _have become_ well-nigh
+recreations."--Ibid., p. 143. The _have been_ should be _were_, and the
+_have become_ should be _became_. "Many pronominal adverbs are
+correlatives of _each other_."--Harkness's "New Latin Grammar," p. 147.
+Should be _one another_. "Hot and cold springs, boiling springs, and
+quiet springs lie within a few feet of _each other_, but _none of them
+are properly geysers_."--Appletons' "Condensed Cyclopædia," vol. ii, p.
+414. Should be _one another_, and _not one of them is properly a
+geyser_. "How much better for you as seller and the nation as buyer ...
+than to sink ... in cutting _one another's_ throats." Should be _each
+other's_. "A minister, noted for prolixity of style, was once preaching
+before the inmates of a lunatic asylum. In one of his illustrations he
+painted a scene of a man condemned to be hung, but reprieved under the
+gallows." These two sentences are so faulty that the only way to mend
+them is to rewrite them. They are from a work that professes to teach
+the "art of speech." Mended: "A minister, noted for his prolixity, once
+_preached_ before the inmates of a lunatic asylum. By way of
+illustration he painted a scene in which a man, _who had been_ condemned
+to be _hanged_, _was_ reprieved under the gallows."
+
+FEMALE. The terms _male_ and _female_ are not unfrequently used where
+good taste would suggest some other word. For example, we see over the
+doors of school-houses, "Entrance for males," "Entrance for females."
+Now bucks and bulls are males as well as boys and men, and cows and sows
+are females as well as girls and women.
+
+FETCH. See BRING.
+
+FEWER. See LESS.
+
+FINAL COMPLETION. If there were such a thing as a plurality or a series
+of completions, there would, of course, be such a thing as the _final_
+completion; but, as every completion is final, to talk about a _final
+completion_ is as absurd as it would be to talk about a _final
+finality_.
+
+FIRST RATE. There are people who object to this phrase, and yet it is
+well enough when properly placed, as it is, for example, in such a
+sentence as this: "He's a 'first class' fellow, and I like him _first
+rate_; if I didn't, 'you bet' I'd just give him 'hail Columbia' for
+'blowing' the thing all round town like the big fool that he is."
+
+FIRSTLY. George Washington Moon says in defense of _firstly_: "I do not
+object to the occasional use of _first_ as an adverb; but, in sentences
+where it would be followed by _secondly_, _thirdly_, etc., I think that
+the adverbial form is preferable." To this, one of Mr. Moon's critics
+replies: "However desirable it may be to employ the word _firstly_ on
+certain occasions, the fact remains that the employment of it on any
+occasion is not the best usage." Webster inserts _firstly_, but remarks,
+"Improperly used for _first_."
+
+FLEE--FLY. These verbs, though near of kin, are not interchangeable. For
+example, we can not say, "He _flew_ the city," "He _flew_ from his
+enemies," "He _flew_ at the approach of danger," _flew_ being the
+imperfect tense of _to fly_, which is properly used to express the
+action of birds on the wing, of kites, arrows, etc. The imperfect tense
+of _to flee_ is _fled_; hence, "He _fled_ the city," etc.
+
+FORCIBLE-FEEBLE. This is a "novicy" kind of diction in which the
+would-be forcible writer defeats his object by the overuse of
+expletives. Examples: "And yet the _great_ centralization of wealth is
+one of the [great] evils of the day. All that Mr. ---- _utters_ [says]
+upon this point is _forcible and_ just. This centralization is due to
+the _enormous_ reproductive power of capital, to the _immense_ advantage
+that _costly and complicated_ machinery gives to _great_ [large]
+establishments, and to _the marked_ difference of personal force among
+men." The first _great_ is misplaced; the word _utters_ is misused; the
+second _great_ is ill-chosen. The other words in italics only enfeeble
+the sentence. Again: "In countries where _immense_ [large] estates
+exist, a breaking up of these _vast_ demesnes into _many_ minor
+freeholds would no doubt be a [of] _very_ great advantage." Substitute
+_large_ for _immense_, and take out _vast_, _many_, and _very_, and the
+language becomes much more forcible. Again: "The _very_ first effect of
+the ---- taxation plan would be destructive to the interests of this
+_great multitude_ [class]; it would impoverish our _innumerable_
+farmers, _it would_ confiscate the earnings of [our] _industrious_
+tradesmen and artisans, _it would_ [and] paralyze the hopes of
+_struggling_ millions." What a waste of portly expletives is here! With
+them the sentence is high-flown and weak; take them out, and introduce
+the words inclosed in brackets, and it becomes simple and forcible.
+
+FRIEND--ACQUAINTANCE. Some philosopher has said that he who has half a
+dozen friends in the course of his life may esteem himself fortunate;
+and yet, to judge from many people's talk, one would suppose they had
+friends by the score. No man knows whether he has any friends or not
+until he has "their adoption tried"; hence, he who is desirous to call
+things by their right names will, as a rule, use the word _acquaintance_
+instead of _friend_. "Your friend" is a favorite and very objectionable
+way many people, especially young people, have of writing themselves at
+the bottom of their letters. In this way the obscure stripling protests
+himself the FRIEND of the first man in the land, and that, too, when he
+is, perhaps, a comparative stranger and asking a favor.
+
+GALSOME. Here is a good, sonorous Anglo-Saxon word--meaning malignant,
+venomous, churlish--that has fallen into disuse.
+
+GENTLEMAN. Few things are in worse taste than to use the term
+_gentleman_, whether in the singular or plural, to designate the sex.
+"If I was a _gentleman_," says Miss Snooks. "_Gentlemen_ have just as
+much curiosity as _ladies_," says Mrs. Jenkins. "_Gentlemen_ have so
+much more liberty than we _ladies_ have," says Mrs. Parvenue. Now, if
+these ladies were ladies, they would in each of these cases use the word
+_man_ instead of _gentleman_, and _woman_ instead of _lady_; further,
+Miss Snooks would say, "If I _were_." Well-bred men, men of culture and
+refinement--gentlemen, in short--use the terms _lady_ and _gentleman_
+comparatively little, and they are especially careful not to call
+themselves _gentlemen_ when they can avoid it. A gentleman, for example,
+does not say, "I, with some _other_ gentlemen, went," etc.; he is
+careful to leave out the word _other_. The men who use these terms most,
+and especially those who lose no opportunity to proclaim themselves
+_gentlemen_, belong to that class of men who cock their hats on one side
+of their heads, and often wear them when and where gentlemen would
+remove them; who pride themselves on their familiarity with the latest
+slang; who proclaim their independence by showing the least possible
+consideration for others; who laugh long and loud at their own wit; who
+wear a profusion of cheap finery, such as outlandish watch-chains hooked
+in the lowest button-hole of their vests, Brazilian diamonds in their
+shirt-bosoms, and big seal-rings on their little fingers; who use bad
+grammar and interlard their conversation with big oaths. In business
+correspondence Smith is addressed as _Sir_, while Smith & Brown are
+often addressed as _Gentlemen_--or, vulgarly, as _Gents_. Better, much,
+is it to address them as _Sirs_.
+
+Since writing the foregoing, I have met with the following paragraph in
+the London publication, "All the Year Round": "Socially, the term
+'gentleman' has become almost vulgar. It is certainly less employed by
+gentlemen than by inferior persons. The one speaks of 'a man I know,'
+the other of 'a gentleman I know.' In the one case the gentleman is
+taken for granted, in the other it seems to need specification. Again,
+as regards the term 'lady.' It is quite in accordance with the usages of
+society to speak of your acquaintance the duchess as 'a very nice
+person.' People who would say 'very nice lady' are not generally of a
+social class which has much to do with duchesses; and if you speak of
+one of these as a 'person,' you will soon be made to feel your mistake."
+
+GENTS. Of all vulgarisms, this is, perhaps, the most offensive. If we
+say _gents_, why not say _lades_?
+
+GERUND. "'I have work _to do_,' 'there is no more _to say_,' are phrases
+where the verb is not in the common infinitive, but in the form of the
+_gerund_. 'He is the man _to do_ it, or _for doing_ it.' 'A house _to
+let_,' 'the course _to steer_ by,' 'a place _to lie_ in,' 'a thing _to
+be_ done,' 'a city _to take_ refuge in,' 'the means _to do_ ill deeds,'
+are adjective gerunds; they may be expanded into clauses: 'a house that
+the owner lets or will let'; 'the course that we should steer by'; 'a
+thing that should be done'; 'a city wherein one may take refuge'; 'the
+means whereby ill deeds may be done.' When the _to_ ceased in the
+twelfth century to be a distinctive mark of the dative infinitive or
+gerund, _for_ was introduced to make the writer's intention clear. Hence
+the familiar form in 'what went ye out _for to see_?' 'they came _for to
+show_ him the temple.'"--Bain.
+
+GET. In sentences expressing simple possession--as, "I have _got_ a
+book," "What has he _got_ there?" "Have you _got_ any news?" "They have
+_got_ a new house," etc.--_got_ is entirely superfluous, if not, as some
+writers contend, absolutely incorrect. Possession is completely
+expressed by _have_. "Foxes have holes; the birds of the air have
+nests"; not, "Foxes have _got_ holes; the birds of the air have _got_
+nests." Formerly the imperfect tense of this verb was _gat_, which is
+now obsolete, and the perfect participle was _gotten_, which, some
+grammarians say, is growing obsolete. If this be true, there is no good
+reason for it. If we say _eaten_, _written_, _striven_, _forgotten_, why
+not say _gotten_, where this form of the participle is more
+euphonious--as it often is--than _got_?
+
+GOODS. This term, like other terms used in trade, should be restricted
+to the vocabulary of commerce. Messrs. Arnold & Constable, in common
+with the Washington Market huckster, very properly speak of their wares
+as their _goods_; but Mrs. Arnold and Mrs. Constable should, and I doubt
+not do, speak of their gowns as being made of fine or coarse _silk_,
+_cashmere_, _muslin_, or whatever the material may be.
+
+GOULD AGAINST ALFORD. Mr. Edward S. Gould, in his review of Dean
+Alford's "Queen's English," remarks, on page 131 of his "Good English":
+"And now, as to the style[4] of the Dean's book, taken as a whole. He
+must be held responsible for every error in it; because, as has been
+shown, he has had full leisure for its revision.[5] The errors are,
+nevertheless, numerous; and the shortest way to exhibit them is[6] in
+tabular form." In several instances Mr. Gould would not have taken the
+Dean to task had he known English better. The following are a few of Mr.
+Gould's corrections in which he is clearly in the right:
+
+Paragraph
+
+4. "Into _another_ land _than_"; should be, "into a land _other than_."
+
+16. "We do not follow rule in spelling other words, but custom"; should
+be, "we do not follow _rule, but custom_, in spelling," etc.
+
+18. "The distinction is observed in French, but _never appears_ to have
+been made," etc.; read, "_appears never_ to have been made."
+
+61. "_Rather_ to aspirate more _than_ less"; should be, "to aspirate
+more _rather than_ less."
+
+9. "It is said also _only_ to occur three times," etc.; read, "_occur
+only_ three times."
+
+44. "This doubling _only takes place_ in a syllable," etc.; read,
+"_takes place only_."
+
+142. "Which can _only_ be decided when those circumstances are known";
+read, "_can be decided only_ when," etc.
+
+166. "I will _only_ say that it produces," etc.; read, "I will _say
+only_," etc.
+
+170. "It is said that this can _only_ be filled in thus"; read, "can be
+_filled in only_ thus."
+
+368. "I can _only_ deal with the complaint in a general way"; read,
+"_deal with the complaint only_," etc.
+
+86. "_In_ so far as they are idiomatic," etc. What is the use of _in_?
+
+171. "Try the experiment"; "_tried_ the experiment." Read, _make_ and
+_made_.
+
+345. "It is _most_ generally used of that very sect," etc. Why _most_?
+
+362. "The joining together two clauses with a third," etc.; read, "_of
+two_ clauses," etc.
+
+GOWN. See DRESS.
+
+GRADUATED. Students do not _graduate_; they _are_ graduated. Hence most
+writers nowadays say, "I _was_, he _was_, or they _were_ graduated"; and
+ask, "When _were_ you, or _was_ he, graduated?"
+
+GRAMMATICAL ERRORS. "The correctness of the expression _grammatical
+errors_ has been disputed. 'How,' it has been asked, 'can an error be
+grammatical?' How, it may be replied, can we with propriety say,
+_grammatically incorrect_? Yet we can do so.
+
+"No one will question the propriety of saying _grammatically correct_.
+Yet the expression is the acknowledgment of things _grammatically
+INcorrect_. Likewise the phrase _grammatical correctness_ implies the
+existence of _grammatical INcorrectness_. If, then, a sentence is
+_grammatically incorrect_, or, what is the same thing, has _grammatical
+incorrectness_, it includes a GRAMMATICAL ERROR. _Grammatically
+incorrect_ signifies INCORRECT WITH RELATION TO THE RULES OF GRAMMAR.
+_Grammatical errors_ signifies ERRORS WITH RELATION TO THE RULES OF
+GRAMMAR.
+
+"They who ridicule the phrase _grammatical errors_, and substitute the
+phrase _errors in grammar_, make an egregious mistake. Can there, it may
+be asked with some show of reason, be an error in grammar? Why, grammar
+is a science founded in our nature, referable to our ideas of time,
+relation, method; imperfect, doubtless, as to the system by which it is
+represented; but surely we can speak of error in that which is error's
+criterion! All this is hypercritical, but hypercriticism must be met
+with its own weapons.
+
+"Of the two expressions--_a grammatical error_, and _an error in
+grammar_--the former is preferable. If one's judgment can accept
+neither, one must relinquish the belief in the possibility of tersely
+expressing the idea of an offense against grammatical rules. Indeed, it
+would be difficult to express the idea even by circumlocution. Should
+some one say, 'This sentence is, according to the rules of grammar,
+incorrect.' 'What!' the hypercritic may exclaim, 'incorrect! and
+according to the rules of grammar!' 'This sentence, then,' the corrected
+person would reply, 'contains an error in grammar.' 'Nonsense!' the
+hypercritic may shout, 'grammar is a science; you may be wrong in its
+interpretation, but principles are immutable!'
+
+"After this, it need scarcely be added that, grammatically, no one can
+make a mistake, that there can be no grammatical mistake, that there can
+be no bad grammar, and, consequently, no bad English; a very pleasant
+conclusion, which would save us a great amount of trouble if it did not
+lack the insignificant quality of being true."--"Vulgarisms and Other
+Errors of Speech."
+
+GRATUITOUS. There are those who object to the use of this word in the
+sense of unfounded, unwarranted, unreasonable, untrue. Its use in this
+sense, however, has the sanction of abundant authority. "Weak and
+_gratuitous_ conjectures."--Porson. "A _gratuitous_ assumption."--Godwin.
+"The _gratuitous_ theory."--Southey. "A _gratuitous_ invention."--De
+Quincey. "But it is needless to dwell on the improbability of a
+hypothesis which has been shown to be altogether _gratuitous_."--Dr.
+Newman.
+
+GROW. This verb originally meant to increase in size, but has normally
+come to be also used to express a change from one state or condition to
+another; as, to _grow_ dark, to _grow_ weak or strong, to _grow_ faint,
+etc. But it is doubtful whether what is large can properly be said to
+_grow_ small. In this sense, _become_ would seem to be the better word.
+
+GUMS. See RUBBERS.
+
+HAD HAVE. Nothing could be more incorrect than the bringing together of
+these two auxiliary verbs in this manner; and yet we occasionally find
+it in writers of repute. Instead of "Had I known it," "Had you seen it,"
+"Had we been there," we hear, "Had I _have_ known it," "Had you _have_
+seen it," "Had we _have_ been there."
+
+HAD OUGHT. This is a vulgarism of the worst description, yet we hear
+people, who would be highly indignant if any one should intimate that
+they were not ladies and gentlemen, say, "He _had_ ought to go." A
+fitting reply would be, "Yes, I think he better had." _Ought_ says all
+that _had ought_ says.
+
+HAD RATHER. This expression and _had better_ are much used, but, in the
+opinion of many, are indefensible. We hear them in such sentences as, "I
+_had_ rather not do it," "You _had_ better go home." "Now, what tense,"
+it is asked, "is _had do_ and _had go_?" If we transpose the words thus,
+"You _had do_ better (to) go home," it becomes at once apparent, it is
+asserted, that the proper word to use in connection with _rather_ and
+_better_ is not _had_, but _would_; thus, "I _would_ rather not do it,"
+"You _would_ better go home." Examples of this use of _had_ can be found
+in the writings of our best authors. For what Professor Bain has to say
+on this subject in his "Composition Grammar," see SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
+
+HALF. "It might have been expressed in _one_ half the space." We see at
+a glance that _one_ here is superfluous.
+
+HANGED--HUNG. The irregular form, _hung_, of the past participle of the
+verb _to hang_ is most used; but, when the word denotes suspension by
+the neck for the purpose of destroying life, the regular form,
+_hanged_, is always used by careful writers and speakers.
+
+HASTE. See HURRY.
+
+HEADING. See CAPTION.
+
+HEALTHY--WHOLESOME. The first of these two words is often improperly
+used for the second; as, "Onions are a _healthy_ vegetable." A man, if
+he is in good health, is _healthy_; the food he eats, if it is not
+deleterious, is _wholesome_. A _healthy_ ox makes _wholesome_ food. We
+speak of _healthy_ surroundings, a _healthy_ climate, situation,
+employment, and of _wholesome_ food, advice, examples. _Healthful_ is
+generally used in the sense of conducive to health, virtue, morality;
+as, _healthful_ exercise, the _healthful_ spirit of the
+community--meaning that the spirit that prevails in the community is
+conducive to virtue and good morals.
+
+HELPMATE. The dictionaries suggest that this word is a corruption of
+_help_ and _meet_, as we find these words used in Gen. ii, 18, "I will
+make him a help meet for him," and that the proper word is _helpmeet_.
+If, as is possible, the words in Genesis mean, "I will make him a help,
+meet [suitable] for him," then neither _helpmate_ nor _helpmeet_ has any
+_raison d'être_.
+
+HIGHFALUTIN. This is a style of writing often called the freshman style.
+It is much indulged in by very young men, and by a class of older men
+who instinctively try to make up in clatter for what they lack in
+matter. Examples of this kind of writing are abundant in Professor L. T.
+Townsend's "Art of Speech," which, as examples, are all the better for
+not being of that exaggerated description sometimes met within the
+newspapers. Vol. i, p. 131: "Very often adverbs, prepositions, and
+relatives drift so far from their moorings as to lose themselves, or
+make attachments where they do not belong." Again, p. 135: "Every law of
+speech enforces the statement that there is no excuse for such inflated
+and defective style. [Such style!] To speak thus is treason in the
+realms and under the laws of language." Again, p. 175: "Cultivate
+figure-making habitudes. This is done by asking the spiritual import of
+every physical object seen; also by forming the habit of constantly
+metaphorizing. Knock at the door of anything met which interests, and
+ask, 'Who lives here?' The process is to look, then close the eyes, then
+look within." The blundering inanity of this kind of writing is equaled
+only by its bumptious grandiloquence. On p. 137 Dr. Townsend quotes this
+wholesome admonition from Coleridge: "If men would only say what they
+have to say in plain terms, how much more eloquent they would be!" As an
+example of reportorial highfalutin, I submit the following: "The spirit
+of departed day had joined communion with the myriad ghosts of
+centuries, and four full hours fled into eternity before the citizens of
+many parts of the town found out there was a freshet here at all."
+
+HINTS. "Never write about any matter that you do not well understand. If
+you clearly understand all about your matter, you will never want
+thoughts, and thoughts instantly become words.
+
+"One of the greatest of all faults in writing and in speaking is this:
+the using of many words to _say little_. In order to guard yourself
+against this fault, inquire what is the _substance_, or _amount_, of
+what you have said. Take a long speech of some talking Lord and put down
+upon paper what the amount of it is. You will most likely find that the
+_amount_ is very small; but at any rate, when you get it, you will then
+be able to examine it and to tell what it is worth. A very few
+examinations of the sort will so frighten you that you will be for ever
+after upon your guard against _talking a great deal_ and _saying
+little_."--Cobbett.
+
+"Be simple, be unaffected, be honest in your speaking and writing. Never
+use a long word where a short one will do. Call a spade _a spade_, not a
+_well-known oblong instrument of manual husbandry_; let home be _home_,
+not a _residence_; a place a _place_, not a _locality_; and so of the
+rest. Where a short word will do, you always lose by using a long one.
+You lose in clearness; you lose in honest expression of your meaning;
+and, in the estimation of all men who are qualified to judge, you lose
+in reputation for ability. The only true way to shine, even in this
+false world, is to be modest and unassuming. Falsehood may be a very
+thick crust, but, in the course of time, truth will find a place to
+break through. Elegance of language may not be in the power of all of
+us; but simplicity and straightforwardness are. Write much as you would
+speak; speak as you think. If with your inferiors, speak no coarser than
+usual; if with your superiors, no finer. Be what you say; and, within
+the rules of prudence, say what you are."--Dean Alford.
+
+"Go critically over what you have written, and strike out every word,
+phrase, and clause which it is found will leave the sentence neither
+less clear nor less forcible than it is without them."--Swinton.
+
+"With all watchfulness, it is astonishing what slips are made, even by
+good writers, in the employment of an inappropriate word. In Gibbon's
+'Rise and Fall,' the following instance occurs: 'Of nineteen tyrants who
+started up after the reign of Gallienus, there was not one who _enjoyed_
+a life of peace or a natural _death_.' Alison, in his 'History of
+Europe,' writes: 'Two great sins--one of _omission_ and one of
+commission--have been _committed_ by the states of Europe in modern
+times.' And not long since a worthy Scotch minister, at the close of
+the services, intimated his intention of visiting some of his people as
+follows: 'I intend, during this week, to visit in Mr. M----'s district,
+and will on this occasion take the opportunity of _embracing_ all the
+servants in the district.' When worthies such as these offend, who shall
+call the bellman in question as he cries, 'Lost, a silver-handled silk
+lady's parasol'?
+
+"The proper arrangement of words into sentences and paragraphs gives
+clearness and strength. To attain a clear and pithy style, it may be
+necessary to cut down, to rearrange, and to rewrite whole passages of an
+essay. Gibbon wrote his 'Memoirs' six times, and the first chapter of
+his 'History' three times. Beginners are always slow to prune or cast
+away any thought or expression which may have cost labor. They forget
+that brevity is no sign of thoughtlessness. Much consideration is needed
+to compress the details of any subject into small compass. Essences are
+more difficult to prepare, and therefore more valuable, than weak
+solutions. Pliny wrote to one of his friends, 'I have not time to write
+you a short letter, therefore I have written you a long one.' Apparent
+elaborateness is always distasteful and weak. Vividness and strength are
+the product of an easy command of those small trenchant Saxon
+monosyllables which abound in the English language."--"Leisure Hour."
+
+"As a rule, the student will do well to banish for the present all
+thought of ornament or elegance, and to aim only at expressing himself
+plainly and clearly. The best ornament is always that which comes
+unsought. Let him not beat about the bush, but go straight to the point.
+Let him remember that what is written is meant to be read; that time is
+short; and that--other things being equal--the fewer words the
+better.... Repetition is a far less serious fault than obscurity. Young
+writers are often unduly afraid of repeating the same word, and require
+to be reminded that it is always better to use the right word over again
+than to replace it by a wrong one--and a word which is liable to be
+misunderstood is a wrong one. A frank repetition of a word has even
+sometimes a kind of charm--as bearing the stamp of _truth_, the
+foundation of all excellence of style."--Hall.
+
+"A young writer is afraid to be simple; he has no faith in beauty
+unadorned, hence he crowds his sentences with superlatives. In his
+estimation, turgidity passes for eloquence, and simplicity is but
+another name for that which is weak and unmeaning."--George Washington
+Moon.
+
+HONORABLE. See REVEREND.
+
+HOW. "I have heard _how_ in Italy one is beset on all sides by beggars":
+read, "heard _that_." "I have heard _how_ some critics have been
+pacified with claret and a supper, and others laid asleep with soft
+notes of flattery."--Dr. Johnson. The _how_ in this sentence also should
+be _that_. _How_ means the _manner in which_. We may, therefore, say, "I
+have heard _how_ he went about it to circumvent you."
+
+"And it is good judgment alone can dictate _how far_ to proceed in it
+and _when_ to stop." Cobbett comments on this sentence in this wise:
+"Dr. Watts is speaking here of writing. In such a case, an adverb, like
+_how far_, expressive of longitudinal space, introduces a _rhetorical
+figure_; for the plain meaning is, that judgment will dictate _how much
+to write on it_ and not _how far to proceed in it_. The figure, however,
+is very proper and much better than the literal words. But when a figure
+is _begun_ it should be carried on throughout, which is not the case
+here; for the Doctor begins with a figure of longitudinal space and
+ends with a figure of _time_. It should have been, _where_ to stop. Or,
+how _long_ to proceed in it and _when_ to stop. To tell a man _how far_
+he is to go into the Western countries of America, and _when_ he is to
+stop, is a very different thing from telling him _how far_ he is to go
+and _where_ he is to stop. I have dwelt thus on this distinction for the
+purpose of putting you on the watch and guarding you against confounding
+figures. The less you use them the better, till you understand more
+about them."
+
+HUMANITARIANISM. This word, in its original, theological sense, means
+the doctrine that denies the godhead of Jesus Christ, and avers that he
+was possessed of a human nature only; a _humanitarian_, therefore, in
+the theological sense, is one who believes this doctrine. The word and
+its derivatives are, however, nowadays, both in this country and in
+England, most used in a humane, philanthropic sense; thus, "The audience
+enthusiastically endorsed the _humanitarianism_ of his eloquent
+discourse."--Hatton.
+
+HUNG. See HANGED.
+
+HURRY. Though widely different in meaning, both the verb and the noun
+_hurry_ are continually used for _haste_ and _hasten_. _Hurry_ implies
+not only _haste_, but haste with confusion, flurry; while _haste_
+implies only rapidity of action, an eager desire to make progress, and,
+unlike _hurry_, is not incompatible with deliberation and dignity. It is
+often wise to _hasten_ in the affairs of life; but, as it is never wise
+to proceed without forethought and method, it is never wise to _hurry_.
+Sensible people, then, may be often in _haste_, but are never in a
+_hurry_; and we tell others to _make haste_, and not to _hurry up_.
+
+HYPERBOLE. The magnifying of things beyond their natural limits is
+called _hyperbole_. Language that signifies, literally, more than the
+exact truth, more than is really intended to be represented, by which a
+thing is represented greater or less, better or worse than it really is,
+is said to be _hyperbolical_. Hyperbole is exaggeration.
+
+"Our common forms of compliment are almost all of them extravagant
+_hyperboles_."--Blair.
+
+Some examples are the following:
+
+"Rivers of blood and hills of slain."
+
+"They were swifter than eagles; they were stronger than lions."
+
+    "The sky shrunk upward with unusual dread,
+    And trembling Tiber div'd beneath his bed."
+
+    "So frowned the mighty combatants, that hell
+    Grew darker at their frown."
+
+"I saw their chief tall as a rock of ice; his spear the blasted fir; his
+shield the rising moon; he sat on the shore like a cloud of mist on a
+hill."
+
+ICE-CREAM--ICE-WATER. As for ice-cream, there is no such thing, as
+ice-cream would be the product of frozen cream, i. e., cream made from
+ice by melting. What is called ice-cream is cream _iced_; hence,
+properly, _iced_ cream and not _ice_-cream. The product of melted ice is
+_ice_-water, whether it be cold or warm; but water made cold with ice is
+_iced_ water, and not _ice_-water.
+
+IF. "I doubt _if_ this will ever reach you": say, "I doubt _whether_
+this will ever reach you."
+
+ILL. See SICK.
+
+ILLY. It will astonish not a few to learn that there is no such word as
+_illy_. The form of the adverb, as well as of the adjective and the
+noun, is _ill_. A thing is _ill_ formed, or _ill_ done, or _ill_ made,
+or _ill_ constructed, or _ill_ put together.
+
+    "_Ill_ fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
+    Where wealth accumulates and men decay."--Goldsmith.
+
+IMMODEST. This adjective and its synonyms, _indecent_ and _indelicate_,
+are often used without proper discrimination being made in their
+respective meanings. _Indecency_ and _immodesty_ are opposed to
+morality: the former in externals, as dress, words, and looks; the
+latter in conduct and disposition. "_Indecency_," says Crabb, "may be a
+partial, _immodesty_ is a positive and entire breach of the moral law.
+_Indecency_ is less than _immodesty_, but more than _indelicacy_." It is
+_indecent_ for a man to marry again very soon after the death of his
+wife. It is _indelicate_ for any one to obtrude himself upon another's
+retirement. It is _indecent_ for women to expose their persons as do
+some whom we can not call _immodest_.
+
+    "Immodest words admit of no defense,
+    For want of decency is want of sense."
+                          --Earl of Roscommon.
+
+IMPROPRIETY. As a rhetorical term, defined as an error in using words in
+a sense different from their recognized signification.
+
+IMPUTE. Non-painstaking writers not unfrequently use _impute_ instead of
+_ascribe_. "The numbers [of blunders] that have been _imputed_ to him
+are endless."--"Appletons' Journal." The use of _impute_ in this
+connection is by no means indefensible; still it would have been better
+to use _ascribe_.
+
+IN OUR MIDST. The phrases _in our midst_ and _in their midst_ are
+generally supposed to be of recent introduction; and, though they have
+been used by some respectable writers, they nevertheless find no favor
+with those who study propriety in the use of language. To the phrase _in
+the midst_ no one objects. "Jesus came and stood in the midst." "There
+was a hut _in the midst_ of the forest."
+
+IN RESPECT OF. "The deliberate introduction of incorrect forms, whether
+by the coinage of new or the revival of obsolete and inexpressive
+syntactical combinations, ought to be resisted even in trifles,
+especially where it leads to the confusion of distinct ideas. An example
+of this is the recent use of the adverbial phrases _in respect of_, _in
+regard of_, for _in_ or _with_ respect _to_, or regard _to_. This
+innovation is without any syntactical ground, and ought to be condemned
+and avoided as a mere grammatical crotchet."--George P. Marsh, "Lectures
+on the English Language," p. 660.
+
+IN SO FAR AS. A phrase often met with, and in which the _in_ is
+superfluous. "A want of proper opportunity would suffice, _in_ so far as
+the want could be shown." "We are to act up to the extent of our
+knowledge; but, _in_ so far as our knowledge falls short," etc.
+
+INAUGURATE. This word, which means to install in office with certain
+ceremonies, is made, by many lovers of big words, to do service for
+_begin_; but the sooner these rhetorical high-fliers stop _inaugurating_
+and content themselves with simply _beginning_ the things they are
+called upon to do in the ordinary routine of daily life, the sooner they
+will cease to set a very bad example.
+
+INDECENT. See IMMODEST.
+
+INDEX EXPURGATORIUS. William Cullen Bryant, who was a careful student of
+English, while he was editor of the "New York Evening Post," sought to
+prevent the writers for that paper from using "over and above (for 'more
+than'); artiste (for 'artist'); aspirant; authoress; beat (for
+'defeat'); bagging (for 'capturing'); balance (for 'remainder'); banquet
+(for 'dinner' or 'supper'); bogus; casket (for 'coffin'); claimed (for
+'asserted'); collided; commence (for 'begin'); compete; cortége (for
+'procession'); cotemporary (for 'contemporary'); couple (for 'two');
+darky (for 'negro'); day before yesterday (for 'the day before
+yesterday'); début; decrease (as a verb); democracy (applied to a
+political party); develop (for 'expose'); devouring element (for
+'fire'); donate; employé; enacted (for 'acted'); indorse (for
+'approve'); en route; esq.; graduate (for 'is graduated'); gents (for
+'gentlemen'); 'Hon.'; House (for 'House of Representatives'); humbug;
+inaugurate (for 'begin'); in our midst; item (for 'particle, extract, or
+paragraph'); is being done, and all passives of this form; jeopardize;
+jubilant (for 'rejoicing'); juvenile (for 'boy'); lady (for 'wife');
+last (for 'latest'); lengthy (for 'long'); leniency (for 'lenity');
+loafer; loan or loaned (for 'lend' or 'lent'); located; majority
+(relating to places or circumstances, for 'most'); Mrs. President, Mrs.
+Governor, Mrs. General, and all similar titles; mutual (for 'common');
+official (for 'officer'); ovation; on yesterday; over his signature;
+pants (for 'pantaloons'); parties (for 'persons'); partially (for
+'partly'); past two weeks (for 'last two weeks,' and all similar
+expressions relating to a definite time); poetess; portion (for 'part');
+posted (for 'informed'); progress (for 'advance'); reliable (for
+'trustworthy'); rendition (for 'performance'); repudiate (for 'reject'
+or 'disown'); retire (as an active verb); Rev. (for 'the Rev.'); rôle
+(for 'part'); roughs; rowdies; secesh; sensation (for 'noteworthy
+event'); standpoint (for 'point of view'); start, in the sense of
+setting out; state (for 'say'); taboo; talent (for 'talents' or
+'ability'); talented; tapis; the deceased; war (for 'dispute' or
+'disagreement')."
+
+This index is offered here as a curiosity rather than as a guide, though
+in the main it might safely be used as such. No valid reason, however,
+can be urged for discouraging the use of several words in the list; the
+words aspirant, banquet, casket, compete, decrease, progress, start,
+talented, and deceased, for example.
+
+INDICATIVE AND SUBJUNCTIVE. "'I _see_ the signal,' is unconditional;
+'_if_ I _see_ the signal,' is the same fact expressed in the form of a
+condition. The one form is said to be in the _indicative_ mood, the mood
+that simply _states or indicates_ the action; the other form is in the
+_subjunctive_, conditional, or conjunctive mood. There is sometimes a
+slight variation made in English, to show that an affirmation is made as
+a condition. The mood is called 'subjunctive,' because the affirmation
+_is subjoined to_ another affirmation: '_If I see the signal_, I will
+call out.'
+
+"Such forms as 'I may see,' 'I can see,' have sometimes been considered
+as a variety of mood, to which the name 'Potential' is given. But this
+can not properly be maintained. There is no trace of any inflection
+corresponding to this meaning, as we find with the subjunctive.
+Moreover, such a mood would have itself to be subdivided into indicative
+and subjunctive forms: 'I may go,' 'if I may go.' And further, we might
+proceed to constitute other moods on the same analogy, as, for example,
+an obligatory mood--'I must go,' or 'I ought to go'; a mood of
+resolution--'I will go, you shall go'; a mood of gratification--'I am
+delighted to go'; of deprecation--'I am grieved to go.' The only
+difference in the two last instances is the use of the sign of the
+infinitive 'to,' which does not occur after 'may,' 'can,' 'must,'
+'ought,' etc.; but that is not an essential difference. Some grammarians
+consider the form 'I do go' a separate mood, and term it the emphatic
+mood. But all the above objections apply to it likewise, as well as many
+others."--Bain. See SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
+
+INDIVIDUAL. This word is often most improperly used for _person_; as,
+"The _individual_ I saw was not over forty"; "There were several
+_individuals_ on board that I had never seen before." _Individual_
+means, etymologically, that which can not be divided, and is used, in
+speaking of things as well as of persons, to express unity. It is
+opposed to the whole, or that which is divisible into parts.
+
+INDORSE. Careful writers generally discountenance the use of _indorse_
+in the sense of _sanction_, _approve_, _applaud_. In this signification
+it is on the list of prohibited words in some of our newspaper offices.
+"The following rules are _indorsed_ by nearly all writers upon this
+subject."--Dr. Townsend. It is plain that the right word to use here is
+_approved_. "The public will heartily _indorse_ the sentiments uttered
+by the court."--New York "Evening Telegram." "The public will heartily
+_approve_ the sentiments _expressed_ by the court," is what the sentence
+should be.
+
+INFINITIVE MOOD. When we can choose, it is generally better to use the
+verb in the infinitive than in the participial form. "Ability being in
+general the power _of doing_," etc. Say, _to do_. "I desire to reply ...
+to the proposal _of substituting_ a tax upon land values ... and
+_making_ this tax, as near [nearly] as may be, equal to rent," etc. Say,
+_to substitute_ and _to make_. "This quality is of prime importance when
+the chief object is _the imparting of_ knowledge." Say, _to impart_.
+
+INITIATE. This is a pretentious word, which, with its derivatives, many
+persons--especially those who like to be grandiloquent--use, when homely
+English would serve their turn much better.
+
+INNUMERABLE NUMBER. A repetitional expression to be avoided. We may say
+_innumerable_ times, or _numberless_ times, but we should not say an
+_innumerable number_ of times.
+
+INTERROGATION. The rhetorical figure that asks a question in order to
+emphasize the reverse of what is asked is called _interrogation_; as,
+"Do we mean to submit to this measure? Do we mean to submit, and consent
+that we ourselves, our country and its rights, shall be trampled on?"
+
+"Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice?"
+
+INTRODUCE. See PRESENT.
+
+IRONY. That mode of speech in which what is meant is contrary to the
+literal meaning of the words--in which praise is bestowed when censure
+is intended--is called _irony_. Irony is a kind of delicate sarcasm or
+satire--raillery, mockery.
+
+"In writings of humor, figures are sometimes used of so delicate a
+nature that it shall often happen that some people will see things in a
+direct contrary sense to what the author and the majority of the readers
+understand them: to such the most innocent _irony_ may appear
+irreligion."--Cambridge.
+
+IRRITATE. See AGGRAVATE.
+
+IS BEING BUILT. A tolerable idea of the state of the discussion
+regarding the propriety of using the locution _is being built_, and all
+like expressions, will, it is hoped, be obtained from the following
+extracts. The Rev. Peter Bullions, in his "Grammar of the English
+Language," says:
+
+"There is properly _no passive_ form, in English, _corresponding to the
+progressive_ form in the _active_ voice, except where it is made by the
+participle _ing_, in a passive sense; thus, 'The house is building';
+'The garments are making'; 'Wheat is selling,' etc. An attempt has been
+made by some grammarians, of late, to banish such expressions from the
+language, though they have been used in all time past by the best
+writers, and to justify and defend a clumsy solecism, which has been
+recently introduced chiefly through the newspaper press, but which has
+gained such currency, and is becoming so familiar to the ear, that it
+seems likely to prevail, with all its uncouthness and deformity. I refer
+to such expressions as 'The house is being built'; 'The letter is being
+written'; 'The mine is being worked'; 'The news is being telegraphed,'
+etc., etc.
+
+"This mode of expression _had no existence_ in the language till _within
+the last fifty years_.[7] This, indeed, would not make the expression
+wrong, were it otherwise unexceptionable; but its recent origin shows
+that it is not, as is pretended, a _necessary_ form.
+
+"This form of expression, when analyzed, is found not to express what it
+is intended to express, and would be used only by such as are either
+ignorant of its import or are careless and loose in their use of
+language. To make this manifest, let it be considered, first, that there
+is _no progressive form_ of the verb _to be_, and no need of it; hence,
+there is no such expression in English as _is being_. Of course the
+expression '_is being_ built,' for example, is not a compound of _is
+being_ and _built_, but of _is_ and _being built_; that is, of the verb
+_to be_ and the _present participle passive_. Now, let it be observed
+that the only verbs in which the present participle passive expresses a
+continued action are those mentioned above as the first class, in which
+the regular passive form expresses a _continuance_ of the action; as,
+_is loved_, _is desired_, etc., and in which, of course, the form in
+question (_is being built_) is not required. Nobody would think of
+saying, 'He is being loved'; 'This result is being desired.'
+
+"The use of this form is justified only by _condemning an established
+usage_ of the language; namely, the passive sense in some verbs of the
+participle in _ing_. In reference to this it is flippantly asked, 'What
+does the house build?' 'What does the letter write?' etc.--taking for
+granted, without attempting to prove, that the participle in _ing_ can
+not have a passive sense in any verb. The following are a few examples
+from writers of the best reputation, which this novelty would condemn:
+'While the ceremony was performing.'--Tom. Brown. 'The court was then
+holding.'--Sir G. McKenzie. 'And still be doing, never done.'--Butler.
+'The books are selling.'--Allen's 'Grammar.' 'To know nothing of what is
+transacting in the regions above us.'--Dr. Blair. 'The spot where this
+new and strange tragedy was acting.'--E. Everett. 'The fortress was
+building.'--Irving. 'An attempt is making in the English
+parliament.'--D. Webster. 'The church now erecting in the city of New
+York.'--'N. A. Review.' 'These things were transacting in
+England.'--Bancroft.
+
+"This new doctrine is in _opposition_ to the almost _unanimous judgment_
+of the _most distinguished grammarians_ and critics, who have considered
+the subject, and expressed their views concerning it. The following are
+a specimen: 'Expressions of this kind are condemned by some critics; but
+the usage is unquestionably of far better authority, and (according to
+my apprehension) in far better taste, than the more complex phraseology
+which some late writers adopt in its stead; as, "The books are now being
+sold."'--Goold Brown. 'As to the notion of introducing a new and more
+complex passive form of conjugation, as, "The bridge _is being built_,"
+"The bridge _was being built_," and so forth, it is one of the most
+absurd and monstrous innovations ever thought of. "The work _is now
+being published_," is certainly no better English than, "The work _was
+being published_, _has been being published_, _had been being
+published_, _shall or will be being published_, _shall or will have
+been being published_," and so on through all the moods and tenses. What
+a language shall we have when our verbs are thus conjugated!'--Brown's
+'Gr. of Eng. Gr.,' p. 361. De War observes: 'The participle in _ing_ is
+also passive in many instances; as, "The house is building," "I heard of
+a plan forming,"' etc.--Quoted in 'Frazee's Grammar,' p. 49. 'It would
+be an absurdity, indeed, to give up the only way we have of denoting the
+incomplete state of action by a passive form (viz., by the participle in
+_ing_ in the passive sense).'--Arnold's 'English Grammar,' p. 46. 'The
+present participle is often used passively; as, "The ship is building."
+The form of expression, _is being built_, _is being committed_, etc., is
+almost universally condemned by grammarians, but it is sometimes met
+with in respectable writers; it occurs most frequently in newspaper
+paragraphs and in hasty compositions. See Worcester's "Universal and
+Critical Dictionary."'--Weld's 'Grammar,' pp. 118 and 180. 'When we say,
+"The house is building," the advocates of the new theory ask, "Building
+what?" We might ask, in turn, when you say, "The field ploughs
+well,"--"Ploughs what?" "Wheat sells well,"--"Sells what?" If usage
+allows us to say, "Wheat sells at a dollar," in a sense that is not
+active, why may we not say, "Wheat is selling at a dollar," in a sense
+that is not active?'--Hart's 'Grammar,' p. 76. 'The prevailing practice
+of the best authors is in favor of the simple form; as, "The house is
+building."'--Wells' 'School Grammar,' p. 148. 'Several other expressions
+of this sort now and then occur, such as the newfangled and most uncouth
+solecism "_is being done_," for the good old English idiom "_is
+doing_"--an absurd periphrasis driving out a pointed and pithy turn of
+the English language.'--'N. A. Review,' quoted by Mr. Wells, p. 148.
+'The phrase, "is being built," and others of a similar kind, have been
+for a few years insinuating themselves into our language; still they are
+not English.'--Harrison's 'Rise, Progress, and Present Structure of the
+English Language.' 'This mode of expression [the house is being built]
+is becoming quite common. It is liable, however, to several important
+objections. It appears formal and pedantic. It has not, as far as I
+know, the support of any respectable grammarian. The easy and natural
+expression is, "The house is building."'--Prof. J. W. Gibbs."
+
+Mr. Richard Grant White, in his "Words and Their Uses," expresses his
+opinion of the locution _is being_ in this wise: "In bad eminence, at
+the head of those intruders in language which to many persons seem to be
+of established respectability, but the right of which to be at all is
+not fully admitted, stands out the form of speech _is being done_, or
+rather, _is being_, which, about seventy or eighty years ago, began to
+affront the eye, torment the ear, and assault the common sense of the
+speaker of plain and idiomatic English." Mr. White devotes thirty pages
+of his book to the discussion of the subject, and adduces evidence that
+is more than sufficient to convince those who are content with an _ex
+parte_ examination that "it can hardly be that such an incongruous and
+ridiculous form of speech as _is being done_ was contrived by a man who,
+by any stretch of the name, should be included among grammarians."
+
+Mr. George P. Marsh, in his "Lectures on the English Language," says
+that the deviser of the locution in question was "some grammatical
+pretender," and that it is "an awkward neologism, which neither
+convenience, intelligibility, nor syntactical congruity demands."
+
+To these gentlemen, and to those who are of their way of thinking with
+regard to _is being_, Dr. Fitzedward Hall replies at some length, in an
+article published in "Scribner's Monthly" for April, 1872. Dr. Hall
+writes:
+
+"'All really well educated in the English tongue lament the many
+innovations introduced into our language from America; and I doubt if
+more than one of these novelties deserve acceptation. That one is,
+substituting a compound participle for an active verb used in a neuter
+signification: for instance, "The house is _being built_," instead of,
+"The house is _building_."' Such is the assertion and such is the
+opinion of some anonymous luminary,[8] who, for his liberality in
+welcoming a supposed Americanism, is somewhat in advance of the herd of
+his countrymen. Almost any popular expression which is considered as a
+novelty, a Briton is pretty certain to assume, off-hand, to have
+originated on our side of the Atlantic. Of the assertion I have quoted,
+no proof is offered; and there is little probability that its author had
+any to offer. 'Are being,' in the phrase 'are being thrown up,'[9] is
+spoken of in 'The North American Review'[10] as 'an outrage upon English
+idiom, "to be detested, abhorred, execrated, and given over to six
+thousand" penny-paper editors'; and the fact is, that phrases of the
+form here pointed at have hitherto enjoyed very much less favor with us
+than with the English.
+
+"As lately as 1860, Dr. Worcester, referring to _is being built_, etc.,
+while acknowledging that 'this new form has been used by some
+respectable writers,' speaks of it as having 'been introduced' 'within a
+few years.' Mr. Richard Grant White, by a most peculiar process of
+ratiocination, endeavors to prove that what Dr. Worcester calls 'this
+new form' came into existence just fifty-six years ago. He premises that
+in Jarvis's translation of 'Don Quixote,' published in 1742, there
+occurs 'were carrying,' and that this, in the edition of 1818, is
+sophisticated into 'were being carried.' 'This change,' continues our
+logician, 'and the appearance of _is being_ with a perfect participle in
+a very few books published between A. D. 1815 and 1820, indicate the
+former period as that of the origin of this phraseology, which, although
+more than half a century old, is still pronounced a novelty as well as a
+nuisance.'
+
+"Who, in the next place, devised our modern imperfects passive? The
+question is not, originally, of my asking; but, as the learned are at
+open feud on the subject, it should not be passed by in silence. Its
+deviser is, more than likely, as undiscoverable as the name of the
+valiant antediluvian who first tasted an oyster. But the deductive
+character of the miscreant is another thing; and hereon there is a war
+between the philosophers. Mr. G. P. Marsh, as if he had actually spotted
+the wretched creature, passionately and categorically denounces him as
+'some grammatical pretender.' 'But,' replies Mr. White, 'that it is the
+work of any grammarian is more than doubtful. Grammarians, with all
+their faults, do not deform language with fantastic solecisms, or even
+seek to enrich it with new and startling verbal combinations. They
+rather resist novelty, and devote themselves to formulating that which
+use has already established.' In the same page with this, Mr. White
+compliments the great unknown as 'some precise and feeble-minded soul,'
+and elsewhere calls him 'some pedantic writer of the last generation.'
+To add even one word toward a solution of the knotty point here
+indicated transcends, I confess, my utmost competence. It is painful to
+picture to one's self the agonizing emotions with which certain
+philologists would contemplate an authentic effigy of the Attila of
+speech who, by his _is being built_ or _is being done_, first offered
+violence to the whole circle of the proprieties. So far as I have
+observed, the first grammar that exhibits them is that of Mr. R. S.
+Skillern, M. A., the first edition of which was published at Gloucester
+in 1802. Robert Southey had not, on the 9th of October, 1795, been out
+of his minority quite two months when, evidently delivering himself in a
+way that had already become familiar enough, he wrote of 'a fellow whose
+uttermost upper grinder _is being torn out_ by the roots by a
+mutton-fisted barber.'[11] This is in a letter. But repeated instances
+of the same kind of expression are seen in Southey's graver writings.
+Thus, in his 'Colloquies,' etc.,[12] we read of 'such [nunneries] as at
+this time _are being reëstablished_.'
+
+"'While my hand _was being drest_ by Mr. Young, I spoke for the first
+time,' wrote Coleridge, in March, 1797.
+
+"Charles Lamb speaks of realities which '_are being acted_ before us,'
+and of 'a man who _is being strangled_.'
+
+"Walter Savage Landor, in an imaginary conversation, represents Pitt as
+saying: 'The man who possesses them may read Swedenborg and Kant while
+he _is being tossed_ in a blanket.' Again: 'I have seen nobles, men and
+women, kneeling in the street before these bishops, when no ceremony of
+the Catholic Church _was being performed_.' Also, in a translation from
+Catullus: 'Some criminal _is being tried_ for murder.'
+
+"Nor does Mr. De Quincey scruple at such English as 'made and _being
+made_,' 'the bride that _was being married_ to him,' and 'the shafts of
+Heaven _were_ even now _being forged_.' On one occasion he writes, 'Not
+done, not even (according to modern purism) _being done_'; as if
+'purism' meant exactness, rather than the avoidance of neoterism.
+
+"I need, surely, name no more, among the dead, who found _is being
+built_, or the like, acceptable. 'Simple-minded common people and those
+of culture were alike protected against it by their attachment to the
+idiom of their mother tongue, with which they felt it to be directly at
+variance.' So Mr. White informs us. But the writers whom I have quoted
+are formidable exceptions. Even Mr. White will scarcely deny to them the
+title of 'people of culture.'
+
+"So much for offenders past repentance; and we all know that the sort of
+phraseology under consideration is daily becoming more and more common.
+The best written of the English reviews, magazines, and journals are
+perpetually marked by it; and some of the choicest of living English
+writers employ it freely. Among these, it is enough if I specify Bishop
+Wilberforce and Mr. Charles Reade.[13]
+
+"Extracts from Bishop Jewel downward being also given, Lord Macaulay,
+Mr. Dickens, 'The Atlantic Monthly,' and 'The Brooklyn Eagle' are
+alleged by Mr. White in proof that people still use such phrases as
+'Chelsea Hospital _was building_,' and 'the train _was preparing_.'
+'Hence we see,' he adds,[14] 'that the form _is being done_, _is being
+made_, _is being built_, lacks the support of authoritative usage from
+the period of the earliest classical English to the present day.' I
+fully concur with Mr. White in regarding 'neither "The Brooklyn Eagle"
+nor Mr. Dickens as a very high authority in the use of language'; yet,
+when he has renounced the aid of these contemned straws, what has he to
+rest his inference on, as to the present day, but the practice of Lord
+Macaulay and 'The Atlantic Monthly'? Those who think fit will bow to the
+dictatorship here prescribed to them; but there may be those with whom
+the classic sanction of Southey, Coleridge, and Landor will not be
+wholly void of weight. All scholars are aware that, to convey the sense
+of the imperfects passive, our ancestors, centuries ago, prefixed, with
+_is_, etc., _in_, afterward corrupted into _a_, to a verbal substantive.
+'The house _is in building_' could be taken to mean nothing but _ædes
+ædificantur_; and, when the _in_ gave place to _a_,[15] it was still
+manifest enough, from the context, that _building_ was governed by a
+preposition. The second stage of change, however, namely, when the _a_
+was omitted, entailed, in many cases, great danger of confusion. In the
+early part of the last century, when English was undergoing what was
+then thought to be purification, the polite world substantially resigned
+_is a-building_ to the vulgar. Toward the close of the same century,
+when, under the influence of free thought, it began to be felt that even
+ideas had a right to faithful and unequivocal representation, a just
+resentment of ambiguity was evidenced in the creation of _is being
+built_. The lament is too late that the instinct of reformation did not
+restore the old form. It has gone forever; and we are now to make the
+best of its successors. '"The brass _is forging_,"' in the opinion of
+Dr. Johnson, is 'a vicious expression, probably corrupted from a phrase
+more pure, but now somewhat obsolete, ... "the brass _is a-forging_."'
+Yet, with a true Tory's timidity and aversion to change, it is not
+surprising that he went on preferring what he found established, vicious
+as it confessedly was, to the end. But was the expression 'vicious'
+solely because it was a corruption? In 1787 William Beckford wrote as
+follows of the fortune-tellers of Lisbon: '_I saw one dragging into
+light_, as I passed by the ruins of a palace thrown down by the
+earthquake. Whether a familiar of the Inquisition was griping her in his
+clutches, or _whether she was taking to account by some disappointed
+votary_, I will not pretend to answer.' Are the expressions here
+italicized either perspicuous or graceful? Whatever we are to have in
+their place, we should be thankful to get quit of them.
+
+"Inasmuch as, concurrently with _building_ for the active participle,
+and _being built_ for the corresponding passive participle, we possessed
+the former, with _is_ prefixed, as the active present imperfect, it is
+in rigid accordance with the symmetry of our verb that, to construct the
+passive present-imperfect, we prefix _is_ to the latter, producing the
+form _is being built_. Such, in its greatest simplicity, is the
+procedure which, as will be seen, has provoked a very levanter of ire
+and vilification. But anything that is new will be excepted to by minds
+of a certain order. Their tremulous and impatient dread of removing
+ancient landmarks even disqualifies them for thoroughly investigating
+its character and pretensions. In _has built_ and _will build_, we find
+the active participle perfect and the active infinitive subjoined to
+auxiliaries; and so, in _has been built_ and _will be built_, the
+passive participle perfect and the passive infinitive are subjoined to
+auxiliaries. In _is building_ and _is being built_, we have, in strict
+harmony with the constitution of the perfect and future tenses, an
+auxiliary followed by the active participle present and the passive
+participle present. _Built_ is determined as active or passive by the
+verbs which qualify it, _have_ and _be_; and the grammarians are right
+in considering it, when embodied in _has built_, as active, since its
+analogue, embodied in _has been built_, is the exclusively passive _been
+built_. Besides this, _has been_ + _built_ would signify something like
+_has existed, built_,[16] which is plainly neuter. We are debarred,
+therefore, from such an analysis; and, by parity of reasoning, we may
+not resolve _is being built_ into _is being_ + _built_. It must have
+been an inspiration of analogy, felt or unfelt, that suggested the form
+I am discussing. _Is being_ + _built_, as it can mean, pretty nearly,
+only _exists, built_, would never have been proposed as adequate to
+convey any but a neuter sense; whereas it was perfectly natural for a
+person aiming to express a passive sense to prefix _is_ to the passive
+concretion _being built_.[17]
+
+"The analogical justification of _is being built_ which I have brought
+forward is so obvious that, as it occurred to myself more than twenty
+years ago, so it must have occurred spontaneously to hundreds besides.
+It is very singular that those who, like Mr. Marsh and Mr. White, have
+pondered long and painfully over locutions typified by _is being built_,
+should have missed the real ground of their grammatical defensibleness,
+and should have warmed themselves, in their opposition to them, into
+uttering opinions which no calm judgment can accept.
+
+"'One who _is being beaten_' is, to Archbishop Whately, 'uncouth
+English.' '"The bridge _is being built_," and other phrases of the like
+kind, have pained the eye' of Mr. David Booth. Such phrases, according
+to Mr. M. Harrison, 'are not English.' To Professor J. W. Gibbs 'this
+mode of expression ... appears formal and pedantic'; and 'the easy and
+natural expression is, "The house _is building_."'[18] In all this,
+little or nothing is discernible beyond sheer prejudice, the prejudice
+of those who resolve to take their stand against an innovation,
+regardless of its utility, and who are ready to find an argument against
+it in any random epithet of disparagement provoked by unreasoning
+aversion. And the more recent denouncers in the same line have no more
+reason on their side than their elder brethren.
+
+"In Mr. Marsh's estimation, _is being built_ illustrates 'corruption of
+language'; it is 'clumsy and unidiomatic'; it is 'at best but a
+philological coxcombry'; it 'is an awkward neologism, which neither
+convenience, intelligibility, nor syntactical congruity demands, and the
+use of which ought, therefore, to be discountenanced, as an attempt at
+the artificial improvement of the language in a point which needed no
+amendment.' Again, 'To reject' _is building_ in favor of the modern
+phrase 'is to violate the laws of language by an arbitrary change; and,
+in this particular case, the proposed substitute is at war with the
+genius of the English tongue.' Mr. Marsh seems to have fancied that,
+wherever he points out a beauty in _is building_, he points out,
+inclusively, a blemish in _is being built_.
+
+"The fervor and feeling with which Mr. White advances to the charge are
+altogether tropical. 'The full absurdity of this phrase, the essence of
+its nonsense, seems not to have been hitherto pointed out.' It is not
+'consistent with reason'; and it is not 'conformed to the normal
+development of the language.' It is 'a monstrosity, the illogical,
+confusing, inaccurate, unidiomatic character of which I have at some
+length, but yet imperfectly, set forth.' Finally, 'In fact, it means
+nothing, and is the most incongruous combination of words and ideas that
+ever attained respectable usage in any civilized language.' These be
+'prave 'ords'; and it seems a pity that so much sterling vituperative
+ammunition should be expended in vain. And that it is so expended thinks
+Mr. White himself; for, though passing sentence in the spirit of a
+Jeffreys, he is not really on the judgment-seat, but on the lowest
+hassock of despair. As concerns the mode of expression exemplified by
+_is being built_, he owns that 'to check its diffusion would be a
+hopeless undertaking.' If so, why not reserve himself for service
+against some evil not avowedly beyond remedy?
+
+"Again we read, 'Some precise and feeble-minded soul, having been taught
+that there is a passive voice in English, and that, for instance,
+_building_ is an active participle, and _builded_ or _built_ a passive,
+felt conscientious scruples at saying "the house _is building_." For
+what could the house build?' As children say at play, Mr. White burns
+here. If it had occurred to him that the 'conscientious scruples' of his
+hypothetical, 'precise, and feeble-minded soul' were roused by _been
+built_, not by _built_, I suspect his chapter on _is being built_ would
+have been much shorter than it is at present, and very different. 'The
+fatal absurdity in this phrase consists,' he tells us, 'in the
+combination of _is_ with _being_; in the making of the verb _to be_ a
+supplement, or, in grammarians' phrase, an auxiliary to itself--an
+absurdity so palpable, so monstrous, so ridiculous, that it should need
+only to be pointed out to be scouted.'[19] Lastly, 'The question is thus
+narrowed simply to this, Does _to be being_ (_esse ens_) mean anything
+more or other than _to be_?'
+
+"Having convicted Mr. White of a mistaken analysis, I am not concerned
+with the observations which he founds on his mistake. However, even if
+his analysis had been correct, some of his arguments would avail him
+nothing. For instance, _is being built_, on his understanding of it,
+that is to say, _is being_ + _built_, he represents by _ens ædificatus
+est_, as 'the supposed corresponding Latin phrase.'[20] The Latin is
+illegitimate; and he infers that, therefore, the English is the same.
+But _ædificans est_, a translation, on the model which he offers, of the
+active _is building_, is quite as illegitimate as _ens æedificatus est_.
+By parity of _non-sequitur_, we are, therefore, to surrender the active
+_is building_. Assume that a phrase in a given language is indefensible
+unless it has its counterpart in some other language; from the very
+conception and definition of an idiom every idiom is illegitimate.
+
+"I now pass to another point. '_To be_ and _to exist_ are,' to Mr.
+White's apprehension, 'perfect synonyms, or more nearly perfect,
+perhaps, than any two verbs in the language. In some of their meanings
+there is a shade of difference, but in others there is none whatever;
+and the latter are those which serve our present purpose. When we say,
+"He, _being_ forewarned of danger, fled," we say, "He, _existing_
+forewarned of danger, fled." When we say that a thing _is_ done, we say
+that it _exists_ done.... _Is being done_ is simply _exists existing
+done_.' But, since _is_ and _exists_ are equipollent, and so _being_ and
+_existing, is being_ is the same as the unimpeachable _is existing_. Q.
+_non_ E. D. _Is existing_ ought, of course, to be no less objectionable
+to Mr. White than _is being_. Just as absurd, too, should he reckon the
+Italian _sono stato_, _era stato_, _sia stato_, _fossi stato_, _saro
+stato_, _sarei stato_, _essere stato_, and _essendo stato_. For in
+Italian both _essere_ and _stare_ are required to make up the verb
+substantive, as in Latin both _esse_ and the offspring of _fuere_ are
+required; and _stare_, primarily 'to stand,' is modified into a true
+auxiliary. The alleged 'full absurdity of this phrase,' to wit, _is
+being built_, 'the essence of its nonsense,' vanishes thus into thin
+air. So I was about to comment bluntly, not forgetting to regret that
+any gentleman's cultivation of logic should fructify in the shape of
+irrepressible tendencies to suicide. But this would be precipitate.
+Agreeably to one of Mr. White's judicial placita, which I make no
+apology for citing twice, 'no man who has preserved all his senses will
+doubt for a moment that "to exist a mastiff or a mule" is absolutely the
+same as "to be a mastiff or a mule."' Declining to admit their identity,
+I have not preserved all my senses; and, accordingly--though it may be
+in me the very superfetation of lunacy--I would caution the reader to
+keep a sharp eye on my arguments, hereabouts particularly. The Cretan,
+who, in declaring all Cretans to be liars, left the question of his
+veracity doubtful to all eternity, fell into a pit of his own digging.
+Not unlike the unfortunate Cretan, Mr. White has tumbled headlong into
+his own snare. It was, for the rest, entirely unavailing that he
+insisted on the insanity of those who should gainsay his fundamental
+postulate. Sanity, of a crude sort, may accept it; and sanity may put it
+to a use other than its propounder's.
+
+"Mr. Marsh, after setting forth the all-sufficiency of _is building_, in
+the passive sense, goes on to say: 'The reformers who object to the
+phrase I am defending must, in consistency, employ the proposed
+substitute with all passive participles, and in other tenses as well as
+the present. They must say, therefore, "The subscription-paper _is being
+missed_, but I know that a considerable sum _is being wanted_ to make up
+the amount"; "the great Victoria Bridge _has been being built_ more than
+two years"; "when I reach London, the ship Leviathan _will be being
+built_"; "if my orders had been followed, the coat _would have been
+being made yesterday_"; "if the house _had_ then _been being built_, the
+mortar _would have been being mixed_."' We may reply that, while awkward
+instances of the old form are most abundant in our literature, there is
+no fear that the repulsive elaborations which have been worked out in
+ridicule of the new forms will prove to have been anticipations of
+future usage. There was a time when, as to their adverbs, people
+compared them, to a large extent, with _-er_ and _-est_, or with _more_
+and _most_, just as their ear or pleasure dictated. They wrote
+_plainlier_ and _plainliest_, or _more plainly_ and _most plainly_; and
+some adverbs, as _early_, _late_, _often_, _seldom_, and _soon_, we
+still compare in a way now become anomalous. And as our forefathers
+treated their adverbs we still treat many adjectives. _Furthermore_,
+_obligingness_, _preparedness_, and _designedly_ seem quite natural; yet
+we do not feel that they authorize us to talk of 'the _seeingness_ of
+the eye,' 'the _understoodness_ of a sentence,' or of 'a statement
+_acknowledgedly_ correct.' 'The now too notorious fact' is tolerable;
+but 'the never to be sufficiently execrated monster Bonaparte' is
+intolerable. The sun may be _shorn_ of his splendor; but we do not allow
+cloudy weather to _shear_ him of it. How, then, can any one claim that a
+man who prefers to say _is being built_ should say _has been being
+built_? Are not awkward instances of the old form, typified by _is
+building_, as easily to be picked out of extant literature as such
+instances of the new form, likely ever to be used, are to be invented?
+And 'the reformers' have not forsworn their ears. Mr. Marsh, at p. 135
+of his admirable 'Lectures,' lays down that 'the adjective _reliable_,
+in the sense of _worthy of confidence_, is altogether unidiomatic'; and
+yet, at p. 112, he writes '_reliable_ evidence.' Again, at p. 396 of the
+same work, he rules that _whose_, in 'I passed a house _whose_ windows
+were open,' is 'by no means yet fully established'; and at p. 145 of his
+very learned 'Man and Nature' he writes 'a quadrangular pyramid, the
+perpendicular of _whose_ sides,' etc. Really, if his own judgments sit
+so very loose on his practical conscience, we may, without being
+chargeable with exaction, ask of him to relax a little the rigor of his
+requirements at the hands of his neighbors.
+
+"Beckford's Lisbon fortune-teller, before had into court, was
+'_dragging_ into light,' and, perchance, '_was taking_ to account.' Many
+moderns would say and write '_being dragged_ into light,' and '_was
+being taken_ to account.' But, if we are to trust the conservative
+critics, in comparison with expressions of the former pattern, those of
+the latter are 'uncouth,' 'clumsy,' 'awkward neologisms,' 'philological
+coxcombries,' 'formal and pedantic,' 'incongruous and ridiculous forms
+of speech,' 'illogical, confusing, inaccurate monstrosities.' Moreover,
+they are neither 'consistent with reason' nor 'conformed to the normal
+development of the language'; they are 'at war with the genius of the
+English tongue'; they are 'unidiomatic'; they are 'not English.' In
+passing, if Mr. Marsh will so define the term _unidiomatic_ as to evince
+that it has any applicability to the case in hand, or if he will arrest
+and photograph 'the genius of the English tongue,' so that we may know
+the original when we meet with it, he will confer a public favor. And
+now I submit for consideration whether the sole strength of those who
+decry _is being built_ and its congeners does not consist in their
+talent for calling hard names. If they have not an uneasy
+subconsciousness that their cause is weak, they would, at least, do well
+in eschewing the violence to which, for want of something better, the
+advocates of weak causes proverbially resort.
+
+"I once had a friend who, for some microscopic penumbra of heresy, was
+charged, in the words of his accuser, with 'as near an approach to the
+sin against the Holy Ghost as is practicable to human infirmity.'
+Similarly, on one view, the feeble potencies of philological turpitude
+seem to have exhibited their most consummate realization in engendering
+_is being built_. The supposed enormity perpetrated in its production,
+provided it had fallen within the sphere of ethics, would, at the least,
+have ranked, with its denunciators, as a brand-new exemplification of
+total depravity. But, after all, what incontestable defect in it has any
+one succeeded in demonstrating? Mr. White, in opposing to the
+expression objections based on an erroneous analysis, simply lays a
+phantom of his own evoking; and, so far as I am informed, other
+impugners of _is being built_ have, absolutely, no argument whatever
+against it over and beyond their repugnance to novelty. Subjected to a
+little untroubled contemplation, it would, I am confident, have ceased
+long ago to be matter of controversy; but the dust of prejudice and
+passion, which so distempers the intellectual vision of theologians and
+politicians, is seen to make, with ruthless impartiality, no exception
+of the perspicacity of philologists.
+
+"Prior to the evolution of _is being built_ and _was being built_, we
+possessed no discriminate equivalents to _ædificatur_ and
+_ædificabatur_; _is built_ and _was built_, by which they were rendered,
+corresponding exactly to _ædificatus est_ and _ædificatus erat_. _Cum
+ædificaretur_ was to us the same as _ædificabatur_. On the wealth of the
+Greek in expressions of imperfect passive I need not dwell. With rare
+exceptions, the Romans were satisfied with the present-imperfect and the
+past-imperfect; and we, on the comparatively few occasions which present
+themselves for expressing other imperfects, shall be sure to have
+recourse to the old forms rather than to the new, or else to use
+periphrases.[21] The purists may, accordingly, dismiss their
+apprehensions, especially as the neoterists have, clearly, a keener
+horror of phraseological ungainliness than themselves. One may have no
+hesitation about saying 'the house _is being built_,' and may yet recoil
+from saying that 'it _should have been being built_ last Christmas'; and
+the same person--just as, provided he did not feel a harshness,
+inadequacy, and ambiguity in the passive 'the house _is building_,' he
+would use the expression--will, more likely than not, elect _is in
+preparation_ preferentially to _is being prepared_. If there are any
+who, in their zealotry for the congruous, choose to adhere to the new
+form in its entire range of exchangeability for the old, let it be hoped
+that they will find, in Mr. Marsh's speculative approbation of
+consistency, full amends for the discomfort of encountering smiles or
+frowns. At the same time, let them be mindful of the career of Mr.
+White, with his black flag and no quarter. The dead Polonius was, in
+Hamlet's phrase, at supper, 'not where he eats, but where he _is
+eaten_.' Shakespeare, to Mr. White's thinking, in this wise expressed
+himself at the best, and deserves not only admiration therefor, but to
+be imitated. 'While the ark _was built_,' 'while the ark _was
+prepared_,' writes Mr. White himself.[22] Shakespeare is commended for
+his ambiguous _is eaten_, though _in eating_ or _an eating_ would have
+been not only correct in his day, but, where they would have come in his
+sentence, univocal. With equal reason a man would be entitled to
+commendation for tearing his mutton-chops with his fingers, when he
+might cut them up with a knife and fork. '_Is eaten_,' says Mr. White,
+'does not mean _has been eaten_.' Very true; but a continuous unfinished
+passion--Polonius's still undergoing manducation, to speak
+Johnsonese--was in Shakespeare's mind; and his words describe a passion
+no longer in generation. The King of Denmark's lord chamberlain had no
+precedent in Herod, when 'he _was eaten_ of worms'; the original,
+γενόμενος σκωληκόβρωτος, yielding, but for its participle, 'he became
+worm-eaten.'
+
+"Having now done with Mr. White, I am anxious, before taking leave of
+him, to record, with all emphasis, that it would be the grossest
+injustice to write of his elegant 'Life and Genius of Shakespeare,' a
+book which does credit to American literature, in the tone which I have
+found unavoidable in dealing with his 'Words and their Uses.'"
+
+The student of English who has honestly weighed the arguments on both
+sides of the question, must, I believe, be of opinion that our language
+is the richer for having two forms for expressing the Progressive
+Passive. Further, he must, I believe, be of opinion that in very many
+cases he conforms to the most approved usage of our time by employing
+the old form; that, however, if he were to employ the old form in all
+cases, his meaning would sometimes be uncertain.
+
+IT. Cobbett discourses of this little neuter pronoun in this wise: "The
+word _it_ is the greatest troubler that I know of in language. It is so
+small and so convenient that few are careful enough in using it. Writers
+seldom spare this word. Whenever they are at a loss for either a
+nominative or an objective to their sentence, they, without any kind of
+ceremony, clap in an _it_. A very remarkable instance of this pressing
+of poor _it_ into actual service, contrary to the laws of grammar and of
+sense, occurs in a piece of composition, where we might, with justice,
+insist on correctness. This piece is on the subject of grammar; it is a
+piece written by a _Doctor of Divinity_ and read by him to students in
+grammar and language in an academy; and the very sentence that I am now
+about to quote is selected by the author of a grammar as testimony of
+high authority in favor of the excellence of his work. Surely, if
+correctness be ever to be expected, it must be in a case like this. I
+allude to two sentences in the 'Charge of the Reverend Doctor
+Abercrombie to the Senior Class of the Philadelphia Academy,' published
+in 1806; which sentences have been selected and published by Mr. Lindley
+Murray as a testimonial of the _merits_ of his grammar; and which
+sentences are by Mr. Murray given to us in the following words: 'The
+unwearied exertions of this gentleman _have_ done more toward
+elucidating the obscurities and embellishing the structure of our
+language than any _other writer_ on the subject. _Such a work_ has long
+been wanted, and from the success with which _it_ is executed, can not
+be too highly appreciated.'
+
+"As in the learned Doctor's opinion obscurities can be elucidated, and
+as in the same opinion Mr. Murray is an able hand at this kind of work,
+it would not be amiss were the grammarian to try his skill upon this
+article from the hand of his dignified eulogist; for here is, if one may
+use the expression, a constellation of obscurities. Our poor oppressed
+_it_, which we find forced into the Doctor's service in the second
+sentence, relates to '_such a work_,' though this work is nothing that
+has an existence, notwithstanding it is said to be '_executed_.' In the
+first sentence, the 'exertions' become, all of a sudden, a '_writer_':
+the _exertions_ have done more than 'any _other_ writer'; for, mind you,
+it is not the _gentleman_ that has done anything; it is 'the
+_exertions_' that _have_ done what is said to be done. The word
+_gentleman_ is in the possessive case, and has nothing to do with the
+action of the sentence. Let us give the sentence a turn, and the Doctor
+and the grammarian will hear how it will sound. 'This gentleman's
+_exertions_ have done more than any _other writer_.' This is on a level
+with 'This gentleman's _dog_ has killed more hares than any _other
+sportsman_.' No doubt Doctor Abercrombie _meant_ to say, 'The exertions
+of this gentleman have done more _than those_ of any other writer. Such
+a work as this gentleman's has long been wanted; his work, seeing the
+successful manner of its execution, can not be too highly commended.'
+_Meant!_ No doubt at all of that! And when we hear a Hampshire ploughboy
+say, 'Poll Cherrycheek have giv'd a thick handkecher,' we know very well
+that he _means_ to say, 'Poll Cherrycheek has given me this
+handkerchief'; and yet we are too apt to _laugh at him_ and to call him
+_ignorant_; which is wrong, because he has no pretensions to a knowledge
+of grammar, and he may be very skillful as a ploughboy. However, we will
+not laugh at Doctor Abercrombie, whom I knew, many years ago, for a very
+kind and worthy man. But, if we may, in any case, be allowed to laugh at
+the ignorance of our fellow-creatures, that case certainly does arise
+when we see a professed grammarian, the author of voluminous precepts
+and examples on the subject of grammar, producing, in imitation of the
+possessors of valuable medical secrets, testimonials vouching for the
+efficacy of his literary panacea, and when, in those testimonials, we
+find most flagrant instances of bad grammar.
+
+"However, my dear James, let this strong and striking instance of the
+misuse of the word _it_ serve you in the way of caution. Never put an
+_it_ upon paper without thinking well of what you are about. When I see
+many _its_ in a page, I always tremble for the writer."
+
+JEOPARDIZE. This is a modern word which we could easily do without, as
+it means neither more nor less than its venerable progenitor _to
+jeopard_, which is greatly preferred by all careful writers.
+
+JUST GOING TO. Instead of "I am _just going to_ go," it is better to
+say, "I am just _about_ to go."
+
+KIDS. "This is another vile contraction. Habit blinds people to the
+unseemliness of a term like this. How would it sound if one should speak
+of silk gloves as _silks_?"
+
+KIND. See POLITE.
+
+KNIGHTS TEMPLARS. The name of this ancient body has been adopted by a
+branch of the Masonic fraternity, but in a perverted form--_Knights
+Templar_; and this form is commonly seen in print, whether referring to
+the old knights or to their modern imitators. This doubtless is due to
+the erroneous impression that _Templar_ is an adjective, and so can not
+take the plural form; while in fact it is a case of two nouns in
+apposition--a double designation--meaning Knights of the order of
+Templars. Hence the plural should be _Knights Templars_, and not
+_Knights Templar_. Members of the contemporaneous order of St. John of
+Jerusalem were commonly called Knights Hospitallers.
+
+LADY. To use the term _lady_, whether in the singular or in the plural,
+simply to designate the sex, is in the worst possible taste. There is a
+kind of pin-feather gentility which seems to have a settled aversion to
+using the terms _man_ and _woman_. Gentlemen and ladies establish their
+claims to being called such by their bearing, and not by arrogating to
+themselves, _even indirectly_, the titles. In England, the title _lady_
+is properly correlative to _lord_; but there, as in this country, it is
+used as a term of complaisance, and is appropriately applied to women
+whose lives are exemplary, and who have received that school and home
+education which enables them to appear to advantage in the better
+circles of society. Such expressions as "She is a fine _lady_, a clever
+_lady_, a well-dressed _lady_, a good _lady_, a modest _lady_, a
+charitable _lady_, an amiable _lady_, a handsome _lady_, a fascinating
+_lady_," and the like, are studiously avoided by persons of refinement.
+_Ladies_ say, "we _women_, the _women_ of America, _women's_ apparel,"
+and so on; _vulgar_ women talk about "us _ladies_, the _ladies_ of
+America, _ladies'_ apparel," and so on. If a woman of culture and
+refinement--in short, a lady--is compelled from any cause soever to work
+in a store, she is quite content to be called a sales-_woman_; not so,
+however, with your young woman who, being in a store, is in a better
+position than ever before. She, Heaven bless her! boils with indignation
+if she is not denominated a sales-_lady_. Lady is often the proper term
+to use, and then it would be very improper to use any other; but it is
+very certain that the terms _lady_ and _gentleman_ are least used by
+those persons who are most worthy of being designated by them. With a
+nice discrimination worthy of special notice, one of our daily papers
+recently said: "Miss Jennie Halstead, daughter of the proprietor of the
+'Cincinnati Commercial,' is one of the most brilliant young _women_ in
+Ohio."
+
+In a late number of the "London Queen" was the following: "The terms
+_ladies_ and _gentlemen_ become in themselves vulgarisms when
+misapplied, and the improper application of the wrong term at the wrong
+time makes all the difference in the world to ears polite. Thus, calling
+a man a _gentleman_ when he should be called a _man_, or speaking of a
+man as a _man_ when he should be spoken of as a _gentleman_; or alluding
+to a lady as a _woman_ when she should be alluded to as a _lady_, or
+speaking of a woman as a _lady_ when she should properly be termed a
+_woman_. Tact and a sense of the fitness of things decide these points,
+there being no fixed rule to go upon to determine when a man is a _man_
+or when he is a _gentleman_; and, although he is far oftener termed the
+one than the other, he does not thereby lose his attributes of a
+gentleman. In common parlance, a man is always a _man_ to a man, and
+never a _gentleman_; to a woman, he is occasionally a _man_ and
+occasionally a _gentleman_; but a man would far oftener term a woman a
+_woman_ than he would term her a _lady_. When a man makes use of an
+adjective in speaking of a lady, he almost invariably calls her a
+_woman_. Thus, he would say, 'I met a rather agreeable _woman_ at dinner
+last night'; but he would _not_ say, 'I met an agreeable _lady_'; but he
+might say, 'A _lady_, a friend of mine, told me,' etc., when he would
+_not_ say, 'A _woman_, a friend of mine, told me,' etc. Again, a man
+would say, 'Which of the _ladies_ did you take in to dinner?' He would
+certainly not say, 'Which of the _women_,' etc.
+
+"Speaking of people _en masse_, it would be to belong to a very advanced
+school to refer to them in conversation as 'men and women,' while it
+would be all but vulgar to style them 'ladies and gentlemen,' the
+compromise between the two being to speak of them as 'ladies and men.'
+Thus a lady would say, 'I have asked two or three ladies and several
+men'; she would not say, 'I have asked several men and women'; neither
+would she say, 'I have asked several ladies and gentlemen.' And,
+speaking of numbers, it would be very usual to say, 'There were a great
+many ladies, and but very few men present,' or, 'The ladies were in the
+majority, so few men being present.' Again, a lady would not say, 'I
+expect two or three men,' but she would say, 'I expect two or three
+gentlemen.' When people are on ceremony with each other [_one another_],
+they might, perhaps, in speaking of a man, call him a _gentleman_; but,
+otherwise, it would be more usual to speak of him as a _man_. Ladies,
+when speaking of each other [_one another_], usually employ the term
+_woman_ in preference to that of _lady_. Thus they would say, 'She is a
+very good-natured _woman_,' 'What sort of a _woman_ is she?' the term
+_lady_ being entirely out of place under such circumstances. Again, the
+term young _lady_ gives place as far as possible to the term _girl_,
+although it greatly depends upon the amount of intimacy existing as to
+which term is employed."
+
+LANGUAGE. A note in Worcester's Dictionary says: "_Language_ is a very
+general term, and is not strictly confined to utterance by words, as it
+is also expressed by the countenance, by the eyes, and by signs.
+_Tongue_ refers especially to an original language; as, 'the Hebrew
+_tongue_.' The modern languages are derived from the original
+_tongues_." If this be correct, then he who speaks French, German,
+English, Spanish, and Italian, may properly say that he speaks five
+_languages_, but only one _tongue_.
+
+LAY--LIE. Errors are frequent in the use of these two irregular verbs.
+_Lay_ is often used for _lie_, and _lie_ is sometimes used for _lay_.
+This confusion in their use is due in some measure, doubtless, to the
+circumstance that _lay_ appears in both verbs, it being the imperfect
+tense of _to lie_. We say, "A mason _lays_ bricks," "A ship _lies_ at
+anchor," etc. "I must _lie_ down"; "I must _lay_ myself down"; "I must
+_lay_ this book on the table"; "He _lies_ on the grass"; "He _lays_ his
+plans well"; "He _lay_ on the grass"; "He _laid_ it away"; "He has
+_lain_ in bed long enough"; "He has _laid up_ some money," "_in_ a
+stock," "_down_ the law"; "He is _laying_ out the grounds"; "Ships _lie_
+at the wharf"; "Hens _lay_ eggs"; "The ship _lay_ at anchor"; "The hen
+_laid_ an egg." It will be seen that _lay_ always expresses transitive
+action, and that _lie_ expresses rest.
+
+    "Here _lies_ our sovereign lord, the king,
+      Whose word no man relies on;
+    He never says a foolish thing,
+      Nor ever does a wise one."
+
+--Written on the bedchamber door of Charles II, by the Earl of
+Rochester.
+
+LEARN. This verb was long ago used as a synonym of _teach_, but in this
+sense it is now obsolete. To _teach_ is to give instruction; to _learn_
+is to take instruction. "I will _learn_, if you will _teach_ me." See
+TEACH.
+
+LEAVE. There are grammarians who insist that this verb should not be
+used without an object, as, for example, it is used in such sentences
+as, "When do you leave?" "I leave to-morrow." The object of the
+verb--home, town, or whatever it may be--is, of course, understood; but
+this, say these gentlemen, is not permissible. On this point opinions
+will, I think, differ; they will, however, not differ with regard to the
+vulgarity of using _leave_ in the sense of _let_; thus, "_Leave_ me be";
+"_Leave_ it alone"; "_Leave_ her be--don't bother her"; "_Leave_ me see
+it."
+
+LEND. See LOAN.
+
+LENGTHY. This word is of comparatively recent origin, and, though it is
+said to be an Americanism, it is a good deal used in England. The most
+careful writers, however, both here and elsewhere, much prefer the word
+_long_: "a _long_ discussion," "a _long_ discourse," etc.
+
+LENIENCY. Mr. Gould calls this word and _lenience_ "two philological
+abortions." _Lenity_ is undoubtedly the proper word to use, though both
+Webster and Worcester do recognize _leniency_ and _lenience_.
+
+LESS. This word is much used instead of _fewer_. _Less_ relates to
+quantity; _fewer_ to number. Instead of, "There were not _less_ than
+twenty persons present," we should say, "There were not _fewer_ than
+twenty persons present."
+
+LESSER. This form of the comparative of _little_ is accounted a
+corruption of _less_. It may, however, be used instead of _less_ with
+propriety in verse, and also, in some cases, in prose. We may say, for
+example, "Of two evils choose the _less_," or "the _lesser_." The latter
+form, in sentences like this, is the more euphonious.
+
+LIABLE. Richard Grant White, in inveighing against the misuse of this
+word, cites the example of a member from a rural district, who called
+out to a man whom he met in the village, where he was in the habit of
+making little purchases: "I say, mister, kin yer tell me whar I'd be
+_li'ble_ to find some beans?" See, also, APT.
+
+LIE. See LAY.
+
+LIKE--AS. Both these words express similarity; _like_ (adjective)
+comparing things, _as_ (adverb) comparing action, existence, or quality.
+Like is followed by an object only, and does not admit of a verb in the
+same construction. _As_ must be followed by a verb expressed or
+understood. We say, "He looks _like_ his brother," or "He looks _as_ his
+brother _looks_." "Do _as_ I do," not "_like_ I do." "You must speak
+_as_ James does," not "_like_ James does." "He died _as_ he had lived,
+_like_ a dog." "It is _as_ blue _as_ indigo"; i. e., "as indigo is."
+
+LIKE, TO. See LOVE.
+
+LIKELY. See APT.
+
+LIT. This form of the past participle of the verb _to light_ is now
+obsolete. "Have you _lighted_ the fire?" "The gas is _lighted_." _Het_
+for _heated_ is a similar, but much greater, vulgarism.
+
+LOAN--LEND. There are those who contend that there is no such verb as
+_to loan_, although it has been found in our literature for more than
+three hundred years. Whether there is properly such a verb or not, it is
+quite certain that it is only those having a vulgar _penchant_ for big
+words who will prefer it to its synonym _lend_. Better far to say
+"_Lend_ me your umbrella" than "_Loan_ me your umbrella."
+
+LOCATE--SETTLE. The use of the verb _to locate_ in the sense of _to
+settle_ is said to be an Americanism. Although the dictionaries
+recognize _to locate_ as a neuter verb, as such it is marked "rarely
+used," and, in the sense of _to settle_, it is among the vulgarisms that
+careful speakers and writers are studious to avoid. A man _settles_, not
+_locates_, in Nebraska. "Where do you intend to _settle_?" not _locate_.
+See, also, SETTLE.
+
+LOGGERHEADS. "In the mean time France is at _loggerheads
+internally_."--"New York Herald," April 29, 1881. Loggerheads
+_internally_?!
+
+LOOKS BEAUTIFULLY. It is sometimes interesting to note the difference
+between _vulgar_ bad grammar and _genteel_ bad grammar, or, more
+properly, between non-painstaking and painstaking bad grammar. The
+former uses, for example, adjectives instead of adverbs; the latter uses
+adverbs instead of adjectives. The former says, "This bonnet is trimmed
+_shocking_"; the latter says, "This bonnet looks _shockingly_." In the
+first sentence the epithet qualifies the verb _is trimmed_, and
+consequently should have its adverbial form--_shockingly_; in the second
+sentence the epithet qualifies the _appearance_--a noun--of the bonnet,
+and consequently should have its adjectival form--_shocking_. The second
+sentence means to say, "This bonnet presents a shocking appearance." The
+bonnet certainly does not really _look_; it is _looked at_, and to the
+_looker_ its appearance is _shocking_. So we say, in like manner, of a
+person, that he or she looks _sweet_, or _charming_, or _beautiful_, or
+_handsome_, or _horrid_, or _graceful_, or _timid_, and so on, always
+using an adjective. "Miss Coghlan, as Lady Teazle, looked _charmingly_."
+The grammar of the "New York Herald" would not have been any more
+incorrect if it had said that Miss Coghlan looked _gladly_, or _sadly_,
+or _madly_, or _delightedly_, or _pleasedly_. A person may look _sick_
+or _sickly_, but in both cases the qualifying word is an adjective. The
+verbs to _smell_, to _feel_, to _sound_, and to _appear_ are also found
+in sentences in which the qualifying word must be an adjective and not
+an adverb. We say, for example, "The rose smells _sweet_"; "The butter
+smells _good_, or _bad_, or _fresh_"; "I feel _glad_, or _sad_, or
+_bad_, or _despondent_, or _annoyed_, or _nervous_"; "This construction
+sounds _harsh_"; "How _delightful_ the country appears!"
+
+On the other hand, to _look_, to _feel_, to _smell_, to _sound_, and to
+_appear_ are found in sentences where the qualifying word must be an
+adverb; thus, "He feels his loss _keenly_"; "The king looked
+_graciously_ on her"; "I smell it _faintly_." We might also say, "He
+feels _sad_ [adjective], because he feels his loss _keenly_" (adverb);
+"He appears _well_" (adverb).
+
+The expression, "_She seemed confusedly_, or _timidly_," is not a whit
+more incorrect than "_She looked beautifully_, or _charmingly_." See
+ADJECTIVES.
+
+LOVE--LIKE. Men who are at all careful in the selection of language to
+express their thoughts, and have not an undue leaning toward the
+superlative, _love_ few things: their wives, their sweethearts, their
+kinsmen, truth, justice, and their country. Women, on the contrary, as a
+rule, _love_ a multitude of things, and, among their loves, the thing
+they perhaps love most is--taffy.
+
+LUGGAGE--BAGGAGE. The former of these words is generally used in
+England, the latter in America.
+
+LUNCH. This word, when used as a substantive, may at the best be
+accounted an inelegant abbreviation of _luncheon_. The dictionaries
+barely recognize it. The proper phraseology to use is, "Have you
+_lunched_?" or, "Have you had your _luncheon_?" or, better, "Have you
+had _luncheon_?" as we may in most cases presuppose that the person
+addressed would hardly take anybody's else luncheon.
+
+LUXURIOUS--LUXURIANT. The line is drawn much more sharply between these
+two words now than it was formerly. Luxurious was once used, to some
+extent at least, in the sense of _rank growth_, but now all careful
+writers and speakers use it in the sense of _indulging_ or _delighting
+in luxury_. We talk of a _luxurious_ table, a _luxurious_ liver,
+_luxurious_ ease, _luxurious_ freedom. Luxuriant, on the other hand, is
+restricted to the sense of _rank_, or _excessive_, growth or production;
+thus, _luxuriant_ weeds, _luxuriant_ foliage or branches, _luxuriant_
+growth.
+
+    "Prune the _luxuriant_, the uncouth refine,
+    But show no mercy to an empty line."--Pope.
+
+MAD. Professor Richard A. Proctor, in a recent number of "The
+Gentleman's Magazine," says: "The word _mad_ in America seems nearly
+always to mean _angry_. For _mad_, as we use the word, Americans say
+_crazy_. Herein they have manifestly impaired the language." Have they?
+
+                "Now, in faith, Gratiano,
+    You give your wife too unkind a cause of grief;
+    An 'twere, to me, I would be _mad at_ it."
+                              --"Merchant of Venice."
+
+"And being exceedingly _mad_ against them, I persecuted them even unto
+strange cities."--Acts xxvi, II.
+
+MAKE A VISIT. The phrase "_make_ a visit," according to Dr. Hall,
+whatever it once was, is no longer English.
+
+MALE. See FEMALE.
+
+MARRY. There has been some discussion, at one time and another, with
+regard to the use of this word. Is John Jones married _to_ Sally Brown
+or _with_ Sally Brown, or are they married to each other? Inasmuch as
+the woman loses her name in that of the man to whom she is wedded, and
+becomes a member of his family, not he of hers--inasmuch as, with few
+exceptions, it is her life that is merged in his--it would seem that,
+_properly_, Sally Brown is married _to_ John Jones, and that this would
+be the proper way to make the announcement of their having been wedded,
+and not John Jones _to_ Sally Brown.
+
+There is also a difference of opinion as to whether the active or the
+passive form is preferable in referring to a person's wedded state. In
+speaking definitely of the _act_ of marriage, the passive form is
+necessarily used with reference to either spouse. "John Jones was
+married to Sally Brown on Dec. 1, 1881"; not, "John Jones _married_
+Sally Brown" on such a date, for (unless they were Quakers) some third
+person married him to her and her to him. But, in speaking indefinitely
+of the _fact_ of marriage, the active form is a matter of course. "Whom
+did John Jones marry?" "He married Sally Brown." "John Jones, when he
+had sown his wild oats, married [married himself, as the French say] and
+settled down." _Got married_ is a vulgarism.
+
+MAY. In the sense of _can_, _may_, in a negative clause, has become
+obsolete. "Though we _may_ say a horse, we _may_ not say a ox." The
+first _may_ here is permissible; not so, however, the second, which
+should be _can_.
+
+MEAT. At table, we ask for and offer beef, mutton, veal, steak, turkey,
+duck, etc., and do not ask for nor offer _meat_, which, to say the
+least, is inelegant. "Will you have [not, take] another piece of _beef_
+[not, of _the_ beef]?" not, "Will you have another piece of _meat_?"
+
+MEMORANDUM. The plural is _memoranda_, except when the singular means a
+book; then the plural is _memorandums_.
+
+MERE. This word is not unfrequently misplaced, and sometimes, as in the
+following sentence, in consequence of being misplaced, it is changed to
+an adverb: "It is true of men as of God, that words _merely_ meet with
+no response." What the writer evidently intended to say is, that _mere_
+words meet with no response.
+
+METAPHOR. An _implied_ comparison is called a metaphor; it is a more
+terse form of expression than the simile. Take, for example, this
+sentence from Spenser's "Philosophy of Style": "As, in passing through
+the crystal, beams of white light are decomposed into the colors of the
+rainbow; so, in traversing the soul of the poet, the colorless rays of
+truth are transformed into brightly-tinted poetry." Expressed in
+metaphors, this becomes: "The white light of truth, in traversing the
+many-sided, transparent soul of the poet, is refracted into iris-hued
+poetry."
+
+Worcester's definition of a _metaphor_ is: "A figure of speech founded
+on the resemblance which one object is supposed to bear, in some
+respect, to another, or a figure by which a word is transferred from a
+subject to which it properly belongs to another, in such a manner that a
+_comparison is implied, though not formally expressed_; a comparison or
+simile comprised in a word; as, 'Thy word is a _lamp_ to my feet.'" A
+_metaphor_ differs from a _simile_ in being expressed without any sign
+of comparison; thus, "the _silver_ moon" is a _metaphor_; "the moon is
+bright as silver" is a simile. Examples:
+
+    "But look, the morn, in russet mantle clad,
+    Walks o'er the dew of yon high eastern hill."
+
+    "Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased--
+    Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow?"
+
+                      "At length Erasmus
+    Stemmed the wild torrent of a barbarous age,
+    And drove those holy Vandals off the stage."
+
+"Censure is the tax a man pays to the public for being eminent."
+
+METONYMY. The rhetorical figure that puts the effect for the cause, the
+cause for the effect, the container for the thing contained, the sign,
+or symbol, for the thing signified, or the instrument for the agent, is
+called _metonymy_.
+
+"One very common species of _metonymy_ is, when the badge is put for the
+office. Thus we say the _miter_ for the priesthood; the _crown_ for
+royalty; for military occupation we say the _sword_; and for the
+literary professions, those especially of theology, law, and physic, the
+common expression is the _gown_."--Campbell.
+
+Dr. Quackenbos, in his "Course of Composition and Rhetoric," says:
+"_Metonymy_ is the exchange of names between things related. It is
+founded, not on resemblance, but on the relation of, 1. Cause and
+effect; as,'They have _Moses_ and _the prophets_,' i. e., their
+writings; '_Gray hairs_ should be respected,' i. e., _old age_. 2.
+Progenitor and posterity; as, 'Hear, O Israel!' i. e., _descendants of
+Israel_. 3. Subject and attribute; as, '_Youth_ and _beauty_ shall be
+laid in dust,' i. e., _the young_ and _beautiful_. 4. Place and
+inhabitant; as, 'What _land_ is so barbarous as to allow this
+injustice?' i. e., what _people_. 5. Container and thing contained; as,
+'Our _ships_ next opened fire,' i. e., our _sailors_. 6. Sign and thing
+signified; as, 'The _scepter_ shall not depart from Judah,' i. e.,
+_kingly_ power. 7. Material and thing made of it; as, 'His _steel_
+gleamed on high,' i. e., his _sword_."
+
+"Petitions having proved unsuccessful, it was determined to approach the
+throne more boldly."
+
+MIDST, THE. See IN OUR MIDST.
+
+MIND--CAPRICIOUS. "Lord Salisbury's _mind_ is _capricious_."--"Tribune,"
+April 3, 1881. See EQUANIMITY OF MIND.
+
+MISPLACED CLAUSES. In writing and speaking, it is as important to give
+each clause its proper place as it is to place the words properly. The
+following are a few instances of misplaced clauses and adjuncts: "All
+these circumstances brought close to us a state of things which we never
+thought to have witnessed [_to witness_] in peaceful England. _In the
+sister island, indeed, we had read of such horrors_, but now they were
+brought home to our very household hearth."--Swift. Better: "We had
+read, indeed, of such horrors occurring in the sister island," etc.
+
+"The savage people in many places in America, except the government of
+families, have no government at all, and live at this day in that savage
+manner as I have said before."--Hobbes. Better: "The savage people ...
+in America have no government at all, except the government of
+families," etc.
+
+"I shall have a comedy for you, in a season or two at farthest, that I
+believe will be worth your acceptance."--Goldsmith. Bettered: "In a
+season or two at farthest, I shall have a comedy for you that I believe
+will be worth your acceptance."
+
+Among the following examples of the wrong placing of words and clauses,
+there are some that are as amusing as they are instructive: "This
+orthography is regarded as normal _in England_." What the writer
+intended was, "in England _as normal_"--a very different thought. "The
+Normal School is a commodious building capable of accommodating three
+hundred students four stories high." "HOUSEKEEPER.--A highly respectable
+middle-aged Person who has been filling the above Situation with a
+gentleman for upwards of eleven years and who is now deceased is anxious
+to meet a similar one." "TO PIANO-FORTE MAKERS.--A lady keeping a
+first-class school requiring a good piano, is desirous of receiving a
+daughter of the above in exchange for the same." "The Moor, seizing a
+bolster boiling over with rage and jealousy, smothers her." "The Dying
+Zouave the most wonderful mechanical representation ever seen of the
+last breath of life being shot in the breast and life's blood leaving
+the wound." "Mr. T---- presents his compliments to Mr. H----, and I have
+got a hat that is not his, and, if he have a hat that is not yours, no
+doubt they are the expectant ones." See ONLY.
+
+MISPLACED WORDS. "Of all the faults to be found in writing," says
+Cobbett, "this is one of the most common, and perhaps it leads to the
+greatest number of misconceptions. All the words may be the proper words
+to be used upon the occasion, and yet, by a _misplacing_ of a part of
+them, the meaning may be wholly destroyed; and even made to be the
+contrary of what it ought to be."
+
+"I asked the question with no other intention than to set the gentleman
+free from the necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of
+mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly from which, _however
+uneasy_, he could not then _escape_, _by a kind introduction_ of the
+only subject on which I believed him to be able to speak with
+propriety."--Dr. Johnson.
+
+"This," says Cobbett, "is a very bad sentence altogether. '_However
+uneasy_' applies to _assembly_ and not to _gentleman_. Only observe how
+easily this might have been avoided. 'From which _he_, _however uneasy_,
+could not then escape.' After this we have, '_he_ could not then
+_escape_, _by a kind introduction_.' We know what is _meant_; but the
+Doctor, with all his _commas_, leaves the sentence confused. Let us see
+whether we can not make it clear. 'I asked the question with no other
+intention than, by a kind introduction of the only subject on which I
+believed him to be able to speak with propriety, to set the gentleman
+free from the necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of
+mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly from which he, however
+uneasy, could not then escape.'"
+
+"Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the chief eminences
+whereby we are raised above our fellow-creatures, the brutes, _in this
+lower world_."--Doctor Watts' "Logic."
+
+"I have before showed an error," Cobbett remarks, "in the _first_
+sentence of Doctor Watts' work. This is the _second_ sentence. The words
+_in this lower world_ are not words _misplaced_ only; they are wholly
+_unnecessary_, and they do great harm; for they do these two things:
+first, they imply _that there are brutes in the higher world_; and,
+second, they excite a doubt _whether we are raised above those brutes_.
+
+"I might greatly extend the number of my extracts from these authors;
+but here, I trust, are enough. I had noted down about _two hundred
+errors_ in Dr. Johnson's 'Lives of the Poets'; but, afterward perceiving
+that he had revised and corrected 'The Rambler' with _extraordinary
+care_, I chose to make my extracts from that work rather than from the
+'Lives of the Poets.'"
+
+The position of the adverb should be as near as possible to the word it
+qualifies. Sometimes we place it before the auxiliary and sometimes
+after it, according to the thought we wish to express. The difference
+between "The fish should _properly_ be broiled" and "The fish should be
+_properly_ broiled" is apparent at a glance. "The colon may be
+_properly_ used in the following cases": should be, "may _properly_ be
+used." "This mode of expression _rather suits_ a familiar than a grave
+style": should be, "suits a familiar _rather than_ a grave style." "It
+is a frequent error _in the writings even_ of some good authors": should
+be, "in the writings of _even some good_ authors." "_Both_ the
+circumstances of contingency and futurity are necessary": should be,
+"The circumstances of contingency and futurity are _both_ necessary."
+"He has made charges ... which he has failed _utterly_ to
+sustain."--"New York Tribune." Here it is uncertain at first sight which
+verb the adverb is intended to qualify; but the nature of the case makes
+it probable that the writer meant "has utterly failed to sustain."
+
+MISTAKEN. "If I am not _mistaken_, you are in the wrong": say, "If I
+_mistake not_." "I tell you, you are _mistaken_." Here _mistaken_ means,
+"You are wrong; you do not understand"; but it might be taken to mean,
+"I _mistake you_." For "you are _mistaken_," say, "you _mistake_." If,
+as Horace and Professor Davidson aver, usage in language makes right,
+then the grammarians ought long ago to have invented some theory upon
+which the locution _you are mistaken_ could be defended. Until they do
+invent such a theory, it will be better to say _you mistake_, _he
+mistakes_, and so on; or _you are_, or _he is_--as the case may be--_in
+error_.
+
+MORE PERFECT. Such expressions as, "the _more_ perfect of the two," "the
+_most_ perfect thing of the kind I have ever seen," "the _most_ complete
+cooking-stove ever invented," and the like, can not be defended
+logically, as nothing can be more perfect than perfection, or more
+complete than completeness. Still such phrases are, and probably will
+continue to be, used by good writers.
+
+MOST. "Everybody abuses this word," says Mr. Gould in his "Good
+English"; and then, in another paragraph, he adds: "If a man would cross
+out _most_ wherever he can find it in any book in the English language,
+he would in _al_most every instance improve the style of the book." That
+this statement may appear within bounds, he gives many examples from
+good authors, some of which are the following: "a _most_ profound
+silence"; "a _most_ just idea"; "a _most_ complete orator"; "this was
+_most_ extraordinary"; "an object of _most_ perfect esteem"; "a _most_
+extensive erudition"; "he gave it _most_ liberally away"; "it is, _most_
+assuredly, not because I value his services least"; "would _most_
+seriously affect us"; "that such a system must _most_ widely and _most_
+powerfully," etc.; "it is _most_ effectually nailed to the counter"; "it
+is _most_ undeniable that," etc.
+
+This word is much, and very erroneously, used for _almost_. "He comes
+here _most_ every day." The user of such a sentence as this means to say
+that he comes _nearly_ every day, but he _really says_, if he says
+anything, that he comes more every day than he does every night. In such
+sentences _almost_, and not _most_, is the word to use.
+
+MUTUAL. This word is much misused in the phrase "our _mutual_ friend."
+Macaulay says: "_Mutual_ friend is a low vulgarism for _common_ friend."
+_Mutual_ properly relates to two persons, and implies reciprocity of
+sentiment--sentiment, be it what it may, received and returned. Thus, we
+say properly, "John and James have a _mutual_ affection, or a _mutual_
+aversion," i. e., they like or dislike each other; or, "John and James
+are _mutually_ dependent," i. e., they are dependent on each other. In
+using the word _mutual_, care should be taken not to add the words _for
+each other_ or _on each other_, the thought conveyed by these words
+being already expressed in the word _mutual_. "Dependent on each other"
+is the exact equivalent of "mutually dependent"; hence, saying that John
+and James are _mutually_ dependent _on each other_ is as redundant in
+form as it would be to say that the editors of "The Great Vilifier" are
+the biggest, greatest mud-slingers in America.
+
+MYSELF. This form of the personal pronoun is properly used in the
+nominative case only where _increased emphasis_ is aimed at.
+
+    "I had as lief not be as live to be
+    In awe of such a thing as I _myself_."
+
+"I will do it _myself_," "I saw it _myself_." It is, therefore,
+incorrect to say, "Mrs. Brown and myself were both very much pleased."
+
+NAME. This word is sometimes improperly used for _mention_; thus, "I
+never _named_ the matter to any one": should be, "I never _mentioned_
+the matter to any one."
+
+NEIGHBORHOOD. See VICINITY.
+
+NEITHER. See EITHER.
+
+NEITHER--NOR. "He would _neither_ give wine, _nor_ oil, _nor_
+money."--Thackeray. The conjunction should be placed before the excluded
+object; "neither _give_" implies neither some other _verb_, a meaning
+not intended. Rearrange thus, taking all the common parts of the
+contracted sentences together: "He would give _neither_ wine, _nor_ oil,
+_nor_ money." So, "She can _neither_ help her beauty, _nor_ her courage,
+_nor_ her cruelty" (Thackeray), should be, "She can help _neither_,"
+etc. "He had _neither_ time to intercept _nor_ to stop her" (Scott),
+should be, "He had time _neither_ to intercept," etc. "Some _neither_
+can for wits _nor_ critics pass" (Pope), should be, "Some can _neither_
+for wits _nor_ critics pass."
+
+NEVER. Grammarians differ with regard to the correctness of using
+_never_ in such sentences as, "He is in error, though _never_ so wise,"
+"Charm he _never_ so wisely." In sentences like these, to say the least,
+it is better, in common with the great majority of writers, to use
+_ever_.
+
+NEW. This adjective is often misplaced. "He has a _new_ suit of clothes
+and a _new_ pair of gloves." It is not the _suit_ and the _pair_ that
+are new, but the _clothes_ and the _gloves_.
+
+NICE. Archdeacon Hare remarks of the use, or rather misuse, of this
+word: "That stupid vulgarism by which we use the word _nice_ to denote
+almost every mode of approbation, for almost every variety of quality,
+and, from sheer poverty of thought, or fear of saying anything definite,
+wrap up everything indiscriminately in this characterless domino,
+speaking at the same breath of a _nice_ cheese-cake, a _nice_ tragedy, a
+_nice_ sermon, a _nice_ day, a _nice_ country, as if a universal deluge
+of _niaiserie_--for _nice_ seems originally to have been only
+_niais_--had whelmed the whole island." Nice is as good a word as any
+other in its place, but its place is not everywhere. We talk very
+properly about a _nice_ distinction, a _nice_ discrimination, a _nice_
+calculation, a _nice_ point, and about a person's being _nice_, and
+over-_nice_, and the like; but we certainly ought not to talk about
+"Othello's" being a _nice_ tragedy, about Salvini's being a _nice_
+actor, or New York bay's being a _nice_ harbor.[23]
+
+NICELY. The very quintessence of popinjay vulgarity is reached when
+_nicely_ is made to do service for _well_, in this wise: "How do you
+do?" "_Nicely_." "How are you?" "_Nicely_."
+
+NO. This word of negation is responded to by _nor_ in sentences like
+this: "Let your meaning be obscure, and _no_ grace of diction _nor_ any
+music of well-turned sentences will make amends."
+
+"Whether he is there or _no_." Supply the ellipsis, and we have,
+"Whether he is there or _no_ there." Clearly, the word to use in
+sentences like this is not _no_, but _not_. And yet our best writers
+sometimes inadvertently use _no_ with _whether_. Example: "But perhaps
+some people are quite indifferent _whether_ or _no_ it is said,"
+etc.--Richard Grant White, in "Words and Their Uses," p. 84. Supply the
+ellipsis, and we have, "said or _no_ said." In a little book entitled
+"Live and Learn," I find, "No _less_ than fifty persons were there; No
+_fewer_," etc. In correcting one mistake, the writer himself makes one.
+It should be, "_Not_ fewer," etc. If we ask, "There were fifty persons
+there, were there or were there _not_?" the reply clearly would be,
+"There were _not_ fewer than fifty." "There was _no_ one of them who
+would not have been proud," etc., should be, "There was _not_ one of
+them."
+
+NOT. The correlative of _not_, when it stands in the first member of a
+sentence, is _nor_ or _neither_. "_Not_ for thy ivory _nor_ thy gold
+will I unbind thy chain." "I will _not_ do it, _neither_ shall you."
+
+The wrong placing of _not_ often gives rise to an imperfect negation;
+thus, "John and James were _not_ there," means that John and James were
+not there _in company_. It does not exclude the presence of one of them.
+The negative should precede in this case: "Neither John _nor_ James was
+there." "Our company was _not_ present" (as a company, but some of us
+might have been), should be, "No member of our company was present."
+
+NOT--BUT ONLY. "Errors frequently arise in the use of _not_--but _only_,
+to understand which we must attend to the force of the whole
+expression. 'He did _not_ pretend to extirpate French music, _but only_
+to cultivate and civilize it.' Here the _not_ is obviously misplaced.
+'He pretended, or professed, _not_ to extirpate.'"--Bain.
+
+NOTORIOUS. Though this word can not be properly used in any but a bad
+sense, we sometimes see it used instead of _noted_, which may be used in
+either a good or a bad sense. _Notorious_ characters are always persons
+to be shunned, whereas _noted_ characters may or may not be persons to
+be shunned.
+
+"This is the tax a man must pay for his virtues--they hold up a torch to
+his vices and render those frailties _notorious_ in him which would pass
+without observation in another."--Lacon.
+
+NOVICE. See AMATEUR.
+
+NUMBER. It is not an uncommon thing for a pronoun in the plural number
+to be used in connection with an antecedent in the singular. At present,
+the following notice may be seen in some of our Broadway omnibuses:
+"Fifty dollars reward for the conviction of any person caught collecting
+or keeping fares given to _them_ to deposit in the box." Should be, to
+_him_. "A person may be very near-sighted if _they_ can not recognize an
+acquaintance ten feet off." Should be, if _he_.
+
+The verb _to be_ is often used in the singular instead of in the plural;
+thus, "There _is_ several reasons why it would be better": say, _are_.
+"How many _is_ there?" say, _are_. "There _is_ four": say, _are_. "_Was_
+there many?" say, _were_. "No matter how many there _was_": say, _were_.
+
+A verb should agree in number with its subject, and not with its
+predicate. We say, for example, "Death _is_ the wages of sin," and "The
+wages of sin _are_ death."
+
+"When singular nouns connected by _and_ are preceded by _each_,
+_every_, or _no_, the verb must be singular." We say, for example,
+"_Each_ boy and _each_ girl _studies_." "_Every_ leaf, and _every_ twig,
+and _every_ drop of water _teems_ with life." "_No_ book and _no_ paper
+_was_ arranged."
+
+_Each_ being singular, a pronoun or verb to agree with it must also be
+singular; thus, "Let them depend each on _his_ own exertions"; "Each
+city has _its_ peculiar privileges"; "Everybody has a right to look
+after _his_ own interest."
+
+Errors are often the result of not repeating the verb; thus, "Its
+significance is as varied as the passions": correctly, "as _are_ the
+passions." "The words are as incapable of analysis as the thing
+signified": correctly, "as _is_ the thing signified."
+
+OBSERVE. The dictionaries authorize the use of this word as a synonym of
+_say_ and _remark_; as, for example, "What did you _observe_?" for "What
+did you _say_, or _remark_?" In this sense, however, it is better to
+leave _observe_ to the exclusive use of those who delight in being fine.
+
+O'CLOCK. "It is a quarter _to_ ten o'clock." What does this statement
+mean, literally? We _understand_ by it that it lacks a quarter of ten,
+i. e., of being ten; but it does not really mean that. Inasmuch as _to_
+means toward, it _really_ means a quarter after nine. We should say,
+then, a quarter _of_, which means, literally, a quarter _out of_ ten.
+
+OF ALL OTHERS. "The vice of covetousness, _of all others_, enters
+deepest into the soul." This sentence says that covetousness is one of
+the _other_ vices. A thing can not be _another_ thing, nor can it be one
+of a number of _other_ things. The sentence should be, "Of all the
+vices, covetousness enters deepest into the soul"; or, "The vice of
+covetousness, of all the vices, enters," etc.; or, "The vice of
+covetousness, _above_ all others, enters," etc.
+
+OF ANY. This phrase is often used when _of all_ is meant; thus, "This is
+the largest _of any_ I have seen." Should be, "the largest _of all_,"
+etc.
+
+OFF OF. In such sentences as, "Give me a yard _off of_ this piece of
+calico," either the _off_ or the _of_ is vulgarly superfluous. The
+sentence would be correct with either one, but not with both of them.
+"The apples fell _off of_ the tree": read, "fell _off_ the tree."
+
+OFTEN. This adverb is properly compared by changing its termination:
+often, oftener, oftenest. Why some writers use _more_ and _most_ to
+compare it, it is not easy to see; this mode of comparing it is
+certainly not euphonious.
+
+OH--O. It is only the most careful writers who use these two
+interjections with proper discrimination. The distinction between them
+is said to be modern. _Oh_ is simply an exclamation, and should always
+be followed by some mark of punctuation, usually by an exclamation
+point. "Oh! you are come at last." "Oh, help him, you sweet heavens!"
+"Oh, woe is me!" "Oh! I die, Horatio." _O_, in addition to being an
+exclamation, denotes a calling to or adjuration; thus, "Hear, O heavens,
+and give ear, O earth!" "O grave, where is thy victory?" "O heavenly
+powers, restore him!" "O shame! where is thy blush?"
+
+OLDER--ELDER. "He is the _older_ man of the two, and the _oldest_ in the
+neighborhood." "He is the _elder_ of the two sons, and the _eldest_ of
+the family." "The _elder_ son is heir to the estate; he is _older_ than
+his brother by ten years."
+
+ON TO. We get _on_ a chair, _on_ an omnibus, _on_ a stump, and _on_ a
+spree, and not on _to_.
+
+ONE. Certain pronouns of demonstrative signification are called
+indefinite because they refer to no particular subject. This is one of
+them. If we were putting a supposition by way of argument or
+illustration, we might say, "Suppose _I_ were to lose my way in a
+wood"; or, "Suppose _you_ were to lose your way in a wood"; or, "Suppose
+_one_ were to lose _one's_ way in a wood." All these forms are used,
+but, as a rule, the last is to be preferred. The first verges on
+egotism, and the second makes free with another's person, whereas the
+third is indifferent. "If _one's_ honesty were impeached, what should
+_one_ do?" is more courtly than to take either one's self or the person
+addressed for the example.
+
+_One_ should be followed by _one_, and not by _he_. "The better
+acquainted _one_ is with any kind of rhetorical trick, the less liable
+_he_ is to be misled by it." Should be, "the less liable _one_ is to be
+misled by it."
+
+In the phrase, "any of the little _ones_," _one_ is the numeral employed
+in the manner of a pronoun, by indicating something that has gone
+before, or, perhaps, has to come after. "I like peaches, but I must have
+a ripe _one_, or ripe _ones_."
+
+Professor Bain says, in his "Composition Grammar":
+
+"This pronoun continually lands writers in difficulties. English idiom
+requires that, when the pronoun has to be again referred to, it should
+be used itself a second time. The correct usage is shown by Pope: '_One_
+may be ashamed to consume half _one's_ days in bringing sense and rhyme
+together.' It would be against idiom to say 'half _his_ days.'
+
+"Still, the repetition of the pronoun is often felt to be heavy, and
+writers have recourse to various substitutions. Even an ear accustomed
+to the idiom can scarcely accept with unmixed pleasure this instance
+from Browning:
+
+                        "'Alack! _one_ lies _oneself_
+    Even in the stating that _one's_ end was truth,
+    Truth only, if _one_ states so much in words.'
+
+"The representative 'I' or 'we' occasionally acts the part of 'one.' The
+following sentence presents a curious alternation of 'we' with
+'one'--possibly not accidental (George Eliot): 'It's a desperately
+vexatious thing that, after all _one's_ reflections and quiet
+determinations, _we_ should be ruled by moods that _one_ can't calculate
+on beforehand.' By the use of 'we' here, a more pointed reference is
+suggested, while the vagueness actually remains.
+
+"Fenimore Cooper, like Scott, is not very particular; an example may be
+quoted: 'Modesty is a poor man's wealth; but, as _we_ grow substantial
+in the world, patroon, _one_ can afford to begin to speak truth of
+_himself_ as well as of _his_ neighbor.' Were Cooper a careful writer,
+we might persuade ourselves that he chose 'we' and 'one' with a purpose:
+'we' might indicate that the speaker had himself and the patroon
+directly in his eye, although at the same time he wanted to put it
+generally; and 'one' might hint that modesty succeeded in getting the
+better of him. But 'himself' and 'his' would alone show that such
+speculations are too refined for the occasion.
+
+"The form 'a man,' which was at one time common, seems to be reviving.
+In 'Adam Bede' we have, '_A man_ can never do anything at variance with
+his own nature.' We might substitute 'one.'
+
+"'Men' was more frequent in good writing formerly than now. 'Neither do
+_men_ light a candle, and put it under a bushel.' 'Do _men_ gather
+grapes of thorns?' Hume is fond of expressing a general subject by
+'men.'
+
+"'Small birds are much more exposed to the cold than large _ones_.' This
+usage is hardly 'indefinite'; and it needs no further exemplification."
+
+ONLY. This word, when used as an adjective, is more frequently misplaced
+than any other word in the language. Indeed, I am confident that it is
+not correctly placed half the time, either in conversation or in
+writing. Thus, "In its pages, papers of sterling merit [only] will
+_only_ appear" (Miss Braddon); "Things are getting dull down in Texas;
+they _only_ shot [only] three men down there last week"; "I have _only_
+got [only] three." _Only_ is sometimes improperly used for _except_ or
+_unless_; thus, "The trains will not stop _only_ when the bell rings."
+The meaning here is clearly "_except_ when the bell rings."
+
+Dr. Bain, in his "Higher English Grammar," speaking of the order of
+words, says:
+
+"The word requiring most attention is _only_.
+
+"According to the position of _only_, the same words may be made to
+express very different meanings.
+
+"'He _only_ lived for their sakes.' Here _only_ must be held as
+qualifying '_lived_ for their sakes,' the emphasis being on _lived_, the
+word immediately adjoining. The meaning then is 'he _lived_,' but did
+not _work_, did not _die_, did not do any other thing for their sakes.
+
+"'He lived _only_ for their sakes.' _Only_ now qualifies 'for their
+sakes,' and the sentence means he lived for this one reason, namely, for
+their sakes, and not for any other reason.
+
+"'He lived for their sakes _only_.' The force of the word when placed at
+the end is peculiar. Then it often has a diminutive or disparaging
+signification. 'He lived for their sakes,' and not for any more worthy
+reason. 'He gave sixpence _only_,' is an insinuation that more was
+expected.
+
+"By the use of _alone_, instead of _only_, other meanings are expressed.
+'He _alone_ lived for their sakes'; that is, _he, and nobody else_, did
+so. 'He lived for their sakes _alone_,' or, 'for the sake of them
+_alone_'; that is, not for the sake of any other persons. 'It was
+_alone_ by the help of the Confederates that any such design could be
+carried out.' Better _only_.
+
+"'When men grow virtuous in their old age, they _only_ make a sacrifice
+to God of the devil's leavings.'--Pope. Here _only_ is rightly placed.
+'Think _only_ of the past as its remembrance gives you pleasure,' should
+be, 'think of the past, _only_ as its remembrance,' etc. 'As he did not
+leave his name, it was _only_ known that a gentleman had called on
+business': it was known _only_. 'I can _only_ refute the accusation by
+laying before you the whole': this would mean, 'the only thing I am able
+to do is to refute; I may not retaliate, or let it drop, I must _refute_
+it.' 'The negroes are to appear at church _only_ in boots'; that is,
+when the negroes go to church they are to have no clothing but boots.
+'The negroes are to appear _only_ at church in boots' might mean that
+they are not to appear anywhere but at church, whether in boots or out
+of them. The proper arrangement would be to connect the adverbial
+adjunct, _in boots_, with its verb, _appear_, and to make _only_ qualify
+_at church_ and no more: 'the negroes are to appear in boots _only_ at
+church.'"
+
+It thus appears very plain that we should look well to our _onlys_.
+
+OUGHT--SHOULD. These two words, though they both imply obligation,
+should not be used indiscriminately. _Ought_ is the stronger term; what
+we _ought_ to do, we are morally bound to do. We _ought_ to be truthful
+and honest, and _should_ be respectful to our elders and kind to our
+inferiors.
+
+OVERFLOWN. _Flown_ is the past participle of _to fly_, and _flowed_ of
+_to flow_. As, therefore, a river does not _fly_ over its banks, but
+_flows_ over them, we should say of it that it has over_flowed_, and not
+that it has over_flown_.
+
+OVERLY. This word is now used only by the unschooled.
+
+OWING. See DUE.
+
+PANTS. This abbreviation is not used by those who are careful in the
+choice of words. The purist does not use the word _pantaloons_ even, but
+_trousers_. _Pants_ are worn by _gents_ who eat _lunches_ and _open_
+wine, and _trousers_ are worn by _gentlemen_ who eat _luncheons_ and
+_order_ wine.
+
+PARAPHERNALIA. This is a law term. In Roman law, it meant the goods
+which a woman brought to her husband besides her dowry. In English law,
+it means the goods which a woman is allowed to have after the death of
+her husband, besides her dower, consisting of her apparel and ornaments
+suitable to her rank. When used in speaking of the affairs of every-day
+life, it is generally misused.
+
+PARLOR. This word, in the sense of _drawing-room_, according to Dr.
+Hall, except in the United States and some of the English colonies, is
+obsolete.
+
+PARTAKE. This is a very fine word to use for _eat_; just the word for
+young women who hobble on French heels.
+
+PARTIALLY--PARTLY. "It is only _partially_ done." This use of the adverb
+_partially_ is sanctioned by high authority, but that does not make it
+correct. A thing done in part is _partly_, not _partially_, done.
+
+PARTICIPLES. When the present participle is used substantively, in
+sentences like the following, it is preceded by the definite article and
+followed by the preposition _of_. The omitting of the preposition is a
+common error. Thus, "Or, it is _the drawing_ a conclusion which was
+before either unknown or dark," should be, "the drawing _of_ a
+conclusion." "Prompted by the most extreme vanity, he persisted in the
+writing bad verses," should be, "in writing bad verses," or "in the
+writing _of_ bad verses." "There is a misuse of the article _a_ which is
+very common. It is the using it before the word _most_."--Moon. Most
+writers would have said "the using _of_ it." Mr. Moon argues for his
+construction.
+
+PARTICLES. "Nothing but study of the best writers and practice in
+composition will enable us to decide what are the prepositions and
+conjunctions that ought to go with certain verbs. The following examples
+illustrate some common blunders:
+
+"'It was characterized _with_ eloquence': read, 'by.'
+
+"'A testimonial _of_ the merits of his grammar': read, 'to.'
+
+"'It was an example of the love _to form_ comparisons': read, 'of
+forming.'
+
+"'Repetition is always to be preferred _before_ obscurity': read, 'to.'
+
+"'He made an effort _for meeting_ them': read, 'to meet.'
+
+"'They have no _other_ object _but_ to come': read, 'other object than,'
+or omit 'other.'
+
+"Two verbs are not unfrequently followed by a single preposition, which
+accords with one only; e. g., 'This duty _is repeated_ and inculcated
+_upon_ the reader.' 'Repeat _upon_' is nonsense; we must read 'is
+repeated _to_ and inculcated upon.'"--Nichol's "English Composition," p.
+39. We often see _for_ used with the substantive _sympathy_; the best
+practice, however, uses _with_; thus, "Words can not express the deep
+sympathy I feel _with_ you."--Queen Victoria.
+
+PARTY. This is a very good word in its place, but it is very much out of
+its place when used--as it often is by the vulgar--where good taste
+would use the word _person_.
+
+PATRONIZE. This word and its derivatives would be much less used by the
+American tradesman than they are, if he were better acquainted with
+their true meaning. Then he would solicit his neighbors' _custom_, not
+their _patronage_. A man can have no _patrons_ without incurring
+obligations--without becoming a _protégé_; while a man may have
+customers innumerable, and, instead of placing himself under obligations
+to them, he may place them under obligations to him. Princes are the
+_patrons_ of those tradesmen whom they allow to call themselves their
+purveyors; as, "John Smith, Haberdasher to H. R. H. the Prince of
+Wales." Here the Prince _patronizes_ John Smith.
+
+PELL-MELL. This adverb means mixed or mingled together; as, "Men,
+horses, chariots, crowded _pell-mell_." It can not properly be applied
+to an individual. To say, for example, "He rushed pell-mell down the
+stairs," is as incorrect as it would be to say, "He rushed down the
+stairs _mixed together_."
+
+PER. This Latin preposition is a good deal used in English, as, for
+example, in such phrases as _per_ day, _per_ man, _per_ pound, _per_
+ton, and so on. In all such cases it is better to use plain English, and
+say, _a_ day, _a_ man, _a_ pound, _a_ ton, etc. _Per_ is correct before
+Latin nouns only; as, per annum, per diem, per cent., etc.
+
+PERFORM. "She _performs_ on the piano beautifully." In how much better
+taste it is to say simply, "She _plays_ the piano well," or, more
+superlatively, "exceedingly well," or "admirably"! If we talk about
+_performing_ on musical instruments, to be consistent, we should call
+those who _perform_, piano-performers, cornet-performers,
+violin-performers, and so on.
+
+PERPETUALLY. This word is sometimes misused for _continually_. Dr.
+William Mathews, in his "Words, their Use and Abuse," says: "The Irish
+are _perpetually_ using _shall_ for _will_." _Perpetual_ means never
+ceasing, continuing without intermission, uninterrupted; while
+_continual_ means that which is constantly renewed and recurring with
+perhaps frequent stops and interruptions. As the Irish do something
+_besides_ misuse _shall_, the Doctor should have said that they
+_continually_ use _shall_ for _will_. I might perhaps venture to
+intimate that _perpetually_ is likewise misused in the following
+sentence, which I copy from the "London Queen," if I were not conscious
+that the monster who can write and print such a sentence would not
+hesitate to cable a thunderbolt at an offender on the slightest
+provocation. Judge, if my fears are groundless: "But some few people
+contract the ugly habit of making use of these expressions unconsciously
+and continuously, _perpetually_ interlarding their conversation with
+them."
+
+PERSON. See PARTY; also, INDIVIDUAL.
+
+PERSONALTY. This word does not, as some persons think, mean the articles
+worn on one's person. It is properly a law term, and means _personal
+property_. "There is but one case on record of a peer of England leaving
+over $7,500,000 personalty."
+
+PERSONIFICATION. That rhetorical figure which attributes sex, life, or
+action to inanimate objects, or ascribes to objects and brutes the acts
+and qualities of rational beings, is called _personification_ or
+_prosopopœia_.
+
+"The mountains _sing together_, the hills rejoice and _clap their
+hands_." "The worm, _aware_ of his intent, _harangued_ him thus."
+
+    "See, _Winter_ comes to _rule_ the varied year,
+    _Sullen_ and _sad_ with all his rising train."--Thomson.
+
+    "So saying, her rash hand, in evil hour,
+    Forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she ate!
+    _Earth felt the wound; and Nature from her seat,
+    Sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe,
+    That all was lost._"--Milton.
+
+    "War and Love are strange compeers.
+    War sheds blood, and Love sheds tears;
+    War has swords, and Love has darts;
+    War breaks heads, and Love breaks hearts."
+
+"Levity is often less foolish and gravity less wise than each of them
+appears."
+
+"The English language, by reserving the distinction of gender for living
+beings that have sex, gives especial scope for personification. The
+highest form of personification should be used seldom, and only when
+justified by the presence of strong feeling."--Bain.
+
+    "Knowledge and wisdom, far from being one,
+    Have ofttimes no connection. Knowledge dwells
+    In heads replete with thoughts of other men;
+    Wisdom in minds attentive to their own.
+    Knowledge is proud that he has learned so much;
+    Wisdom is humble that he knows no more."--Cowper.
+
+PHENOMENON. Plural, _phenomena_.
+
+PLEAD. The imperfect tense and the perfect participle of the verb _to
+plead_ are both _pleaded_ and not _plead_. "He _pleaded_ not guilty."
+"You should have _pleaded_ your cause with more fervor."
+
+PLENTY. In Worcester's Dictionary we find the following note: "_Plenty_
+is much used colloquially as an adjective, in the sense of _plentiful_,
+both in this country and in England; and this use is supported by
+respectable authorities, though it is condemned by various critics.
+Johnson says: 'It is used barbarously, I think, for _plentiful_'; and
+Dr. Campbell, in his 'Philosophy of Rhetoric,' says: '_Plenty_ for
+_plentiful_ appears to me so gross a vulgarism that I should not have
+thought it worthy of a place here if I had not sometimes found it in
+works of considerable merit.'" We should say, then, that money is
+_plentiful_, and not that it is _plenty_.
+
+PLEONASM. Redundancy or pleonasm is the use of more words than are
+necessary to express the thought clearly. "They returned _back again_ to
+the _same_ city _from_ whence they came _forth_": the five words in
+italics are _redundant_ or _pleonastic_. "The different departments of
+science and of art _mutually_ reflect light _on each other_": either of
+the expressions in italics embodies the whole idea. "The _universal_
+opinion of _all_ men" is a pleonastic expression often heard. "I wrote
+you _a letter_ yesterday": here _a letter_ is redundant.
+
+Redundancy is _sometimes_ permissible for the surer conveyance of
+meaning, for emphasis, and in the language of poetic embellishment.
+
+POLITE. This word is much used by persons of doubtful culture, where
+those of the better sort use the word _kind_. We accept _kind_, not
+_polite_ invitations; and, when any one has been obliging, we tell him
+that he has been _kind_; and, when an interviewing reporter tells us of
+his having met with a _polite_ reception, we may be sure that the person
+by whom he has been received deserves well for his considerate kindness.
+"I thank you and Mrs. Pope for my _kind_ reception."--Atterbury.
+
+PORTION. This word is often incorrectly used for _part_. A _portion_ is
+properly a part assigned, allotted, set aside for a special purpose; a
+share, a division. The verb _to portion_ means to divide, to parcel, to
+endow. We ask, therefore, "In what _part_ [not, in what _portion_] of
+the country, state, county, town, or street do you live?"--or, if we
+prefer grandiloquence to correctness, _reside_. In the sentence, "A
+large _portion_ of the land is unfilled," the right word would be
+either _part_ or _proportion_, according to the intention of the writer.
+
+POSTED. A word very much and very inelegantly used for _informed_. Such
+expressions as, "I will _post_ you," "I must _post_ myself up," "If I
+had been better _posted_," and the like, are, at the best, but one
+remove from slang.
+
+PREDICATE. This word is often very incorrectly used in the sense of _to
+base_; as, "He _predicates_ his opinion on insufficient data." Then we
+sometimes hear people talk about predicating an action upon certain
+information or upon somebody's statement. To predicate means primarily
+_to speak before_, and has come to be properly used in the sense of
+_assumed_ or believed to be the consequence of. Examples: "Contentment
+is _predicated_ of virtue"; "Good health may be _predicated_ of a good
+constitution." He who is not very sure that he uses the word correctly
+would do better not to use it at all.
+
+PREJUDICE--PREPOSSESS. Both these words mean, to incline in one
+direction or the other for some reason not founded in justice; but by
+common consent _prejudice_ has come to be used in an unfavorable sense,
+and _prepossess_ in a favorable one. Thus, we say, "He is _prejudiced_
+against him," and "He is _prepossessed_ in his favor." We sometimes hear
+the expression, "He is _prejudiced_ in his favor," but this can not be
+accounted a good use of the word.
+
+PREPOSITIONS. The errors made in the use of the prepositions are very
+numerous. "The indolent child is one who [that?] has a strong aversion
+_from_ action of any sort."--Graham's "English Synonymes," p. 236. The
+prevailing and best modern usage is in favor of _to_ instead of _from_
+after _averse_ and _aversion_, and before the object. "Clearness ...
+enables the reader to see thoughts without noticing the language _with_
+which they are clothed."--Townsend's "Art of Speech." We clothe thoughts
+_in_ language. "Shakespeare ... and the Bible are ... models _for_ the
+English-speaking tongue."--Ibid. If this means models of English, then
+it should be _of_; but if it means models for English organs of speech
+to practice on, then it should be _for_; or if it means models to model
+English tongues after, then also it should be _for_. "If the resemblance
+is too faint, the mind is fatigued _while_ attempting to trace the
+analogies." "Aristotle is in error _while_ thus describing
+governments."--Ibid. Here we have two examples, not of the misuse of the
+preposition, but of the erroneous use of the adverb _while_ instead of
+the preposition _in_. "For my part I can not think that Shelley's
+poetry, except _by_ snatches and fragments, has the value of the good
+work of Wordsworth or Byron."--Matthew Arnold. Should be, "except _in_
+snatches." "Taxes with us are collected nearly [almost] solely _from_
+real and personal estate."--"Appletons' Journal." Taxes are levied _on_
+estates and collected _from_ the owners.
+
+"If I am not commended _for_ the beauty of my works, I may hope to be
+pardoned for their brevity." Cobbett comments on this sentence as
+follows: "We may commend him _for_ the beauty of his works, and we may
+_pardon_ him _for_ their brevity, if we deem the brevity _a fault_; but
+this is not what he means. He means that, at any rate, he shall have the
+_merit_ of brevity. 'If I am not commended for the beauty of my works, I
+may hope to be pardoned _on account of_ their brevity.' This is what the
+Doctor meant; but this would have marred a little the antithesis: it
+would have unsettled a little of the balance of that _seesaw_ in which
+Dr. Johnson so much delighted, and which, falling into the hands of
+novel-writers and of members of Parliament, has, by moving unencumbered
+with any of the Doctor's reason or sense, lulled so many thousands
+asleep! Dr. Johnson created a race of writers and speakers. 'Mr.
+Speaker, that the state of the nation is very critical, all men will
+allow; but that it is wholly desperate, few will believe.' When you hear
+or see a sentence like this, be sure that the person who speaks or
+writes it has been reading Dr. Johnson, or some of his imitators. But,
+observe, these imitators go no further than the frame of the sentences.
+They, in general, take care not to imitate the Doctor in knowledge and
+reasoning."
+
+The rhetoricians would have us avoid such forms of expression as, "The
+boy went _to_ and asked the advice _of_ his teacher"; "I called _on_ and
+had a conversation _with_ my brother."
+
+Very often the preposition is not repeated in a sentence, when it should
+be. We say properly, "He comes from Ohio or _from_ Indiana"; or, "He
+comes _either_ from Ohio or Indiana."
+
+PREPOSSESS. See PREJUDICE.
+
+PRESENT--INTRODUCE. Few errors are more common, especially among those
+who are always straining to be fine, than that of using _present_, in
+the social world, instead of _introduce_. _Present_ means to place in
+the presence of a superior; _introduce_, to bring to be acquainted. A
+person is presented at court, and on an official occasion to our
+President; but persons who are unknown to each other are _introduced_ by
+a common acquaintance. And in these introductions, it is the younger who
+is introduced to the older; the lower to the higher in place or social
+position; the gentleman to the lady. A lady should say, as a rule, that
+Mr. Blank was introduced to her, not that she was introduced to Mr.
+Blank.
+
+PRESUMPTIVE. This word is sometimes misused by the careless for
+_presumptuous_.
+
+PREVENTIVE. A useless and unwarranted syllable is sometimes added to
+this word--_preventative_.
+
+PREVIOUS. This adjective is much used in an adverbial sense; thus,
+"_Previous_ to my return," etc. Until _previous_ is recognized as an
+adverb, if we would speak grammatically, we must say, "_Previously_ to
+my return." "_Previously_ to my leaving England, I called on his
+lordship."
+
+PROCURE. This is a word much used by people who strive to be fine.
+"Where did you _get_ it?" with them is, "Where did you _procure_ it?"
+
+PROFANITY. The extent to which some men habitually interlard their talk
+with oaths is disgusting even to many who, on occasion, do not
+themselves hesitate to give expression to their feelings in oaths portly
+and unctuous. If these fellows could be made to know how offensive to
+decency they make themselves, they would, perhaps, be less profane.
+
+PROMISE. This word is sometimes very improperly used for _assure_; thus,
+"I _promise_ you I was very much astonished."
+
+PRONOUNS OF THE FIRST PERSON. "The ordinary uses of 'I' and 'we,' as the
+singular and plural pronouns of the first person, would appear to be
+above all ambiguity, uncertainty, or dispute. Yet when we consider the
+force of the plural 'we,' we are met with a contradiction; for, as a
+rule, only one person can speak at the same time to the same audience.
+It is only by some exceptional arrangement, or some latitude or license
+of expression, that several persons can be conjoint speakers. For
+example, a plurality may sing together in chorus, and may join in the
+responses at church, or in the simultaneous repetition of the Lord's
+Prayer or the Creed. Again, one person may be the authorized spokesman
+in delivering a judgment or opinion held by a number of persons in
+common. Finally, in written compositions, the 'we' is not unsuitable,
+because a plurality of persons may append their names to a document.
+
+"A speaker using 'we' may speak for himself and one or more others;
+commonly he stands forward as the representative of a class, more or
+less comprehensive. 'As soon as my companion and I had entered the
+field, _we_ saw a man coming toward _us_'; '_we_ like _our_ new curate';
+'you do _us_ poets the greatest injustice'; '_we_ must see to the
+efficiency of _our_ forces.' The widest use of the pronoun will be
+mentioned presently.
+
+"'We' is used for 'I' in the decrees of persons in authority; as when
+King Lear says:
+
+        'Know that _we_ have divided
+    In three _our_ kingdom.'
+
+By the fiction of plurality a veil of modesty is thrown over the
+assumption of vast superiority over human beings generally. Or, 'we' may
+be regarded as an official form whereby the speaker personally is
+magnified or enabled to rise to the dignity of the occasion.
+
+"The editorial 'we' is to be understood on the same principle. An author
+using 'we' appears as if he were not alone, but sharing with other
+persons the responsibility of his views.
+
+"This representative position is at its utmost stretch in the practice
+of using 'we' for human beings generally; as in discoursing on the laws
+of human nature. The preacher, the novelist, or the philosopher, in
+dwelling upon the peculiarity of our common constitution, being himself
+an example of what he is speaking of, associates the rest of mankind
+with him, and speaks collectively by means of 'we.' '_We_ are weak and
+fallible'; '_we_ are of yesterday'; '_we_ are doomed to dissolution.'
+'Here have _we_ no continuing city, but _we_ seek one to come.'
+
+"It is not unfrequent to have in one sentence, or in close proximity,
+both the editorial and the representative meaning, the effect being
+ambiguity and confusion. 'Let _us_ [the author] now consider why _we_
+[humanity generally] overrate distant good.' In such a case the author
+should fall back upon the singular for himself--'_I_ will now
+consider--.' '_We_ [speaker] think _we_ [himself and hearers together]
+should come to the conclusion.' Say, either '_I_ think,' or '_you_
+would.'
+
+"The following extract from Butler exemplifies a similar confusion:
+'Suppose _we_ [representative] are capable of happiness and of misery in
+degrees equally intense and extreme, yet _we_ [rep.] are capable of the
+latter for a much longer time, beyond all comparison. _We_ [change of
+subject to a limited class] see men in the tortures of pain--. Such is
+_our_ [back to representative] make that anything may become the
+instrument of pain and sorrow to _us_.' The 'we' at the commencement of
+the second sentence--'_We_ see men in the tortures'--could be
+advantageously changed to 'you,' or the passive construction could be
+substituted; the remaining _we_'s would then be consistently
+representative.
+
+"From the greater emphasis of singularity, energetic speakers and
+writers sometimes use 'I' as representative of mankind at large. Thus:
+'The current impressions received through the senses are not voluntary
+in origin. What _I_ see in walking is seen because _I_ have an organ of
+vision.' The question of general moral obligation is forcibly stated by
+Paley in the individual form, 'Why am _I_ obliged to keep my word?' It
+is sometimes well to confine the attention of the hearer or reader to
+his own relation to the matter under consideration, more especially in
+difficult or non-popular argument or exposition. The speaker, by using
+'I,' does the action himself, or makes himself the example, the hearer
+being expected to put himself in the same position."--Bain's
+"Composition Grammar."
+
+PRONOUNS OF THE SECOND PERSON. "Anomalous usages have sprung up in
+connection with these pronouns. The plural form has almost wholly
+superseded the singular; a usage more than five centuries old.[24]
+
+"The motive is courtesy. The singling out of one person for address is
+supposed to be a liberty or an excess of familiarity; and the effect is
+softened or diluted by the fiction of taking in others. If our address
+is uncomplimentary, the sting is lessened by the plural form; and if the
+reverse, the shock to modesty is not so great. This is a refinement that
+was unknown to the ancient languages. The orators of Greece delighted in
+the strong, pointed, personal appeal implied in the singular 'thou.' In
+modern German, 'thou' (_du_) is the address of familiarity and intimacy;
+while the ordinary pronoun is the curiously indirect 'they' (_Sie_). On
+solemn occasions, we may revert to 'thou.' Cato, in his meditative
+soliloquy on reading Plato's views on the immortality of the soul before
+killing himself, says: 'Plato, _thou_ reasonest well.' So in the
+Commandments, 'thou' addresses to each individual an unavoidable appeal:
+'_Thou_ shall not----.' But our ordinary means of making the personal
+appeal is, 'you, _sir_,' 'you, _madam_,' 'my _Lord_, you----,' etc.; we
+reserve 'thou' for the special case of addressing the Deity. The
+application of the motive of courtesy is here reversed; it would be
+irreverent to merge this vast personality in a promiscuous assemblage.
+
+"'You' is not unfrequently employed, like 'we,' as a representative
+pronoun. The action is represented with great vividness, when the person
+or persons addressed may be put forward as the performers: 'There is
+such an echo among the old ruins, and vaults, that if _you_ stamp a
+little louder than ordinary, _you_ hear the sound repeated'; 'Some
+practice is required to see these animals in the thick forest, even when
+_you_ hear them close by _you_.'
+
+"There should not be a mixture of 'thou' and 'you' in the same passage.
+Thus, Thackeray (Adventures of Philip): 'So, as _thy_ sun rises, friend,
+over the humble house-tops round about _your_ home, shall _you_ wake
+many and many a day to duty and labor.' So, Cooper (Water-Witch):
+'_Thou_ hast both master and mistress? _You_ have told us of the latter,
+but we would know something of the former. Who is _thy_ master?'
+Shakespeare, Scott, and others might also be quoted.
+
+"'Ye' and 'you' were at one time strictly distinguished as different
+cases; 'ye' was nominative, 'you' objective (dative or accusative). But
+the Elizabethan dramatists confounded the forms irredeemably; and 'you'
+has gradually ousted 'ye' from ordinary use. 'Ye' is restricted to the
+expression of strong feeling, and in this employment occurs chiefly in
+the poets."--Bain's "Composition Grammar."
+
+PROOF. This word is much and very improperly used for _evidence_, which
+is only the medium of _proof_, _proof_ being the effect of _evidence_.
+"What _evidence_ have you to offer in _proof_ of the truth of your
+statement?" See also EVIDENCE.
+
+PROPOSE--PURPOSE. Writers and speakers often fail to discriminate
+properly between the respective meanings of these two verbs. _Propose_,
+correctly used, means, to put forward or to offer for _the
+consideration of others_; hence, _a proposal_ is a scheme or design
+offered for acceptance or consideration, a proposition. _Purpose_ means,
+to intend, to design, to resolve; hence, _a purpose_ is an intention, an
+aim, that which one sets _before one's self_. Examples: "What do you
+_purpose_ doing in the matter?" "What do you _propose_ that we shall do
+in the matter?" "I will do" means "I _purpose_ doing, or to do." "I
+_purpose_ to write a history of England from the accession of King James
+the Second down to a time which is within the memory of men still
+living."--Macaulay. It will be observed that Macaulay says, "I purpose
+_to write_" and not, "I purpose _writing_," using the verb in the
+infinitive rather than in the participial form. "On which he _purposed_
+to mount one of his little guns." See INFINITIVE.
+
+PROPOSITION. This word is often used when _proposal_ would be better,
+for the reason that _proposal_ has but one meaning, and is shorter by
+one syllable. "He demonstrated the _proposition_ of Euclid, and rejected
+the _proposal_ of his friend."
+
+PROSAIST. Dr. Hall is of opinion that this is a word we shall do well to
+encourage. It is used by good writers.
+
+PROVEN. This form for the past participle of the verb _to prove_ is said
+to be a Scotticism. It is not used by careful writers and speakers. The
+correct form is _proved_.
+
+PROVIDING. The present participle of the verb _to provide_ is sometimes
+vulgarly used for the conjunction _provided_, as in this sentence from
+the "London Queen": "Society may be congratulated, ... _providing_
+that," etc.
+
+PROVOKE. See AGGRAVATE.
+
+PUNCTUATION. The importance of punctuation can not be overestimated; it
+not only helps to make plain the meaning of what one writes, but it may
+prevent one's being misconstrued. Though no two writers could be found
+who punctuate just alike, still in the main those who pay attention to
+the art put in their stops in essentially the same manner. The
+difference that punctuation may make in the meaning of language is well
+illustrated by the following anecdote:
+
+At Ramessa there lived a benevolent and hospitable prior, who caused
+these lines to be painted over his door:
+
+    "Be open evermore,
+    O thou my door!
+    To none be shut--to honest or to poor!"
+
+In time the good prior was succeeded by a man as selfish as his
+predecessor was generous. The lines over the door of the priory were
+allowed to remain; one stop, however, was altered, which made them read
+thus:
+
+    "Be open evermore,
+    O thou my door!
+    To none--be shut to honest or to poor!"
+
+He punctuates best who makes his punctuation contribute most to the
+clear expression of his thought; and that construction is best that has
+least need of being punctuated.
+
+  THE COMMA.--The chief difference in the punctuation of different
+  writers is usually in their use of the comma, in regard to which there
+  is a good deal of latitude; much is left to individual taste. Nowadays
+  the best practice uses it sparingly. An idea of the extent to which
+  opinions differ with regard to the use of the comma may be formed from
+  the following excerpt from a paper prepared for private use:
+
+  "In the following examples, gathered from various sources--chiefly
+  from standard books--the superfluous commas are inclosed in
+  parentheses:
+
+  "1. 'It remains(,) perhaps(,) to be said(,) that, if any lesson at
+  all(,) as to these delicate matters(,) is needed(,) in this period, it
+  is not so much a lesson,' etc. 2. 'The obedience is not due to the
+  power of a right authority, but to the spirit of fear, and(,)
+  therefore(,) is(,) in reality(,) no obedience at all.' 3. 'The patriot
+  disturbances in Canada ... awakened deep interest among the people of
+  the United States(,) who lived adjacent to the frontier.' 4.
+  'Observers(,) who have recently investigated this point(,) do not all
+  agree,' etc. 5. 'The wind did(,) in an instant(,) what man and steam
+  together had failed to do in hours.' 6. 'All the cabin passengers(,)
+  situated beyond the center of the boat(,) were saved.' 7. 'No other
+  writer has depicted(,) with so much art or so much accuracy(,) the
+  habits, the manners,' etc. 8. 'If it shall give satisfaction to those
+  who have(,) in any way(,) befriended it, the author will feel,' etc.
+  9. 'Formed(,) or consisting of(,) clay.' 10. 'The subject [witchcraft]
+  grew interesting; and(,) to examine Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth
+  Proctor, the deputy-governor(,) and five other magistrates(,) went to
+  Salem.' 11. 'The Lusitanians(,) who had not left their home(,) rose as
+  a man,' etc. 12. 'Vague reports ... had preceded him to Washington,
+  and his Mississippi friends(,) who chanced to be at the capital(,)
+  were not backward to make their boast of him.' 13. 'Our faith has
+  acquired a new vigor(,) and a clearer vision.' 14. 'In 1819(,) he
+  removed to Cambridge.' 15. 'Doré was born at Strasburg(,) in 1832, and
+  labors,' etc. 16. 'We should never apply dry compresses, charpie, or
+  wadding(,) to the wound.' 17. '--to stand idle, to look, act, or
+  think(,) in a leisurely way.' 18. '--portraits taken from the farmers,
+  schoolmasters, and peasantry(,) of the neighborhood.' 19. '--gladly
+  welcomed painters of Flanders, Holland, and Spain(,) to their
+  shores.'
+
+  "In all these cases, the clauses between or following the inclosed
+  commas are so closely connected grammatically with the immediately
+  preceding words or phrases, that they should be read without a
+  perceptible pause, or with only a slight one for breath, without
+  change of voice. Some of the commas would grossly pervert the meaning
+  if strictly construed. Thus, from No. 3 it would appear that the
+  people of the United States in general lived adjacent to the frontier;
+  from No. 4, that all observers have recently investigated the point in
+  question; from No. 6, that all the cabin passengers were so situated
+  that they were saved, whereas it is meant that only a certain small
+  proportion of them were saved; from No. 10 (Bancroft), that somebody
+  whose name is accidentally omitted went to Salem 'to examine Sarah
+  Cloyce and Elizabeth Proctor, the deputy-governor, and five other
+  magistrates'; from No. 11, that none of the Lusitanians had left their
+  home, whereas it was the slaughter by the Romans of a great number of
+  them who _had_ left their home that caused the rising.
+
+  "Commas are frequently omitted, and in certain positions very
+  generally, where the sense and correct reading require a pause. In the
+  following examples, such commas, omitted in the works from which they
+  were taken, are inclosed in brackets:
+
+  "1. 'The modes of thought[,] and the types of character which those
+  modes produce[,] are essentially and universally transformed.' 2.
+  'Taken by itself[,] this doctrine could have no effect whatever;
+  indeed[,] it would amount to nothing but a verbal proposition.' 3.
+  'Far below[,] the little stream of the Oder foamed over the rocks.' 4.
+  'When the day returned[,] the professor, the artist[,] and I rowed to
+  within a hundred yards of the shore.' 5. 'Proceeding into the interior
+  of India[,] they passed through Belgaum.' 6. 'If Loring is defeated
+  in the Sixth District[,] it can be borne.'
+
+  "In No. 3, the reader naturally enunciates 'the little stream of the
+  Oder' as in the objective case after 'below'; but there he comes to a
+  predicate which compels him to go back and read differently. In No. 4,
+  it appears that 'the day returned the professor,' and then 'the artist
+  and I rowed,' etc."
+
+  All clauses should generally be isolated by commas; where, however,
+  the connection is very close or the clause is very short, no point may
+  be necessary. "But his pride is greater than his ignorance, and what
+  he wants in knowledge he supplies by sufficiency." "A man of polite
+  imagination can converse with a picture, and find an agreeable
+  companion in a statue." "Though he slay me, yet will I trust him."
+  "The prince, his father being dead, succeeded." "To confess the truth,
+  I was much at fault." "As the heart panteth after the water-brooks, so
+  panteth my soul after thee." "Where the bee sucks, there suck I." "His
+  father dying, he succeeded to the estate." "The little that is known,
+  and the circumstance that little is known, must be considered as
+  honorable to him."
+
+  The comma is used before and after a phrase when coördinating and not
+  restrictive. "The jury, having retired for half an hour, brought in a
+  verdict." "The stranger, unwilling to obtrude himself on our notice,
+  left in the morning." "Rome, the city of the Emperors, became the city
+  of the Popes." "His stories, which made everybody laugh, were often
+  made to order." "He did not come, which I greatly regret." "The
+  younger, who was yet a boy, had nothing striking in his appearance."
+  "They passed the cup to the stranger, who drank heartily." "Peace at
+  any price, which these orators seem to advocate, means war at any
+  cost." "Sailors, who are generally superstitious, say it is unlucky to
+  embark on Friday."
+
+  Adverbs and short phrases, _when they break the connection_, should be
+  between commas. Some of the most common words and phrases so used are
+  the following: Also, too, there, indeed, perhaps, surely, moreover,
+  likewise, however, finally, namely, therefore, apparently, meanwhile,
+  consequently, unquestionably, accordingly, notwithstanding, in truth,
+  in fact, in short, in general, in reality, no doubt, of course, as it
+  were, at all events, to be brief, to be sure, now and then, on the
+  contrary, in a word, by chance, in that case, in the mean time, for
+  the most part. "History, in a word, is replete with moral lessons."
+  "As an orator, however, he was not great." "There is, remember, a
+  limit at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue." "Our civilization,
+  therefore, is not an unmixed good." "This, I grant you, is not of
+  great importance."
+
+  If, however, the adverb does not break the connection, but readily
+  coalesces with the rest of the sentence, the commas are omitted.
+  "Morning will come at last, however dark the night may be." "We then
+  proceeded on our way." "Our civilization is therefore not an unmixed
+  good." "Patience, I say; your mind perhaps may change."
+
+  Adverbial phrases and clauses beginning a sentence are set off by
+  commas. "In truth, I could not tell." "To sum up, the matter is this."
+  "Everything being ready, they set out." "By looking a little deeper,
+  the reason will be found." "Finally, let me sum up the argument." "If
+  the premises were admitted, I should deny the conclusion." "Where your
+  treasure is, there will your heart be also."
+
+  Words used in apposition should be isolated by commas. "Newton, the
+  great mathematician, was very modest." "And he, their prince, shall
+  rank among my peers." In such sentences, however, as, "The
+  mathematician Newton was very modest," and "The Emperor Napoleon was a
+  great soldier," commas are not used.
+
+  The name or designation of a person addressed is isolated by commas.
+  "It touches you, my lord, as well as me." "John, come here." "Mr.
+  President, my object is peace." "Tell me, boy, where do you live?"
+  "Yes, sir, I will do as you say." "Mr. Brown, what is your number?"
+
+  Pairs of words.--"Old and young, rich and poor, wise and foolish, were
+  involved." "Sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish, I give my
+  hand and heart to this vote." "Interest and ambition, honor and shame,
+  friendship and enmity, gratitude and revenge, are the prime movers in
+  public transactions."
+
+  A restrictive clause is not separated by a comma from the noun. "Every
+  one must love a boy who [that] is attentive and docile." "He preaches
+  sublimely who [that] lives a holy life." "The things which [that] are
+  seen are temporal." "A king depending on the support of his subjects
+  can not rashly go to war." "The sailor who [that] is not superstitious
+  will embark any day."
+
+  The comma is used after adjectives, nouns, and verbs in sentences like
+  the following:
+
+      "Are all thy conquests, glories, triumphs, spoils
+      Shrunk to this little measure?"
+
+      "He fills, he bounds, connects and equals all."
+
+      "Who to the enraptured heart, and ear, and eye
+      Teach beauty, virtue, truth, and love, and melody."[25]
+
+  "He rewarded his friends, chastised his foes, set Justice on her seat,
+  and made his conquest secure."
+
+  The comma is used to separate adjectives in opposition, but closely
+  connected. "Though deep, yet clear; though gentle, yet not dull."
+  "Liberal, not lavish, is kind Nature's hand." "Though black, yet
+  comely; and though rash, benign."
+
+  After a nominative, where the verb is understood. "To err is human; to
+  forgive, divine." "A wise man seeks to shine in himself; a fool, in
+  others." "Conversation makes a ready man; writing, an exact man;
+  reading, a full man."
+
+  A long subject is often separated from the predicate by a comma. "Any
+  one that refuses to earn an honest livelihood, is not an object of
+  charity." "The circumstance of his being unprepared to adopt immediate
+  and decisive measures, was represented to the Government." "That he
+  had persistently disregarded every warning and persevered in his
+  reckless course, had not yet undermined his credit with his dupes."
+  "That the work of forming and perfecting the character is difficult,
+  is generally allowed."
+
+  In a series of adjectives that precede their noun, a comma is placed
+  after each except the last; there usage omits the point. "A beautiful,
+  tall, willowy, sprightly girl." "A quick, brilliant, studious, learned
+  man."[26]
+
+  A comma is placed between short members of compound sentences,
+  connected by _and_, _but_, _for_, _nor_, _or_, _because_, _whereas_,
+  _that_ expressing purpose (so that, in order that), and other
+  conjunctions. "Be virtuous, that you may be respected." "Love not
+  sleep, lest you come to poverty." "Man proposes, but God disposes."
+
+  A comma must not be placed before _that_ except when it is equivalent
+  to _in order that_. "He says that he will be here."
+
+  A comma must not be placed before _and_ when it connects two words
+  only. "Time and tide wait for no man." "A rich and prosperous people."
+  "Plain and honest truth wants no artificial covering."
+
+  A comma is sometimes necessary to prevent ambiguity. "He who pursues
+  pleasure only defeats the object of his creation." Without a comma
+  before or after _only_, the meaning of this sentence is doubtful.
+
+  The following sentences present some miscellaneous examples of the use
+  of the comma by writers on punctuation: "Industry, as well as genius,
+  is essential to the production of great works." "Prosperity is secured
+  to a state, not by the acquisition of territory or riches, but by the
+  encouragement of industry." "Your manners are affable, and, for the
+  most part, pleasing."[27]
+
+  "However fairly a bad man may appear to act, we distrust him." "Why,
+  this is rank injustice." "Well, follow the dictates of your
+  inclination." "The comma may be omitted in the case of _too_, _also_,
+  _therefore_, and _perhaps_, when introduced so as not to interfere
+  with the harmonious flow of the period; and, particularly, when the
+  sentence is short."[28] "Robert Horton, M. D., F. R. S." "To those who
+  labor, sleep is doubly pleasant"; "Sleep is doubly pleasant to those
+  who labor." "Those who persevere, succeed." "To be overlooked,
+  slighted, and neglected; to be misunderstood, misrepresented, and
+  slandered; to be trampled under foot by the envious, the ignorant, and
+  the vile; to be crushed by foes, and to be distrusted and betrayed
+  even by friends--such is too often the fate of genius." "She is tall,
+  though not so handsome as her sister." "Verily, verily, I say unto
+  you." "Whatever is, is right." "What is foreordained to be, will be."
+  "The Emperor Augustus was a patron of the fine arts." "Augustus, the
+  Emperor, was a patron of the fine arts." "United, we stand; divided,
+  we fall." "God said, Let there be light." "July 21, 1881." "President
+  Garfield was shot, Saturday morning, July 2, 1881; he died, Monday
+  night, Sept. 19, 1881." "I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient
+  servant, John Jones." "New York, August, 1881." "Room 20, Equitable
+  Building, Broadway, New York."
+
+  "_When you are in doubt as to the propriety of inserting commas, omit
+  them_; IT IS BETTER TO HAVE TOO FEW THAN TOO MANY."--Quackenbos.
+
+  THE SEMICOLON.--Reasons are preceded by semicolons; "Economy is no
+  disgrace; for it is better to live on a little than to outlive a great
+  deal." Clauses in opposition are separated by a semicolon when the
+  second is introduced by an adversative: "Straws swim at the surface;
+  but pearls lie at the bottom"; "Lying lips are an abomination to the
+  Lord; but they that deal truly are his delight." Without the
+  adversative, the colon is to be preferred: "Prosperity showeth vice:
+  adversity, virtue." The great divisions of a sentence must be pointed
+  with a semicolon when the minor divisions are pointed with commas:
+  "Mirth should be the embroidery of conversation, not the web; and wit
+  the ornament of the mind, not the furniture." The things enumerated
+  must be separated by semicolons, when the enunciation of particulars
+  is preceded by a colon: "The value of a maxim depends on four things:
+  the correctness of the principle it embodies; the subject to which it
+  relates; the extent of its application; and the ease with which it may
+  be practically carried out." When _as_ introduces an example, it is
+  preceded by a semicolon. When several successive clauses have a common
+  connection with a preceding or following clause, they are separated by
+  semicolons; as, "Children, as they gamboled on the beach; reapers, as
+  they gathered the harvest; mowers, as they rested from using the
+  scythe; mothers, as they busied themselves about the household--were
+  victims to an enemy, who disappeared the moment a blow was struck."
+  "Reason as we may, it is impossible not to read in such a fate much
+  that we know not how to interpret; much of provocation to cruel deeds
+  and deep resentment; much of apology for wrong and perfidy; much of
+  doubt and misgiving as to the past; much of painful recollections;
+  much of dark foreboding." "Philosophers assert that Nature is
+  unlimited; that her treasures are endless; that the increase of
+  knowledge will never cease."
+
+  THE COLON.--This point is less used now than formerly: its place is
+  supplied by the period, the semicolon, or the dash; and sometimes,
+  even by the comma. The colon is used very differently by different
+  writers. "He was heard to say, 'I have done with this world.'" Some
+  writers would put a colon, some a comma, after _say_. "When the quoted
+  passage is brought in without any introductory word, if short," says
+  Quackenbos, "it is generally preceded by a comma; if long, by a colon;
+  as, 'A simpleton, meeting a philosopher, asked him, "What affords wise
+  men the greatest pleasure?" Turning on his heel, the sage replied,
+  "To get rid of fools."'"
+
+  Formal enumerations of particulars, and direct quotations, when
+  introduced by such phrases as _in these words_, _as follows_, _the
+  following_, _namely_, _this_, _these_, _thus_, etc., are properly
+  preceded by a colon. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
+  all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with
+  certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and
+  the pursuit of happiness." "Lord Bacon has summed up the whole matter
+  in the following words: 'A little philosophy inclineth men's minds to
+  atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds to religion.'"
+  "The human family is composed of five races: first, the Caucasian;
+  second, the Mongolian; third, the," etc.
+
+      "All were attentive to the godlike man
+      When from his lofty couch he thus began:
+      'Great queen,'" etc.--Dryden.
+
+  When the quotation, or other matter, begins a new paragraph, the colon
+  is, by many writers, followed with a dash; as, "The cloth being
+  removed, the President rose and said:--
+
+      "'Ladies and gentlemen, we are,'" etc.
+
+  The colon is used to mark the greater breaks in sentences, when the
+  lesser breaks are marked by semicolons. "You have called yourself an
+  atom in the universe; you have said that you are but an insect in the
+  solar blaze: is your present pride consistent with these professions?"
+  "A clause is either independent or dependent: independent, if it forms
+  an assertion by itself; dependent, if it enters into some other clause
+  with the value of a part of speech." A colon is sometimes used instead
+  of a period to separate two short sentences, which are closely
+  connected. "Never flatter people: leave that to such as mean to
+  betray them." "Some things we can, and others we can not do: we can
+  walk, but we can not fly."
+
+  THE PERIOD.--Complete sentences are always followed either by a
+  period, or by an exclamation or an interrogation point.[29]
+
+  The period is also used after abbreviations; as, R. D. Van Nostrand,
+  St. Louis, Mo.; Jno. B. Morris, M. D., F. R. S., London, Eng.; Jas. W.
+  Wallack, Jr., New York City, N. Y.; Jas. B. Roberts, Elocutionist,
+  Phila., Pa.
+
+  INTERROGATION-POINT.--This point is used after questions put by the
+  writer, and after questions reported directly. "What can I do for
+  you?" "Where are you going?" "What do you say?" cried the General.
+  "The child still lives?" It should not be used when the question is
+  reported indirectly. "He asked me where I was going." "The Judge asked
+  the witness if he believed the man to be guilty."
+
+  EXCLAMATION-POINT.--This mark is placed after interjections, after
+  sentences and clauses of sentences of passionate import, and after
+  solemn invocations and addresses. "Zounds! the man's in earnest."
+  "Pshaw! what can we do?" "Bah! what's that to me?" "Indeed! then I
+  must look to it." "Look, my lord, it comes!" "Rest, rest, perturbed
+  spirit!" "O heat, dry up my brains!" "Dear maid, kind sister, sweet
+  Ophelia!" "While in this part of the country, I once more
+  revisited--and, alas, with what melancholy presentiments!--the home of
+  my youth." "O rose of May!" "Oh, from this time forth, my thoughts be
+  bloody or be nothing worth!" "O heavens! die two months ago, and not
+  forgotten yet?"
+
+      "Night, sable goddess! from her ebon throne,
+      In rayless majesty now stretches forth
+      Her leaden scepter o'er a slumbering world.
+      Silence, how dead! and darkness, how profound!"--Young.
+
+      "Hail, holy light! offspring of heaven just born!"--Milton.
+
+      "But thou, O Hope! with eyes so fair,
+      What was thy delighted measure?"--Collins.
+
+  It will be observed that the interjection O is an exception to the
+  rule: it is often followed by a comma, but never by an
+  exclamation-point.
+
+  An exclamation-point sometimes gives the same words quite another
+  meaning. The difference between "What's that?" and "What's that!" is
+  obvious.
+
+  THE DASH.--Cobbett did not favor the use of this mark, as we see from
+  the following: "Let me caution you against the use of what, by some,
+  is called the _dash_. The dash is a stroke along the line; thus, 'I am
+  rich--I was poor--I shall be poor again.' This is wild work indeed!
+  Who is to know what is intended by these _dashes_? Those who have
+  thought proper, like Mr. Lindley Murray, to place the _dash_ amongst
+  the _grammatical points_, ought to give us some rule relative to its
+  different longitudinal dimensions in different cases. The _inch_, the
+  _three-quarter-inch_, the _half-inch_, the _quarter-inch_: these would
+  be something determinate; but '_the dash_,' without measure, must be a
+  perilous thing for the young grammarian to handle. In short, '_the
+  dash_' is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points, and it can
+  answer no other purpose."
+
+  This is one of the few instances in which Cobbett was wrong. The
+  _dash_ is the proper point with which to mark an unexpected or
+  emphatic pause, or a sudden break or transition. It is very often
+  preceded by another point. "And Huitzilopochtli--a sweet name to roll
+  under one's tongue--for how many years has this venerable war-god
+  blinked in the noonday sun!" "Crowds gathered about the newspaper
+  bulletins, recalling the feverish scenes that occurred when the
+  President's life was thought to be hanging by a thread. 'Wouldn't it
+  be too bad,' said one, 'if, after all--no, I won't allow myself to
+  think of it.'" "Was there ever--but I scorn to boast." "You are--no,
+  I'll not tell you what you are."
+
+      "He suffered--but his pangs are o'er;
+        Enjoyed--but his delights are fled;
+      Had friends--his friends are now no more;
+        And foes--his foes are dead."--Montgomery.
+
+  "Greece, Carthage, Rome,--where are they?" "He chastens;--but he
+  chastens to save."
+
+  Dashes are much used where parentheses were formerly employed. "In the
+  days of Tweed the expression to divide fair--forcible, if not
+  grammatical--acquired much currency." "In truth, the character of the
+  great chief was depicted two thousand five hundred years before his
+  birth, and depicted--such is the power of genius--in colors which will
+  be fresh as many years after his death." "To render the Constitution
+  perpetual--which God grant it may be!--it is necessary that its
+  benefits should be practically felt by all parts of the country."
+
+  PARENTHESIS.--This mark is comparatively little used nowadays. The
+  dash is preferred, probably because it disfigures the page less. The
+  office of the parenthesis is to isolate a phrase which is merely
+  incidental, and which might be omitted without detriment to the
+  grammatical construction.
+
+      "Know then this truth (enough for man to know),
+      Virtue alone is happiness below."--Pope.
+
+      "The bliss of man (could pride that blessing find)
+      Is not to act or think beyond mankind."
+
+  BRACKETS.--This mark is used principally to inclose words improperly
+  omitted by the writer, or words introduced for the purpose of
+  explanation or to correct an error. The bracket is often used in this
+  book.
+
+  THE APOSTROPHE.--This point is used to denote the omission of letters
+  and sometimes of figures; as, Jan'y, '81; _I've_ for _I have_;
+  _you'll_ for _you will_; _'tis_ for _it is_; _don't_ for _do not_;
+  _can't_ for _can not_; It was in the year '93; the spirit of '76; It
+  was in the years 1812, '13, and '14.
+
+  Also to denote the possessive case; as, Brown's house; the king's
+  command; Moses' staff; for conscience' sake; the boys' garden.
+
+  Also with _s_ to denote the plural of letters, figures, and signs; as,
+  Cross your _t_'s, dot your _i_'s, and mind your _p_'s and _q_'s; make
+  your 5's better, and take out the _x_'s.
+
+  CAPITALS.--A capital letter should begin every sentence, every line of
+  verse, and every direct quotation.
+
+  All names of the Deity, of Jesus Christ, of the Trinity, and of the
+  Virgin Mary must begin with a capital. Pronouns are usually
+  capitalized when they refer to the Deity.
+
+  Proper names, and nouns and adjectives formed from proper names, names
+  of streets, of the months, of the days of the week, and of the
+  holidays, are capitalized.
+
+  Titles of nobility and of high office, when used to designate
+  particular persons, are capitalized; as, the Earl of Dunraven, the
+  Mayor of Boston, the Baron replied, the Cardinal presided.
+
+  THE PARAGRAPH.--In writing for the press, the division of matter into
+  paragraphs is often quite arbitrary; in letter-writing, on the
+  contrary, the several topics treated of should, as a rule, be isolated
+  by paragraphic divisions. These divisions give one's letters a
+  shapely appearance that they otherwise never have.
+
+PURCHASE. This word is much preferred to its synonym _buy_, by that
+class of people who prefer the word _reside_ to _live_, _procure_ to
+_get_, _inaugurate_ to _begin_, and so on. They are generally of those
+who are great in pretense, and who would be greater still if they were
+to pretend to all they have to pretend to.
+
+PURPOSE. See PROPOSE.
+
+QUANTITY. This word is often improperly used for _number_. _Quantity_
+should be used in speaking of what is measured or weighed; _number_, of
+what is counted. Examples: "What _quantity_ of apples have you, and what
+_number_ of pineapples?" "Delaware produces a large _quantity_ of
+peaches and a large _number_ of melons."
+
+QUIT.--This word means, properly, to leave, to go away from, to forsake;
+as, "Avaunt! _quit_ my sight." This is the only sense in which the
+English use it. In America, it is generally used in the sense of to
+leave off, to stop; as, "_Quit_ your nonsense"; "_Quit_ laughing";
+"_Quit_ your noise"; "He has _quit_ smoking," and so on.
+
+QUITE. This word originally meant completely, perfectly, totally,
+entirely, fully; and this is the sense in which it was used by the early
+writers of English. It is now often used in the sense of _rather_; as,
+"It is _quite_ warm"; "She is _quite_ tall"; "He is _quite_ proficient."
+Sometimes it is incorrectly used in the sense of _considerable_; as,
+_quite_ an amount, _quite_ a number, _quite_ a fortune. _Quite_,
+according to good modern usage, may qualify an adjective, but not a
+noun. "She is quite the lady," is a vile phrase, meaning, "She is very
+or _quite_ ladylike."
+
+RAILROAD DEPOT. Few things are more offensive to fastidious ears than to
+hear a railway _station_ called a _depot_. A depot is properly a place
+where goods or stores of any kind are kept; and the places at which the
+trains of a railroad--or, better, rail_way_--stop for passengers, or the
+points from which they start and at which they arrive, are, properly,
+the _stations_.
+
+RAILWAY. The English prefer this word to rail_road_.
+
+RAISE THE RENT. An expression incorrectly used for _increase the rent_.
+
+RARELY. It is no uncommon thing to see this adverb improperly used in
+such sentences as, "It is very _rarely_ that the puppets of the romancer
+assume," etc.--"Appletons' Journal," February, 1881, p. 177. "But," says
+the defender of this phraseology, "_rarely_ qualifies a verb--the verb
+_to be_." Not at all. The sentence, if written out in full, would be,
+"It is a very rare thing that," etc., or "The circumstance is a very
+rare one that," etc., or "It is a very rare occurrence that," etc. To
+those who contend for "It is very _rarely_ that," etc., I would say, It
+is very _sadly_ that persons of culture will write and then defend--or
+rather try to defend--such grammar.
+
+RATIOCINATE. See EFFECTUATE.
+
+REAL.--This adjective is often vulgarly used in the sense of the adverb
+_very_; thus, _real_ nice, _real_ pretty, _real_ angry, _real_ cute, and
+so on.
+
+RECOMMEND. This word, which means to commend or praise to another, to
+declare worthy of esteem, trust, or favor, is sometimes put to strange
+uses. Example: "Resolved, that the tax-payers of the county be
+_recommended_ to meet," etc. What the resolving gentlemen meant was,
+that the tax-payers should be _counseled_ to meet.
+
+REDUNDANCY. See PLEONASM.
+
+RELIABLE. This is a modern word which is often met with; but it is not
+used by our careful writers. They prefer its synonym _trustworthy_, and
+argue that, in consequence of being ill-formed, _reliable_ can not
+possibly have the signification in which it is used.
+
+REMAINDER. See BALANCE.
+
+RENDITION. This word is much misused for _rendering_. Example: "The
+excellence of Mr. Gilbert's _rendition_ of certain characters, Sir Peter
+and Sir Antony, for instance, is not equaled," etc. _Rendition_ means
+the act of yielding possession, surrender, as the _rendition_ of a town
+or fortress. The sentence above should read, "The excellence of Mr.
+Gilbert's _rendering_," etc. _Rendition_ is also sometimes improperly
+used for _performance_.
+
+REPLY. See ANSWER.
+
+REPUTATION. See CHARACTER.
+
+RESIDE. A big word that Mr. Wouldbe uses where Mr. Is uses the little
+word _live_.
+
+RESIDENCE. In speaking of a man's domicile, it is not only in better
+taste but more correct to use the term _house_ than _residence_. A man
+has a _residence_ in New York, when he has lived here long enough to
+have the right to exercise the franchise here; and he may have a _house_
+in Fifth Avenue where he _lives_. People who _are_ live in houses;
+people who _would be_ reside in residences. The former _buy_ things; the
+latter _purchase_ them.
+
+REST. See BALANCE.
+
+RESTIVE. Some of the dictionaries, Richard Grant White, and some other
+writers, contend that this word, when properly used, means unwilling to
+go, standing still stubbornly, obstinate, stubborn, and nothing else. In
+combating this opinion, Fitzedward Hall says: "Very few instances, I
+apprehend, can be produced, from our literature, of this use of
+_restive_." Webster gives impatient, uneasy, as a second meaning; and
+this is the sense in which the word is nearly always used.
+
+RETIRE. It is only the over-nice who use _retire_ in the sense of _go to
+bed_.
+
+REVEREND--HONORABLE. Many persons are in doubt whether they should or
+should not put _the_ before these adjectives. Emphatically, yes, they
+should. See "Words and Their Uses," by Richard Grant White, for a full
+discussion of the question; also "Good English," by Edward S. Gould.
+
+RHETORIC. The art which has for its object the rendering of language
+effective is called _rhetoric_. Without some study of the art of
+composition, no one can expect to write well, or to judge the literary
+work of others.
+
+    "True ease in writing comes from art, not chance,
+    As those move easiest who have learned to dance."
+
+RIDE--DRIVE. Fashion, both in England and in this country, says that we
+must always use the second of these words when we speak of going out in
+a carriage, although _ride_ means, according to all the lexicographers,
+"to be carried on a horse or other animal, or in any kind of vehicle or
+carriage."
+
+RIGHT. Singularly enough, this word is made, by some people, to do
+service for _ought_, _in duty bound_, under _obligation_ to; thus, "You
+had a _right_ to tell me," meaning, "You should have told me." "The
+Colonists contended that they _had no right_ to pay taxes," meaning,
+"They were _under no obligation_ to pay taxes," i. e., that it was
+unjust to tax them.
+
+RIGHT HERE. The expressions "right here" and "right there" are
+Americanisms. Correctly, "just here" and "just there."
+
+ROLLING. The use of this participial adjective in the sense of
+undulating is said to be an Americanism. Whether an Americanism or not,
+it would seem to be quite unobjectionable.
+
+RUBBERS. This word, in common with _gums_ and _arctics_, is often, in
+defiance of good taste, used for _overshoes_.
+
+SABBATH. This term was first used in English for Sunday, or Lord's day,
+by the Puritans. Nowadays it is little used in this sense. The word to
+use is _Sunday_.
+
+SARCASM. Bain says that _sarcasm_ is vituperation softened in the
+outward expression by the arts and figures of disguise--epigram,
+innuendo, irony--and embellished with the figures of illustration. Crabb
+says that _sarcasm_ is the indulgence only of personal resentment, and
+is never justifiable.
+
+SATIRE. The holding up to ridicule of the follies and weaknesses of
+mankind, by way of rebuke, is called _satire_. Satire is general rather
+than individual, its object being the reformation of abuses. A
+_lampoon_, which has been defined as a _personal satire_, attacks the
+individual rather than his fault, and is intended to injure rather than
+to reform.
+
+Said Sheridan: "Satires and lampoons on particular people circulate more
+by giving copies in confidence to the friends of the parties than by
+printing them."
+
+SAW. The imperfect tense of the verb _to see_ is carelessly used by good
+writers and speakers when they should use the perfect; thus, "I never
+_saw_ anything like it before," when the meaning intended is, "I _have_
+never [in all my life] _seen_ anything like it before [until now]." We
+say properly, "I never _saw_ anything like it _when I was in Paris_";
+but, when the period of time referred to extends to the time when the
+statement is made, it must be _have seen_. Like mistakes are made in
+the use of other verbs, but they are hardly as common; yet we often hear
+such expressions as, "I _was_ never in Philadelphia," "I never _went_ to
+the theatre in my life," instead of _have been_ in Philadelphia, and
+_have gone_ to the theatre.
+
+SECTION. The use of this word for region, neighborhood, vicinity, part
+(of the town or country), is said to be a Westernism. A _section_ is a
+division of the public lands containing six hundred and forty acres.
+
+SEEM--APPEAR. Graham, in his "English Synonymes," says of these two
+words: "What _seems_ is in the mind; what _appears_ is external. Things
+_appear_ as they present themselves to the eye; they _seem_ as they are
+represented to the mind. Things _appear_ good or bad, as far as we can
+judge by our senses. Things _seem_ right or wrong as we determine by
+reflection. Perception and sensation have to do with appearing;
+reflection and comparison, with seeming. When things are not what they
+_appear_, our senses are deceived; when things are not what they _seem_,
+our judgment is at fault."
+
+"No man had ever a greater power over himself, or was less the man he
+_seemed_ to be, which shortly after _appeared_ to everybody, when he
+cared less to keep on the mask."--Clarendon.
+
+SELDOM OR EVER. This phrase should be "seldom _if_ ever," or "seldom or
+_never_."
+
+SERAPHIM. This is the plural of _seraph_. "One of the _seraphim_." "To
+Thee cherubim and seraphim continually do cry." See CHERUBIM.
+
+SET--SIT. The former of these two verbs is often incorrectly used for
+the latter. To _set_; imperfect tense, _set_; participles, _setting_,
+_set_. To _sit_; imperfect tense, _sat_; participles, _sitting_, _sat_.
+To _set_ means to put, to place, to plant; to put in any place,
+condition, state, or posture. We say, to _set_ about, to _set_ against,
+to _set_ out, to _set_ going, to _set_ apart, to _set_ aside, to _set_
+down (to put in writing). To _sit_ means to rest on the lower part of
+the body, to repose on a seat, to perch, as a bird, etc. We say, "_Sit_
+up," i. e., rise from lying to sitting; "We will _sit_ up," i. e., will
+not go to bed; "_Sit_ down," i. e., place yourself on a seat. We _sit_ a
+horse and we _sit_ for a portrait. Garments _sit_ well or otherwise.
+Congress _sits_, so does a court. "I have _sat_ up long enough." "I have
+_set_ it on the table." We _set_ down figures, but we _sit_ down on the
+ground. We _set_ a hen, and a hen _sits_ on eggs. We should say,
+therefore, "as cross as a _sitting_ [not, as a _setting_] hen."
+
+SETTLE. This word is often inelegantly, if not incorrectly, used for
+_pay_. We _pay_ our way, _pay_ our fare, _pay_ our hotel-bills, and the
+like. See, also, LOCATE.
+
+SHALL AND WILL. The nice distinctions that should be made between these
+two auxiliaries are, in some parts of the English-speaking world, often
+disregarded, and that, too, by persons of high culture. The proper use
+of _shall_ and _will_ can much better be learned from example than from
+precept. Many persons who use them, and also _should_ and _would_, with
+well-nigh unerring correctness, do so unconsciously; it is simply habit
+with them, and they, though their culture may be limited, will receive a
+sort of verbal shock from Biddy's inquiry, "_Will_ I put the kettle on,
+ma'am?" when your Irish or Scotch countess would not be in the least
+disturbed by it.
+
+  SHALL, _in an affirmative sentence, in the first person, and_ WILL _in
+  the second and third persons, merely announce future action_. Thus, "I
+  _shall_ go to town to-morrow." "I _shall_ not; I _shall_ wait for
+  better weather." "We _shall_ be glad to see you." "I _shall_ soon be
+  twenty." "We _shall_ set out early, and _shall_ try to arrive by
+  noon." "You _will_ be pleased." "You _will_ soon be twenty." "You
+  _will_ find him honest." "He _will_ go with us."
+
+  SHALL, _in an affirmative sentence, in the second and third persons,
+  announces the speaker's intention to control_. Thus, "You _shall_ hear
+  me out." "You _shall_ go, sick or well." "He _shall_ be my heir."
+  "They _shall_ go, whether they want to go or not."
+
+  WILL, _in the first person, expresses a promise, announces the
+  speaker's intention to control, proclaims a determination_. Thus, "I
+  _will_ [I promise to] assist you." "I _will_ [I am determined to] have
+  my right." "We _will_ [we promise to] come to you in the morning."
+
+  SHALL, _in an interrogative sentence, in the first and third persons,
+  consults the will or judgment of another; in the second person, it
+  inquires concerning the intention or future action of another_. Thus,
+  "_Shall_ I go with you?" "When _shall_ we see you again?" "When
+  _shall_ I receive it?" "When _shall_ I get well?" "When _shall_ we get
+  there?" "_Shall_ he come with us?" "_Shall_ you demand indemnity?"
+  "_Shall_ you go to town to-morrow?" "What _shall_ you do about it?"
+
+  WILL, _in an interrogative sentence, in the second person, asks
+  concerning the wish, and, in the third person, concerning the purpose
+  or future action of others_. Thus, "_Will_ you have an apple?" "_Will_
+  you go with me to my uncle's?" "_Will_ he be of the party?" "_Will_
+  they be willing to receive us?" "When _will_ he be here?"
+
+  _Will_ can not be used interrogatively in the first person singular or
+  plural. We can not say, "_Will_ I go?" "_Will_ I help you?" "_Will_ I
+  be late?" "_Will_ we get there in time?" "_Will_ we see you again
+  soon?"
+
+  Official courtesy, in order to avoid the semblance of compulsion,
+  conveys its commands in the _you-will_ form instead of the strictly
+  grammatical _you-shall_ form. It says, for example, "You _will_
+  proceed to Key West, where you will find further instructions awaiting
+  you."
+
+  A clever writer on the use of _shall_ and _will_ says that whatever
+  concerns one's beliefs, hopes, fears, likes, or dislikes, can not be
+  expressed in conjunction with _I will_. Are there no exceptions to
+  this rule? If I say, "I think I _shall_ go to Philadelphia to-morrow,"
+  I convey the impression that my going depends upon circumstances
+  beyond my control; but if I say, "I think I _will_ go to Philadelphia
+  to-morrow," I convey the impression that my going depends upon
+  circumstances within my control--that my going or not depends on mere
+  inclination. We certainly must say, "I fear that I _shall_ lose it";
+  "I hope that I _shall_ be well"; "I believe that I _shall_ have the
+  ague"; "I hope that I _shall_ not be left alone"; "I fear that we
+  _shall_ have bad weather"; "I _shall_ dislike the country"; "I _shall_
+  like the performance." The writer referred to asks, "How can one say,
+  'I _will_ have the headache'?" I answer, Very easily, as every young
+  woman knows. Let us see: "Mary, you know you promised John to drive
+  out with him to-morrow; how _shall_ you get out of it?" "Oh, I _will_
+  have the headache!" We request that people _will_ do thus or so, and
+  not that they _shall_. Thus, "It is requested that no one _will_ leave
+  the room."
+
+  _Shall_ is rarely, if ever, used for _will_; it is _will_ that is used
+  for _shall_. Expressions like the following are common: "Where _will_
+  you be next week?" "I _will_ be at home." "We _will_ have dinner at
+  six o'clock." "How _will_ you go about it?" "When _will_ you begin?"
+  "When _will_ you set out?" "What _will_ you do with it?" In all such
+  expressions, when it is a question of mere future action on the part
+  of the person speaking or spoken to, the auxiliary must be _shall_,
+  and not _will_.
+
+  _Should_ and _would_ follow the regimen of _shall_ and _will_. _Would_
+  is often used for _should_; _should_ rarely for _would_. Correct
+  speakers say, "I _should_ go to town to-morrow if I had a horse." "I
+  _should_ not; I _should_ wait for better weather." "We _should_ be
+  glad to see you." "We _should_ have started earlier, if the weather
+  had been clear." "I _should_ like to go to town, and _would_ go if I
+  could." "I _would_ assist you if I could." "I _should_ have been ill
+  if I had gone." "I _would_ I were home again!" "I _should_ go fishing
+  to-day if I were home." "I _should_ so like to go to Europe!" "I
+  _should_ prefer to see it first." "I _should_ be delighted." "I
+  _should_ be glad to have you sup with me." "I knew that I _should_ be
+  ill." "I feared that I _should_ lose it." "I hoped that I _should_ see
+  him." "I thought I _should_ have the ague." "I hoped that I _should_
+  not be left alone." "I was afraid that we _should_ have bad weather."
+  "I knew I _should_ dislike the country." "I _should_ not like to do
+  it, and _will_ not [determination] unless compelled to."
+
+SHIMMY. "We derive from the French language our word
+_chemise_--pronounced _shemmeeze_. In French, the word denotes a man's
+shirt, as well as the under garment worn by women. In this country, it
+is often pronounced by people who should know better--_shimmy_. Rather
+than call it _shimmy_, resume the use of the old English words _shift_
+and _smock_. Good usage unqualifiedly condemns _gents_, _pants_, _kids_,
+_gums_, and _shimmy_."--"Vulgarisms and Other Errors of Speech."
+
+SHOULD. See OUGHT.
+
+SICK--ILL. These words are often used indiscriminately. _Sick_, however,
+is the stronger word, and generally the better word to use. _Ill_ is
+used in England more than with us: there _sick_ is generally limited to
+the expressing of nausea; as, "sick at the stomach."
+
+SIGNATURE, OVER OR UNDER? A man writes _under_, not _over_, a signature.
+Charles Dickens wrote _under_ the signature of "Boz"; Mr. Samuel L.
+Clemens writes _under_ the signature of "Mark Twain." The reason given
+in Webster's Dictionary for preferring the use of _under_ is absurd;
+viz., that the paper is _under_ the hand in writing. The expression is
+elliptical, and has no reference to the position either of the signature
+or of the paper. "Given under my hand and seal" means "under the
+guarantee of my signature and my seal." "Under his own signature" or
+"name" means "under his own character, without disguise." "Under the
+signature of Boz" means "under the disguise of the assumed name Boz." We
+always write _under_ a certain date, though the date be placed, as it
+often is, at the bottom of the page.
+
+SIGNS. In one of the principal business streets of New York there is a
+sign which reads, "German Lace Store." Now, whether this is a store that
+makes a specialty of German laces, or whether it is a store where all
+kinds of lace are sold, kept by a German or after the German fashion, is
+something that the sign doubtless means to tell us, but, owing to the
+absence of a hyphen ("German-Lace Store," or "German Lace-Store"), does
+not tell us. Nothing is more common than erroneous punctuation in signs,
+and gross mistakes by the unlettered in the wording of the simplest
+printed matter.
+
+The bad taste, incorrect punctuation, false grammar, and ridiculous
+nonsense met with on signs and placards, and in advertisements, are
+really surprising. An advertisement tells us that "a pillow which
+assists in procuring sleep is a _benediction_"; a placard, that they
+have "Charlotte _de_ Russe" for sale within, which means, if it means
+anything, that they have for sale somebody or something called Charlotte
+of Russian; and, then, on how many signs do we see the possessive case
+when the plural number is intended!
+
+SIMILE. In rhetoric, a direct and formal comparison is called a
+_simile_. It is generally denoted by _like_, _as_, or _so_; as,
+
+                            "I have ventured,
+    _Like_ little wanton boys that swim on bladders,
+    These many summers in a sea of glory."
+
+    "Thy smile is _as_ the dawn of vernal day."--Shakespeare.
+
+    "_As_, down in the sunless retreats of the ocean,
+      Sweet flow'rets are springing no mortal can see;
+    _So_, deep in my bosom, the prayer of devotion,
+      Unheard by the world, rises silent to thee."--Moore.
+
+    "'Tis with our judgments _as_ with our watches; none
+    Go just alike, yet each believes his own."--Pope.
+
+    "Grace abused brings forth the foulest deeds,
+    _As_ richest soil the most luxuriant weeds."--Cowper.
+
+"_As_ no roads are so rough as those that have just been mended, _so_ no
+sinners are so intolerant as those who have just turned
+saints."--"Lacon."
+
+SIN. See CRIME.
+
+SINCE--AGO. Dr. Johnson says of these two adverbs: "Reckoning time
+toward the present, we use _since_; as, 'It is a year _since_ it
+happened': reckoning from the present, we use _ago_; as, 'It is a year
+_ago_.' This is not, perhaps, always observed."
+
+Dr. Johnson's rule will hardly suffice as a sure guide. _Since_ is often
+used for _ago_, but _ago_ never for _since_. _Ago_ is derived from the
+participle _agone_, while _since_ comes from a preposition. We say
+properly, "not long" or "some time _ago_ [agone]." _Since_ requires a
+verbal clause after it; as, "_Since_ I saw you"; "_Since_ he was here."
+
+SING. Of the two forms--_sang_ and _sung_--for the imperfect tense of
+the verb to _sing_, the former--_sang_--is to be preferred.
+
+SIT. See SET.
+
+SLANG. The slang that is heard among respectable people is made up of
+genuine words, to which an arbitrary meaning is given. It is always low,
+generally coarse, and not unfrequently foolish. With the exception of
+_cant_, there is nothing that is more to be shunned. We sometimes meet
+with persons of considerable culture who interlard their talk with slang
+expressions, but it is safe to assert that they are always persons of
+coarse natures.
+
+SMART. See CLEVER.
+
+SMELL OF. See TASTE OF.
+
+SO. See AS; SUCH; THAT.
+
+SO MUCH SO. "The shipments by the coast steamers are very large, _so
+much so_ [large?] as to tax the capacity of the different
+lines."--"Telegram," September 19, 1881. The sentence should be, "The
+shipments by the coast steamers are very large, _so large_ as to tax,"
+etc.
+
+SOLECISM. In rhetoric, a solecism is defined as an offense against the
+rules of grammar by the use of words in a wrong construction; false
+syntax.
+
+"Modern grammarians designate by _solecism_ any word or expression which
+does not agree with the established usage of writing or speaking. But,
+as customs change, that which at one time is considered a _solecism_ may
+at another be regarded as correct language. A _solecism_, therefore,
+differs from a _barbarism_, inasmuch as the latter consists in the use
+of a word or expression which is altogether contrary to the spirit of
+the language, and can, properly speaking, never become established as
+correct language."--"Penny Cyclopædia." See, also, BARBARISM.
+
+SOME. This word is not unfrequently misused for _somewhat_; thus, "She
+is _some_ better to-day." It is likewise often misused for _about_;
+thus, "I think it is _some_ ten miles from here": read, "_about_ ten
+miles from here."
+
+SPECIALTY. This form has within a recent period been generally
+substituted for _speciality_. There is no apparent reason, however, why
+the _i_ should be dropped, since it is required by the etymology of the
+word, and is retained in nearly all other words of the same formation.
+
+SPECIOUS FALLACY. A _fallacy_ is a sophism, a logical artifice, a
+deceitful or false appearance; while _specious_ means having the
+appearance of truth, plausible. Hence we see that the very essence of a
+_fallacy_ is its _speciousness_. We may very properly say that a
+_fallacy_ is more or less _specious_, but we can not properly say that a
+fallacy _is_ specious, since without speciousness we can have no
+fallacies.
+
+SPLENDID. This poor word is used by the gentler sex to qualify well-nigh
+everything that has their approval, from a sugar-plum to the national
+capitol. In fact, _splendid_ and _awful_ seem to be about the only
+adjectives some of our superlative young women have in their
+vocabularies.
+
+STANDPOINT. This is a word to which many students of English seriously
+object, and among them are the editors of some of our daily papers, who
+do not allow it to appear in their columns. The phrase to which no one
+objects is, _point of view_.
+
+STATE. This word, which properly means to make known specifically, to
+explain particularly, is often misused for _say_. When _say_ says all
+one _wants_ to say, why use a more pretentious word?
+
+STOP. "Where are you _stopping_?" "At the Metropolitan." The proper word
+to use here is _staying_. _To stop_ means to cease to go forward, to
+leave off; and _to stay_ means to abide, to tarry, to dwell, to sojourn.
+We _stay_, not _stop_, at home, at a hotel, or with a friend, as the
+case may be.
+
+STORM. Many persons indulge in a careless use of this word, using it
+when they mean to say simply that it rains or snows. To a _storm_ a
+violent commotion of the atmosphere is indispensable. A very high wind
+constitutes a storm, though it be dry.
+
+STRAIGHTWAY. Here is a good Anglo-Saxon word of _two_ syllables whose
+place, without any good reason, is being usurped by the Latin word
+_immediately_, of _five_ syllables.
+
+STREET. We live _in_, not _on_--meet our acquaintances _in_, not
+_on_--things occur _in_, not _on_--houses are built _in_, not _on_, the
+street, and so forth.
+
+STYLE. This is a term that is used to characterize the peculiarities
+that distinguish a writer or a composition. Correctness and clearness
+properly belong to the domain of _diction_; simplicity, conciseness,
+gravity, elegance, diffuseness, floridity, force, feebleness,
+coarseness, etc., belong to the domain of _style_.
+
+SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. This mood is unpopular with not a few now-a-day
+grammarians. One says that it is rapidly falling into disuse; that, in
+fact, there is good reason to suppose it will soon become obsolete.
+Another says that it would, perhaps, be better to abolish it entirely,
+as its use is a continual source of dispute among grammarians and of
+perplexity to schools. Another says that it is a universal
+stumbling-block; that nobody seems to understand it, although almost
+everybody attempts to use it.
+
+That the subjunctive mood is much less used now than it was a hundred
+years ago is certain, but that it is obsolescent is very far from
+certain. It would not be easy, I think, to find a single contemporary
+writer who does not use it. That it is not always easy to determine what
+form of it we should employ is very true; but if we are justified in
+abolishing it altogether, as Mr. Chandler suggests, because its correct
+use is not always easy, then we are also justified in abolishing the use
+of _shall_ and _will_, and of the prepositions, for surely their right
+use is likewise at times most puzzling. Meanwhile, most persons will
+think it well to learn to use the subjunctive mood properly. With that
+object in view, one can not, perhaps, do better than to attend to what
+Dr. Alexander Bain, Professor of Logic in the University of Aberdeen,
+says upon the subject. In Professor Bain's "Higher English Grammar" we
+find:
+
+"In subordinate clauses.--In a clause expressing a condition, and
+introduced by a conjunction of condition, the verb is sometimes, but not
+always, in the subjunctive mood: 'If I _be_ able,' 'if I _were_ strong
+enough,' 'if thou _should_ come.'
+
+"The subjunctive inflexions have been wholly lost. The sense that
+something is wanting appears to have led many writers to use indicative
+forms where the subjunctive might be expected. The tendency appears
+strongest in the case of 'wert,' which is now used as indicative (for
+'wast') only in poetical or elevated language.
+
+"The following is the rule given for the use of the subjunctive mood:
+
+"When in a conditional clause it is intended to express doubt or denial,
+use the subjunctive mood.[30] 'If I _were_ sure of what you tell me, I
+would go.'
+
+"When the conditional clause is _affirmative_ and _certain_, the verb is
+_indicative_: 'If that _is_ the case' (as you now tell me, and as I
+believe), 'I can understand you.' This is equivalent to a clause of
+assumption, or supposition: 'That being the case,' 'inasmuch as that is
+the case,' etc.
+
+"As _futurity_ is by its nature uncertain, the subjunctive is
+extensively used for future conditionality: 'If it _rain_, we shall not
+be able to go'; 'if I _be_ well'; 'if he _come_ shortly'; 'if thou
+_return_ at all in peace'; 'though he _slay_ me, yet will I trust in
+him.' These events are all in the uncertain future, and are put in the
+subjunctive.[31]
+
+"A future result or consequence is expressed by the subjunctive in such
+instances as these: 'I will wait till he _return_'; 'no fear lest dinner
+_cool_'; 'thou shalt stone him with stones, that he _die_'; 'take heed
+lest at any time your hearts _be_ overcharged with surfeiting.'
+
+"Uncertainty as to a past event may arise from our own ignorance, in
+which case the subjunctive is properly employed, and serves the useful
+purpose of distinguishing our ignorance from our knowledge. 'If any of
+my readers _has_ looked with so little attention upon the world around
+him'; this would mean--'as I know that they have.' The meaning intended
+is probably--'as I do not know whether they have or not,' and therefore
+the subjunctive 'have' is preferable. 'If ignorance _is_ bliss,' which I
+(ironically) admit. Had Gray been speaking seriously, he would have
+said, 'if ignorance _be_ bliss,' he himself dissenting from the
+proposition.
+
+"A wish contrary to the fact takes the subjunctive: 'I wish he _were_
+here' (which he is not).
+
+"An intention not yet carried out is also subjunctive: 'The sentence is
+that you _be_ imprisoned.'
+
+"The only correct form of the future subjunctive is--'if I should.' We
+may say, 'I do not know whether or not I _shall_ come'; but 'if I shall
+come,' expressing a condition, is not an English construction. 'If he
+will' has a real meaning, as being the present subjunctive of the verb
+'will': 'if he be willing,' 'if he have the will.' It is in accordance
+with good usage to express a future subjunctive meaning by a present
+tense; but in that case the form must be strictly subjunctive, and not
+indicative. 'If any member _absents_ himself, he shall forfeit a penny
+for the use of the club'; this ought to be either 'absent,' or 'should
+absent.' 'If thou _neglectest_ or _doest_ unwillingly what I command
+thee, I will rack thee with old cramps'; better, 'if thou _neglect_ or
+_do_ unwillingly,' or 'if thou should neglect.' The indicative would be
+justified by the speaker's belief that the supposition is sure to turn
+out to be the fact.
+
+"The past subjunctive may imply denial; as, 'if the book _were_ in the
+library (as it is not), it should be at your service.'
+
+"'If the book _be_ in the library,' means, 'I do not know whether it be
+or not.' We have thus the power of discriminating _three_ different
+suppositions. 'If the book _is_ in the library' (as I know it is); 'if
+it _be_' (I am uncertain); 'if it _were_' (as I know it is not). So, 'if
+it rains,' 'if it rain,' 'if it rained.' 'Nay, and the villains march
+wide between the legs, as if they _had_ gyves on,' implying that they
+had not.
+
+"The same power of the past tense is exemplified in 'if I _could_, I
+would,' which means, 'I can not'; whereas, 'if I can, I will,' means 'I
+do not know.'
+
+"The past subjunctive may be expressed by an inversion: '_Had_ I the
+power,' '_were_ I as I have been.'
+
+"In Principal Clauses.--The principal clause in a conditional statement
+also takes the subjunctive form when it refers to what is future and
+contingent, and when it refers to what is past and uncertain, or denied.
+'If he should try, he _would_ succeed'; 'if I had seen him, I _should_
+have asked him.'
+
+"The usual forms of the subjunctive in the principal clause are 'would,'
+'should,' 'would have,' 'should have'; and it is to be noted that in
+this application the second persons take the inflexional ending of the
+indicative: 'shouldst,' 'wouldst.'
+
+    "'If 'twere done when 'tis done, then 't_were_ (would be) well
+    It _were_ (should be) done quickly.'
+
+"The English idiom appears sometimes to permit the use of an indicative
+where we should expect a subjunctive form. 'Many acts, that _had_ been
+otherwise blamable, were employed'; 'I _had_ fainted, unless I had
+believed,' etc.
+
+    "'Which else _lie_ furled and shrouded in the soul.'
+
+"In 'else' there is implied a conditional clause that would suit 'lie';
+or the present may be regarded as a more vivid form of expression. 'Had'
+may be indicative; just as we sometimes find pluperfect indicative for
+pluperfect subjunctive in the same circumstances in Latin. We may refer
+it to the general tendency, as already seen in the uses of 'could,'
+'would,' 'should,' etc., to express conditionality by a past tense; or
+the indicative may be used as a more direct and vivid mode. 'Had' may be
+subjunctive; 'I _had_ fainted' is, in construction, analogous to 'I
+_should_ have fainted'; the word for futurity, 'shall,' not being
+necessary to the sense, is withdrawn, and its past inflexion transferred
+to 'have.' Compare Germ. _würde haben_ and _hätte_."
+
+In addition to the foregoing, we find in Professor Bain's "Composition
+Grammar" the following:
+
+"The case most suited to the subjunctive is _contingent futurity_, or
+the expression of an event unknown absolutely, as being still in the
+future: 'If to-morrow _be_ fine, I will walk with you.'
+
+"'Unless I _were_ prepared,' insinuates pretty strongly that I am or am
+not prepared, according to the manner of the principal clause.
+
+    "'What's a tall man unless he _fight_?'
+
+    "'The sword hath ended him: so shall it thee,
+    Unless thou _yield_ thee as my prisoner.'
+
+    "'Who but must laugh, if such a man there _be_?
+    Who would not weep, if Atticus _were_ he?'
+
+"'I am to second Ion if he _fail_'; the failing is left quite doubtful.
+'I should very imperfectly execute the task which I have undertaken if I
+_were_ merely to treat of battles and sieges.' Macaulay thus implies
+that the scope of his work is to be wider than mere battles and sieges.
+
+"The subjunctive appears in some other constructions. 'I hope to see the
+exhibition before _it close_'; 'wait till he _return_'; 'thou shall
+stand by the river's brink against he _come_'; 'take heed lest passion
+_sway_ thy judgment'; 'speak to me, though it _be_ in wrath'; 'if he
+_smite_ him with an instrument of iron so that he _die_, he is a
+murderer'; 'beware this night that thou _cross_ not my footsteps'
+(Shelley).
+
+"Again. 'Whatever this _be_'; 'whoever he _be_'; 'howe'er it _be_'
+(Tennyson); and such like.
+
+    "'And _as long_, O God, _as_ she
+    _Have_ a grain of love for me,
+    So long, no doubt, no doubt,
+    Shall I nurse in my dark heart,
+    However weary, a spark of will
+    Not to be trampled out.'
+
+"The Future Subjunctive is given in our scheme of the verb as 'should'
+in all persons: 'If I should, if thou should, if he should.' In old
+English, we have 'thou _shouldst_': 'if thou, Lord, _shouldst_ mark
+iniquities.'
+
+"An inverted conditional form has taken deep root in our language, and
+may be regarded as an elegant and forcible variety. While dispensing
+with the conjunction, it does not cause ambiguity; nevertheless,
+conditionality is well marked.
+
+"'_If_ you _should_ abandon your Penelope and your home for Calypso,
+----': '_should_ you abandon ----.'
+
+            "'_Go_ not my horse the better,
+    I must become a borrower of the night
+    For a dark hour or twain.'
+
+    "'Here had we now our country's honor roof'd
+    _Were_ the graced person of our Banquo present.'
+
+    "'_Be_ thou a spirit of health or goblin damn'd,
+    _Bring_ with thee airs from heaven or blasts from hell,
+    _Be_ thy intents wicked or charitable,
+    Thou com'st in such a questionable shape
+    That I will speak to thee.'
+
+    "'_Come_ one, _come_ all, this rock shall fly
+    From its firm base as soon as I.'--Scott.
+
+"The following examples are given by Mätzner:
+
+"'Varney's communications, _be_ they what they might, were operating in
+his favor.'--Scott.
+
+"'Governing persons, _were_ they never so insignificant intrinsically,
+have for most part plenty of Memoir-writers.'--Carlyle.
+
+"'Even _were_ I disposed, I could not gratify the reader.'--Warren.
+
+"'Bring them back to me, _cost_ what it may.'--Coleridge, 'Wallenstein.'
+
+"'And _will_ you, _nill_ you, I will marry you.'--'Taming of the Shrew.'
+
+"_Were_ is used in the principal clause for 'should be' or 'would
+be.'[32]
+
+    "'I _were_ (=should be) a fool, not less than if a panther
+    Were panic-stricken by the antelope's eye,
+    If she escape me.'--Shelley.
+
+    "'Were you but riding forth to air yourself,
+    Such parting _were_ too petty.'
+
+"'He _were_ (=would be) no lion, were not Romans hinds.'
+
+    "'Should he be roused out of his sleep to-night, ...
+    It _were_ not well; indeed it _were_ not well.'--Shelley.
+
+"_Had_ is sometimes used in the principal clause for 'should have' or
+'would have.'[33]
+
+"'Had I known this before we set out, I think I _had_ (= would have)
+remained at home.'--Scott.
+
+    "'Hadst thou been kill'd when first thou didst presume,
+    Thou _hadst_ not lived to kill a son of mine.'
+
+                                        "'If he
+    Had killed me, he _had_ done a kinder deed.'
+
+    "'For once he _had_ been ta'en or slain,
+    An it had not been his ministry.'--Scott.
+
+    "'If thou hadst said him nay, it _had_ been sin.'[34]
+
+"'_Had_ better, rather, best, as lief, as well, etc.,' is a form that is
+explained under this heading. 'Had' stands for 'would have.' The
+exploded notion that 'had' is a corrupted 'would' must be guarded
+against.
+
+"'I _had_ as lief not be.' That is--'I _would_ as lief _have_ not (_to_)
+be' = 'I would as willingly (or as soon) have non-existence.'
+
+"'_Had_ you rather Cæsar were living----?' '_Would_ you rather _have_
+(_would_ you _prefer_ that) Cæsar were living?'
+
+"'He _had_ better reconsider the matter' is 'he _would_ better _have_
+(_to_) reconsider the matter.'
+
+    "'I _had_ rather be a kitten and cry mew
+    Than one of these same metre ballad-mongers;
+    I _had_ rather hear a brazen canstick turned.'
+
+"Let us compare this form with another that appears side by side with it
+in early writers. (Cp. Lat. 'habeo' and 'mihi est.')
+
+"The construction of 'had' is thus illustrated in Chaucer, as in--Nonne
+Prestes Tale, 300:
+
+    "'By God, I _hadde_ levere than my scherte,
+    That ye hadde rad his legend, as I have.'
+
+"Compare now:
+
+    "'Ah _me were levere_ with lawe _loose_ my lyf
+    Then so to fote hem _falle_.'--Wright, 'Polit. S.'
+
+"Here 'were' is unquestionably for 'would be'; and the whole expression
+might be given by 'had,' thus: 'Ah, _I hadde_ levere ----,' '(to)
+_loose_' and '(to) _falle_,' changing from subjects of 'were' to objects
+of 'hadde.'
+
+"So, in the Chaucer example above, if we substitute 'be' for 'have,' we
+shall get the same meaning, thus: 'By God, _me were_ levere ----.' The
+interchange helps us to see more clearly that 'hadde' is to be explained
+as subjunctive for 'would have.'" See INDICATIVE AND SUBJUNCTIVE.
+
+SUCH. "I have never before seen _such_ a large ox." By a little
+transposing of the words of this sentence, we have, "I have never before
+seen an ox _such_ large," which makes it quite clear that we should say
+_so large an ox_ and not _such a large ox_. As proof that this error in
+the use of _such_ is common, we find in Mr. George Washington Moon's
+"Dean's English and Bad English," the sentence, "With all due deference
+to _such_ a high authority on _such_ a very important matter." With a
+little transposing, this sentence is made to read, "With all due
+deference to an authority _such_ high on a matter _such_ very
+important." It is clear that the sentence should read, "With all due
+deference to _so_ high an authority on _so_ very important a matter."
+The phrases, _such_ a handsome, _such_ a lovely, _such_ a long, _such_
+narrow, etc., are incorrect, and should be _so_ handsome, _so_ lovely,
+_so_ long, and so on.
+
+SUMMON. This verb comes in for its full share of mauling. We often hear
+such expressions as "I will _summons_ him," instead of _summon_ him;
+and "He was _summonsed_," instead of _summoned_.
+
+SUPERFLUOUS WORDS. "Whenever I try to write well, I _always_ find I can
+do it." "I shall have finished by the _latter_ end of the week." "Iron
+sinks _down_ in water." "He combined _together_ all the facts." "My
+brother called on me, and we _both_ took a walk." "I can do it _equally_
+as well as he." "We could not forbear _from_ doing it." "Before I go, I
+must _first_ be paid." "We were compelled to return _back_." "We forced
+them to retreat _back_ fully a mile." "His conduct was approved _of_ by
+everybody." "They conversed _together_ for a long time." "The balloon
+rose _up_ very rapidly." "Give me another _one_." "Come home as soon as
+_ever_ you can." "Who finds him _in_ money?" "He came in last _of all_."
+"He has _got_ all he can carry." "What have you _got_?" "No matter what
+I have _got_." "I have _got_ the headache." "Have you _got_ any
+brothers?" "No, but I have _got_ a sister." All the words in _italics_
+are superfluous.
+
+SUPERIOR. This word is not unfrequently used for able, excellent,
+gifted; as, "She is a _superior_ woman," meaning an _excellent_ woman;
+"He is a _superior_ man," meaning an _able_ man. The expression _an
+inferior man_ is not less objectionable.
+
+SUPPOSITITIOUS. This word is _properly_ used in the sense of put by a
+trick into the place or character belonging to another, spurious,
+counterfeit, not genuine; and _improperly_ in the sense of conjectural,
+hypothetical, imaginary, presumptive; as, "This is a _supposititious_
+case," meaning an _imaginary_ or _presumptive_ case. "The English critic
+derived his materials from a stray copy of some _supposititious_ indexes
+devised by one of the 'Post' reporters."--"Nation." Here is a correct
+use of the word.
+
+SWOSH. There is a kind of ill-balanced brain in which the reflective and
+the imaginative very much outweight the perceptive. Men to whom this
+kind of an organization has been given generally have active minds, but
+their minds never present anything clearly. To their mental vision all
+is ill-defined, chaotic. They see everything in a haze. Whether such men
+talk or write, they are verbose, illogical, intangible,
+will-o'-the-wispish. Their thoughts are phantomlike; like shadows, they
+continually escape their grasp. In their talk they will, after long
+dissertations, tell you that they have not said just what they would
+like to say; there is always a subtle, lurking something still
+unexpressed, which something is the real essence of the matter, and
+which your penetration is expected to divine. In their writings they are
+eccentric, vague, labyrinthine, pretentious, transcendental,[35] and
+frequently ungrammatical. These men, if write they must, should confine
+themselves to the descriptive; for when they enter the essayist's
+domain, which they are very prone to do, they write what I will venture
+to call _swosh_.
+
+We find examples in plenty of this kind of writing in the essays of Mr.
+Ralph Waldo Emerson. Indeed, the impartial critic who will take the
+trouble to examine any of Mr. Emerson's essays at all carefully, is
+quite sure to come to the conclusion that Mr. Emerson has seen
+everything he has ever made the subject of his essays very much as
+London is seen from the top of Saint Paul's in a fog.
+
+Mr. Emerson's definition of Nature runs thus: "Philosophically
+considered, the universe is composed of Nature and the Soul. Strictly
+speaking, therefore, all that is separate from us, all which philosophy
+distinguishes from the _Not Me_--that is, both Nature and Art, and all
+other men, and my own body--must be ranked under this name 'NATURE.' In
+enumerating the values of Nature and casting up their sum, I shall use
+the word in both senses--in its common and in its philosophical import.
+In inquiries so general as our present one, the inaccuracy is not
+material; no confusion of thought will occur. _Nature_, in the common
+sense, refers to essences unchanged by man: space, the air, the river,
+the leaf. _Art_ is applied to the mixture of his will with the same
+things, as in a house, a canal, a picture, a statue. But his operations,
+taken together, are so insignificant--a little chipping, baking,
+patching, and washing--that in an impression so grand as that of the
+world on the human mind they do not vary the result."
+
+In "Letters and Social Aims" Mr. Emerson writes: "Eloquence is the power
+to translate a truth into language perfectly intelligible to the person
+to whom you speak. He who would convince the worthy Mr. Dunderhead of
+any truth which Dunderhead does not see, must be a master of his art.
+Declamation is common; but such possession of thought as is here
+required, such practical chemistry as the conversion of a truth written
+in God's language into a truth in Dunderhead's language, is one of the
+most beautiful and cogent weapons that is forged in the shop of the
+Divine Artificer."
+
+The first paragraph of Mr. Emerson's "Essay on Art" reads: "All
+departments of life at the present day--Trade, Politics, Letters,
+Science, or Religion--seem to feel, and to labor to express, the
+identity of their law. They are rays of one sun; they translate each
+into a new language the sense of the other. They are sublime when seen
+as emanations of a Necessity contradistinguished from the vulgar Fate by
+being instant and alive, and dissolving man, as well as his works, in
+its flowing beneficence. This influence is conspicuously visible in the
+principles and history of Art."
+
+Another paragraph from Mr. Emerson's "Essay on Eloquence": "The orator,
+as we have seen, must be a substantial personality. Then, first, he must
+have power of statement--must have the fact, and know how to tell it. In
+a knot of men conversing on any subject, the person who knows most about
+it will have the ear of the company, if he wishes it, and lead the
+conversation, no matter what genius or distinction other men there
+present may have; and, in any public assembly, him who has the facts,
+and can and will state them, people will listen to, though he is
+otherwise ignorant, though he is hoarse and ungrateful, though he
+stutters and screams."
+
+Mr. Emerson, in his "Essay on Prudence," writes: "There are all degrees
+of proficiency in knowledge of the world. It is sufficient to our
+present purpose to indicate three. One class live to the utility of the
+symbol, esteeming health and wealth a final good. Another class live
+above this mark to the beauty of the symbol, as the poet and artist, and
+the naturalist and man of science. A third class live above the beauty
+of the symbol to the beauty of the thing signified; these are wise men.
+The first class have common sense; the second, taste; and the third,
+spiritual perception. Once in a long time a man traverses the whole
+scale, and sees and enjoys the symbol solidly; then, also, has a clear
+eye for its beauty; and, lastly, whilst he pitches his tent on this
+sacred volcanic isle of nature, does not offer to build houses and
+barns thereon, reverencing the splendor of God which he sees bursting
+through each chink and cranny."
+
+Those who are wont to accept others at their self-assessment and to see
+things through other people's eyes--and there are many such--are in
+danger of thinking this kind of writing very fine, when in fact it is
+not only the veriest _swosh_, but that kind of swosh that excites at
+least an occasional doubt with regard to the writer's sanity. We can
+make no greater mistake than to suppose that the reason we do not
+understand these rhetorical contortionists is because they are so subtle
+and profound. We understand them quite as well as they understand
+themselves. At their very best, they are but incoherent diluters of
+other men's ideas. They have but one thing to recommend them--honesty.
+They believe in themselves.
+
+"Whatever is dark is deep. Stir a puddle, and it is deeper than a
+well."--Swift.
+
+SYNECDOCHE. The using of the name of a part for that of the whole, the
+name of the whole for that of a part, or the using of a definite number
+for an indefinite, is called, in rhetoric, _synecdoche_. "The bay was
+covered with _sails_"; i. e., with _ships_. "The man was old, careworn,
+and gray"; i. e., literally, _his hair_, not the man, was gray. "_Nine
+tenths_ of every man's happiness depends on the reception he meets with
+in the world." "He had seen seventy _winters_." "Thus spoke the
+_tempter_": here the part of the character is named that suits the
+occasion.
+
+"His roof was at the service of the outcast; the unfortunate ever found
+a welcome at his threshold."
+
+TAKE. I copy from the "London Queen": "The verb _to take_ is open to
+being considered a vulgar verb when used in reference to dinner, tea, or
+to refreshments of any kind. 'Will you _take_' is not considered _comme
+il faut_; the verb in favor for the offering of civilities being _to
+have_." According to "The Queen," then, we must say, "Will you _have_
+some dinner, tea, coffee, wine, fish, beef, salad," etc.
+
+TASTE OF. The redundant _of_, often used, in this country, in connection
+with the transitive verbs _to taste_ and _to smell_, is a Yankeeism. We
+_taste_ or _smell_ a thing, not taste _of_ nor smell _of_ a thing. The
+neuter verbs _to taste_ and _to smell_ are often followed by _of_. "If
+butter _tastes of_ brass." "For age but _tastes of_ pleasures."
+
+    "You shall stifle in your own report,
+    and _smell of_ calumny."--Shakespeare.
+
+TAUTOLOGY. Among the things to be avoided in writing is _tautology_,
+which is _the repeating of the same thought_, whether in the same or in
+different words.
+
+TAUTOPHONY. "A regard for harmony requires us, in the progress of a
+sentence, to avoid repeating a sound by employing the same word more
+than once, or using, in contiguous words, similar combinations of
+letters. This fault is known as _tautology_."--Dr. G. P. Quackenbos,
+"Advanced Course of Composition and Rhetoric," p. 300. Dr. Quackenbos is
+in error. The repetition of the same _sense_ is tautology, and the
+repetition of the same _sound_, or, as Dr. Quackenbos has it, "the
+repeating of a sound by employing the same word more than once, or by
+using in contiguous words similar combinations of letters," is
+_tautophony_.
+
+TEACH. To impart knowledge, to inform, to instruct; as, "_Teach_ me how
+to do it"; "_Teach_ me to swim"; "He _taught_ me to write." The
+uncultured often misuse _learn_ for _teach_. See LEARN.
+
+TENSE. The errors made in the use of the tenses are manifold. The one
+most frequently made by persons of culture--the one that everybody
+makes would, perhaps, be nearer the fact--is that of using the
+_imperfect_ instead of the _perfect_ tense; thus, "I never _saw_ it
+played but once": say, _have seen_. "He was the largest man I ever
+_saw_": say, _have seen_. "I never in my life _had_ such trouble": say,
+_have had_. Another frequent error, the making of which is not confined
+to the unschooled, is that of using two verbs in a past tense when only
+one should be in that time; thus, "I intended to _have gone_": say, _to
+go_. "It was my intention to _have_ come": say, _to come_. "I expected
+to _have found_ you here": say, _to find_. "I was very desirous to _have
+gone_": say, _to go_. "He was better than I expected to _have found_
+him": say, _to find_.
+
+Among other common errors are the following: "I _seen_ him when he
+_done_ it": say, "I _saw_ him when he _did_ it." "I should have _went_
+home": say, _gone_. "If he had _went_": say, _gone_. "I wish you had
+_went_": say, _gone_. "He has _went_ out": say, _gone_. "I _come_ to
+town this morning": say, _came_. "He _come_ to me for advice": say,
+_came_. "It _begun_ very late": say, _began_. "It had already _began_":
+say, _begun_. "The following toasts were _drank_": say, _drunk_. "His
+text was that God _was_ love": say, _is_ love. Another error is made in
+such sentences as these: "If I had _have_ known": say, _had known_. "If
+he had _have_ come as he promised": say, _had come_. "If you had _have_
+told me": say, _had told_.
+
+TESTIMONY. See EVIDENCE.
+
+THAN. _Than_ and _as_ implying comparison have the same case after as
+before them. "He owes more than _me_": read, than _I_--i. e., more than
+_I owe_. "John is not so old as _her_": read, as _she_--i. e., as _she
+is_. We should say, then, "He is stronger than _she_," "She is older
+than _he_," "You are richer than _I_," etc. But it does not always
+happen that the nominative case comes after _than_ or _as_. "I love you
+more than _him_," "I give you more than _him_," "I love you as well as
+_him_"; that is to say, "I love you more than _I love him_," "I give you
+more than _I give him_," "I love you as well as _I love him_." Take away
+_him_ and put _he_ in all these cases, and the grammar is just as good,
+but the meaning is quite different. "I love you as well as _him_," means
+that I love you as well _as I love him_; but, "I love you as well as
+_he_," means that I love you as well _as he loves you_.
+
+THAN WHOM. Cobbett, in his "Grammar of the English Language," says:
+"There is an erroneous way of employing _whom_, which I must point out
+to your particular attention, because it is so often seen in very good
+writers, and because it is very deceiving. 'The Duke of Argyll, _than
+whom_ no man was more hearty in the cause.' 'Cromwell, _than whom_ no
+man was better skilled in artifice.' A hundred such phrases might be
+collected from Hume, Blackstone, and even from Drs. Blair and Johnson.
+Yet they are bad grammar. In all such cases, _who_ should be made use
+of: for it is _nominative_ and not objective. 'No man was more hearty in
+the cause _than he was_'; 'No man was better skilled in artifice _than
+he was_.'[36] It is a very common Parliament-house phrase, and therefore
+presumably _corrupt_; but it is a Dr. Johnson phrase, too: 'Pope, _than
+whom_ few men had more vanity.' The Doctor did not say, 'Myself, _than
+whom_ few men have been found more base, having, in my dictionary,
+described a pensioner as a slave of state, and having afterward myself
+become a pensioner.'
+
+"I differ in this matter from Bishop Lowth, who says that 'The relative
+_who_, having reference to no verb or preposition understood, but only
+to its antecedent, when it follows _than_, is _always in the objective
+case_; even though the pronoun, if substituted in its place, would be in
+the nominative.' And then he gives an instance from Milton. 'Beelzebub,
+_than whom_, Satan except, none higher sat.' It is curious enough that
+this sentence of the Bishop is, itself, ungrammatical! Our poor
+unfortunate _it_ is so placed as to make it a matter of doubt whether
+the Bishop meant it to relate to _who_ or to _its antecedent_. However,
+we know its meaning; but, though he says that _who_, when it follows
+_than_, is always in the objective case, he gives us no reason for this
+departure from a clear general principle; unless we are to regard as a
+reason the example of Milton, who has committed many hundreds, if not
+thousands, of grammatical errors, many of which the Bishop himself has
+pointed out. There is a sort of side-wind attempt at reason in the
+words, 'having reference to no _verb_ or _preposition_ understood.' I do
+not see the _reason_, even if this could be; but it appears to me
+impossible that a noun or pronoun can exist in a grammatical state
+without having reference to some _verb_ or _preposition_, either
+expressed or understood. What is meant by Milton? 'Than Beelzebub, none
+_sat_ higher, except Satan.' And when, in order to avoid the repetition
+of the word Beelzebub, the relative becomes necessary, the full
+construction must be, 'no devil sat higher _than who_ sat, except
+Satan'; and not, 'no devil sat higher _than whom_ sat.'[37] The
+supposition that there can be a noun or pronoun which has reference to
+_no verb_ and _no preposition_, is certainly a mistake."
+
+Of this, Dr. Fitzedward Hall remarks, in his "Recent Exemplifications of
+False Philology": "That any one but Cobbett would abide this as English
+is highly improbable; and how the expression--a quite classical
+one--which he discards can be justified grammatically, except by calling
+its _than_ a preposition, others may resolve at their leisure and
+pleasure."
+
+THANKS. There are many persons who think it in questionable taste to use
+_thanks_ for _thank you_.
+
+THAT. The best writers often appear to grope after a separate employment
+for the several relatives.
+
+"'THAT' _is the proper restrictive, explicative, limiting, or defining
+relative_.
+
+"'_That_,' the neuter of the definite article, was early in use as a
+neuter relative. All the other oldest relatives gradually dropt away,
+and 'that' came to be applied also to plural antecedents, and to
+masculines and feminines. When 'as,' 'which,' and 'who' came forward to
+share the work of 'that,' there seems to have arisen not a little
+uncertainty about the relatives, and we find curious double forms: 'whom
+that,' 'which that,' 'which as,' etc. Gower has, 'Venus _whose_ priest
+_that_ I am'; Chaucer writes--'This Abbot _which that_ was an holy man,'
+'his love _the which that_ he oweth.' By the Elizabethan period, these
+double forms have disappeared, and all the relatives are used singly
+without hesitation. From then till now, 'that' has been struggling with
+'who' and 'which' to regain superior favor, with varying success. 'Who'
+is used for persons, 'which' for things, in both numbers; so is 'that';
+and the only opportunity of a special application of 'that' lies in the
+important distinction between coördination and restriction. Now, as
+'who' and 'which' are most commonly preferred for coördination, it would
+be a clear gain to confine them to this sense, and to reserve 'that' for
+the restrictive application alone. This arrangement, then, would _fall
+in with the most general use of 'that,' especially beyond the limits of
+formal composition_.
+
+"The use of 'that' solely as restrictive, with 'who' and 'which' solely
+as coördinating, _also avoids ambiguities_ that often attend the
+indiscriminate use of 'who' and 'which' for coördinate and for
+restrictive clauses. Thus, when we say, 'his conduct surprised his
+English friends, _who_ had not known him long,' we may mean either that
+his English friends generally were surprised (the relative being, in
+that case, _coördinating_), or that only a portion of them--namely, the
+particular portion that had not known him long--were surprised. In this
+last case the relative is meant to define or explain the antecedent, and
+the doubt would be removed by writing thus: 'his English friends _that_
+had not known him long.' So in the following sentence there is a similar
+ambiguity in the use of 'which': 'the next winter _which_ you will spend
+in town will give you opportunities of making a more prudent choice.'
+This may mean, either 'you will spend next winter in town' ('which'
+being coördinating), or 'the next of the winters when you are to live in
+town,' let that come when it may. In the former case, 'which' is the
+proper relative; in the latter case, the meaning is restrictive or
+defining, and would be best brought out by 'that': 'the next winter
+_that_ you will spend in town.'
+
+"A further consideration in favor of employing 'that' for explicative
+clauses is the unpleasant effect arising from the _too frequent
+repetition of 'who' and 'which.'_ Grammarians often recommend 'that' as
+a means of varying the style; but this end ought to be sought in
+subservience to the still greater end of perspicuity.
+
+"The following examples will serve further to illustrate the distinction
+between _that_, on the one hand, and _who_ and _which_, on the other:
+
+"'In general, Mr. Burchell was fondest of the company of children,
+_whom_ he used to call harmless little men.' 'Whom' is here
+idiomatically used, being the equivalent of '_and them_ he used to
+call,' etc.
+
+    "'Bacon at last, a mighty man, arose,
+    _Whom_ a wise king and nation chose
+    Lord Chancellor of both their laws.'
+
+Here, also, 'whom' is equal to 'and him.'
+
+"In the following instance the relative is restrictive or defining, and
+'that' would be preferable: 'the conclusion of the "Iliad" is like the
+exit of a great man out of company _whom_ he has entertained
+magnificently.' Compare another of Addison's sentences: 'a man of polite
+imagination is let into a great many pleasures _that_ the vulgar are not
+capable of receiving.'
+
+"Both relatives are introduced discriminatingly in this passage:--'She
+had learned that from Mrs. Wood, _who_ had heard it from her husband,
+_who_ had heard it at the public-house from the landlord, _who_ had been
+let into the secret by the boy _that_ carried the beer to some of the
+prisoners.'
+
+"The following sentences are ambiguous under the modern system of using
+'who' for both purposes:--'I met the boatman _who_ took me across the
+ferry.' If 'who' is the proper relative here, the meaning is, 'I met the
+boatman, _and he_ took me across,' it being supposed that the boatman is
+known and definite. But if there be several boatmen, and I wish to
+indicate one in particular by the circumstance that he had taken me
+across the ferry, I should use 'that.' 'The youngest boy _who_ has
+learned to dance is James.' This means either 'the youngest boy is
+James, _and he_ has learned to dance,' or, 'of the boys, the youngest
+that has learned to dance is James.' This last sense is restrictive, and
+'that' should be used.
+
+"Turning now to 'which,' we may have a series of parallel examples. 'The
+court, _which_ gives currency to manners, should be exemplary': here the
+meaning is 'the court should be exemplary, _for the court_ gives
+currency to manners.' 'Which' is the idiomatic relative in this case.
+'The cat, _which_ you despise so much, is a very useful animal.' The
+relative here also is coördinating, and not restrictive. If it were
+intended to point out one individual cat specially despised by the
+person addressed, 'that' would convey the sense. 'A theory _which_ does
+not tend to the improvement of practice is utterly unworthy of regard.'
+The meaning is restrictive; 'a theory _that_ does not tend.' The
+following sentence is one of many from Goldsmith that give 'that'
+instead of 'which':--'Age, _that_ lessens the enjoyment of life,
+increases our desire of living.' Thackeray also was fond of this usage.
+But it is not very common.
+
+"'Their faith tended to make them improvident; but a wise instinct
+taught them that if there was one thing _which_ ought not to be left to
+fate, or to the precepts of a deceased prophet, it was the artillery'; a
+case where 'that' is the proper relative.
+
+"'All words, _which_ are signs of complex ideas, furnish matter of
+mistake.' This gives an erroneous impression, and should be 'all words
+_that_ are signs of complex ideas.'
+
+"'In all cases of prescription, the universal practice of judges is to
+direct juries by analogy to the Statute of Limitations, to decide
+against incorporeal rights _which_ have for many years been
+relinquished': say instead, 'incorporeal rights _that_ have for many
+years,' and the sense is clear.
+
+"It is necessary for the proper understanding of 'which' to advert to
+its peculiar function of referring to a whole clause as the antecedent:
+'William ran along the top of the wall, _which_ alarmed his mother very
+much.' The antecedent is obviously not the noun 'wall,' but the fact
+expressed by the entire clause--'William ran,' etc. 'He by no means
+wants sense, _which_ only serves to aggravate his former folly'; namely,
+(not 'sense,' but) the circumstance 'that he does not want sense.' 'He
+is neither over-exalted by prosperity, nor too much depressed by
+misfortune; _which_ you must allow marks a great mind.' 'We have done
+many things _which_ we ought not to have done,' might mean 'we ought not
+_to have done many things_'; that is, 'we ought to have done few
+things.' 'That' would give the exact sense intended: 'we have done many
+things _that_ we ought not to have done.' 'He began to look after his
+affairs himself, _which_ was the way to make them prosper.'
+
+"We must next allude to the cases where the relative is governed by a
+preposition. We can use a preposition before 'who' and 'which,' but when
+the relative is 'that,' the preposition must be thrown to the end of the
+clause. Owing to an imperfect appreciation of the genius of our
+language, offense was taken at this usage by some of our leading writers
+at the beginning of last century, and to this circumstance we must refer
+the disuse of 'that' as the relative of restriction.[38]
+
+"'It is curious that the only circumstance connected with Scott, and
+related by Lockhart, _of which_ I was a witness, is incorrectly stated
+in the "Life of Sir Walter."'--Leslie's 'Memoirs.' The relative should
+be restrictive: '_that_ I was a witness _of_.'
+
+"'There are many words _which_ are adjectives _which_ have nothing to do
+with the qualities of the nouns _to which_ they are put.'--Cobbett.
+Better: 'there are many words _that_ are adjectives _that_ have nothing
+to do with the qualities of the nouns (_that_) they are put _to_.'
+
+"'Other objects, _of which_ we have not occasion to speak so frequently,
+we do not designate by a name of their own.' This, if amended, would be:
+'other objects _that_ we have not occasion to speak _of_ so frequently,
+we do not,' etc.
+
+"'Sorrow for the dead is the only sorrow _from which_ we refuse to be
+divorced': 'the only sorrow (_that_) we refuse to be divorced _from_.'
+
+"'Why, there is not a single sentence in this play _that_ I do not know
+the meaning _of_.'--Addison.
+
+"'Originality is a thing we constantly clamor _for_, and constantly
+quarrel _with_.'--Carlyle.
+
+"'A spirit more amiable, but less vigorous, than Luther's would have
+shrunk back from the dangers _which_ he braved and surmounted': '_that_
+he braved'; 'the dangers _braved_ and _surmounted_ by him.'
+
+"'Nor is it at all improbable that the emigrants had been guilty of
+those faults _from which_ civilized men _who_ settle among an
+uncivilized people are rarely free.'--Macaulay. 'Nor is it at all
+improbable that the emigrants had been guilty of _the_ faults _that_
+(_such_ faults _as_) civilized men _that settle_ (_settling_, or
+_settled_) among an uncivilized people are rarely free _from_.'
+
+"'Prejudices are notions or opinions _which_ the mind entertains without
+knowing the grounds and reasons of them, and _which_ are assented to
+without examination.'--Berkeley. The 'which' in both cases should be
+'that,' but the relative may be entirely dispensed with by participial
+conversion: 'prejudices are notions or opinions _entertained_ by the
+mind without knowing the grounds and reasons of them, and _assented_ to
+without examination.'
+
+"The too frequent repetition of 'who' and 'which' may be avoided by
+resolving them into the conjunction and personal or other pronoun: 'In
+such circumstances, the utmost that Bosquet could be expected to do was
+to hold his ground, (_which_) _and this_ he did.'"--Bain's "Higher
+English Grammar."
+
+This word is sometimes vulgarly used for _so_; thus, "I was _that_
+nervous I forgot everything"; "I was _that_ frightened I could hardly
+stand."
+
+THE. Bungling writers sometimes write sheer nonsense, or say something
+very different from what they have in their minds, by the simple
+omission of the definite article; thus, "The indebtedness of the
+English tongue to the French, Latin and Greek is disclosed in almost
+every sentence framed." According to this, there is such a thing as a
+French, Latin and Greek tongue. Professor Townsend meant to say: "The
+indebtedness of the English tongue to the French, _the_ Latin, and _the_
+Greek," etc.
+
+THEN. The use of this word as an adjective is condemned in very emphatic
+terms by some of our grammarians, and yet this use of it has the
+sanction of such eminent writers as Addison, Johnson, Whately, and Sir
+J. Hawkins. Johnson says, "In his _then_ situation," which, if brevity
+be really the soul of wit, certainly has much more soul in it than "In
+the situation he then occupied." However, it is doubtful whether _then_,
+as an adjective, will ever again find favor with careful writers.
+
+THENCE. See WHENCE.
+
+THINK FOR. We not unfrequently hear a superfluous _for_ tacked to a
+sentence; thus, "You will find that he knows more about the affair than
+you think _for_."
+
+THOSE KIND. "_Those_ kind of apples _are_ best": read, "_That_ kind of
+apples _is_ best." It is truly remarkable that many persons who can
+justly lay claim to the possession of considerable culture use this
+barbarous combination. It would be just as correct to say, "Those flock
+of geese," or "Those drove of cattle," as to say, "Those _sort_ or
+_kind_ of people."
+
+THOSE WHO. This phrase, applied in a restrictive sense, is the modern
+substitute for the ancient idiom _they that_, an idiom in accordance
+with the true meaning of _that_.
+
+"'_They that_ told me the story said'; 'Blessed are _they that_ mourn';
+'and Simon and _they that_ were with him'; 'I love _them that_ love me,
+and _they that_ seek me early shall find me'; '_they that_ are whole
+have no need of a physician'; 'how sweet is the rest of _them that_
+labor!' 'I can not tell who to compare them to so fitly as to _them
+that_ pick pockets in the presence of the judge'; '_they that_ enter
+into the state of marriage cast a die of the greatest contingency' (J.
+Taylor).
+
+    "'_That_ man hath perfect blessedness
+    _Who_ walketh not astray,'
+
+if expressed according to the old idiom would be, '_the_ man
+hath--_that_ walketh.'
+
+"'That' and 'those,' as demonstrative adjectives, refer backward, and
+are not therefore well suited for the forward reference implied in
+making use of 'that which' and 'those who' as restrictive relatives. It
+is also very cumbrous to say '_that_ case _to which_ you allude' for
+'the case (_that_) you allude _to_.'
+
+"Take now the following: 'The Duke of Wellington is not one of _those
+who_ interfere with matters _over which_ he has no control': 'the Duke
+is not one of _them that_ interfere in matters _that_ they have no
+control _over_ (matters _that_ they can not control, _beyond their
+control_, _out of their province_).' If 'them that' sounds too
+antiquated, we may adopt as a convenient compromise, 'the Duke is not
+one of _those that_'; or, 'the Duke is not one to _interfere_ in matters
+out of his province'; 'the duke is not one _that interferes_ with _what_
+he has no control _over_.'"--Bain.
+
+THREADBARE QUOTATIONS. Among the things that are in bad taste in
+speaking and writing, the use of threadbare quotations and expressions
+is in the front rank. Some of these _usés et cassés_ old-timers are the
+following: "Their name is legion"; "hosts of friends"; "the upper ten";
+"Variety is the spice of life"; "Distance lends enchantment to the
+view"; "A thing of beauty is a joy for ever"; "the light fantastic toe";
+"own the soft impeachment"; "fair women and brave men"; "revelry by
+night"; "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
+
+TO. It is a well-established rule of grammar that _to_, the sign of the
+infinitive mood, should not be used for the infinitive itself: thus, "He
+has not done it, nor is he likely _to_." It should be, "nor is he likely
+_to do it_."
+
+We often find _to_, when the sign of the infinitive, separated by an
+adverb from the verb to which it belongs. Professor A. P. Peabody says
+that no standard English writer makes this mistake, and that, so far as
+he knows, it occurs frequently with but one respectable American writer.
+
+Very often _to_ is used instead of _at_; thus, "I have been _to_ the
+theatre, _to_ church, _to_ my uncle's, _to_ a concert," and so on. In
+all these cases, the preposition to use is clearly _at_, and not _to_.
+See, also, AND.
+
+TO THE FORE. An old idiomatic phrase, now freely used again.
+
+TONGUE. "Much _tongue_ and much judgment seldom go
+together."--L'Estrange. See LANGUAGE.
+
+TOWARD. Those who profess to know about such things say that etymology
+furnishes no pretext for the adding of _s_ to _ward_ in such words as
+_backward_, _forward_, _toward_, _upward_, _onward_, _downward_,
+_afterward_, _heavenward_, _earthward_, and the like.
+
+TRANSFERRED EPITHET. This is the shifting of a qualifying word from its
+proper subject to some allied subject. Examples:
+
+    "The little fields made green
+    By husbandry of many _thrifty years_."
+
+"He plods his _weary way_." "Hence to your _idle bed_!" By this figure
+the diction is rendered more terse and vigorous; it is much used in
+verse. For the sake of conciseness, it is used in prose in such phrases
+as the _lunatic asylum_, the _criminal court_, the _condemned cell_,
+the _blind asylum_, the _cholera hospital_, the _foundling asylum_, and
+the like.
+
+    "Still in harmonious intercourse they lived
+    The rural day, and talked the flowing heart."
+
+"There be some who, with everything to make them happy, plod their
+discontented and melancholy way through life, less grateful than the dog
+that licks the hand that feeds it."
+
+TRANSPIRE. This is one of the most frequently misused words in the
+language. Its primary meaning is to evaporate insensibly through the
+pores, but in this sense it is not used; in this sense we use its twin
+sister _per_spire. _Transpire_ is now properly used in the sense of to
+escape from secrecy, to become known, to leak out; and improperly used
+in the sense of to occur, to happen, to come to pass, and to elapse. The
+word is correctly used thus: "You will not let a word concerning the
+matter _transpire_"; "It _transpires_ [leaks out] that S. & B. control
+the enterprise"; "Soon after the funeral it _transpired_ [became known]
+that the dead woman was alive"; "It has _transpired_ [leaked out] that
+the movement originated with John Blank"; "No report of the proceedings
+was allowed to _transpire_"; "It has not yet _transpired_ who the
+candidate is to be." The word is incorrectly used thus: "The Mexican war
+_transpired_ in 1847"; "The drill will _transpire_ under shelter"; "The
+accident _transpired_ one day last week"; "Years will _transpire_ before
+it will be finished"; "More than a century _transpired_ before it was
+revisited by civilized man."
+
+TRIFLING MINUTIÆ. The meaning of _trifles_ and of _minutiæ_ is so nearly
+the same that no one probably ever uses the phrase _trifling minutiæ_
+except from thoughtlessness.
+
+TRUSTWORTHY. See RELIABLE.
+
+TRY. This word is often improperly used for _make_. We _make_
+experiments, not _try_ them, which is as incorrect as it would be to
+say, _try_ the _attempt_, or the _trial_.
+
+UGLY. In England, this word is restricted to meaning ill-favored; with
+us it is often used--and not without authority--in the sense of
+ill-tempered, vicious, unmanageable.
+
+UNBEKNOWN. This word is no longer used except by the unschooled.
+
+UNDERHANDED. This word, though found in the dictionaries, is a
+vulgarism, and as such is to be avoided. The proper word is _underhand_.
+An _underhand_, not an _underhanded_, proceeding.
+
+UNIVERSAL--ALL. "He is _universally_ esteemed by _all_ who know him." If
+he is _universally_ esteemed, he must be esteemed by _all_ who know him;
+and, if he is esteemed by _all_ who know him, he must be _universally_
+esteemed.
+
+UPWARD OF. This phrase is often used, if not improperly, at least
+inelegantly, for _more than_; thus, "I have been here for _upward of_ a
+year"; "For _upward of_ three quarters of a century she has," etc.,
+meaning, for _more than_ three quarters of a century.
+
+UTTER. This verb is often misused for _say_, _express_. To _utter_ means
+to _speak_, to _pronounce_; and its derivative _utterance_ means the
+act, manner, or power of uttering, vocal expression; as, "the utterance
+of articulate sounds." We _utter_ a cry; _express_ a thought or
+sentiment; _speak_ our mind; and, though prayers are _said_, they may be
+_uttered_ in a certain tone or manner. "Mr. Blank is right in all he
+_utters_": read, _says_. "The court _uttered_ a sentiment that all will
+applaud": read, _expressed_ a sentiment.
+
+The primary meaning of the adjective _utter_ is outer, on the outside;
+but it is no longer used in this sense. It is now used in the sense of
+complete, total, perfect, mere, entire; but he who uses it
+indiscriminately as a synonym of these words will frequently utter
+_utter_ nonsense--i. e., he will utter that which is without the pale of
+sense. For example, we can not say _utter_ concord, but we can say
+_utter_ discord--i. e., without the pale of concord.
+
+VALUABLE. The following sentence, which recently appeared in one of the
+more fastidious of our morning papers, is offered as an example of
+extreme slipshodness in the use of language: "Sea captains are among the
+most _valuable_ contributors to the Park aviary." What the writer
+probably meant to say is, "Sea captains are among those whose
+contributions to the Park aviary are the most valuable."
+
+VAST. This word is often met with in forcible-feeble diction, where it
+is used instead of _great_ or _large_ to qualify such words as number,
+majority, multitude, and the like. Big words and expletives should be
+used only where they are really needed; where they are not really
+needed, they go wide of the object aimed at. The sportsman that hunts
+small game with buck-shot comes home empty-handed.
+
+VERACITY. The loss would be a small one if we were to lose this word and
+its derivatives. Truth and its derivatives would supply all our needs.
+In the phrase so often heard, "A man of truth and veracity," _veracity_
+is entirely superfluous, it having precisely the same meaning as truth.
+The phrase, "A big, large man," is equally good diction.
+
+VERBIAGE. An unnecessary profusion of words is called _verbiage_:
+verbosity, wordiness.
+
+"I thought what I read of it _verbiage_."--Johnson.
+
+Sometimes a better name than verbiage for wordiness would be
+_emptiness_. Witness: "Clearness may be developed and cultivated in
+three ways, (_a_) By constantly practicing in heart and life the
+thoughts and ways of honesty and frankness." The first sentence
+evidently means, "Clearness may be _attained_ in three ways"; but what
+the second sentence means--if it means anything--is more than I can
+tell. Professor L. T. Townsend, "Art of Speech," vol. i, p. 130, adds:
+"This may be regarded as the surest path to greater transparency of
+style." The transparency of Dr. Townsend's style is peculiar. Also, p.
+144, we find: "The laws and rules[1] thus far laid down[2] furnish ample
+foundation for[3] the general statement that an easy and natural[4]
+expression, an exact verbal incarnation of one's thinking,[5] together
+with the power of using appropriate figures, and of making nice
+discriminations between approximate synonyms,[6] each being an important
+factor in correct style, are attained in two ways.[7] (1) Through
+moral[8] and mental discipline. (2) Through continuous and intimate[9]
+acquaintance with such authors as best exemplify those attainments."[10]
+
+1. Would not _laws_ cover the whole ground? 2. _En passant_ I would
+remark that Dr. Townsend did not make these laws, though he so
+intimates. 3. I suggest the word _justify_ in place of these four. 4.
+What is natural is easy; _easy_, therefore, is superfluous. 5. If this
+means anything, it does not mean more than the adjective _clear_ would
+express, if properly used in the sentence. 6. _Approximate_ synonyms!!
+Who ever heard of any antagonistic or even of dissimilar synonyms? 7.
+The transparency of this sentence is not unlike the transparency of
+corrugated glass. 8. What has morality to do with correctness? 9. An
+intimate acquaintance would suffice for most people. 10. Those
+attainments! What are they? Dr. Townsend's corrugated style makes it
+hard to tell.
+
+This paragraph is so badly conceived throughout that it is well-nigh
+impossible to make head, middle, or tail of it; still, if I am at all
+successful in guessing what Professor Townsend wanted to say in it,
+then--when shorn of its redundancy and high-flown emptiness--it will
+read somewhat like this: "The laws thus far presented justify the
+general statement that a clear and natural mode of expression--together
+with that art of using appropriate figures and that ability properly to
+discriminate between synonyms which are necessary to correctness--is
+attained in two ways. (1) By mental discipline. (2) By the study of our
+best authors."
+
+The following sentence is from a leading magazine: "If we begin a system
+of interference, _regulating men's gains_, bolstering here, _in order to
+strengthen this interest_, [and] repressing _elsewhere_ [there], in
+order to equalize wealth, we shall do _an_ [a] _immense_ deal of
+mischief, and without bringing about a more agreeable condition of
+things _than now_ [we] shall _simply_ discourage enterprise, repress
+industry, and check material growth _in all directions_." Read without
+the eighteen words in italics and with the four inclosed.
+
+"Nothing disgusts sooner than the empty pomp of language."
+
+VICE. See CRIME.
+
+VICINITY. This word is sometimes incorrectly used without the possessive
+pronoun; thus, "Washington and vicinity," instead of "Washington and
+_its_ vicinity." The primary meaning of _vicinity_ is nearness,
+proximity. In many of the cases in which vicinity is used,
+_neighborhood_ would be the better word, though _vicinity_ is perhaps
+preferable where it is a question of mere locality.
+
+VOCATION--AVOCATION. These words are frequently confounded. A man's
+_vocation_ is his profession, his calling, his business; and his
+_avocations_ are the things that occupy him incidentally. Mademoiselle
+Bernhardt's _vocation_ is acting; her _avocations_ are painting and
+sculpture. "The tracing of resemblances among the objects and events of
+the world is a constant _avocation_ of the human mind."
+
+VULGAR. By the many, this word is probably more frequently used
+improperly than properly. As a noun, it means the common people, the
+lower orders, the multitude, the many; as an adjective, it means coarse,
+low, unrefined, as "the _vulgar_ people." The sense in which it is
+misused is that of immodest, indecent. The wearing, for example, of a
+gown too short at the top may be _indecent_, but is not _vulgar_.
+
+WAS. "He said he had come to the conclusion that there _was_ no God."
+"The greatest of Byron's works _was_ his whole work taken
+together."--Matthew Arnold. What is true at all times should be
+expressed by using the verb in the present tense. The sentences above
+should read _is_, not _was_.
+
+WHARF. See DOCK.
+
+WHAT. "He would not believe but _what_ I did it": read, but _that_. "I
+do not doubt _but what_ I shall go to Boston to-morrow": read, doubt
+_that_. We say properly, "I have nothing _but what_ you see"; "You have
+brought everything _but what_ I wanted."
+
+WHENCE. As this adverb means--unaided--_from_ what place, source, or
+cause, it is, as Dr. Johnson styled it, "a vicious mode of speech" to
+say _from whence_, Milton to the contrary notwithstanding. Nor is there
+any more propriety in the phrase _from thence_, as _thence_
+means--unaided--from that place. "_Whence_ do you come?" not "_From
+whence_ do you come?" Likewise, "He went _hence_," not "_from hence_."
+
+WHETHER. This conjunction is often improperly repeated in a sentence;
+thus, "I have not decided whether I shall go to Boston or _whether I
+shall go_ to Philadelphia."
+
+WHICH. This pronoun as an _interrogative_ applies to _persons_ as well
+as to _things_; as a _relative_, it is now made to refer to _things
+only_.
+
+"_Which_ is employed in coördinate sentences, where _it_, or _they_, and
+a conjunction might answer the purpose; thus, 'At school I studied
+geometry, _which_ (and it) I found useful afterward.' Here the new
+clause is something independent added to the previous clause, and not
+limiting that clause in any way. So in the adjectival clause; as, 'He
+struck the poor dog, _which_ (and it, or although it) had never done him
+harm.' Such instances represent the most accurate meaning of _which_.
+_Who_ and _which_ might be termed the COÖRDINATING RELATIVES.
+
+"_Which_ is likewise used in _restrictive_ clauses that limit or explain
+the antecedent; as, 'The house _which_ he built still remains.' Here the
+clause introduced by _which_ specifies, or points out, the house that is
+the subject of the statement, namely, by the circumstance that a certain
+person built it. As remarked with regard to _who_, our most idiomatic
+writers prefer _that_ in this particular application, and would say,
+'The house _that_ he built still remains.'"
+
+"_Which_ sometimes has a special reference attaching to it, as the
+neuter relative: 'Cæsar crossed the Rubicon, _which_ was in effect a
+declaration of war.' The antecedent in this instance is not _Rubicon_,
+but the entire clause.
+
+"There is a peculiar usage where _which_ may _seem_ to be still
+regularly used in reference to persons, as in 'John is a soldier,
+_which_ I should like to be,' that is, 'And I should like _to be a
+soldier_.'" See THAT.
+
+WHO. There are few persons, even among the most cultivated, who do not
+make frequent mistakes in the use of this pronoun. They say, "_Who_ did
+you see?" "_Who_ did you meet?" "_Who_ did he marry?" "_Who_ did you
+hear?" "_Who_ did he know?" "_Who_ are you writing to?" "_Who_ are you
+looking at?" In all these sentences the interrogative pronoun is in the
+objective case, and should be used in the objective form, which is
+_whom_, and not _who_. To show that these sentences are not correct, and
+are not defensible by supposing any ellipsis whatsoever, we have only to
+put the questions in another form. Take the first one, and, instead of
+"Who did you see?" say, "Who saw you?" which, if correct, justifies us
+in saying, "Who knew he," which is the equivalent of "Who did he know?"
+But "Who saw you?" in this instance, is clearly not correct, since it
+says directly the opposite of what is intended.
+
+_Who_ was little used as a relative till about the sixteenth century.
+Bain says: "In modern use, more especially in books, _who_ is frequently
+employed to introduce a clause intended to restrict, define, limit, or
+explain a noun (or its equivalent); as, 'That is the man _who_ spoke to
+us yesterday.'"
+
+"Here the clause introduced by _who_ is necessary to define or explain
+the antecedent _the man_; without it, we do not know who _the man_ is.
+Such relative clauses are typical _adjective_ clauses--i. e., they have
+the same effect as adjectives in limiting nouns. This may be called the
+RESTRICTIVE use of the relative.
+
+"Now it will be found that the practice of our most idiomatic writers
+and speakers is to prefer _that_ to _who_ in this application.
+
+"_Who_ is properly used in such coördinate sentences as, 'I met the
+watchman, _who_ told me there had been a fire.' Here the two clauses are
+distinct and independent; in such a case, _and he_ might be substituted
+for _who_.
+
+"Another form of the same use is when the second clause is of the kind
+termed adverbial, where we may resolve _who_ into a personal or
+demonstrative pronoun and conjunction. 'Why should we consult Charles,
+_who_ (_for he_, _seeing that he_) knows nothing of the matter?'
+
+"_Who_ may be regarded as a modern objective form, side by side with
+_whom_. For many good writers and speakers say '_who_ are you talking
+of?' '_who_ does the garden belong to?' '_who_ is this for?' '_who_
+from?'" etc.
+
+If this be true--if _who may_ be regarded as a modern objective form,
+side by side with _whom_--then, of course, such expressions as "_Who_
+did you see?" "_Who_ did you meet?" "_Who_ did he marry?" "_Who_ were
+you with?" "_Who_ will you give it to?" and the like, are correct. That
+they are used colloquially by well-nigh everybody, no one will dispute;
+but that they are _correct_, few grammarians will concede. See THAT.
+
+WHOLE. This word is sometimes most improperly used for _all_; thus, "The
+_whole_ Germans seem to be saturated with the belief that they are
+really the greatest people on earth, and that they would be universally
+recognized as being the greatest, if they were not so exceeding modest."
+"The whole Russians are inspired with the belief that their mission is
+to conquer the world."--Alison.
+
+WHOLESOME. See HEALTHY.
+
+WHOSE. Mr. George Washington Moon discountenances the use of _whose_ as
+the possessive of _which_. He says, "The best writers, when speaking of
+inanimate objects, use _of which_ instead of _whose_." The correctness
+of this statement is doubtful. The truth is, I think, that good writers
+use that form for the possessive case of _which_ that in their judgment
+is, in each particular case, the more euphonious, giving the preference,
+perhaps, to _of which_. On this subject Dr. Campbell says: "The
+possessive of _who_ is properly _whose_. The pronoun _which_,
+originally indeclinable, had no possessive. This was supplied, in the
+common periphrastic manner, by the help of the preposition and the
+article. But, as this could not fail to enfeeble the expression, when so
+much time was given to mere conjunctives, all our best authors, both in
+prose and verse, have now come regularly to adopt, in such cases, the
+possessive of _who_, and thus have substituted one syllable in the room
+of three, as in the example following: 'Philosophy, _whose_ end is to
+instruct us in the knowledge of nature,' for 'Philosophy, _the_ end _of
+which_ is to instruct us.' Some grammarians remonstrate; but it ought to
+be remembered that use, well established, must give law to grammar, and
+not grammar to use."
+
+Professor Bain says: "_Whose_, although the possessive of _who_, and
+practically of _which_, is yet frequently employed for the purpose of
+restriction: 'We are the more likely to guard watchfully against those
+faults _whose_ deformity we have seen fully displayed in others.' This
+is better than 'the deformity _of which_ we have seen.' 'Propositions of
+_whose_ truth we have no certain knowledge.'--Locke." Dr. Fitzedward
+Hall says that the use of _whose_ for _of which_, where the antecedent
+is not only irrational but inanimate, has had the support of high
+authority for several hundred years.
+
+WIDOW WOMAN. Since widows are always women, why say a widow _woman_? It
+would be perfectly correct to say a _widowed_ woman.
+
+WIDOWHOOD. There is good authority for using this word in speaking of
+men as well as of women.
+
+WITHOUT. This word is often improperly used instead of _unless_; as,
+"You will never live to my age _without_ you keep yourself in breath and
+exercise"; "I shall not go _without_ my father consents": properly,
+_unless_ my father consents, or, _without_ my father's consent.
+
+WORST. We should say _at the worst_, not _at worst_.
+
+WOVE. The past participle of the verb _to weave_ is _woven_. "Where was
+this cloth _woven_?" not _wove_.
+
+YOU ARE MISTAKEN. See MISTAKEN.
+
+YOU WAS. Good usage does, and it is to be hoped always will, consider
+_you was_ a gross vulgarism, certain grammarians to the contrary
+notwithstanding. _You_ is the form of the pronoun in the second person
+plural, and must, if we would speak correctly, be used with the
+corresponding form of the verb. The argument that we use _you_ in the
+singular number is so nonsensical that it does not merit a moment's
+consideration. It is a custom we have--and have in common with other
+peoples--to speak to one another in the second person plural, and that
+is all there is of it. The Germans speak to one another in the _third_
+person plural. The exact equivalent in German of our _How are you?_ is,
+_How are they?_ Those who would say _you was_ should be consistent, and
+in like manner say _you has_ and _you does_.
+
+YOURS, &C. The ignorant and obtuse not unfrequently profess themselves
+at the bottom of their letters "Yours, &c." And so forth! forth what?
+Few vulgarisms are equally offensive, and none could be more so. In
+printing correspondence, the newspapers often content themselves with
+this short-hand way of intimating that the writer's name was preceded by
+some one of the familiar forms of ending letters; this an occasional
+dunderhead seems to think is sufficient authority for writing himself,
+_Yours, &c._
+
+
+THE END.
+
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] If this is true in England, it is not true in America. Nowhere in
+the United States is such "questionable grammar" as this frequently
+heard in cultivated circles.
+
+[2] "It may be confidently affirmed that with good speakers, in the case
+of negation, _not me_ is the usual practice."--Bain. This, I confidently
+affirm, is not true in America.--A. A.
+
+[3] Should be, _a text-book for his course_, and not, _for his course a
+text-book_.
+
+[4] Mr. Gould criticises the Dean's _diction_, not his _style_.
+
+[5] Better, "to revise it."
+
+[6] "Is _to put them_ in tabular form."
+
+[7] Bullions' "Grammar" was published in 1867.
+
+[8] "L. W. K., CLK., LL. D., EX. SCH., T. C., D. Of this reverend
+gentleman's personality I know nothing. He does not say exactly what he
+means; but what he means is, yet, unmistakable. The extract given above
+is from 'Public Opinion,' January 20, 1866."
+
+[9] "The analysis, taken for granted in this quotation, of 'are being
+thrown up' into 'are being' and 'thrown up' will be dealt with in the
+sequel, and shown to be untenable."
+
+[10] "Vol. xlv, p. 504 (1837)."
+
+[11] "'The Life and Correspondence of the late Robert Southey,' vol. i,
+p. 249."
+
+[12] "Vol. i, p. 338. 'A student who _is being crammed_'; 'that verb is
+eternally _being declined_.'--'The Doctor,' pp. 38 and 40 (mono-tome
+ed.)."
+
+[13] "In 'Put Yourself in his Place,' chapter x, he writes: 'She basked
+in the present delight, and looked as if she _was being taken_ to heaven
+by an angel.'"
+
+[14] "'Words,' etc., p. 340."
+
+[15] "Thomas Fuller writes: 'At his arrival, the last stake of the
+Christians was _on losing_.'--'The Historie of the Holy Warre,' p. 218
+(ed. 1647)."
+
+[16] "I express myself in this manner because I distinguish between _be_
+and _exist_."
+
+[17] "Samuel Richardson writes: 'Jenny, who attends me here, has more
+than once hinted to me that Miss Jervis loves to sit up late, either
+reading or _being read to_ by Anne, who, though she reads well, is not
+fond of the task.'--'Sir Charles Grandison,' vol. iii, p. 46 (ed. 1754).
+
+"The transition is very slight by which we pass from 'sits being read
+to' to 'is being read to.'"
+
+[18] "I am here indebted to the last edition of Dr. Worcester's
+'Dictionary,' preface, p. xxxix."
+
+[19] "'Words and their Uses,' p. 353."
+
+[20] "'_It is being_ is simply equal to _it is_. And, in the supposed
+corresponding Latin phrases, _ens factus est_, _ens ædificatus est_ (the
+obsoleteness of _ens_ as a participle being granted), the monstrosity is
+not in the use of _ens_ with _factus_, but in that of _ens_ with _est_.
+The absurdity is, in Latin, just what it is in English, the use of _is_
+with _being_, the making of the verb _to be_ a complement to
+itself.'--_Ibid._, pp. 354, 355.
+
+"Apparently, Mr. White recognizes no more difference between
+_supplement_ and _complement_ than he recognizes between _be_ and
+_exist_. See the extract I have made above, from p. 353."
+
+[21] "'But those things which, _being not now doing_, or having not yet
+been done, have a natural aptitude to exist hereafter, may be properly
+said to appertain to the future.'--Harris's 'Hermes,' book I, chap. viii
+(p. 155, foot-note, ed. 1771). For Harris's _being not now doing_, which
+is to translate μὴ γινόμενα, the modern school, if they pursued
+uniformity with more of fidelity than of taste, would have to put _being
+not now being done_. There is not much to choose between the two."
+
+[22] "'Words and their Uses,' p. 343."
+
+[23] The possessive construction here is, in my judgment, not
+imperatively demanded. There is certainly no lack of authority for
+putting the three substantives in the accusative. The possessive
+construction seems to me, however, to be preferable.
+
+[24] "The use of the plural for the singular was established as early
+the beginning of the fourteenth century."--Morris, p. 118, § 153.
+
+[25] "Some writers omit the comma in cases where the conjunction is
+used. But, as the conjunction is generally employed in such cases for
+emphasis, commas ought to be used; although, where the words are very
+closely connected, or where they constitute a clause in the midst of a
+long sentence, they may be omitted."--Bigelow's "Handbook of
+Punctuation."
+
+[26] "This usage violates one of the fundamental principles of
+punctuation; it indicates, very improperly, that the noun _man_ is more
+closely connected with _learned_ than with the other adjectives. Analogy
+and perspicuity require a comma after _learned_."--Quackenbos.
+
+[27] Many writers would omit the last two commas in this sentence.
+
+[28] The commas before and after _particularly_ are hardly necessary.
+
+[29] The only exception to this rule is the occasional use of the colon
+to separate two short sentences that are closely connected.
+
+[30] "Dr. Angus on the 'English Tongue,' art. 527."
+
+[31] "In the following passages, the indicative mood would be more
+suitable than the subjunctive: 'If thou _be_ the Son of God, command
+that these stones be made bread'; 'if thou _be_ the Son of God, come
+down from the cross.' For, although the address was not sincere on the
+part of the speakers, they really meant to make the supposition or to
+grant that he was the Son of God; 'seeing that thou _art_ the Son of
+God.' Likewise in the following: 'Now if Christ _be_ preached, that He
+rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection
+from the dead?' The meaning is, 'Seeing now that Christ _is_ preached.'
+In the continuation, the conditional clauses are of a different
+character, and 'be' is appropriate: 'But if there _be_ no resurrection
+from the dead, then is Christ not risen. And if Christ _be_ not risen,
+then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.' Again, 'If
+thou _bring_ thy gift to the altar, and there remember_est_,' etc.
+Consistency and correctness require 'remember.'"--Harrison on the
+"English Language," p. 287.
+
+[32] "So, in German, _wäre_ for _würde sein_. 'Hätt' ich Schwingen,
+hätt' ich Flügel, nach den Hügeln _zög_' ich hin,' for '_würde_ ich
+_ziehen_.'"
+
+[33] "So, in German, _hätte_ occurs for _würde haben_. 'Wäre er da
+gewesen, so _hätten_ wir ihn gesehen,' for 'so _würden_ wir ihn gesehen
+_haben_.' _Hätten_ is still conditional, not indicative. In Latin, the
+pluperfect _indicative_ is occasionally used; which is explained as a
+more vivid form."
+
+[34] "In _principal_ clauses the inflection of the second person is
+always retained: 'thou had_st_,' 'thou would_st_, should_st_,' etc. In
+the example, the subordinate clause, although subjunctive, shows,
+'had_st_.' And this usage is exceedingly common."
+
+[35] To those who are not quite clear as to what transcendentalism is,
+the following lucid definition will be welcome: "It is the spiritual
+cognoscence of psychological irrefragability connected with concutient
+ademption of incolumnient spirituality and etherealized contention of
+subsultory concretion." Translated by a New York lawyer, it stands thus:
+"Transcendentalism is two holes in a sand-bank: a storm washes away the
+sand-bank without disturbing the holes."
+
+[36] "Cromwell--_than he_ no man was more skilled in artifice; or,
+Cromwell--no man was more skilled in artifice _than he_ (was)."
+
+[37] "No devil sat higher than _he_ sat, except Satan."
+
+[38] "Speaking of Dryden, Hallam says, 'His "Essay on Dramatic Poesy,"
+published in 1668, was reprinted sixteen years afterward, and it is
+curious to observe the changes which Dryden made in the expression.
+Malone has carefully noted all these; they show both the care the author
+took with his own style, and the change which was gradually working in
+the English language. The Anglicism of terminating the sentence with a
+preposition is rejected. Thus, "I can not think so contemptibly of the
+age I live in," is exchanged for "the age in which I live." "A deeper
+expression of belief than all the actor can persuade us to," is altered,
+"can insinuate into us." And, though the old form continued in use long
+after the time of Dryden, it has of late years been reckoned inelegant,
+and proscribed in all cases, perhaps with an unnecessary fastidiousness,
+to which I have not uniformly deferred, since our language is of
+Teutonic structure, and the rules of Latin and French grammar are not
+always to bind us.'
+
+"The following examples, taken from Massinger's 'Grand Duke of
+Florence,' will show what was the usage of the Elizabethan writers:--
+
+    "'For I must use the freedom I _was born with_.'
+
+    "'In that dumb rhetoric _which_ you _make use of_.'
+
+                          "'---- if I had been heir
+    Of all the globes and sceptres mankind _bows to_.'
+
+                    "'---- the name of friend
+    _Which_ you are pleased to _grace me with_.'
+
+          "'---- wilfully ignorant in my opinion
+    Of what it did _invite him to_.'
+
+    "'I look to her as on a princess
+    _I dare not be ambitious of_.'
+
+                      "'---- a duty
+    _That I was born with_.'"
+
+
+
+
+                            THE ORTHOËPIST:
+
+
+                         _A PRONOUNCING MANUAL_,
+
+              CONTAINING ABOUT THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED
+                WORDS, INCLUDING A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF
+              THE NAMES OF FOREIGN AUTHORS, ARTISTS, ETC.,
+                     THAT ARE OFTEN MISPRONOUNCED.
+
+                            By ALFRED AYRES.
+
+̤
+SELECTIONS FROM THE WORK.
+
+ ạb-dō´mẹn, _not_ ăb´dọ-mĕn.
+
+ ạc-crṳe´, _not_ -crū´.
+   The orthoëpists agree that _u_, preceded by _r_ in the same syllable,
+   generally becomes simply _oo_, as in _rude_, _rumor_, _rural_, _rule_,
+   _ruby_.
+
+ ạl-lŏp´ạ-thy; ạl-lŏp´ạ-thĭst.
+
+ Ăr´ạ-bĭc, _not_ Ạ-rā´bĭc.
+
+ Asia--ā´shẹ-ȧ, _not_ ā´zhȧ.
+
+ ay, _or_ aye (meaning _yes_)--ī.
+
+ aye (meaning _always_)--ā.
+
+ Bĭs´märck, _not_ bĭz´-.
+   At the end of a syllable, _s_, in German, has invariably its sharp,
+   hissing sound.
+
+ Cairo--in Egypt, kī´rō; in the United States, kā´rō.
+
+ Courbet--ko̤r´bā´.
+
+ dĕc´ạde, _not_ dẹ-kād´.
+
+ dẹ-cō´roŭs.
+   The authority is small, and is becoming less, for saying
+   _dĕc´o-roŭs_, which is really as incorrect as it would be to say
+   _sŏn´o-roŭs_.
+
+ dĕf´ị-cĭt, _not_ dẹ-fĭç´it.
+
+ dịs̱-dāin´, _not_ dis-.
+
+ dịs̱-hŏn´or, _not_ dis-.
+
+ ĕc-ọ-nŏm´ị-cạl, _or_ ē-cọ-nŏm´ị-cạl.
+   The first is the marking of a large majority of the orthoëpists.
+
+ ẹ-nēr´vāte.
+   The only authority for saying _ĕn´er-vāte_ is popular usage; all
+   the orthoëpists say _e-nẽr´vāte_.
+
+ ĕp´ọc̵h, _not_ ē´pŏc̵h.
+   The latter is a Websterian pronunciation, which is not even permitted
+   in the late editions.
+
+ fĭn-ạn-ciēr´.
+   This much-used word is rarely pronounced correctly.
+
+ Heī´nẹ, _not_ hine.
+   Final _e_ in German is never silent.
+
+ honest--ŏn´est, _not_ -ĭst, _nor_ -ŭst.
+   "Hon_est_, hon_est_ Iago," is preferable to "hon_ust_, hon_ust_ Iago,"
+   some of our accidental Othellos to the contrary notwithstanding.
+
+ ĭs̱´ọ-lāte, _or_ ĭs´ọ-late, _not_ ī´sọ-lāt.
+   The first marking is Walker's, Worcester's, and Smart's; the second,
+   Webster's.
+
+
+                  ONE VOL., 18MO, CLOTH. PRICE, $1.00.
+
+          New York: D. APPLETON & CO., 1, 3, & 5 Bond Street.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Verbalist, by 
+Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+***** This file should be named 22457-0.txt or 22457-0.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/2/2/4/5/22457/
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/22457-h/22457-h.htm b/22457-h/22457-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e9594e4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-h/22457-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,8920 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
+  <head>
+    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" />
+    <title>
+      The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Verbalist, by Alfred Ayres
+    </title>
+    <style type="text/css">
+/*<![CDATA[  XML blockout */
+<!--
+    p {  margin-top: .75em;
+         text-align: justify;
+         margin-bottom: .75em;
+         }
+    h2,h3 {
+         text-align: center;
+         clear: both;
+         }
+    h1 {
+         text-align: center;
+         clear: both;
+         margin-bottom: 2em;
+         }
+
+    hr { width: 33%;
+	 margin-top: 2em;
+	 margin-bottom: 2em;
+         margin-left: auto;
+         margin-right: auto;
+         clear: both;
+       }
+
+    .thin { width: 15%;
+	 margin-top: .5em;
+	 margin-bottom: .5em;
+         margin-left: auto;
+         margin-right: auto;
+         clear: both;
+       }
+
+    body{margin-left: 10%;
+         margin-right: 10%;
+        }
+
+    .pagenum  {
+                position: absolute;
+                left: 92%;
+                font-size: smaller;
+                text-align: right;
+              }
+
+    .blockquot{margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 10%;}
+
+    .center   {text-align: center;}
+    .smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
+
+    .figcenter   {margin: auto; text-align: center;}
+
+    .footnotes        {border: dashed 1px; margin-top: 2em;}
+    .footnote         {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;}
+    .footnote .label  {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;}
+    .fnanchor         {vertical-align: 0.25em; font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;}
+
+    .poem             {margin-left:10%; margin-right:10%; text-align: left;}
+    .poem br          {display: none;}
+    .poem .stanza     {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;}
+    .poem span.i0     {display: block; margin-left: 0em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i2     {display: block; margin-left: 2em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i4     {display: block; margin-left: 4em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+
+    .trans1     {border: solid 1px;
+                 margin: 3em 15%; padding: 1em; text-align: left;}
+
+    .trnhd      {text-align: center; font-size: larger; font-weight: bold;}
+
+    img {border: none}
+
+    .czerop1      {text-align: center; font-weight: bold;
+                   margin-bottom: .5em; margin-top: .5em;}
+    .czerop2      {text-align: center; font-weight: bold; font-size: 0.9em;
+                   margin-bottom: .5em; margin-top: .5em;}
+    .czerop3      {text-align: center; font-weight: bold; margin-top: 3em;}
+
+    a:link    {text-decoration:none; }
+    a:visited {text-decoration:none; }
+
+    ul        {list-style-type: none}
+    li        {font-size: larger; margin-bottom: .5em; margin-top: .5em;}
+
+    .author  {text-align: left; margin-left: 65%;}
+
+    .poem span.i10     {display: block; margin-left: 10em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i12     {display: block; margin-left: 12em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i5     {display: block; margin-left: 5em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i6     {display: block; margin-left: 6em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i7     {display: block; margin-left: 7em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i8     {display: block; margin-left: 8em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i9     {display: block; margin-left: 9em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+
+    // -->
+    /* XML end  ]]>*/
+    </style>
+  </head>
+<body>
+
+
+<pre>
+
+Project Gutenberg's The Verbalist, by Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: 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.
+
+Author: Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+Release Date: August 30, 2007 [EBook #22457]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<h1><small><small>THE<br /><br /></small></small>
+<big>VERBALIST:</big></h1>
+
+
+<p class="czerop1"><i><big><big>A MANUAL</big></big></i></p>
+
+<p class="czerop1"><small><small>DEVOTED</small></small></p>
+
+<p class="czerop1">TO BRIEF DISCUSSIONS OF THE RIGHT AND THE<br />
+WRONG USE OF WORDS</p>
+
+<p class="czerop1"><small><small>AND</small></small></p>
+
+<p class="czerop2">TO SOME OTHER MATTERS OF INTEREST TO THOSE WHO<br />
+WOULD SPEAK AND WRITE WITH PROPRIETY.</p>
+
+
+<p class="czerop3"><small>BY</small></p>
+
+<h2>ALFRED AYRES.</h2>
+
+<p>&nbsp;</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p>We remain shackled by timidity till we have learned to speak with
+propriety.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Johnson</span>.</p>
+
+<p>As a man is known by his company, so a man's company may be
+known by his manner of expressing himself.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Swift</span>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 100px;">
+<img src="images/001.png" width="100" height="98" alt="" title="" />
+</div>
+
+<p class="center">&nbsp;<br />NEW YORK:<br />
+D. APPLETON AND COMPANY,<br />
+<small>1, 3, AND 5 BOND STREET.</small><br />
+1887.<br /></p>
+
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+
+<p class="center"><small>COPYRIGHT BY</small><br />
+D. APPLETON AND COMPANY,<br />
+<small>1881</small></p>
+
+<div class="trans1"><p class="trnhd">Transcriber's Note</p>
+
+<p>Minor typographical errors have been corrected without note. Archaic spellings have been retained as printed.</p>
+
+<p>All Greek words have mouse-hover transliterations, <span title="genomenos">&#947;&#949;&#957;&#8057;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962;</span>, and appear as printed in the original publication.</p>
+</div>
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" /><p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</a></span></p>
+<h2><a name="PREFATORY_NOTE" id="PREFATORY_NOTE"></a>PREFATORY NOTE.</h2>
+
+
+<p>The title-page sufficiently sets forth the end
+this little book is intended to serve.</p>
+
+<p>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."</p>
+
+<p>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,"<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</a></span>
+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.</p>
+
+<p>Suggestions and criticisms are solicited, with
+the view of profiting by them in future editions.</p>
+
+<p>If "The Verbalist" receive as kindly a welcome
+as its companion volume, "The Ortho&euml;pist,"
+has received, I shall be content.</p>
+
+<p class="author">A. A.</p>
+<p><span class="smcap">New York</span>, <i>October</i>, 1881.</p>
+
+
+
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" /><p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</a></span></p>
+<div class="blockquot"><p>Eschew fine words as you would rouge.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Hare.</span></p>
+
+<p>Cant is properly a double-distilled lie; the second
+power of a lie.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Carlyle.</span></p>
+
+<p>If a gentleman be to study any language, it ought to be
+that of his own country.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Locke.</span></p>
+
+<p>In language the unknown is generally taken for the
+magnificent.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Richard Grant White.</span></p>
+
+<p>He who has a superlative for everything, wants a measure
+for the great or small.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Lavater.</span></p>
+
+<p>Inaccurate writing is generally the expression of inaccurate
+thinking.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Richard Grant White</span>.</p>
+
+<p>To acquire a few tongues is the labor of a few years; but
+to be eloquent in one is the labor of a life.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Anonymous</span>.</p>
+
+<p>Words and thoughts are so inseparably connected that
+an artist in words is necessarily an artist in thoughts.-<span class="smcap">Wilson
+Flagg</span>.</p>
+
+<p>It is an invariable maxim that words which add nothing
+to the sense or to the clearness must diminish the force of
+the expression.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Campbell</span>.</p>
+
+<p>Propriety of thought and propriety of diction are commonly
+found together. Obscurity of expression generally
+springs from confusion of ideas.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Macaulay.</span></p>
+
+<p>He who writes badly thinks badly. Confusedness in
+words can proceed from nothing but confusedness in the
+thoughts which give rise to them.&mdash;<span class="smcap">Cobbett</span>.</p></div>
+
+
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" /><p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</a></span></p>
+<h2><a name="THE_VERBALIST" id="THE_VERBALIST"></a>THE VERBALIST.</h2>
+
+
+<p><b>A&mdash;An.</b> 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 <i>an</i> before a word beginning with an aspirated
+<i>h</i>, when the accented syllable of the word is the
+second. For myself, so long as I continue to aspirate the
+<i>h's</i> in such words as <i>heroic</i>, <i>harangue</i>, and <i>historical</i>, I shall
+continue to use <i>a</i> before them; and when I adopt the Cockney
+mode of pronouncing such words, then I shall use <i>an</i>
+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 <i>an</i> high mountain and eminent," as it
+is to say <i>an</i> harangue, <i>an</i> heroic, or <i>an</i> historical. <i>An</i> 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 <i>h's</i> 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 <i>a</i> and not <i>an</i> before such <i>h's</i> until
+we decide to ape the Cockney mode of pronouncing
+them.</p>
+
+<p>Errors are not unfrequently made by omitting to repeat
+the article in a sentence. It should always be repeated<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</a></span>
+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 <i>a</i> white
+horse." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#The">The</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Ability" id="Ability"></a>Ability&mdash;Capacity.</b> The distinctions between these
+two words are not always observed by those who use them.
+"<i>Capacity</i> is the power of receiving and retaining knowledge
+with facility; <i>ability</i> 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."&mdash;Graham's
+"English Synonymes."</p>
+
+<p><b>Abortive.</b> An outlandish use of this word may be occasionally
+met with, especially in the newspapers. "A
+lad was yesterday caught in the act of <i>abortively</i> 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 <i>abortion</i> used in the sense of failure, but
+never by those that study to express themselves in chaste
+English.</p>
+
+<p><b>Above.</b> There is little authority for using this word as
+an adjective. Instead of, "the <i>above</i> statement," say, "the
+<i>foregoing</i> statement." <i>Above</i> is also used very inelegantly
+for <i>more than</i>; as, "above a mile," "above a thousand";
+also, for <i>beyond</i>; as, "above his strength."</p>
+
+<p><b>Accident.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Casualty">Casualty</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Accord.</b> "He [the Secretary of the Treasury] was
+shown through the building, and the information he desired
+was <i>accorded</i> him."&mdash;Reporters' English.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</a></span></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"The heroes prayed, and Pallas from the skies<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Accords</i> their vow."&mdash;Pope.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The goddess of wisdom, when she granted the prayers
+of her worshipers, may be said to have <i>accorded</i>; not so,
+however, when the clerks of our Sub-Treasury answer the
+inquiries of their chief.</p>
+
+<p><b>Accuse.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Blame_it_on">Blame it on</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Acquaintance.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Friend">Friend</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Ad.</b> This abbreviation for the word <i>advertisement</i> is
+very justly considered a gross vulgarism. It is doubtful
+whether it is permissible under any circumstances.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Adapt" id="Adapt"></a>Adapt&mdash;Dramatize.</b> In speaking and in writing of
+stage matters, these words are often misused. To <i>adapt</i> 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 <i>adapted</i>;
+i. e., altered to suit the taste of the public before which the
+translation is to be represented. To <i>dramatize</i> 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 <i>adaptation</i>;
+in the second, a <i>dramatization</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Adjectives" id="Adjectives"></a>Adjectives.</b> "Very often adjectives stand where adverbs
+might be expected; as, 'drink <i>deep</i>,' 'this looks
+<i>strange</i>,' 'standing <i>erect</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"We have also examples of one adjective qualifying another
+adjective; as, '<i>wide</i> open,' '<i>red</i> hot,' 'the <i>pale</i> blue
+sky.' Sometimes the corresponding adverb is used, but
+with a different meaning; as, 'I found the way <i>easy</i>&mdash;<i>easily</i>';
+'it appears <i>clear</i>&mdash;<i>clearly</i>.' Although there is a propriety in
+the employment of the adjective in certain instances, yet
+such forms as '<i>indifferent</i> well,' '<i>extreme</i> bad,' are grammatical
+errors. 'He was interrogated <i>relative</i> to that circumstance,'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</a></span>
+should be <i>relatively</i>, or <i>in relation to</i>. It is not
+unusual to say, 'I would have done it <i>independent</i> of that
+circumstance,' but <i>independently</i> is the proper construction.</p>
+
+<p>"The employment of adjectives for adverbs is accounted
+for by the following considerations:</p>
+
+<p>"(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.</p>
+
+<p>"(2.) In the oldest English the adverb was regularly
+formed from the adjective by adding 'e,' as 'soft, soft<i>e</i>,' and
+the dropping of the 'e' left the adverb in the adjective
+form; thus, '<i>cl&aelig;ne</i>,' adverb, became 'clean,' and appears in
+the phrase '<i>clean</i> gone'; '<i>f&aelig;ste</i>, fast,' 'to stick <i>fast</i>.' By a
+false analogy, many adjectives that never formed adverbs
+in <i>-e</i> were freely used as adverbs in the age of Elizabeth:
+'Thou didst it <i>excellent</i>,' '<i>equal</i> (for <i>equally</i>) good,' '<i>excellent</i>
+well.' This gives precedent for such errors as those mentioned
+above.</p>
+
+<p>"(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 <i>clear</i>,'
+'clear' is part of the predicate of 'matter.' 'They arrived
+<i>safe</i>': 'safe' does not qualify 'arrived,' but goes with it to
+complete the predicate. So, 'he sat <i>silent</i>,' 'he stood <i>firm</i>.'
+'It comes <i>beautiful</i>' and 'it comes <i>beautifully</i>' 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 <i>gleaming</i> through the trees': 'gleaming' is a
+shortened predicate of 'church'; and the full form would
+be, 'the church stood <i>and gleamed</i>.' The participle retains<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</a></span>
+its force as such, while acting the part of a co&ouml;rdinating
+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. '<i>Passing</i> strange' is elliptical: 'passing (surpassing)
+<i>what is</i> strange.'"&mdash;Bain.</p>
+
+<p>"The comparative adjectives <i>wiser</i>, <i>better</i>, <i>larger</i>, etc.,
+and the contrasting adjectives <i>different</i>, <i>other</i>, etc., are often
+so placed as to render the construction of the sentence awkward;
+as, 'That is a much <i>better</i> statement of the case <i>than</i>
+yours,' instead of, 'That statement of the case is much <i>better
+than</i> yours'; 'Yours is a <i>larger</i> plot of ground <i>than</i>
+John's,' instead of, 'Your plot of ground is <i>larger than</i>
+John's'; 'This is a <i>different</i> course of proceeding <i>from</i>
+what I expected,' instead of, 'This course of proceeding is
+<i>different from</i> what I expected'; 'I could take no <i>other</i>
+method of silencing him <i>than</i> the one I took,' instead of,
+'I could take no method of silencing him <i>other than</i> the
+one I took.'"&mdash;Gould's "Good English," p. 69.</p>
+
+<p><b>Administer.</b> "Carson died from blows <i>administered</i>
+by policeman Johnson."&mdash;"New York Times." If policeman
+Johnson was as barbarous as is this use of the verb <i>to
+administer</i>, it is to be hoped that he was hanged. Governments,
+oaths, medicine, affairs&mdash;such as the affairs of the
+state&mdash;are <i>administered</i>, but not blows: <i>they</i> are <i>dealt</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Adopt.</b> This word is often used instead of <i>to decide
+upon</i>, and of <i>to take</i>; thus, "The measures <i>adopted</i> [by
+Parliament], as the result of this inquiry, will be productive
+of good." Better, "The measures <i>decided upon</i>," etc. Instead
+of, "What course shall you <i>adopt</i> to get your pay?"
+say, "What course shall you <i>take</i>," etc. <i>Adopt</i> is properly
+used in a sentence like this: "The course (or measures)<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</a></span>
+proposed by Mr. Blank was <i>adopted</i> by the committee."
+That is, what was Blank's was <i>adopted</i> by the committee&mdash;a
+correct use of the word, as <i>to adopt</i>, means, to assume as
+one's own.</p>
+
+<p><i>Adopt</i> 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 <i>relieved</i> of the care of a child, not that he
+wishes to <i>assume</i> the care of one.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Aggravate" id="Aggravate"></a>Aggravate.</b> This word is often used when the speaker
+means to provoke, irritate, or anger. Thus, "It <i>aggravates</i>
+[provokes] me to be continually found fault with"; "He is
+easily <i>aggravated</i> [irritated]." To <i>aggravate</i> means to make
+worse, to heighten. We therefore very properly speak of
+<i>aggravating</i> circumstances. To say of a person that he is
+<i>aggravated</i> is as incorrect as to say that he is <i>palliated</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Agriculturist.</b> This word is to be preferred to <i>agriculturalist</i>.
+See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Conversationist">Conversationist</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Alike.</b> This word is often most bunglingly coupled
+with <i>both</i>. 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.</p>
+
+<p><b>All.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Universal">Universal</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>All over.</b> "The disease spread <i>all over</i> the country."
+It is more logical and more emphatic to say, "The disease
+spread <i>over all</i> the country."</p>
+
+<p><b>Allegory.</b> An elaborated metaphor is called an <i>allegory</i>;
+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:</p>
+
+<p>"Thou hast brought a vine out of Egypt: thou hast<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</a></span>
+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."</p>
+
+<p>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.</p>
+
+<p><b>Allow.</b> This word is frequently misused in the West
+and South, where it is made to do service for <i>assert</i> or <i>to be
+of opinion</i>. Thus, "He <i>allows</i> that he has the finest horse
+in the country."</p>
+
+<p><b>Allude.</b> 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. <i>Allude</i> 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.</p>
+
+<p><b>Alone.</b> This word is often improperly used for <i>only</i>.
+That is <i>alone</i> which is unaccompanied; that is <i>only</i> of
+which there is no other. "Virtue <i>alone</i> makes us happy,"
+means that virtue unaided suffices to make us happy;
+"Virtue <i>only</i> makes us happy," means that nothing else
+can do it&mdash;that that, and that only (not alone), can do it.
+"This means of communication is employed by man <i>alone</i>."<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</a></span>
+Dr. Quackenbos should have written, "By man <i>only</i>". See
+also <span class="smcap"><a href="#Only">Only</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Amateur" id="Amateur"></a>Amateur&mdash;Novice.</b> There is much confusion in the
+use of these two words, although they are entirely distinct
+from each other in meaning. An <i>amateur</i> is one versed in,
+or a lover and practicer of, any particular pursuit, art, or
+science, but <i>not</i> engaged in it professionally. A <i>novice</i> is
+one who is new or inexperienced in any art or business&mdash;a
+beginner, a tyro. A professional actor, then, who is new
+and unskilled in his art, is a <i>novice</i> and not an <i>amateur</i>.
+An amateur may be an artist of great experience and extraordinary
+skill.</p>
+
+<p><b>Ameliorate.</b> "The health of the Empress of Germany
+is greatly <i>ameliorated</i>." Why not say <i>improved</i>?</p>
+
+<p><b>Among.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Between">Between</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Amount of Perfection.</b> The observant reader of periodical
+literature often notes forms of expression which are
+perhaps best characterized by the word <i>bizarre</i>. Of these
+queer locutions, <i>amount of perfection</i> is a very good example.
+Mr. G. F. Watts, in the "Nineteenth Century," says,
+"An <i>amount of perfection</i> has been reached which I was
+by no means prepared for." What Mr. Watts meant to
+say was, doubtless, that a <i>degree of excellence</i> 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.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="And" id="And"></a>And.</b> Few vulgarisms are more common than the use
+of <i>and</i> for <i>to</i>. Examples: "Come <i>and</i> see me before you
+go"; "Try <i>and</i> do what you can for him"; "Go <i>and</i> see<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</a></span>
+your brother, if you can." In such sentences as these, the
+proper particle to use is clearly <i>to</i> and not <i>and</i>.</p>
+
+<p><i>And</i> is sometimes improperly used instead of <i>or</i>; thus,
+"It is obvious that a language like the Greek <i>and</i> Latin"
+(language?), etc., should be, "a language like the Greek <i>or
+the</i> Latin" (language), etc. There is no such thing as a
+Greek and Latin language.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Answer" id="Answer"></a>Answer&mdash;Reply.</b> These two words should not be
+used indiscriminately. An <i>answer</i> is given to a question;
+a <i>reply</i>, to an assertion. When we are addressed, we <i>answer</i>;
+when we are accused, we <i>reply</i>. We <i>answer</i> letters,
+and <i>reply</i> to any arguments, statements, or accusations they
+may contain. Crabb is in error in saying that <i>replies</i> "are
+used in personal discourse only." <i>Replies</i>, as well as <i>answers</i>,
+are written. We very properly write, "I have
+now, I believe, <i>answered</i> all your questions and <i>replied</i> to
+all your arguments." A <i>rejoinder</i> is made to a <i>reply</i>. "Who
+goes there?" he cried; and, receiving no <i>answer</i>, he fired.
+"The advocate <i>replied</i> to the charges made against his
+client."</p>
+
+<p><b>Anticipate.</b> Lovers of big words have a fondness for
+making this verb do duty for <i>expect</i>. <i>Anticipate</i> is derived
+from two Latin words meaning <i>before</i> and <i>to take</i>, 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 <i>anticipated</i>"; "By this means it is <i>anticipated</i> that
+the time from Europe will be lessened two days."</p>
+
+<p><b>Antithesis.</b> A phrase that opposes contraries is called
+an <i>antithesis</i>.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"I see a chief who leads my chosen sons,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">All armed with points, <i>antitheses</i>, and puns."<br /></span>
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</a></span></div></div>
+
+<p>The following are examples:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Though gentle, yet not dull;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Strong, without rage; without o'erflowing, full."<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Contrasted faults through all their manners reign;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Though poor, luxurious; though submissive, vain;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Though grave, yet trifling; zealous, yet untrue;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And e'en in penance planning sins anew."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The following is an excellent example of <i>personification</i>
+and <i>antithesis</i> combined:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Talent convinces; Genius but excites:<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That tasks the reason; this the soul delights.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Talent from sober judgment takes its birth,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And reconciles the pinion to the earth;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Genius unsettles with desires the mind,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Contented not till earth be left behind."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>In the following extract from Johnson's "Life of Pope,"
+individual peculiarities are contrasted by means of antitheses:</p>
+
+<p>"Of genius&mdash;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&mdash;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<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</a></span>
+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."</p>
+
+<p>There are forms of antithesis in which the contrast is
+only of a secondary kind.</p>
+
+<p><b>Any.</b> This word is sometimes made to do service for
+<i>at all</i>. We say properly, "She is not <i>any</i> better"; but we
+can not properly say, "She does not see <i>any</i>," meaning that
+she is blind.</p>
+
+<p><b>Anybody else.</b> "Public School Teachers are informed
+that <i>anybody else's</i> is correct."&mdash;"New York Times,"
+Sunday, July 31, 1881. An English writer says: "In
+such phrases as anybody else, and the like, <i>else</i> is often put
+in the possessive case; as, 'anybody else's servant'; and
+some grammarians defend this use of the possessive case,
+arguing that <i>somebody else</i> is a compound noun." It is better
+grammar and more euphonious to consider <i>else</i> as being
+an adjective, and to form the possessive by adding the
+apostrophe and <i>s</i> to the word that <i>else</i> qualifies; thus, anybody's
+else, nobody's else, somebody's else.</p>
+
+<p><b>Anyhow.</b> "An exceedingly vulgar phrase," says Professor
+Mathews, in his "Words: Their Use and Abuse."
+"Its use, <i>in any manner</i>, by one who professes to write
+and speak the English tongue with purity, is unpardonable."<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</a></span>
+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.</p>
+
+<p><b>Anxiety of Mind.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Equanimity_of_mind">Equanimity of Mind</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Apostrophe.</b> 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 <i>apostrophe</i>. The following are some examples:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i6">"O gentle sleep,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Nature's soft nurse, how have I frighted thee,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That thou no more wilt weigh my eyelids down,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And steep my senses in forgetfulness?"<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">"Sail on, thou lone imperial bird<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of quenchless eye and tireless wing!"<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i4">"Help, angels, make assay!<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Bow, stubborn knees! and heart with strings of steel,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Be soft as sinews of the new-born babe:<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">All may yet be well!"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b>Appear.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Seem">Seem</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Appreciate.</b> If any word in the language has cause
+to complain of ill-treatment, this one has. <i>Appreciate</i>
+means, to estimate <i>justly</i>&mdash;to set the <i>true</i> value on men
+or things, their worth, beauty, or advantages of any sort
+whatsoever. Thus, an overestimate is no more <i>appreciation</i>
+than is an underestimate; hence it follows that such
+expressions as, "I appreciate it, or her, or him, <i>highly</i>,"
+can not be correct. We <i>value</i>, or <i>prize</i>, things highly, not
+<i>appreciate</i> them highly. This word is also very improperly
+made to do service for <i>rise</i>, or <i>increase</i>, in value; thus, "Land
+<i>appreciates</i> rapidly in the West." Dr. L. T. Townsend<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</a></span>
+blunders in the use of <i>appreciate</i> 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 <i>more highly
+appreciated</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Apprehend&mdash;Comprehend.</b> 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 <i>apprehend</i>
+is simply to take an idea into the mind&mdash;it is the mind's
+first effort&mdash;while to <i>comprehend</i> is <i>fully to understand</i>.
+We are dull or quick of <i>apprehension</i>. Children <i>apprehend</i>
+much that they do not <i>comprehend</i>. Trench says: "We
+<i>apprehend</i> many truths which we do not <i>comprehend</i>."
+"<i>Apprehend</i>," says Crabb, "expresses the weakest kind
+of belief, the having [of] the least idea of the presence of
+a thing."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Apt" id="Apt"></a>Apt.</b> Often misused for <i>likely</i>, and sometimes for <i>liable</i>.
+"What is he <i>apt</i> to be doing?" "Where shall I be <i>apt</i> to
+find him?" "If properly directed, it will be <i>apt</i> to reach
+me." In such sentences as these, <i>likely</i> is the proper word
+to use. "If you go there, you will be <i>apt</i> to get into
+trouble." Here either <i>likely</i> or <i>liable</i> is the proper word,
+according to the thought the speaker would convey.</p>
+
+<p><b>Arctics.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Rubbers">Rubbers</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Artist.</b> 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
+<i>artists</i>. Painters, sculptors, architects, actors, and singers,
+nowadays, generally prefer being thus called, rather than
+to be spoken of as <i>artists</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="As" id="As"></a>As.</b> "Not <i>as</i> I know": read, "not <i>that</i> I know."
+"This is not <i>as</i> good as the last": read, "not <i>so</i> good."<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</a></span>
+"It may be complete <i>so</i> far as the specification is concerned":
+correctly, "<i>as</i> far as."</p>
+
+<p><i>As</i>, preceded by <i>such</i> or by <i>same</i>, has the force of a relative
+applying to persons or to things. "He offered me the
+<i>same</i> conditions <i>as</i> he offered you." "The same conditions
+<i>that</i>" would be equally proper. See, also, <span class="smcap"><a href="#Like">Like</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Ascribe.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Impute">Impute</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="At" id="At"></a>At.</b> Things are sold <i>by</i>, not <i>at</i>, auction. "The scene
+is more beautiful <i>at</i> night than by day": say, "<i>by</i> night."</p>
+
+<p><b>At all.</b> "It is not strange, for my uncle is King of
+Denmark." Had Shakespeare written, "It is not <i>at all</i>
+strange," it is clear that his diction would have been much
+less forcible. "I do not wish for any <i>at all</i>"; "I saw no
+one <i>at all</i>"; "If he had any desire <i>at all</i> to see me, he
+would come where I am." The <i>at all</i> 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.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="At_best" id="At_best"></a>At best.</b> Instead of <i>at best</i> and <i>at worst</i>, we should
+say at <i>the</i> best and at <i>the</i> worst.</p>
+
+<p><b>At last.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#At_length">At length</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>At least.</b> This adverbial phrase is often misplaced.
+"'The Romans understood liberty <i>at least</i> as well as we.'
+This must be interpreted to mean, 'The Romans understood
+liberty <i>as well as we</i> understand liberty.' The intended
+meaning is, 'that whatever things the Romans failed
+to understand, they understood <i>liberty</i>.' To express this
+meaning we might put it thus: 'The Romans understood
+<i>at least</i> liberty as well as we <i>do</i>'; 'liberty, <i>at least</i>, the
+Romans understood as well as we do.' 'A tear, <i>at least</i>, is
+due to the unhappy'; '<i>at least</i> a tear is due to the unhappy';
+'a tear is due <i>at least</i> to the unhappy'; 'a tear is
+due to the unhappy <i>at least</i>'&mdash;all express different meanings.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</a></span>
+'This can not, <i>often at least</i>, be done'; 'this can not
+be done <i>often, at least</i>.' (1. 'It often happens that this can
+not be done.' 2. 'It does not often happen that this can
+be done.') So, 'man is <i>always</i> capable of laughing'; 'man
+is capable of laughing <i>always</i>.'"&mdash;Bain.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="At_length" id="At_length"></a>At length.</b> This phrase is often used instead of <i>at last</i>.
+"<i>At length</i> we managed to get away": read, "<i>at last</i>."
+"<i>At length</i> we heard from him." To hear from any one <i>at
+length</i> is to hear fully; i. e., in detail.</p>
+
+<p><b>Authoress.</b> With regard to the use of this and certain
+other words of like formation, Mr. Gould, in his "Good
+English," says: "<i>Poet</i> means simply a person who writes
+poetry; and <i>author</i>, in the sense under consideration, a
+person who writes poetry or prose&mdash;not a <i>man</i> who writes,
+but a <i>person</i> 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, <i>authoress</i>
+and <i>poetess</i> are superfluous. And they are superfluous, also,
+in another respect&mdash;that they are very rarely used, indeed
+they hardly <i>can</i> be used, independently of the <i>name</i> 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
+<i>men</i>. They are, moreover, liable to the charge of affectation
+and prettiness, to say nothing of pedantic pretension to
+accuracy.</p>
+
+<p>"If the <i>ess</i> is to be permitted, there is no reason for excluding
+it from <i>any</i> noun that indicates a person; and the
+next editions of our dictionaries may be made complete by
+the addition of <i>writress</i>, <i>officeress</i>, <i>manageress</i>, <i>superintendentess</i>,
+<i>secretaryess</i>, <i>treasureress</i>, <i>walkeress</i>, <i>talkeress</i>, and so
+on to the end of the vocabulary."</p>
+
+<p><b>Avocation.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Vocation">Vocation</a></span>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Bad cold.</b> Inasmuch as colds are never <i>good</i>, why say
+a <i>bad</i> cold? We may talk about <i>slight</i> colds and <i>severe</i>
+colds, but not about <i>bad</i> colds.</p>
+
+<p><b>Baggage.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Luggage">Luggage</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Balance" id="Balance"></a>Balance.</b> This word is very frequently and very erroneously
+used in the sense of <i>rest</i>, <i>remainder</i>. It properly
+means <i>the excess of one thing over another</i>, and in this sense
+and in no other should it be used. Hence it is improper
+to talk about the <i>balance</i> of the edition, of the evening, of
+the money, of the toasts, of the men, etc. In such cases
+we should say the <i>rest</i> or the <i>remainder</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Barbarism" id="Barbarism"></a>Barbarism.</b> Defined as an offense against good usage,
+by the use of an improper word, i. e., a word that is antiquated
+or improperly formed. <i>Preventative</i>, <i>enthuse</i>, <i>agriculturalist</i>,
+<i>donate</i>, etc., are barbarisms. See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#Solecism">Solecism</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Been to.</b> We not unfrequently hear a superfluous <i>to</i>
+tacked to a sentence; thus, "Where have you been <i>to</i>?"</p>
+
+<p><b>Beg.</b> We often see letters begin with the words, "I
+<i>beg</i> to acknowledge the receipt of your favor," etc. We
+should write, "I <i>beg leave</i> to acknowledge," etc. No one
+would say, "I beg to tell you," instead of, "I beg <i>leave</i> to
+tell you."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Begin" id="Begin"></a>Begin&mdash;Commence.</b> 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 <span class="smcap"><a href="#Commence">Commence</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Being built.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Is_being_built">Is being built</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Belongings.</b> An old idiomatic expression now coming
+into use again.</p>
+
+<p><b>Beside&mdash;Besides.</b> In the later unabridged editions
+of Webster's dictionary we find the following remarks concerning
+the use of these two words: "<i>Beside</i> and <i>besides</i>,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</a></span>
+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 <i>beside</i> be
+used only and always as a preposition, with the original
+meaning <i>by the side of</i>; as, to sit <i>beside</i> a fountain; or
+with the closely allied meaning <i>aside from</i>, or <i>out of</i>; as,
+this is <i>beside</i> our present purpose: 'Paul, thou art <i>beside</i>
+thyself.' The adverbial sense to be wholly transferred to
+the cognate word. 2. That <i>besides</i>, as a preposition, take
+the remaining sense, <i>in addition to</i>; as, <i>besides</i> all this;
+<i>besides</i> the consideration here offered: 'There was a famine
+in the land <i>besides</i> the first famine.' And that it also take
+the adverbial sense of <i>moreover</i>, <i>beyond</i>, etc., which had
+been divided between the words; as, <i>besides</i>, there are other
+considerations which belong to this case."</p>
+
+<p><b>Best.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#At_best">At best</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Between" id="Between"></a>Between.</b> This word is often misused for <i>among</i>; thus,
+"The word <i>fellow</i>, however much in use it may be <i>between</i>
+men, sounds very objectionable from the lips of women."&mdash;"London
+Queen." Should be, "<i>among</i> men." <i>Between</i> is
+used in reference to two things, parties, or persons; <i>among</i>,
+in reference to a greater number. "Castor and Pollux
+with one soul <i>between</i> them." "You have <i>among</i> you
+many a purchased slave."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Blame_it_on" id="Blame_it_on"></a>Blame it on.</b> Here is a gross vulgarism which we
+sometimes hear from persons of considerable culture. They
+use it in the sense of <i>accuse</i> or <i>suspect</i>; thus, "He <i>blames
+it on</i> his brother," meaning that he <i>accuses</i> or <i>suspects</i> his
+brother of having done it, or of being at fault for it.</p>
+
+<p><b>Bogus.</b> A colloquial term incompatible with dignified
+diction.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Both.</b> We sometimes hear such absurd sentences as,
+"They <i>both</i> resemble each other very much"; "They are
+<i>both</i> alike"; "They <i>both</i> met in the street." <i>Both</i> is likewise
+redundant in the following sentence: "It performs at
+the same time the offices <i>both</i> of the nominative and objective
+cases."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Bound" id="Bound"></a>Bound.</b> The use of this word in the sense of <i>determined</i>
+is not only inelegant but indefensible. "I am
+<i>bound</i> to have it," should be, "I am <i>determined</i> to
+have it."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Bravery" id="Bravery"></a>Bravery&mdash;Courage.</b> The careless often use these two
+words as though they were interchangeable. <i>Bravery</i> is
+inborn, is instinctive; <i>courage</i> is the product of reason, calculation.
+There is much merit in being courageous, little
+merit in being brave. Men who are simply <i>brave</i> are careless,
+while the courageous man is always cautious. <i>Bravery</i>
+often degenerates into temerity. <i>Moral courage</i> 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 <i>moral courage</i> is one of the
+rarest and most admirable of virtues.</p>
+
+<p>Alfred the Great, in resisting the attacks of the Danes,
+displayed <i>bravery</i>; in entering their camp as a spy, he displayed
+<i>courage</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Bring" id="Bring"></a>Bring&mdash;Fetch&mdash;Carry.</b> The indiscriminate use of
+these three words is very common. To <i>bring</i> is to convey
+to or toward&mdash;a simple act; to <i>fetch</i> means to <i>go</i> and bring&mdash;a
+compound act; to <i>carry</i> often implies motion from the
+speaker, and is followed by <i>away</i> or <i>off</i>, and thus is opposed
+to <i>bring</i> and <i>fetch</i>. Yet one hears such expressions as,
+"Go to Mrs. D.'s and <i>bring</i> her this bundle; and here, you
+may <i>fetch</i> her this book also." We use the words correctly
+thus: "<i>Fetch</i>, or <i>go bring</i>, me an apple from the cellar";<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</a></span>
+"When you come home <i>bring</i> some lemons"; "<i>Carry</i> this
+book home with you."</p>
+
+<p><b>British against American English.</b> "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 <i>different to</i> for <i>different from</i>, 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."&mdash;George P. Marsh.</p>
+
+<p><b>British against American Ortho&euml;py.</b> "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<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</a></span>
+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 <i>dic-tion-ar-y</i>,
+<i>mil-it-ar-y</i>, 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
+ortho&euml;py 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<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</a></span>
+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
+<i>dactyl</i> or a <i>trochee</i>, and comes home an <i>amphibrach</i> or an
+<i>iambus</i>. 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.</p>
+
+<p>"To the joint operation, then, of these two causes&mdash;universal
+reading and climatic influences&mdash;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<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</a></span>
+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."&mdash;George P.
+Marsh.</p>
+
+<p><b>Bryant's Prohibited Words.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Index_expurgatorius">Index Expurgatorius</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>But.</b> This word is misused in various ways. "I do
+not doubt <i>but</i> he will be here": read, doubt <i>that</i>. "I
+should not wonder <i>but</i>": read, <i>if</i>. "I have no doubt <i>but</i>
+that he will go": suppress <i>but</i>. "I do not doubt <i>but</i> that
+it is true": suppress <i>but</i>. "There can be no doubt <i>but</i>
+that the burglary is the work of professional cracksmen."&mdash;"New
+York Herald." Doubt <i>that</i>, and not <i>but that</i>. "A
+careful canvass leaves no doubt <i>but</i> that the nomination,"
+etc.: suppress <i>but</i>. "There is no reasonable doubt <i>but</i>
+that it is all it professes to be": suppress <i>but</i>. "The
+mind no sooner entertains any proposition <i>but</i> it presently
+hastens," etc.: read, <i>than</i>. "No other resource <i>but</i> this
+was allowed him": read, <i>than</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>By.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#At">At</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Calculate.</b> 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. <i>If this is
+true</i>, we can not say a thing is <i>calculated</i> 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, <i>likely</i> or <i>apt</i>, for example. Cobbett, however,
+says, "That, to Her, whose great example is so well <i>calculated</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</a></span>
+to inspire," etc.; and, "The first two of the three
+sentences are well enough <i>calculated</i> for ushering," etc.
+<i>Calculate</i> is sometimes vulgarly used for <i>intend</i>, <i>purpose</i>,
+<i>expect</i>; as, "He <i>calculates</i> to get off to-morrow."</p>
+
+<p><b>Caliber.</b> This word is sometimes used very absurdly;
+as, "Brown's Essays are of a much higher <i>caliber</i> than
+Smith's." It is plain that the proper word to use here is
+<i>order</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Cant.</b> <i>Cant</i> 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 <span class="smcap">lying</span>!</p>
+
+<p>"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'?"</p>
+
+<p>"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 <i>improve</i> this and that text, and they must do so and
+so in a prayerful way; and so on."</p>
+
+<p><b>Capacity.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Ability">Ability</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Caption" id="Caption"></a>Caption.</b> This word is often used for <i>heading</i>, but, thus
+used, it is condemned by careful writers. The true meaning
+of <i>caption</i> is a seizure, an arrest. It does not come from<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</a></span>
+a Latin word meaning <i>a head</i>, but from a Latin word meaning
+<i>to seize</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Caret.</b> Cobbett writes of the caret to his son: "The
+last thing I shall mention under this head is the <i>caret</i> [^],
+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 <i>blunder-mark</i>.
+I would have you, my dear James, scorn the use of
+the thing. <i>Think</i> before you write; let it be your custom
+to <i>write correctly</i> and in <i>a plain hand</i>. 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 <i>read</i> and
+to <i>understand</i> what you write. This will make your handwriting
+and also your meaning <i>plain</i>. 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."</p>
+
+<p><b>Carry.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Bring">Bring</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Case.</b> 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>I</i>."&mdash;George Merideth
+in "The Tragic Comedies," Eng. ed., vol. i, p. 33.
+"Let's you and <i>I</i> go": say, <i>me</i>. We can not say, Let <i>I</i>
+go. Properly, Let's go, i. e., let us go, or, let you and <i>me</i>
+go. "He is as good as <i>me</i>": say, as <i>I</i>. "She is as tall as
+<i>him</i>": say, as <i>he</i>. "You are older than <i>me</i>": say, than <i>I</i>.
+"Nobody said so but <i>he</i>": say, but <i>him</i>. "Every one can<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</a></span>
+master a grief but <i>he</i> that hath it": correctly, but <i>him</i>.
+"John went out with James and <i>I</i>": say, and <i>me</i>. "You
+are stronger than <i>him</i>": say, than <i>he</i>. "Between you
+and <i>I</i>": say, and <i>me</i>. "Between you and <i>they</i>": say,
+and <i>them</i>. "He gave it to John and <i>I</i>": say, and <i>me</i>.
+"You told John and <i>I</i>": say, and <i>me</i>. "He sat between
+him and <i>I</i>": say, and <i>me</i>. "He expects to see
+you and <i>I</i>": say, and <i>me</i>. "You were a dunce to do
+it. Who? <i>me</i>?" say, <i>I</i>. Supply the ellipsis, and we
+should have, Who? <i>me</i> a dunce to do it? "Where are
+you going? Who? <i>me</i>?" say, <i>I</i>. We can't say, <i>me</i> going.
+"<i>Who</i> do you mean?" say, <i>whom</i>. "Was it <i>them</i>?" say,
+<i>they</i>. "If I <i>was him</i>, I would do it": say, <i>were he</i>. "If
+I <i>was her</i>, I would not go": say, <i>were she</i>. "Was it <i>him</i>?"
+say, <i>he</i>. "Was it <i>her</i>?" say, <i>she</i>. "For the benefit of those
+<i>whom</i> he thought were his friends": say, <i>who</i>. 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 <i>whom</i> were his
+friends."</p>
+
+<p>"On the supposition," says Bain, "that the interrogative
+<i>who</i> has <i>whom</i> for its objective, the following are errors:
+'<i>who</i> do you take me to be?' '<i>who</i> should I meet
+the other day?' '<i>who</i> is it by?' '<i>who</i> did you give it to?'
+'<i>who</i> to?' '<i>who</i> for?' But, considering that these expressions
+<i>occur with the best writers and speakers</i>, that they <i>are
+more energetic</i> than the other form, and that they <i>lead to
+no ambiguity</i>, it may be doubted whether grammarians
+have not exceeded their province in condemning them."</p>
+
+<p>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. '<i>Who</i>, of all the men in the world, do you<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</a></span>
+think I <i>saw</i> to-day?' '<i>Who</i>, for the sake of numerous services,
+the office was given to.' In both these cases it
+should be <i>whom</i>. Bring the verb in the first and the preposition
+in the second case closer to the relative, as, <i>who I
+saw</i>, <i>to who the office was given</i>, and you see the error at
+once. But take care! '<i>Whom</i>, of all the men in the world,
+do you think, <i>was</i> chosen to be sent as an ambassador?'
+'<i>Whom</i>, for the sake of his numerous services, <i>had</i> an
+office of honor bestowed upon him.' These are nominative
+cases, and ought to have <i>who</i>; that is to say, <i>who was
+chosen</i>, <i>who had an office</i>."</p>
+
+<p>"Most grammarians," says Dr. Bain, in his "Higher
+English Grammar," "have laid down this rule: 'The verb <i>to
+be</i> has the same case after as before it.' Macaulay censures
+the following as a solecism: 'It was <i>him</i> 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 <i>him</i>?" said the lady in <i>questionable
+grammar</i>.' But, notwithstanding this," continues Dr.
+Bain, "we certainly hear in the actual speech of all classes
+of society such expressions as 'it was <i>me</i>,' 'it was <i>him</i>,' 'it
+was <i>her</i>,' more frequently than the prescribed form.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> 'This
+shy creature, my brother says, is <i>me</i>'; 'were it <i>me</i>, I'd show
+him the difference.'&mdash;Clarissa Harlowe. 'It is not <i>me</i><a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> you
+are in love with.'&mdash;Addison. 'If there is one character
+more base than another, it is <i>him</i> who,' etc.&mdash;Sydney Smith.
+'If I were <i>him</i>'; 'if I had been <i>her</i>,' etc. The authority
+of good writers is strong on the side of objective forms.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</a></span>
+There is also the analogy of the French language; for while
+'I am here' is <i>je suis ici</i>, the answer to 'who is there?' is
+<i>moi</i> (me); and <i>c'est moi</i> (it is <i>me</i>) is the legitimate phrase&mdash;never
+<i>c'est je</i> (it is I)."</p>
+
+<p>But <i>moi</i>, according to all French grammarians, is very
+often in the nominative case. <i>Moi</i> 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>I</i>" the correct
+translation of the phrase, and not "It is <i>me</i>." The French
+equivalent of "I! I am here," is "Moi! je suis ici." The
+Frenchman uses <i>moi</i> in the nominative case when <i>je</i> would
+be inharmonious. Euphony with him is a matter of more
+importance than grammatical correctness. Bescherelle
+gives many examples of <i>moi</i> 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 <i>me</i>," we must do as the French do&mdash;consider <i>me</i>
+as being in the nominative case, and offer <i>euphony</i> as our
+reason for thus using it.</p>
+
+<p>When shall we put nouns (or pronouns) preceding verbal,
+or participial, nouns, as they are called by some grammarians&mdash;infinitives
+in <i>ing</i>, as they are called by others&mdash;in the
+possessive case?</p>
+
+<p>"'I am surprised at <i>John's</i> (or <i>his</i>, <i>your</i>, etc.) <i>refusing</i>
+to go.' 'I am surprised at <i>John</i> (or <i>him</i>, <i>you</i>, etc.) <i>refusing</i>
+to go.' [In the latter sentence <i>refusing</i> 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 <i>him going</i> forward':
+better, 'They prevented <i>his going</i> forward.' 'He
+was dismissed without any <i>reason being</i> assigned.' 'The
+boy died through his <i>clothes being</i> burned.' 'We hear little
+of any <i>connection being</i> kept up between the two nations.'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</a></span>
+'The men rowed vigorously for fear of the <i>tide turning</i>
+against us.' <i>But most examples of the construction without
+the possessive form are</i> <span class="smcap">obviously due to mere slovenliness</span>....
+'In case of <i>your being</i> absent': here <i>being</i> is
+an infinitive [verbal, or participial, noun] qualified by the
+possessive <i>your</i>. 'In case of <i>you being</i> present': here
+<i>being</i> would have to be construed as a participle. <i>The possessive
+construction is, in this case, the primitive and regular
+construction</i>; <span class="smcap">the other is a mere lapse</span>. 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 <i>demand</i> creating supply': in strictness, '<i>Demand's</i>
+creating supply.' 'A petition was presented
+against the <i>license being</i> granted.' But for the awkwardness
+of extending the possessive to impersonal subjects, it
+would be right to say, 'against the <i>license's being</i> granted.'
+'He had conducted the ball without any <i>complaint
+being</i> urged against him.' The possessive would be suitable,
+but undesirable and unnecessary."&mdash;Professor Alexander
+Bain.</p>
+
+<p>"Though the <i>ordinary</i> 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, <i>in my
+opinion, the three possessives are all wrong</i>: 'The kitchen,
+too, now begins to give dreadful note of preparation;
+not from <i>armorers</i> accomplishing the knights, but from the
+<i>shopmaid's</i> chopping force-meat, the <i>apprentice's</i> cleaning
+knives, and the <i>journeyman's</i> receiving a practical lesson in<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</a></span>
+the art of waiting at table.' 'The daily instances of <i>men's</i>
+dying around us.' Say rather, 'Of <i>men</i> dying around us.'
+The leading word in sense ought not to be made the adjunct
+in construction."&mdash;Goold Brown.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Casualty" id="Casualty"></a>Casualty.</b> This word is often heard with the incorrect
+addition of a syllable, <i>casuality</i>, which is not recognized
+by the lexicographers. Some writers object to the word
+casualty, and always use its synonym <i>accident</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Celebrity.</b> "A number of <i>celebrities</i> 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 <i>distinguished
+persons</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Character" id="Character"></a>Character&mdash;Reputation.</b> These two words are not
+synonyms, though often used as such. <i>Character</i> means
+the sum of distinguishing qualities. "Actions, looks,
+words, steps, form the alphabet by which you may spell
+characters."&mdash;Lavater. <i>Reputation</i> 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 <i>reputation</i>, but
+not <i>character</i>. Sir Peter does not leave his <i>character</i> behind
+him, but his <i>reputation</i>&mdash;his <i>good name</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Cheap.</b> The dictionaries define this adjective as meaning,
+bearing a low price, or to be had at a low price; but
+nowadays good usage makes it mean that a thing may be
+had, or has been sold, at a bargain. Hence, in order to
+make sure of being understood, it is better to say <i>low-priced</i>,
+when one means low-priced, than to use the word <i>cheap</i>.
+What is low-priced, as everybody knows, is often <i>dear</i>, and
+what is high-priced is often <i>cheap</i>. A diamond necklace<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</a></span>
+might be <i>cheap</i> at ten thousand dollars, and a pinchbeck
+necklace dear at ten dollars.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Cherubim" id="Cherubim"></a>Cherubim.</b> The Hebrew plural of <i>cherub</i>. "We are
+authorized," says Dr. Campbell, "both by use and analogy,
+to say either <i>cherubs</i> and <i>seraphs</i>, according to the English
+idiom, or <i>cherubim</i> and <i>seraphim</i>, according to the Oriental.
+The former suits better the familiar, the latter the solemn,
+style. As the words <i>cherubim</i> and <i>seraphim</i> are plural, the
+terms <i>cherubims</i> and <i>seraphims</i>, as expressing the plural, are
+quite improper."&mdash;"Philosophy of Rhetoric."</p>
+
+<p><b>Citizen.</b> This word properly means one who has certain
+political rights; when, therefore, it is used, as it often
+is, to designate persons who may be aliens, it, to say the
+least, betrays a want of care in the selection of words.
+"Several <i>citizens</i> were injured by the explosion." Here
+some other word&mdash;<i>persons</i>, for example&mdash;should be used.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Clever" id="Clever"></a>Clever.</b> In this country the word <i>clever</i> is most improperly
+used in the sense of good-natured, well-disposed,
+good-hearted. It is properly used in the sense in which
+we are wont most inelegantly to use the word <i>smart</i>, though
+it is a less colloquial term, and is of wider application. In
+England the phrase "a <i>clever</i> man" is the equivalent of the
+French phrase, "<i>un homme d'esprit</i>." The word is properly
+used in the following sentences: "Every work of Archbishop
+Whately must be an object of interest to the admirers
+of <i>clever</i> reasoning"; "Cobbett's letter ... very
+<i>clever</i>, but very mischievous"; "Bonaparte was certainly as
+<i>clever</i> a man as ever lived."</p>
+
+<p><b>Climax.</b> A clause, a sentence, a paragraph, or any literary
+composition whatsoever, is said to end with a <i>climax</i>
+when, by an artistic arrangement, the more effective is
+made to follow the less effective in regular gradation.
+Any great departure from the order of ascending strength<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</a></span>
+is called an <i>anti-climax</i>. Here are some examples of climax:</p>
+
+<p>"Give all diligence; add to your faith, virtue; and to
+virtue, knowledge; and to knowledge, temperance; and to
+temperance, patience; and to patience, godliness; and to
+godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness,
+charity."</p>
+
+<p>"What is every year of a wise man's life but a criticism
+on the past! Those whose life is the shortest live long
+enough to laugh at one half of it; the boy despises the infant,
+the man the boy, the sage both, and the Christian
+all."</p>
+
+<p>"What a piece of work is man! how noble in reason!
+how infinite in faculties! in form and moving, how express
+and admirable! in action, how like an angel! in apprehension,
+how like a god!"</p>
+
+<p><b>Co.</b> The prefix <i>co</i> should be used only when the word
+to which it is joined begins with a vowel, as in <i>co-eval</i>, <i>co-incident</i>,
+<i>co-operate</i>, etc. <i>Con</i> is used when the word begins
+with a consonant, as in <i>con-temporary</i>, <i>con-junction</i>, etc.
+<i>Co-partner</i> is an exception to the rule.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Commence" id="Commence"></a>Commence.</b> The Britons use or misuse this word in
+a manner peculiar to themselves. They say, for example,
+"commenced merchant," "commenced actor," "commenced
+politician," and so on. Dr. Hall tells us that <i>commence</i> has
+been employed in the sense of "begin to be," "become,"
+"set up as," by first-class writers, for more than two centuries.
+Careful speakers make small use of <i>commence</i> in any
+sense; they prefer to use its Saxon equivalent, <i>begin</i>. See,
+also, <span class="smcap"><a href="#Begin">Begin</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Comparison.</b> When only two objects are compared,
+the comparative and not the superlative degree should be
+used; thus, "Mary is the <i>older</i> of the two"; "John is the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</a></span>
+<i>stronger</i> of the two"; "Brown is the <i>richer</i> of the two, and
+the <i>richest</i> man in the city"; "Which is the <i>more</i> desirable,
+health or wealth?" "Which is the <i>most</i> desirable,
+health, wealth, or genius?"</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Of two such lessons, why forget<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The <i>nobler</i> and the <i>manlier</i> one?"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b>Completed.</b> This word is often incorrectly used for
+<i>finished</i>. That is <i>complete</i> which lacks nothing; that is
+<i>finished</i> which has had all done to it that was intended.
+The builder of a house may <i>finish</i> it and yet leave it very
+<i>incomplete</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Condign.</b> It is safe to say that most of those who
+use this word do not know its meaning, which is, suitable,
+deserved, merited, proper. "His endeavors shall not lack
+<i>condign</i> praise"; i. e., his endeavors shall not lack <i>proper</i>
+or their <i>merited</i> praise. "A villain <i>condignly</i> punished" is
+a villain punished <i>according to his deserts</i>. To use <i>condign</i>
+in the sense of <i>severe</i> is just as incorrect as it would
+be to use <i>deserved</i> or <i>merited</i> in the sense of <i>severe</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Confirmed Invalid.</b> This phrase is a convenient mode
+of expressing the idea it conveys, but it is difficult to defend,
+inasmuch as <i>confirmed</i> means strengthened, established.</p>
+
+<p><b>Consequence.</b> This word is sometimes used instead
+of <i>importance</i> or <i>moment</i>; as, "They were all persons of
+more or less <i>consequence</i>": read, "of more or less <i>importance</i>."
+"It is a matter of no <i>consequence</i>": read, "of no
+<i>moment</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Consider.</b> "This word," says Mr. Richard Grant
+White, in his "Words and Their Uses," "is perverted
+from its true meaning by most of those who use it." <i>Consider</i>
+means, to meditate, to deliberate, to reflect, to revolve
+in the mind; and yet it is made to do service for<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</a></span>
+<i>think</i>, <i>suppose</i>, and <i>regard</i>. Thus: "I <i>consider</i> his course
+very unjustifiable"; "I have always <i>considered</i> it my duty,"
+etc.; "I <i>consider</i> him as being the cleverest man of my
+acquaintance."</p>
+
+<p><b>Contemptible.</b> This word is sometimes used for <i>contemptuous</i>.
+An old story says that a man once said to Dr.
+Parr, "Sir, I have a <i>contemptible</i> opinion of you." "That
+does not surprise me," returned the Doctor; "all your
+opinions are <i>contemptible</i>." What is worthless or weak is
+<i>contemptible</i>. Despicable is a word that expresses a still
+more intense degree of the contemptible. A traitor is a
+<i>despicable</i> character, while a poltroon is only <i>contemptible</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Continually.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Perpetually">Perpetually</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Continue on.</b> The <i>on</i> in this phrase is generally superfluous.
+"We continued on our way" is idiomatic English,
+and is more euphonious than the sentence would be without
+the particle. The meaning is, "We continued to travel
+<i>on</i> our way." In such sentences, however, as "Continue
+<i>on</i>," "He continued to read <i>on</i>," "The fever continued
+<i>on</i> for some hours," and the like, the <i>on</i> generally serves
+no purpose.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Conversationist" id="Conversationist"></a>Conversationist.</b> This word is to be preferred to
+<i>conversationalist</i>. Mr. Richard Grant White says that <i>conversationalist</i>
+and <i>agriculturalist</i> are inadmissible. On the
+other hand, Dr. Fitzedward Hall says: "As for <i>conversationist</i>
+and <i>conversationalist</i>, <i>agriculturist</i> and <i>agriculturalist</i>,
+as all are alike legitimate formations, it is for convention
+to decide which we are to prefer."</p>
+
+<p><b>Convoke&mdash;Convene.</b> At one time and another there
+has been some discussion with regard to the correct use of
+these two words. According to Crabb, "There is nothing
+imperative on the part of those that <i>assemble</i>, or <i>convene</i>,
+and nothing binding on those <i>assembled</i>, or <i>convened</i>: one<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</a></span>
+<i>assembles</i>, or <i>convenes</i>, by invitation or request; one attends
+to the notice or not, at pleasure. <i>Convoke</i>, on the other
+hand, is <i>an act of authority</i>; it is the call of one who has
+the authority to give the call; it is heeded by those who
+feel themselves bound to attend." Properly, then, President
+Arthur <i>convokes</i>, not <i>convenes</i>, the Senate.</p>
+
+<p><b>Corporeal&mdash;Corporal.</b> These adjectives, though regarded
+as synonyms, are not used indiscriminately. <i>Corporal</i>
+is used in reference to the body, or animal frame, in
+its proper sense; <i>corporeal</i>, to the animal substance in an
+extended sense&mdash;opposed to spiritual. <i>Corporal</i> punishment;
+<i>corporeal</i> or <i>material</i> form or substance.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"That to <i>corporeal</i> substances could add<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Speed most spiritual."&mdash;Milton.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"What seemed <i>corporal</i><br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Melted as breath into the wind."&mdash;Shakespeare.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b>Couple.</b> In its primitive signification, this word does
+not mean simply two, but two that are united by some
+bond; such as, for example, the tie that unites the sexes.
+It has, however, been so long used to mean two of a kind
+considered together, that in this sense it may be deemed
+permissible, though the substitution of the word <i>two</i> for it
+would often materially improve the diction.</p>
+
+<p><b>Courage.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Bravery">Bravery</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Crime" id="Crime"></a>Crime&mdash;Vice&mdash;Sin.</b> The confusion that exists in the
+use of these words is due largely to an imperfect understanding
+of their respective meanings. <i>Crime</i> is the violation
+of the law of a state; hence, as the laws of states differ,
+what is crime in one state may not be crime in another.
+<i>Vice</i> is a course of wrong-doing, and is not modified either
+by country, religion, or condition. As for <i>sin</i>, it is very
+difficult to define what it is, as what is sinful in the eyes of
+one man may not be sinful in the eyes of another; what is<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</a></span>
+sinful in the eyes of a Jew may not be sinful in the eyes of
+a Christian; and what is sinful in the eyes of a Christian of
+one country may not be sinful in the eyes of a Christian of
+another country. In the days of slavery, to harbor a runaway
+slave was a <i>crime</i>, but it was, in the eyes of most people,
+neither a <i>vice</i> nor a <i>sin</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Crushed out.</b> "The rebellion was finally <i>crushed out</i>."
+Out of what? We may <i>crush</i> the life out of a man, or
+<i>crush</i> a man to death, and <i>crush</i>, not <i>crush out</i>, a rebellion.</p>
+
+<p><b>Cultured.</b> This word is said to be a product of Boston&mdash;an
+excellent place for anybody or anything to come
+from. Many persons object to its use on the ground that
+there can be no such participial adjective, because there is
+no verb in use from which to form it. We have in use
+the substantive <i>culture</i>, but, though the dictionaries recognize
+the verb <i>to culture</i>, we do not use it. Be this objection
+valid or be it not, <i>cultured</i> having but two syllables,
+while its synonym <i>cultivated</i> has four, it is likely
+to find favor with those who employ short words when
+they convey their meaning as well as long ones. Other
+adjectives of this kind are, moneyed, whiskered, slippered,
+lettered, talented, cottaged, lilied, anguished, gifted, and
+so forth.</p>
+
+<p><b>Curious.</b> This word is often used instead of <i>strange</i>
+or <i>remarkable</i>. "A <i>curious</i> fact": better, "a <i>remarkable</i>
+fact." "A <i>curious</i> proceeding": better, "a <i>strange</i> proceeding."</p>
+
+<p><b>Dangerous.</b> "He is pretty sick, but not <i>dangerous</i>."
+Dangerous people are generally most dangerous when they
+are most vigorous. Say, rather, "He is sick, but not <i>in
+danger</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Dearest.</b> "A gentleman once began a letter to his<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</a></span>
+bride thus: 'My <i>dearest</i> Maria.' The lady replied: 'My
+dear John, I beg that you will mend either your morals or
+your grammar. You call me your "<i>dearest</i> Maria"; am I
+to understand that you have other Marias'?"&mdash;Moon's
+"Bad English."</p>
+
+<p><b>Deceiving.</b> "You are <i>deceiving</i> me." Not unfrequently
+<i>deceiving</i> is used when the speaker means <i>trying to deceive</i>.
+It is when we do not suspect deception that we are
+deceived.</p>
+
+<p><b>Decimate.</b> This word, meaning as it properly does to
+tithe, to take the tenth part, is hardly permissible in the
+sense in which it is used in such sentences as, "The regiment
+held its position, though terribly <i>decimated</i> by the
+enemy's artillery." "Though terribly <i>tithed</i>" would be
+equally correct.</p>
+
+<p><b>Demean.</b> This word is sometimes erroneously used in
+the sense of <i>to debase</i>, <i>to disgrace</i>, <i>to humble</i>. It is a reflexive
+verb, and its true meaning is <i>to behave</i>, <i>to carry</i>, <i>to
+conduct</i>; as, "He <i>demeans himself</i> in a gentlemanly manner,"
+i. e., He <i>behaves</i>, or <i>carries</i>, or <i>conducts</i>, himself in a
+gentlemanly manner.</p>
+
+<p><b>Denude.</b> "The vulture," says Brande, "has some
+part of the head and sometimes of the neck <i>denuded</i> of
+feathers." Most birds might be <i>denuded</i> of the feathers on
+their heads; not so, however, the vulture, for his head is
+always featherless. A thing can not be <i>denuded</i> of what
+it does not have. Denuding a vulture's head and neck of
+the feathers is like <i>denuding</i> an eel of its scales.</p>
+
+<p><b>Deprecate.</b> Strangely enough, this word is often
+used in the sense of disapprove, censure, condemn; as,
+"He <i>deprecates</i> the whole proceeding"; "Your course,
+from first to last, is universally <i>deprecated</i>." But, according
+to the authorities, the word really means, to endeavor to<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</a></span>
+avert by prayer; to pray exemption or deliverance from;
+to beg off; to entreat; to urge against.</p>
+
+<p>"Daniel kneeled upon his knees to <i>deprecate</i> the captivity
+of his people."&mdash;Hewyt.</p>
+
+<p><b>Despite.</b> This word is often incorrectly preceded by
+<i>in</i> and followed by <i>of</i>; thus, "<i>In</i> despite <i>of</i> all our efforts
+to detain him, he set out"; which should be, "Despite all
+our efforts," etc., or "<i>In spite of</i> all our efforts," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Determined.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Bound">Bound</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Diction.</b> This is a general term, and is applicable to
+a single sentence or to a connected composition. <i>Bad diction</i>
+may be due to errors in grammar, to a confused disposition
+of words, or to an improper use of words. <i>Diction</i>,
+to be good, requires to be only correct and clear. Of excellent
+examples of bad diction there are very many in
+a little work by Dr. L. T. Townsend, Professor of Sacred
+Rhetoric in Boston University, the first volume of which
+has lately come under my notice. The first ten lines of
+Dr. Townsend's preface are:</p>
+
+<p>"The leading genius<span class="fnanchor">1</span> of the People's College at Chautauqua
+Lake, with a [the?] view of providing for his course<span class="fnanchor">2</span>
+a text-book, asked for the publication of the following laws
+and principles of speech.<span class="fnanchor">3</span></p>
+
+<p>"The author, not seeing sufficient reason<span class="fnanchor">4</span> for withholding
+what had been of much practical benefit<span class="fnanchor">5</span> to himself,
+consented.<span class="fnanchor">6</span></p>
+
+<p>"The subject-matter herein contained is an outgrowth
+from<span class="fnanchor">7</span> occasional instructions<span class="fnanchor">8</span> given<span class="fnanchor">9</span> while occupying the
+chair<span class="fnanchor">10</span> of Sacred Rhetoric."</p>
+
+<p>1. The phrase <i>leading genius</i> is badly chosen. Founder,
+projector, head, organizer, principal, or president&mdash;some one
+of these terms would probably have been appropriate. 2.
+What course? Race-course, course of ethics, &aelig;sthetics,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</a></span>
+rhetoric, or what?<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> 3. "The following laws and principles
+of speech." And how came these laws and principles in
+existence? Who made them? We are to infer, it would
+seem, that Professor Townsend made them, and that the
+world would have had to go without the laws that govern
+language and the principles on which language is formed
+had it pleased Professor Townsend to withhold them. 4.
+"<i>Sufficient</i> reason"! Then there were reasons why Professor
+Townsend ought to have kept these good things all
+to himself; only, they were not <i>sufficient</i>. 5. "Practical
+benefit"! Is there <i>any</i> such thing as impractical benefit?
+Are not all benefits practical? and, if they are, what
+purpose does the epithet <i>practical</i> serve? 6. Consented
+to what? It is easy to see that the Doctor means <i>acceded
+to the request</i>, but he is a long way from saying
+so. The object writers usually have in view is to convey
+thought, not to set their readers to guessing. 7. <i>The
+outgrowth of</i> would be English. 8. "Occasional instructions"!
+Very vague, and well calculated to set the reader
+to guessing again. 9. Given to whom? 10. "<i>The</i> chair."
+The definite article made it necessary for the writer to
+specify what particular chair of Sacred Rhetoric he meant.</p>
+
+<p>These ten lines are a fair specimen of the diction of the
+entire volume.</p>
+
+<p>Page 131. "To render a <i>given ambiguous or</i> unintelligible
+sentence transparent, the following suggestions are
+recommended." The words in italics are unnecessary,
+since what is ambiguous is unintelligible. Then who has
+ever heard of <i>recommending suggestions</i>?</p>
+
+<p>Dr. Townsend speaks of <i>mastering a subject before publishing
+it</i>. Publishing a subject?<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>Page 133. "Violations of simplicity, whatever the
+type, show either that <i>the mind of</i> the writer is tainted with
+affectation, or <i>else</i> that <i>an effort is making</i> to conceal <i>conscious</i>
+poverty of <i>sentiment</i> under loftiness of expression."
+Here is an example of a kind of sentence that can be
+mended in only one way&mdash;by rewriting, which might be
+done thus: Violations of simplicity, whatever the type,
+show either that the writer is tainted with affectation, or
+that he is making an effort to conceal poverty of thought
+under loftiness of expression.</p>
+
+<p>Page 143. "This <i>quality</i> is fully <i>stated</i> and recommended,"
+etc. Who has ever heard of <i>stating a quality</i>?</p>
+
+<p>On page 145 Dr. Townsend says: "A person can not
+read a single book of poor style without having his own
+style vitiated." <i>A book of poor style</i> is an awkward expression,
+to say the least. <i>A single badly-written book</i> would
+have been unobjectionable.</p>
+
+<p>Page 160. "The presented picture produces instantly
+a definite effect." Why this unusual disposition of
+words? Why not say, in accordance with the idiom of
+the language, "The picture presented instantly produces,"
+etc.?</p>
+
+<p>Page 161. "The boy studies ... geography and hates
+everything connected with the sea and land." Why <i>the</i>
+boy? As there are few things besides seals and turtles that
+are connected with the sea <i>and</i> land, the boy in question
+has few things to hate.</p>
+
+<p>On page 175, Dr. Townsend heads a chapter thus:
+"<i>Art</i> of acquiring <i>Skill</i> in the use of Poetic Speech."
+This reminds one of the man who tried to lift himself over
+a fence by taking hold of the seat of his breeches. "<i>How</i>
+to acquire skill" is probably what is meant.</p>
+
+<p>On page 232, "Jeremy Taylor is among the best<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</a></span>
+models of long sentences which are both clear and logical."
+Jeremy Taylor is a clear and logical long sentence?! True,
+our learned rhetorician says so, but he doesn't mean it.
+He means, "In Jeremy Taylor we find some of the best
+examples of long sentences which are at once clear and
+logical."</p>
+
+<p>Since the foregoing was written, the second volume of
+Professor Townsend's "Art of Speech" has been published.
+In the brief preface to this volume we find this characteristic
+sentence: "The author has felt that <i>clergymen</i> more
+than <i>those</i> of other professions will study this treatise."
+The antecedent of the relative <i>those</i> being <i>clergymen</i>, the
+sentence, it will be perceived, says: "The author has felt
+that <i>clergymen</i> more than <i>clergymen of other professions</i> will
+study this treatise." Comment on such "art" as Professor
+Townsend's is not necessary.</p>
+
+<p>I find several noteworthy examples of bad diction in an
+article in a recent number of an Australian magazine. The
+following are some of them: "<i>Large capital</i> always manages
+to make <i>itself</i> master of the situation; it is the small
+capitalist and the small landholder that would suffer,"
+etc. Should be, "<i>The large capitalist ... himself</i>," etc.
+Again: "The small farmer would ... be despoiled ...
+of the meager profit which <i>strenuous</i> labor had conquered
+from the <i>reluctant</i> soil." Not only are the epithets in
+italics superfluous, and consequently weakening in their
+effect, but idiom does not permit <i>strenuous</i> to be used to
+qualify <i>labor</i>: <i>hard</i> labor and <i>strenuous</i> effort. Again:
+"Capital has always the choice <i>of</i> a large field." Should
+be, "the choice <i>offered by</i> a large field." Again: "Should
+capital be withdrawn, tenements would soon prove insufficient."
+Should be, "<i>the number of</i> tenements would," etc.
+Again: "Men of wealth, therefore, would find their Fifth<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</a></span>
+Avenue mansions and their summer villas a little more
+burdened with taxes, but with this increase happily balanced
+by the exemption of their bonds and mortgages, their
+plate and furniture." The thought here is so simple that
+we easily divine it; but, if we look at the sentence at all
+carefully, we find that, though we supply the ellipses in the
+most charitable manner possible, the sentence really says:
+"Men would find their mansions more burdened, but would
+find them with this increased burden happily balanced by
+the exemption," etc. The sentence should have been framed
+somewhat in this wise: "Men ... would find their ...
+mansions ... more burdened with taxes, but this increase
+in the taxes on their real estate would be happily balanced
+by the exemption from taxation of their bonds, mortgages,
+plate, and furniture." Again: "Men generally ... would
+be inclined to laugh at the idea of intrusting the modern
+politician with such gigantic opportunities for enriching his
+favorites." We do not <i>intrust</i> one another with <i>opportunities</i>.
+<i>To enrich</i> would better the diction. Again: "The
+value of land that has accrued from labor is not ... a just
+object for confiscation." Correctly: "The value of land
+that has <i>resulted</i> from labor is not <i>justly</i> ... an object <i>of</i>
+confiscation." <i>Accrue</i> is properly used more in the sense of
+<i>spontaneous growth</i>. Again: "If the state attempts to confiscate
+this increase by means of taxes, either rentals will
+increase correspondingly, or such a check will be put upon
+<i>the</i> growth <i>of each place</i> and <i>all the</i> enterprises <i>connected with
+it</i> that greater injury would be done than if things had been
+left untouched." We have here, it will be observed, a confusion
+of moods; the sentence begins in the indicative and
+ends in the conditional. The words in italics are worse
+than superfluous. Rewritten: "If the state <i>should</i> attempt
+to confiscate this increase by means of taxes, either rentals<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</a></span>
+<i>would</i> increase correspondingly, or such a check <i>would</i> be
+put upon growth and enterprise that greater injury would,"
+etc. Again: "The <i>theory</i> that land ... is a <i>boon</i> of Nature,
+to which every person has an inalienable right equal
+to every other person, is not new." The words <i>theory</i> and
+<i>boon</i> are here misused. A <i>theory</i> is a system of suppositions.
+The things man receives from Nature are <i>gifts</i>, not <i>boons</i>:
+the gift of reason, the gift of speech, etc. The sentence
+should be: "The <i>declaration</i> (or <i>assertion</i>) that land ... is
+a <i>gift</i> of Nature, to which every person has an inalienable
+right equal to <i>that of any</i> other person, is not new." Or,
+more simply and quite as forcibly: "... to which one person
+has an inalienable right equal to that of another, is not
+new." Or, more simply still, and more forcibly: "... to
+which one <i>man</i> has as good a right as another, is not new."
+By substituting the word <i>man</i> for <i>person</i>, we have a word
+of one syllable that expresses, in this connection, all that
+the longer word expresses. The fewer the syllables, if the
+thought be fully expressed, the more vigorous the diction.
+Inalienability being foreign to the discussion, the long word
+<i>inalienable</i> only encumbers the sentence.</p>
+
+<p>"We have thus<span class="fnanchor">1</span> passed in review<span class="fnanchor">2</span> the changes and improvements<span class="fnanchor">3</span>
+which the revision contains<span class="fnanchor">4</span> in the First Epistle
+to the Corinthians. It has<span class="fnanchor">5</span> not, indeed,<span class="fnanchor">6</span> been possible
+to refer to<span class="fnanchor">7</span> them all; but so many illustrations<span class="fnanchor">8</span> have been
+given in<span class="fnanchor">9</span> the several classes described that the reader will
+have<span class="fnanchor">10</span> a satisfactory<span class="fnanchor">11</span> survey of the whole subject. Whatever
+may be said of other portions<span class="fnanchor">12</span> of the New Testament,
+we think it will be generally admitted that in this
+Epistle the changes have improved the old<span class="fnanchor">13</span> translation.
+They are such as<span class="fnanchor">14</span> make the English version<span class="fnanchor">15</span> conform
+more completely<span class="fnanchor">16</span> to the Greek original. If this be<span class="fnanchor">17</span> true,
+the revisers have done a good work for the Church.<span class="fnanchor">18</span> If it<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</a></span>
+be true<span class="fnanchor">19</span> with regard to all the New Testament books, the
+work which they have done will remain<span class="fnanchor">20</span> a blessing to the
+readers of those books for<span class="fnanchor">21</span> generations to come. But the
+blessing will be only in the clearer presentation of the Divine
+truth, and, therefore, it will be only to the glory of God."</p>
+
+<p>This astonishingly slipshod bit of composition is from
+the pen of the Rev. Dr. Timothy Dwight. If the learned
+Professor of Divinity in Yale College deemed it worth while
+to give a little thought to manner as well as to matter, it is
+probable that his diction would be very different from what
+it is; and, if he were to give a few minutes to the making
+of verbal corrections in the foregoing paragraph, he would,
+perhaps, do something like this: 1, change <i>thus</i> to <i>now</i>; 2,
+write <i>some of</i> the changes; 3, strike out <i>and improvements</i>;
+4, for <i>contains changes</i> substitute some other form of expression;
+5, instead of <i>has been</i>, write <i>was</i>; 6, strike out <i>indeed</i>;
+7, instead of <i>refer to</i>, write <i>cite</i>; 8, change <i>illustrations</i>
+to <i>examples</i>; 9, instead of <i>in</i>, write <i>of</i>; 10, instead
+of <i>the reader will have</i>, write <i>the reader will be able to get</i>;
+11, change <i>satisfactory</i> to <i>tolerable</i>; 12, change <i>portions</i> to
+<i>parts</i>; 13, not talk of the <i>old</i> translation, as we have no
+new one; 14, strike out as superfluous the words <i>are such
+as</i>; 15, change <i>version</i> to <i>text</i>; 16, substitute <i>nearly</i> for
+<i>completely</i>, which does not admit of comparison; 17, substitute
+the indicative for the conditional; 18, end sentence
+with the word <i>work</i>; 19, introduce <i>also</i> after <i>be</i>; 20, instead
+of <i>remain</i>, in the sense of <i>be</i>, use <i>be</i>; 21, introduce
+<i>the</i> after <i>for</i>. As for the last sentence, it reminds one of
+Mendelssohn's "Songs without Words," though here we
+have, instead of a song and no words, words and no song,
+or rather no meaning. As is often true of cant, we have
+here simply a syntactical arrangement of words signifying&mdash;nothing.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>If Professor Dwight were of those who, in common
+with the Addisons and Macaulays and Newmans, think it
+worth while to give some attention to diction, the thought
+conveyed in the paragraph under consideration would, perhaps,
+have been expressed somewhat in this wise:</p>
+
+<p>"We have now passed in review some of the changes
+that, in the revision, have been made in the First Epistle
+to the Corinthians. It was not possible to cite them all,
+but a sufficient number of examples of the several classes
+described have been given to enable the reader to get a tolerable
+survey of the whole subject. Whatever may be said
+of the other parts of the New Testament, we think it will
+be generally admitted that in this Epistle the changes have
+improved the translation. They make the English text
+conform more nearly to the Greek. This being true, the
+revisers have done a good work; and, if it be also true with
+regard to all the New Testament books, the work which
+they have done will be a blessing to the readers of these
+books for the generations to come."</p>
+
+<p><b>Die with.</b> Man and brute die <i>of</i>, and not <i>with</i>, fevers,
+consumption, the plague, pneumonia, old age, and so on.</p>
+
+<p><b>Differ.</b> Writers differ <i>from</i> one another in opinion with
+regard to the particle we should use with this verb. Some
+say they differ <i>with</i>, others that they differ <i>from</i>, their
+neighbors in opinion. The weight of authority is on the
+side of always using <i>from</i>, though A may differ <i>with</i> C
+from D in opinion with regard, say, to the size of the fixed
+stars. "I differ, as to this matter, <i>from</i> Bishop Lowth."&mdash;Cobbett.
+<i>Different to</i> is heard sometimes instead of <i>different
+from</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Directly.</b> The Britons have a way of using this word
+in the sense of <i>when</i>, <i>as soon as</i>. This is quite foreign to
+its true meaning, which is immediately, at once, straightway.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</a></span>
+They say, for example, "<i>Directly</i> he reached the city,
+he went to his brother's." "Directly he [the saint] was
+dead, the Arabs sent his woolen shirt to the sovereign."&mdash;"London
+News." Dr. Hall says of its use in the sense of
+<i>as soon as</i>: "But, after all, it may simply anticipate on the
+English of the future."</p>
+
+<p><b>Dirt.</b> This word means filth or anything that renders
+foul and unclean, and means nothing else. It is often improperly
+used for earth or loam, and sometimes even for
+sand or gravel. We not unfrequently hear of a <i>dirt</i> road
+when an unpaved road is meant.</p>
+
+<p><b>Discommode.</b> This word is rarely used; <i>incommode</i>
+is accounted the better form.</p>
+
+<p><b>Disremember.</b> This is a word vulgarly used in the
+sense of <i>forget</i>. It is said to be more frequently heard in
+the South than in the North.</p>
+
+<p><b>Distinguish.</b> This verb is sometimes improperly used
+for <i>discriminate</i>. We <i>distinguish</i> by means of the senses
+as well as of the understanding; we <i>discriminate</i> by means
+of the understanding only. "It is difficult, in some cases,
+to <i>distinguish between</i>," etc.: should be, "It is difficult, in
+some cases, to <i>discriminate between</i>," etc. We <i>distinguish</i>
+one thing <i>from another</i>, and <i>discriminate between</i> two or
+more things.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Dock" id="Dock"></a>Dock&mdash;Wharf.</b> The first of these words is often improperly
+used for the second. Of docks there are several
+kinds: a <i>naval dock</i> is a place for the keeping of naval stores,
+timber, and materials for ship-building; a <i>dry dock</i> is a
+place where vessels are drawn out of the water for repairs;
+a <i>wet dock</i> is a place where vessels are kept afloat at a certain
+level while they are loaded and unloaded; a <i>sectional
+dock</i> is a contrivance for raising vessels out of the water on
+a series of air-tight boxes. A <i>dock</i>, then, is a place into<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</a></span>
+which things are received; hence, a man might fall <i>into</i> a
+dock, but could no more fall <i>off</i> a dock than he could fall off
+a hole. A <i>wharf</i> is a sort of quay built by the side of the
+water. A similar structure built at a right angle with the
+shore is generally called a <i>pier</i>. Vessels lie at <i>wharves</i> and
+<i>piers</i>, not at <i>docks</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Donate.</b> This word, which is defined as meaning to
+give, to contribute, is looked upon by most champions of
+good English as being an abomination. <i>Donation</i> is also
+little used by careful writers. "<i>Donate</i>," says Mr. Gould,
+"may be dismissed with this remark: so long as its place is
+occupied by <i>give</i>, <i>bestow</i>, <i>grant</i>, <i>present</i>, etc., it is not needed;
+and it should be unceremoniously bowed out, or thrust
+out, of the seat into which it has, temporarily, intruded."</p>
+
+<p><b>Done.</b> This past participle is often very inelegantly, if
+not improperly, used thus: "He did not cry out as some
+have <i>done</i> against it," which should read, "He did not cry
+out as some have against it"; i. e., "as some <i>have cried out</i>
+against it."</p>
+
+<p>"Done is frequently a very great offender against grammar,"
+says Cobbett. "<i>To do</i> is the <i>act of doing</i>. We see
+people write, 'I <i>did</i> not speak yesterday so well as I wished
+to have <i>done</i>.' Now, what is meant by the writer? He
+means to say that he <i>did</i> not speak so well as he then
+<i>wished</i>, or was wishing, <i>to speak</i>. Therefore, the sentence
+should be, 'I did not speak yesterday so well as I wished
+<i>to do</i>.' That is to say, 'so well as I wished to do it'; that is
+to say, to do or to perform <i>the act of speaking</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"Take great care not to be too free in your use of the
+verb <i>to do</i> in any of its times or modes. It is a nice little
+handy word, and, like our oppressed <i>it</i>, it is made use of
+very often when the writer is at a <i>loss</i> for what to put down.
+<i>To do</i> is to <i>act</i>, and therefore it never can, in any of its<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</a></span>
+parts, supply the place of a <i>neuter</i> verb. 'How do you
+do?' Here <i>do</i> refers to the <i>state</i>, and is essentially passive
+or neuter. Yet, to employ it for this purpose is very
+common. Dr. Blair, in his 23d Lecture, says: 'It is somewhat
+unfortunate that this Number of the "Spectator"
+did not <i>end</i>, as it might have <i>done</i>, with the former beautiful
+period.' That is to say, <i>done it</i>. And then we ask,
+Done what? Not the <i>act of ending</i>, because in this case
+there is <i>no action</i> at all. The verb means <i>to come to an
+end</i>, <i>to cease</i>, <i>not to go any further</i>. This same verb <i>to
+end</i> is sometimes an active verb: 'I <i>end</i> my sentence';
+<i>then</i> the verb <i>to do</i> may supply its place; as, 'I have not
+ended my sentence so well as I might have <i>done</i>'; that is,
+done <i>it</i>; that is, done, or performed, the <i>act of ending</i>. But
+the Number of the 'Spectator' was no <i>actor</i>; it was expected
+to <i>perform</i> nothing; it was, by the Doctor, wished to have
+<i>ceased</i> to proceed. 'Did not <i>end</i> as it very well might have
+ended....' This would have been correct; but the Doctor
+wished to avoid the <i>repetition</i>, and thus he fell into bad
+grammar. 'Mr. Speaker, I do not <i>feel</i> so well satisfied as
+I should have <i>done</i> if the Right Honorable Gentleman had
+explained the matter more fully.' To <i>feel</i> satisfied is&mdash;when
+the satisfaction is to arise from conviction produced by fact
+or reasoning&mdash;a senseless expression; and to supply its
+place, when it is, as in this case, a neuter verb, by <i>to do</i>, is
+as senseless. Done <i>what</i>? Done <i>the act of feeling</i>! 'I
+do not <i>feel</i> so well satisfied as I should have <i>done</i>, or <i>executed</i>,
+or <i>performed</i> the <i>act of feeling</i>'! What incomprehensible
+words!"</p>
+
+<p><b>Don't.</b> Everybody knows that <i>don't</i> is a contraction of
+<i>do not</i>, and that <i>doesn't</i> is a contraction of <i>does not</i>; and yet
+<i>nearly</i> everybody is guilty of using <i>don't</i> when he should
+use <i>doesn't</i>. "So you <i>don't</i> go; John <i>doesn't</i> either, I hear."<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Double Genitive.</b> An anecdote of Mr. Lincoln&mdash;an
+anecdote of Mr. Lincoln's. We see at a glance that these
+two phrases are very different in meaning. So, also, a portrait
+of Brown&mdash;a portrait of Brown's. No precise rule
+has ever been given to guide us in our choice between these
+two forms of the possessive case. Sometimes it is not material
+which form is employed; where, however, it is material&mdash;and
+it generally is&mdash;we must consider the thought
+we wish to express, and rely on our discrimination.</p>
+
+<p><b>Dramatize.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Adapt">Adapt</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Drawing-room.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Parlor">Parlor</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Dress" id="Dress"></a>Dress&mdash;Gown.</b> Within the memory of many persons
+the outer garment worn by women was properly called a
+<i>gown</i> by everybody, instead of being improperly called a
+<i>dress</i>, as it now is by nearly everybody.</p>
+
+<p><b>Drive.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Ride">Ride</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Due" id="Due"></a>Due&mdash;Owing.</b> These two words, though close synonyms,
+should not be used indiscriminately. The mistake
+usually made is in using <i>due</i> instead of <i>owing</i>. That is <i>due</i>
+which ought to be paid as a debt; that is <i>owing</i> which is to
+be referred to as a source. "It was <i>owing</i> to his exertions
+that the scheme succeeded." "It was <i>owing</i> to your negligence
+that the accident happened." "A certain respect is
+<i>due</i> to men's prejudices." "This was <i>owing</i> to an indifference
+to the pleasures of life." "It is <i>due</i> to the public that
+I should tell all I know of the matter."</p>
+
+<p><b>Each other.</b> "Their great authors address themselves,
+not to their country, but to <i>each other</i>."&mdash;Buckle. <i>Each
+other</i> is properly applied to two only; <i>one another</i> must be
+used when the number considered exceeds two. Buckle
+should have written <i>one another</i> and not <i>each other</i>, unless
+he meant to intimate that the Germans had only two great
+authors, which is not probable.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Eat.</b> Grammarians differ very widely with regard to
+the conjugation of this verb; there is no doubt, however,
+that from every point of view the preferable forms for the
+preterite and past participle are respectively <i>ate</i> and <i>eaten</i>.
+To refined ears the other forms smack of vulgarity, although
+supported by good authority. "I <i>ate</i> an apple." "I have
+<i>eaten</i> dinner." "John <i>ate</i> supper with me." "As soon as
+you have <i>eaten</i> breakfast we will set out."</p>
+
+<p><b>Editorial.</b> The use of this adjective as a substantive
+is said to be an Americanism.</p>
+
+<p><b>Education.</b> This is one of the most misused of words.
+A man may be well acquainted with the contents of text-books,
+and yet be a person of little <i>education</i>; on the other
+hand, a man may be a person of good education, and yet
+know little of the contents of text-books. Abraham Lincoln
+and Edwin Forrest knew comparatively little of what
+is generally learned in schools; still they were men of culture,
+men of <i>education</i>. A man may have ever so much
+book-knowledge and still be a boor; but a man can not be
+a person of good education and not be&mdash;so far as manner
+is concerned&mdash;a gentleman. <i>Education</i>, then, is a whole
+of which Instruction and Breeding are the parts. The man
+or the woman&mdash;even in this democratic country of ours&mdash;who
+<i>deserves</i> the title of gentleman or lady is always a person
+of education; i. e., he or she has a sufficient acquaintance
+with books and with the usages of social intercourse
+to acquit himself or herself creditably in the society of cultivated
+people. Not moral worth, nor learning, nor wealth,
+nor all three combined, can unaided make a gentleman, for
+with all three a man might be <i>uneducated</i>&mdash;i. e., coarse, unbred,
+unschooled in those things which alone make men
+welcome in the society of the refined.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Effectuate" id="Effectuate"></a>Effectuate.</b> This word, together with <i>ratiocinate</i> and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</a></span>
+<i>eventuate</i>, is said to be a great favorite with the rural members
+of the Arkansas legislature.</p>
+
+<p><b>Effluvium.</b> The plural of this word is <i>effluvia</i>. It is
+a common error with those who have no knowledge of Latin
+to speak of "a disagreeable effluvia," which is as incorrect
+as it would be to talk about "a disagreeable vapors."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Effort_without_Effect" id="Effort_without_Effect"></a>Effort without Effect.</b> "Some writers deal in expletives
+to a degree that tires the ear and offends the understanding.
+With them everything is <i>excessively</i>, or <i>immensely</i>,
+or <i>extremely</i>, or <i>vastly</i>, or <i>surprisingly</i>, or <i>wonderfully</i>, or
+<i>abundantly</i>, or the like. The notion of such writers is that
+these words give <i>strength</i> to what they are saying. This is
+a great error. Strength must be found in the <i>thought</i>, or it
+will never be found in the <i>words</i>. Big-sounding words,
+without thoughts corresponding, are effort without effect."&mdash;William
+Cobbett. See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Forcible-feeble">Forcible-feeble</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Egoist.</b> "One of a class of philosophers who professed
+to be sure of nothing but their own existence."&mdash;Reid.</p>
+
+<p><b>Egotist.</b> "One who talks much of himself."</p>
+
+<p>"A tribe of <i>egotists</i> for whom I have always had a mortal
+aversion."&mdash;"Spectator."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Either" id="Either"></a>Either.</b> This word means, strictly, the <i>one</i> or the <i>other</i>
+of two. Unlike <i>both</i>, which means two taken collectively,
+<i>either</i>, like <i>each</i>, may mean <i>two considered separately</i>; but in
+this sense <i>each</i> is the better word to use. "Give me <i>either</i>
+of them" means, Give me the one or the other of two.
+"He has a farm on <i>either</i> side of the river" would mean
+that he has two farms, one on each (or either) side of the
+river. "He has a farm on <i>both</i> sides of the river" would
+mean that his farm lies partly on the one side of the river
+and partly on the other. The use of <i>either</i> in the sense of
+<i>each</i>, though biblical and defensible, may be accounted little
+if any better than an affectation. <i>Neither</i> is the negative<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</a></span>
+of <i>either</i>. <i>Either</i> is responded to by <i>or</i>, <i>neither</i> by <i>nor</i>;
+as, "<i>either</i> this <i>or</i> that," "<i>neither</i> this <i>nor</i> that." <i>Either</i>
+and <i>neither</i> should not&mdash;strictly&mdash;be used in relation to
+more than two objects. But, though both <i>either</i> and <i>neither</i>
+are strictly applicable to two only, they have been for a
+very long time used in relation to more than two by many
+good writers; and, as it is often convenient so to use them,
+it seems probable that the custom will prevail. When more
+than two things are referred to, <i>any</i> and <i>none</i> should be
+used instead of <i>either</i> and <i>neither</i>; as, "<i>any</i> of the three,"
+not, "<i>either</i> of the three"; "<i>none</i> of the four," not, "<i>neither</i>
+of the four."</p>
+
+<p><b>Either Alternative.</b> The word <i>alternative</i> means a
+choice offered between two things. An <i>alternative writ</i>,
+for example, offers the <i>alternative</i> of choosing between the
+doing of a specified act or of showing cause why it is not
+done. Such propositions, therefore, as, "You are at liberty
+to choose <i>either</i> alternative," "<i>Two</i> alternatives are
+presented to me," "<i>Several</i> alternatives presented themselves,"
+and the like, are not correct English. The word is
+correctly used thus: "I am confronted with a hard <i>alternative</i>:
+I must either denounce a friend or betray my trust."
+We rarely hear the word <i>alternate</i> or any of its derivatives
+correctly pronounced.</p>
+
+<p><b>Elder.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Older">Older</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Elegant.</b> Professor Proctor says: "If you say to an
+American, 'This is a fine morning,' he is likely to reply,
+'It is an <i>elegant</i> morning,' or perhaps oftener by using simply
+the word <i>elegant</i>. This is not a pleasing use of the
+word." This is not American English, Professor, but popinjay
+English.</p>
+
+<p><b>Ellipsis.</b> The omission of a word or of words necessary
+to complete the grammatical construction, but not<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</a></span>
+necessary to make the meaning clear, is called an <i>ellipsis</i>.
+We almost always, whether in speaking or in writing, leave
+out some of the words necessary to the <i>full</i> expression of
+our meaning. For example, in dating a letter to-day, we
+should write, "New York, August 25, 1881," which would
+be, if fully written out, "I am now writing in the city of
+New York; this is the twenty-fifth day of August, and this
+month is in the one thousand eight hundred and eighty-first
+year of the Christian era." "I am going to Wallack's"
+means, "I am going to Wallack's <i>theatre</i>." "I shall spend
+the summer at my aunt's"; i. e., at my aunt's <i>house</i>.</p>
+
+<p>By supplying the <i>ellipses</i> we can often discover the
+errors in a sentence, if there are any.</p>
+
+<p><b>Enjoy bad Health.</b> As no one has ever been known
+to <i>enjoy</i> bad health, it is better to employ some other form
+of expression than this. Say, for example, he is in <i>feeble</i>,
+or <i>delicate</i>, health.</p>
+
+<p><b>Enthuse.</b> This is a word that is occasionally heard in
+conversation, and is sometimes met with in print; but it
+has not as yet made its appearance in the dictionaries.
+What its ultimate fate will be, of course, no one can tell;
+for the present, however, it is studiously shunned by those
+who are at all careful in the selection of their language. It
+is said to be most used in the South. The writer has never
+seen it anywhere in the North but in the columns of the
+"Boston Congregationalist."</p>
+
+<p><b>Epigram.</b> "The word <i>epigram</i> signified originally an
+inscription on a monument. It next came to mean a short
+poem containing some single thought pointedly expressed,
+the subjects being very various&mdash;amatory, convivial, moral,
+eulogistic, satirical, humorous, etc. Of the various devices
+for brevity and point employed in such compositions, especially
+in modern times, the most frequent is a play upon<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</a></span>
+words.... In the <i>epigram</i> the mind is roused by a conflict
+or contradiction between the form of the language and the
+meaning really conveyed."&mdash;Bain.</p>
+
+<p>Some examples are:</p>
+
+<p>"When you have nothing to say, say it."</p>
+
+<p>"We can not see the wood for the trees"; that is, we
+can not get a general view because we are so engrossed with
+the details.</p>
+
+<p>"Verbosity is cured by a large vocabulary"; that is, he
+who commands a large vocabulary is able to select words
+that will give his meaning tersely.</p>
+
+<p>"By indignities men come to dignities."</p>
+
+<p>"Some people are too foolish to commit follies."</p>
+
+<p>"He went to his imagination for his facts, and to his
+memory for his tropes."</p>
+
+<p><b>Epithet.</b> Many persons use this word who are in error
+with regard to its meaning; they think that to "apply epithets"
+to a person is to vilify and insult him. Not at all.
+An <i>epithet</i> is a word that expresses a quality, good or bad;
+a term that expresses an attribute. "All <i>adjectives</i> are <i>epithets</i>,
+but all <i>epithets</i> are not <i>adjectives</i>," says Crabb; "thus,
+in Virgil's Pater &AElig;neas, the <i>pater</i> is an <i>epithet</i>, but not an
+<i>adjective</i>." <i>Epithet</i> is the technical term of the rhetorician;
+<i>adjective</i>, that of the grammarian.</p>
+
+<p><b>Equally as well.</b> A redundant form of expression, as
+any one will see who for a moment considers it. <i>As well</i>,
+or <i>equally well</i>, expresses quite as much as <i>equally as well</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Equanimity_of_mind" id="Equanimity_of_mind"></a>Equanimity of mind.</b> This phrase is tautological,
+and expresses no more than does <i>equanimity</i> (literally,
+"equalmindedness") alone; hence, <i>of mind</i> is superfluous,
+and consequently inelegant. <i>Anxiety of mind</i> is a scarcely
+less redundant form of expression. <i>A capricious mind</i> is in
+the same category.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Erratum.</b> Plural, <i>errata</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Esquire.</b> An esquire was originally the shield-bearer
+of a knight. It is much, and, in the opinion of some, rather
+absurdly, used in this country. Mr. Richard Grant White
+says on the subject of its use: "I have yet to discover
+what a man means when he addresses a letter to John
+Dash, <i>Esqr.</i>" He means no more nor less than when he
+writes <i>Mr.</i> (master). The use of <i>Esq.</i> is quite as prevalent
+in England as in America, and has little more meaning
+there than here. It simply belongs to our stock of courteous
+epithets.</p>
+
+<p><b>Euphemism.</b> A description which describes in inoffensive
+language that which is of itself offensive, or a
+figure which uses agreeable phraseology when the literal
+would be offensive, is called a <i>euphemism</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Eventuate.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Effectuate">Effectuate</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Everlastingly.</b> This adverb is misused in the South
+in a manner that is very apt to excite the risibility of one
+to whom the peculiar misuse is new. The writer recently
+visited the upper part of New York with a distinguished
+Southern poet and journalist. It was the gentleman's first
+ride over an elevated road. When we were fairly under
+way, in admiration of the rate of speed at which the cars
+were moving, he exclaimed, "Well, they do just <i>everlastingly</i>
+shoot along, don't they!"</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Every" id="Every"></a>Every.</b> This word, which means simply each or all
+taken separately, is of late years frequently made, by slipshod
+speakers, to do duty for perfect, entire, great, or all
+possible. Thus we have such expressions as <i>every</i> pains,
+<i>every</i> confidence, <i>every</i> praise, <i>every</i> charity, and so on.
+We also have such diction as, "<i>Every one</i> has this in common";
+meaning, "<i>All of us</i> have this in common."</p>
+
+<p><b>Every-day Latin.</b> <i>A fortiori</i>: with stronger reason.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</a></span>
+<i>A posteriori</i>: from the effect to the cause. <i>A priori</i>: from
+the cause to the effect. <i>Bona fide</i>: in good faith; in reality.
+<i>Certiorari</i>: to be made more certain. <i>Ceteris paribus</i>:
+other circumstances being equal. <i>De facto</i>: in fact; in
+reality. <i>De jure</i>: in right; in law. <i>Ecce homo</i>: behold
+the man. <i>Ergo</i>: therefore. <i>Et cetera</i>: and the rest; and
+so on. <i>Excerpta</i>: extracts. <i>Exempli gratia</i>: by way of
+example; abbreviated, <i>e. g.</i>, and <i>ex. gr.</i> <i>Ex officio</i>: by
+virtue of his office. <i>Ex parte</i>: on one side; an <i>ex parte</i>
+statement is a statement on one side only. <i>Ibidem</i>: in the
+same place; abbreviated, <i>ibid.</i> <i>Idem</i>: the same. <i>Id est</i>:
+that is; abbreviated, <i>i. e.</i> <i>Imprimis</i>: in the first place.
+<i>In statu quo</i>: in the former state; just as it was. <i>In statu
+quo ante bellum</i>: in the same state as before the war. <i>In
+transitu</i>: in passing. <i>Index expurgatorius</i>: a purifying
+index. <i>In extremis</i>: at the point of death. <i>In memoriam</i>:
+in memory. <i>Ipse dixit</i>: on his sole assertion. <i>Item</i>: also.
+<i>Labor omnia vincit</i>: labor overcomes every difficulty. <i>Locus
+sigilli</i>: the place of the seal. <i>Multum in parvo</i>: much
+in little. <i>Mutatis mutandis</i>: after making the necessary
+changes. <i>Ne plus ultra</i>: nothing beyond; the utmost
+point. <i>Nolens volens</i>: willing or unwilling. <i>Nota bene</i>:
+mark well; take particular notice. <i>Omnes</i>: all. <i>O tempora,
+O mores!</i> O the times and the manners! <i>Otium cum
+dignitate</i>: ease with dignity. <i>Otium sine dignitate</i>: ease
+without dignity. <i>Particeps criminis</i>: an accomplice. <i>Peccavi</i>:
+I have sinned. <i>Per se</i>: by itself. <i>Prima facie</i>: on
+the first view or appearance; at first sight. <i>Pro bono publico</i>:
+for the public good. <i>Quid nunc</i>: what now? <i>Quid
+pro quo</i>: one thing for another; an equivalent. <i>Quondam</i>:
+formerly. <i>Rara avis</i>: a rare bird; a prodigy. <i>Resurgam</i>:
+I shall rise again. <i>Seriatim</i>: in order. <i>Sine
+die</i>: without specifying any particular day; to an indefinite<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</a></span>
+time. <i>Sine qua non</i>: an indispensable condition. <i>Sui
+generis</i>: of its own kind. <i>Vade mecum</i>: go with me.
+<i>Verbatim</i>: word by word. <i>Versus</i>: against. <i>Vale</i>: fare-well.
+<i>Via</i>: by the way of. <i>Vice</i>: in the place of. <i>Vide</i>:
+see. <i>Vi et armis</i>: by main force. <i>Viva voce</i>: orally; by
+word of mouth. <i>Vox populi, vox Dei</i>: the voice of the
+people is the voice of God.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Evidence" id="Evidence"></a>Evidence&mdash;Testimony.</b> These words, though differing
+widely in meaning, are often used indiscriminately by
+careless speakers. <i>Evidence</i> is that which <i>tends</i> to convince;
+<i>testimony</i> is that which is <i>intended</i> to convince. In a judicial
+investigation, for example, there might be a great deal
+of <i>testimony</i>&mdash;a great deal of <i>testifying</i>&mdash;and very little <i>evidence</i>;
+and the <i>evidence</i> might be quite the reverse of the
+<i>testimony</i>. See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Proof">Proof</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Exaggeration.</b> "Weak minds, feeble writers and
+speakers delight in <i>superlatives</i>." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Effort_without_Effect">Effort without
+Effect</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Except.</b> "No one need apply <i>except</i> he is thoroughly
+familiar with the business," should be, "No one need
+apply <i>unless</i>," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Excessively.</b> That class of persons who are never
+content with any form of expression that falls short of the
+superlative, frequently use <i>excessively</i> when <i>exceedingly</i> or
+even the little word <i>very</i> would serve their turn better.
+They say, for example, that the weather is <i>excessively hot</i>,
+when they should content themselves with saying simply
+that the weather is <i>very warm</i>, or, if the word suits them
+better, <i>hot</i>. Intemperance in the use of language is as
+much to be censured as intemperance in anything else;
+like intemperance in other things, its effect is vulgarizing.</p>
+
+<p><b>Execute.</b> This word means to follow out to the end,
+to carry into effect, to accomplish, to fulfill, to perform;<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</a></span>
+as, to execute an order, to execute a purpose. And the
+dictionaries and almost universal usage say that it also
+means to put to death in conformity with a judicial sentence;
+as, to execute a criminal. Some of our careful
+speakers, however, maintain that the use of the word in
+this sense is indefensible. They say that <i>laws</i> and <i>sentences</i>
+are executed, but not <i>criminals</i>, and that their execution
+only rarely results in the death of the persons upon whom
+they are executed. In the hanging of a criminal, it is, then,
+not the criminal who is executed, but the law and the sentence.
+The criminal is <i>hanged</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Expect.</b> This verb always has reference to what is to
+come, never to what is past. We can not <i>expect</i> backward.
+Instead, therefore, of saying, "I <i>expect</i>, you thought
+I would come to see you yesterday," we should say, "I
+<i>suppose</i>," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Experience.</b> "We <i>experience</i> great difficulty in getting
+him to take his medicine." The word <i>have</i> ought to
+be big enough, in a sentence like this, for anybody. "We
+<i>experienced</i> great hardships." Better, "We <i>suffered</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Extend.</b> This verb, the primary meaning of which is
+to stretch out, is used, especially by lovers of big words, in
+connections where to give, to show, or to offer would be
+preferable. For example, it is certainly better to say,
+"They <i>showed</i> me every courtesy," than "They <i>extended</i>
+every courtesy to me." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Every">Every</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>False Grammar.</b> Some examples of false grammar
+will show what every one is the better for knowing: that
+in literature nothing should be taken on trust; that errors
+of grammar even are found where we should least expect
+them. "I do not know whether the imputation <i>were</i> just
+or not."&mdash;Emerson. "I proceeded to inquire if the 'extract'
+... <i>were</i> a veritable quotation."&mdash;Emerson. Should<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</a></span>
+be <i>was</i> in both cases. "How <i>sweet</i> the moonlight sleeps!"&mdash;Townsend,
+"Art of Speech," vol. i, p. 114. Should be
+<i>sweetly</i>. "There is no question <i>but</i> these arts ... will
+greatly aid him," etc.&mdash;Ibid., p. 130. Should be <i>that</i>. "Nearly
+all who have been distinguished in literature or oratory
+have made ... the generous confession that their attainments
+<i>have been</i> reached through patient and laborious industry.
+They have declared that speaking and writing,
+though once difficult for them, <i>have become</i> well-nigh recreations."&mdash;Ibid.,
+p. 143. The <i>have been</i> should be <i>were</i>, and
+the <i>have become</i> should be <i>became</i>. "Many pronominal adverbs
+are correlatives of <i>each other</i>."&mdash;Harkness's "New
+Latin Grammar," p. 147. Should be <i>one another</i>. "Hot
+and cold springs, boiling springs, and quiet springs lie within
+a few feet of <i>each other</i>, but <i>none of them are properly
+geysers</i>."&mdash;Appletons' "Condensed Cyclop&aelig;dia," vol. ii, p.
+414. Should be <i>one another</i>, and <i>not one of them is properly a
+geyser</i>. "How much better for you as seller and the nation
+as buyer ... than to sink ... in cutting <i>one another's</i>
+throats." Should be <i>each other's</i>. "A minister, noted for
+prolixity of style, was once preaching before the inmates of
+a lunatic asylum. In one of his illustrations he painted a
+scene of a man condemned to be hung, but reprieved under
+the gallows." These two sentences are so faulty that the
+only way to mend them is to rewrite them. They are from
+a work that professes to teach the "art of speech." Mended:
+"A minister, noted for his prolixity, once <i>preached</i> before
+the inmates of a lunatic asylum. By way of illustration
+he painted a scene in which a man, <i>who had been</i>
+condemned to be <i>hanged</i>, <i>was</i> reprieved under the gallows."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Female" id="Female"></a>Female.</b> The terms <i>male</i> and <i>female</i> are not unfrequently
+used where good taste would suggest some other
+word. For example, we see over the doors of school-houses,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[Pg 65]</a></span>
+"Entrance for males," "Entrance for females."
+Now bucks and bulls are males as well as boys and men,
+and cows and sows are females as well as girls and women.</p>
+
+<p><b>Fetch.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Bring">Bring</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Fewer.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Less">Less</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Final Completion.</b> If there were such a thing as a
+plurality or a series of completions, there would, of course,
+be such a thing as the <i>final</i> completion; but, as every
+completion is final, to talk about a <i>final completion</i> is as
+absurd as it would be to talk about a <i>final finality</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>First rate.</b> There are people who object to this phrase,
+and yet it is well enough when properly placed, as it is, for
+example, in such a sentence as this: "He's a 'first class'
+fellow, and I like him <i>first rate</i>; if I didn't, 'you bet' I'd
+just give him 'hail Columbia' for 'blowing' the thing
+all round town like the big fool that he is."</p>
+
+<p><b>Firstly.</b> George Washington Moon says in defense of
+<i>firstly</i>: "I do not object to the occasional use of <i>first</i> as
+an adverb; but, in sentences where it would be followed
+by <i>secondly</i>, <i>thirdly</i>, etc., I think that the adverbial form is
+preferable." To this, one of Mr. Moon's critics replies:
+"However desirable it may be to employ the word <i>firstly</i>
+on certain occasions, the fact remains that the employment
+of it on any occasion is not the best usage." Webster inserts
+<i>firstly</i>, but remarks, "Improperly used for <i>first</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Flee&mdash;Fly.</b> These verbs, though near of kin, are not
+interchangeable. For example, we can not say, "He <i>flew</i>
+the city," "He <i>flew</i> from his enemies," "He <i>flew</i> at the approach
+of danger," <i>flew</i> being the imperfect tense of <i>to fly</i>,
+which is properly used to express the action of birds on
+the wing, of kites, arrows, etc. The imperfect tense of <i>to
+flee</i> is <i>fled</i>; hence, "He <i>fled</i> the city," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Forcible-feeble" id="Forcible-feeble"></a>Forcible-feeble.</b> This is a "novicy" kind of diction<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[Pg 66]</a></span>
+in which the would-be forcible writer defeats his object by
+the overuse of expletives. Examples: "And yet the <i>great</i>
+centralization of wealth is one of the [great] evils of the
+day. All that Mr. &mdash;&mdash; <i>utters</i> [says] upon this point is
+<i>forcible and</i> just. This centralization is due to the <i>enormous</i>
+reproductive power of capital, to the <i>immense</i> advantage
+that <i>costly and complicated</i> machinery gives to <i>great</i>
+[large] establishments, and to <i>the marked</i> difference of personal
+force among men." The first <i>great</i> is misplaced; the
+word <i>utters</i> is misused; the second <i>great</i> is ill-chosen. The
+other words in italics only enfeeble the sentence. Again:
+"In countries where <i>immense</i> [large] estates exist, a breaking
+up of these <i>vast</i> demesnes into <i>many</i> minor freeholds would
+no doubt be a [of] <i>very</i> great advantage." Substitute <i>large</i>
+for <i>immense</i>, and take out <i>vast</i>, <i>many</i>, and <i>very</i>, and the
+language becomes much more forcible. Again: "The <i>very</i>
+first effect of the &mdash;&mdash; taxation plan would be destructive
+to the interests of this <i>great multitude</i> [class]; it would impoverish
+our <i>innumerable</i> farmers, <i>it would</i> confiscate the
+earnings of [our] <i>industrious</i> tradesmen and artisans, <i>it
+would</i> [and] paralyze the hopes of <i>struggling</i> millions."
+What a waste of portly expletives is here! With them the
+sentence is high-flown and weak; take them out, and introduce
+the words inclosed in brackets, and it becomes
+simple and forcible.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Friend" id="Friend"></a>Friend&mdash;Acquaintance.</b> Some philosopher has said
+that he who has half a dozen friends in the course of his
+life may esteem himself fortunate; and yet, to judge from
+many people's talk, one would suppose they had friends by
+the score. No man knows whether he has any friends or
+not until he has "their adoption tried"; hence, he who is
+desirous to call things by their right names will, as a rule,
+use the word <i>acquaintance</i> instead of <i>friend</i>. "Your friend"<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[Pg 67]</a></span>
+is a favorite and very objectionable way many people, especially
+young people, have of writing themselves at the
+bottom of their letters. In this way the obscure stripling
+protests himself the <span class="smcap">friend</span> of the first man in the land,
+and that, too, when he is, perhaps, a comparative stranger
+and asking a favor.</p>
+
+<p><b>Galsome.</b> Here is a good, sonorous Anglo-Saxon word&mdash;meaning
+malignant, venomous, churlish&mdash;that has fallen
+into disuse.</p>
+
+<p><b>Gentleman.</b> Few things are in worse taste than to use
+the term <i>gentleman</i>, whether in the singular or plural, to
+designate the sex. "If I was a <i>gentleman</i>," says Miss
+Snooks. "<i>Gentlemen</i> have just as much curiosity as <i>ladies</i>,"
+says Mrs. Jenkins. "<i>Gentlemen</i> have so much more liberty
+than we <i>ladies</i> have," says Mrs. Parvenue. Now, if these
+ladies were ladies, they would in each of these cases use the
+word <i>man</i> instead of <i>gentleman</i>, and <i>woman</i> instead of <i>lady</i>;
+further, Miss Snooks would say, "If I <i>were</i>." Well-bred
+men, men of culture and refinement&mdash;gentlemen, in short&mdash;use
+the terms <i>lady</i> and <i>gentleman</i> comparatively little, and
+they are especially careful not to call themselves <i>gentlemen</i>
+when they can avoid it. A gentleman, for example, does
+not say, "I, with some <i>other</i> gentlemen, went," etc.; he is
+careful to leave out the word <i>other</i>. The men who use
+these terms most, and especially those who lose no opportunity
+to proclaim themselves <i>gentlemen</i>, belong to that class
+of men who cock their hats on one side of their heads, and
+often wear them when and where gentlemen would remove
+them; who pride themselves on their familiarity with the
+latest slang; who proclaim their independence by showing
+the least possible consideration for others; who laugh long
+and loud at their own wit; who wear a profusion of cheap
+finery, such as outlandish watch-chains hooked in the lowest<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[Pg 68]</a></span>
+button-hole of their vests, Brazilian diamonds in their
+shirt-bosoms, and big seal-rings on their little fingers; who
+use bad grammar and interlard their conversation with big
+oaths. In business correspondence Smith is addressed as
+<i>Sir</i>, while Smith &amp; Brown are often addressed as <i>Gentlemen</i>&mdash;or,
+vulgarly, as <i>Gents</i>. Better, much, is it to address
+them as <i>Sirs</i>.</p>
+
+<p>Since writing the foregoing, I have met with the following
+paragraph in the London publication, "All the Year
+Round": "Socially, the term 'gentleman' has become almost
+vulgar. It is certainly less employed by gentlemen
+than by inferior persons. The one speaks of 'a man I
+know,' the other of 'a gentleman I know.' In the one
+case the gentleman is taken for granted, in the other it
+seems to need specification. Again, as regards the term
+'lady.' It is quite in accordance with the usages of society
+to speak of your acquaintance the duchess as 'a very nice
+person.' People who would say 'very nice lady' are not
+generally of a social class which has much to do with
+duchesses; and if you speak of one of these as a 'person,'
+you will soon be made to feel your mistake."</p>
+
+<p><b>Gents.</b> Of all vulgarisms, this is, perhaps, the most
+offensive. If we say <i>gents</i>, why not say <i>lades</i>?</p>
+
+<p><b>Gerund.</b> "'I have work <i>to do</i>,' 'there is no more <i>to
+say</i>,' are phrases where the verb is not in the common infinitive,
+but in the form of the <i>gerund</i>. 'He is the man <i>to
+do</i> it, or <i>for doing</i> it.' 'A house <i>to let</i>,' 'the course <i>to steer</i>
+by,' 'a place <i>to lie</i> in,' 'a thing <i>to be</i> done,' 'a city <i>to take</i>
+refuge in,' 'the means <i>to do</i> ill deeds,' are adjective gerunds;
+they may be expanded into clauses: 'a house that the
+owner lets or will let'; 'the course that we should steer
+by'; 'a thing that should be done'; 'a city wherein one
+may take refuge'; 'the means whereby ill deeds may be<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[Pg 69]</a></span>
+done.' When the <i>to</i> ceased in the twelfth century to be
+a distinctive mark of the dative infinitive or gerund, <i>for</i>
+was introduced to make the writer's intention clear. Hence
+the familiar form in 'what went ye out <i>for to see</i>?' 'they
+came <i>for to show</i> him the temple.'"&mdash;Bain.</p>
+
+<p><b>Get.</b> In sentences expressing simple possession&mdash;as, "I
+have <i>got</i> a book," "What has he <i>got</i> there?" "Have you
+<i>got</i> any news?" "They have <i>got</i> a new house," etc.&mdash;<i>got</i>
+is entirely superfluous, if not, as some writers contend, absolutely
+incorrect. Possession is completely expressed by
+<i>have</i>. "Foxes have holes; the birds of the air have
+nests"; not, "Foxes have <i>got</i> holes; the birds of the air
+have <i>got</i> nests." Formerly the imperfect tense of this verb
+was <i>gat</i>, which is now obsolete, and the perfect participle
+was <i>gotten</i>, which, some grammarians say, is growing obsolete.
+If this be true, there is no good reason for it. If we
+say <i>eaten</i>, <i>written</i>, <i>striven</i>, <i>forgotten</i>, why not say <i>gotten</i>,
+where this form of the participle is more euphonious&mdash;as it
+often is&mdash;than <i>got</i>?</p>
+
+<p><b>Goods.</b> This term, like other terms used in trade, should
+be restricted to the vocabulary of commerce. Messrs. Arnold
+&amp; Constable, in common with the Washington Market
+huckster, very properly speak of their wares as their <i>goods</i>;
+but Mrs. Arnold and Mrs. Constable should, and I doubt
+not do, speak of their gowns as being made of fine or
+coarse <i>silk</i>, <i>cashmere</i>, <i>muslin</i>, or whatever the material
+may be.</p>
+
+<p><b>Gould against Alford.</b> Mr. Edward S. Gould, in his
+review of Dean Alford's "Queen's English," remarks, on
+page 131 of his "Good English": "And now, as to the
+style<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> of the Dean's book, taken as a whole. He must be
+held responsible for every error in it; because, as has been<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[Pg 70]</a></span>
+shown, he has had full leisure for its revision.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> The errors
+are, nevertheless, numerous; and the shortest way to exhibit
+them is<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> in tabular form." In several instances Mr.
+Gould would not have taken the Dean to task had he
+known English better. The following are a few of Mr.
+Gould's corrections in which he is clearly in the right:</p>
+
+<p>Paragraph</p>
+
+<p>4. "Into <i>another</i> land <i>than</i>"; should be, "into a land
+<i>other than</i>."</p>
+
+<p>16. "We do not follow rule in spelling other words,
+but custom"; should be, "we do not follow <i>rule, but custom</i>,
+in spelling," etc.</p>
+
+<p>18. "The distinction is observed in French, but <i>never
+appears</i> to have been made," etc.; read, "<i>appears never</i> to
+have been made."</p>
+
+<p>61. "<i>Rather</i> to aspirate more <i>than</i> less"; should be,
+"to aspirate more <i>rather than</i> less."</p>
+
+<p>9. "It is said also <i>only</i> to occur three times," etc.;
+read, "<i>occur only</i> three times."</p>
+
+<p>44. "This doubling <i>only takes place</i> in a syllable," etc.;
+read, "<i>takes place only</i>."</p>
+
+<p>142. "Which can <i>only</i> be decided when those circumstances
+are known"; read, "<i>can be decided only</i> when,"
+etc.</p>
+
+<p>166. "I will <i>only</i> say that it produces," etc.; read, "I
+will <i>say only</i>," etc.</p>
+
+<p>170. "It is said that this can <i>only</i> be filled in thus";
+read, "can be <i>filled in only</i> thus."</p>
+
+<p>368. "I can <i>only</i> deal with the complaint in a general
+way"; read, "<i>deal with the complaint only</i>," etc.</p>
+
+<p>86. "<i>In</i> so far as they are idiomatic," etc. What is the
+use of <i>in</i>?</p>
+
+<p>171. "Try the experiment"; "<i>tried</i> the experiment."
+Read, <i>make</i> and <i>made</i>.</p>
+
+<p>345. "It is <i>most</i> generally used of that very sect," etc.
+Why <i>most</i>?<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[Pg 71]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>362. "The joining together two clauses with a third,"
+etc.; read, "<i>of two</i> clauses," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Gown.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Dress">Dress</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Graduated.</b> Students do not <i>graduate</i>; they <i>are</i> graduated.
+Hence most writers nowadays say, "I <i>was</i>, he
+<i>was</i>, or they <i>were</i> graduated"; and ask, "When <i>were</i> you,
+or <i>was</i> he, graduated?"</p>
+
+<p><b>Grammatical Errors.</b> "The correctness of the expression
+<i>grammatical errors</i> has been disputed. 'How,' it
+has been asked, 'can an error be grammatical?' How, it
+may be replied, can we with propriety say, <i>grammatically
+incorrect</i>? Yet we can do so.</p>
+
+<p>"No one will question the propriety of saying <i>grammatically
+correct</i>. Yet the expression is the acknowledgment
+of things <i>grammatically <span class="smcap">in</span>correct</i>. Likewise the phrase
+<i>grammatical correctness</i> implies the existence of <i>grammatical
+<span class="smcap">in</span>correctness</i>. If, then, a sentence is <i>grammatically incorrect</i>,
+or, what is the same thing, has <i>grammatical incorrectness</i>, it
+includes a <span class="smcap">grammatical error</span>. <i>Grammatically incorrect</i>
+signifies <span class="smcap">incorrect with relation to the rules of
+grammar.</span> <i>Grammatical errors</i> signifies <span class="smcap">errors with relation
+to the rules of grammar</span>.</p>
+
+<p>"They who ridicule the phrase <i>grammatical errors</i>, and
+substitute the phrase <i>errors in grammar</i>, make an egregious
+mistake. Can there, it may be asked with some show of
+reason, be an error in grammar? Why, grammar is a
+science founded in our nature, referable to our ideas of
+time, relation, method; imperfect, doubtless, as to the system
+by which it is represented; but surely we can speak
+of error in that which is error's criterion! All this is
+hypercritical, but hypercriticism must be met with its own
+weapons.</p>
+
+<p>"Of the two expressions&mdash;<i>a grammatical error</i>, and <i>an</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[Pg 72]</a></span>
+<i>error in grammar</i>&mdash;the former is preferable. If one's judgment
+can accept neither, one must relinquish the belief in
+the possibility of tersely expressing the idea of an offense
+against grammatical rules. Indeed, it would be difficult
+to express the idea even by circumlocution. Should some
+one say, 'This sentence is, according to the rules of grammar,
+incorrect.' 'What!' the hypercritic may exclaim, 'incorrect!
+and according to the rules of grammar!' 'This
+sentence, then,' the corrected person would reply, 'contains
+an error in grammar.' 'Nonsense!' the hypercritic may
+shout, 'grammar is a science; you may be wrong in its
+interpretation, but principles are immutable!'</p>
+
+<p>"After this, it need scarcely be added that, grammatically,
+no one can make a mistake, that there can be no
+grammatical mistake, that there can be no bad grammar,
+and, consequently, no bad English; a very pleasant conclusion,
+which would save us a great amount of trouble if it
+did not lack the insignificant quality of being true."&mdash;"Vulgarisms
+and Other Errors of Speech."</p>
+
+<p><b>Gratuitous.</b> There are those who object to the use of
+this word in the sense of unfounded, unwarranted, unreasonable,
+untrue. Its use in this sense, however, has the sanction
+of abundant authority. "Weak and <i>gratuitous</i> conjectures."&mdash;Porson.
+"A <i>gratuitous</i> assumption."&mdash;Godwin.
+"The <i>gratuitous</i> theory."&mdash;Southey. "A <i>gratuitous</i> invention."&mdash;De
+Quincey. "But it is needless to dwell on the
+improbability of a hypothesis which has been shown to be
+altogether <i>gratuitous</i>."&mdash;Dr. Newman.</p>
+
+<p><b>Grow.</b> This verb originally meant to increase in size,
+but has normally come to be also used to express a change
+from one state or condition to another; as, to <i>grow</i> dark, to
+<i>grow</i> weak or strong, to <i>grow</i> faint, etc. But it is doubtful
+whether what is large can properly be said to <i>grow</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[Pg 73]</a></span>
+small. In this sense, <i>become</i> would seem to be the better
+word.</p>
+
+<p><b>Gums.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Rubbers">Rubbers</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Had have.</b> Nothing could be more incorrect than the
+bringing together of these two auxiliary verbs in this manner;
+and yet we occasionally find it in writers of repute.
+Instead of "Had I known it," "Had you seen it," "Had
+we been there," we hear, "Had I <i>have</i> known it," "Had
+you <i>have</i> seen it," "Had we <i>have</i> been there."</p>
+
+<p><b>Had ought.</b> This is a vulgarism of the worst description,
+yet we hear people, who would be highly indignant
+if any one should intimate that they were not ladies and
+gentlemen, say, "He <i>had</i> ought to go." A fitting reply
+would be, "Yes, I think he better had." <i>Ought</i> says all
+that <i>had ought</i> says.</p>
+
+<p><b>Had rather.</b> This expression and <i>had better</i> are much
+used, but, in the opinion of many, are indefensible. We
+hear them in such sentences as, "I <i>had</i> rather not do it,"
+"You <i>had</i> better go home." "Now, what tense," it is asked,
+"is <i>had do</i> and <i>had go</i>?" If we transpose the words thus,
+"You <i>had do</i> better (to) go home," it becomes at once apparent,
+it is asserted, that the proper word to use in connection
+with <i>rather</i> and <i>better</i> is not <i>had</i>, but <i>would</i>; thus, "I <i>would</i>
+rather not do it," "You <i>would</i> better go home." Examples
+of this use of <i>had</i> can be found in the writings of our best
+authors. For what Professor Bain has to say on this subject
+in his "Composition Grammar," see <span class="smcap"><a href="#Subjunctive_Mood">Subjunctive
+Mood</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Half.</b> "It might have been expressed in <i>one</i> half the
+space." We see at a glance that <i>one</i> here is superfluous.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Hanged" id="Hanged"></a>Hanged&mdash;Hung.</b> The irregular form, <i>hung</i>, of the
+past participle of the verb <i>to hang</i> is most used; but, when
+the word denotes suspension by the neck for the purpose of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[Pg 74]</a></span>
+destroying life, the regular form, <i>hanged</i>, is always used by
+careful writers and speakers.</p>
+
+<p><b>Haste.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Hurry">Hurry</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Heading.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Caption">Caption</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Healthy" id="Healthy"></a>Healthy&mdash;Wholesome.</b> The first of these two words
+is often improperly used for the second; as, "Onions are a
+<i>healthy</i> vegetable." A man, if he is in good health, is <i>healthy</i>;
+the food he eats, if it is not deleterious, is <i>wholesome</i>.
+A <i>healthy</i> ox makes <i>wholesome</i> food. We speak of <i>healthy</i>
+surroundings, a <i>healthy</i> climate, situation, employment, and
+of <i>wholesome</i> food, advice, examples. <i>Healthful</i> is generally
+used in the sense of conducive to health, virtue, morality;
+as, <i>healthful</i> exercise, the <i>healthful</i> spirit of the community&mdash;meaning
+that the spirit that prevails in the community
+is conducive to virtue and good morals.</p>
+
+<p><b>Helpmate.</b> The dictionaries suggest that this word is
+a corruption of <i>help</i> and <i>meet</i>, as we find these words used
+in Gen. ii, 18, "I will make him a help meet for him," and
+that the proper word is <i>helpmeet</i>. If, as is possible, the
+words in Genesis mean, "I will make him a help, meet
+[suitable] for him," then neither <i>helpmate</i> nor <i>helpmeet</i> has
+any <i>raison d'&ecirc;tre</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Highfalutin.</b> This is a style of writing often called the
+freshman style. It is much indulged in by very young men,
+and by a class of older men who instinctively try to make
+up in clatter for what they lack in matter. Examples of this
+kind of writing are abundant in Professor L. T. Townsend's
+"Art of Speech," which, as examples, are all the better for
+not being of that exaggerated description sometimes met
+within the newspapers. Vol. i, p. 131: "Very often adverbs,
+prepositions, and relatives drift so far from their moorings
+as to lose themselves, or make attachments where they
+do not belong." Again, p. 135: "Every law of speech enforces<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[Pg 75]</a></span>
+the statement that there is no excuse for such inflated
+and defective style. [Such style!] To speak thus is treason
+in the realms and under the laws of language." Again,
+p. 175: "Cultivate figure-making habitudes. This is done
+by asking the spiritual import of every physical object
+seen; also by forming the habit of constantly metaphorizing.
+Knock at the door of anything met which interests,
+and ask, 'Who lives here?' The process is to look, then
+close the eyes, then look within." The blundering inanity
+of this kind of writing is equaled only by its bumptious
+grandiloquence. On p. 137 Dr. Townsend quotes
+this wholesome admonition from Coleridge: "If men
+would only say what they have to say in plain terms, how
+much more eloquent they would be!" As an example of
+reportorial highfalutin, I submit the following: "The spirit
+of departed day had joined communion with the myriad
+ghosts of centuries, and four full hours fled into eternity
+before the citizens of many parts of the town found out
+there was a freshet here at all."</p>
+
+<p><b>Hints.</b> "Never write about any matter that you do
+not well understand. If you clearly understand all about
+your matter, you will never want thoughts, and thoughts
+instantly become words.</p>
+
+<p>"One of the greatest of all faults in writing and in
+speaking is this: the using of many words to <i>say little</i>.
+In order to guard yourself against this fault, inquire what is
+the <i>substance</i>, or <i>amount</i>, of what you have said. Take a
+long speech of some talking Lord and put down upon paper
+what the amount of it is. You will most likely find that
+the <i>amount</i> is very small; but at any rate, when you
+get it, you will then be able to examine it and to tell
+what it is worth. A very few examinations of the sort
+will so frighten you that you will be for ever after upon<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[Pg 76]</a></span>
+your guard against <i>talking a great deal</i> and <i>saying little</i>."&mdash;Cobbett.</p>
+
+<p>"Be simple, be unaffected, be honest in your speaking and
+writing. Never use a long word where a short one will do.
+Call a spade <i>a spade</i>, not a <i>well-known oblong instrument
+of manual husbandry</i>; let home be <i>home</i>, not a <i>residence</i>;
+a place a <i>place</i>, not a <i>locality</i>; and so of the rest. Where
+a short word will do, you always lose by using a long one.
+You lose in clearness; you lose in honest expression of
+your meaning; and, in the estimation of all men who are
+qualified to judge, you lose in reputation for ability. The
+only true way to shine, even in this false world, is to be
+modest and unassuming. Falsehood may be a very thick
+crust, but, in the course of time, truth will find a place to
+break through. Elegance of language may not be in the
+power of all of us; but simplicity and straightforwardness
+are. Write much as you would speak; speak as you think.
+If with your inferiors, speak no coarser than usual; if with
+your superiors, no finer. Be what you say; and, within
+the rules of prudence, say what you are."&mdash;Dean Alford.</p>
+
+<p>"Go critically over what you have written, and strike
+out every word, phrase, and clause which it is found will
+leave the sentence neither less clear nor less forcible than
+it is without them."&mdash;Swinton.</p>
+
+<p>"With all watchfulness, it is astonishing what slips are
+made, even by good writers, in the employment of an inappropriate
+word. In Gibbon's 'Rise and Fall,' the following
+instance occurs: 'Of nineteen tyrants who started up
+after the reign of Gallienus, there was not one who <i>enjoyed</i>
+a life of peace or a natural <i>death</i>.' Alison, in his 'History
+of Europe,' writes: 'Two great sins&mdash;one of <i>omission</i>
+and one of commission&mdash;have been <i>committed</i> by the states
+of Europe in modern times.' And not long since a worthy<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[Pg 77]</a></span>
+Scotch minister, at the close of the services, intimated his
+intention of visiting some of his people as follows: 'I
+intend, during this week, to visit in Mr. M&mdash;&mdash;'s district,
+and will on this occasion take the opportunity of <i>embracing</i>
+all the servants in the district.' When worthies such as
+these offend, who shall call the bellman in question as he
+cries, 'Lost, a silver-handled silk lady's parasol'?</p>
+
+<p>"The proper arrangement of words into sentences and
+paragraphs gives clearness and strength. To attain a clear
+and pithy style, it may be necessary to cut down, to rearrange,
+and to rewrite whole passages of an essay. Gibbon
+wrote his 'Memoirs' six times, and the first chapter of
+his 'History' three times. Beginners are always slow to
+prune or cast away any thought or expression which may
+have cost labor. They forget that brevity is no sign of
+thoughtlessness. Much consideration is needed to compress
+the details of any subject into small compass. Essences
+are more difficult to prepare, and therefore more
+valuable, than weak solutions. Pliny wrote to one of his
+friends, 'I have not time to write you a short letter, therefore
+I have written you a long one.' Apparent elaborateness
+is always distasteful and weak. Vividness and strength
+are the product of an easy command of those small trenchant
+Saxon monosyllables which abound in the English language."&mdash;"Leisure
+Hour."</p>
+
+<p>"As a rule, the student will do well to banish for
+the present all thought of ornament or elegance, and to
+aim only at expressing himself plainly and clearly. The
+best ornament is always that which comes unsought. Let
+him not beat about the bush, but go straight to the point.
+Let him remember that what is written is meant to be
+read; that time is short; and that&mdash;other things being
+equal&mdash;the fewer words the better.... Repetition is a far<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[Pg 78]</a></span>
+less serious fault than obscurity. Young writers are often
+unduly afraid of repeating the same word, and require to
+be reminded that it is always better to use the right word
+over again than to replace it by a wrong one&mdash;and a word
+which is liable to be misunderstood is a wrong one. A
+frank repetition of a word has even sometimes a kind of
+charm&mdash;as bearing the stamp of <i>truth</i>, the foundation of all
+excellence of style."&mdash;Hall.</p>
+
+<p>"A young writer is afraid to be simple; he has no
+faith in beauty unadorned, hence he crowds his sentences
+with superlatives. In his estimation, turgidity passes for
+eloquence, and simplicity is but another name for that
+which is weak and unmeaning."&mdash;George Washington
+Moon.</p>
+
+<p><b>Honorable.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Reverend">Reverend</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>How.</b> "I have heard <i>how</i> in Italy one is beset on all
+sides by beggars": read, "heard <i>that</i>." "I have heard
+<i>how</i> some critics have been pacified with claret and a supper,
+and others laid asleep with soft notes of flattery."&mdash;Dr.
+Johnson. The <i>how</i> in this sentence also should be <i>that</i>.
+<i>How</i> means the <i>manner in which</i>. We may, therefore,
+say, "I have heard <i>how</i> he went about it to circumvent
+you."</p>
+
+<p>"And it is good judgment alone can dictate <i>how far</i>
+to proceed in it and <i>when</i> to stop." Cobbett comments
+on this sentence in this wise: "Dr. Watts is speaking here
+of writing. In such a case, an adverb, like <i>how far</i>, expressive
+of longitudinal space, introduces a <i>rhetorical figure</i>;
+for the plain meaning is, that judgment will dictate <i>how
+much to write on it</i> and not <i>how far to proceed in it</i>. The
+figure, however, is very proper and much better than the
+literal words. But when a figure is <i>begun</i> it should be carried
+on throughout, which is not the case here; for the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[Pg 79]</a></span>
+Doctor begins with a figure of longitudinal space and ends
+with a figure of <i>time</i>. It should have been, <i>where</i> to stop.
+Or, how <i>long</i> to proceed in it and <i>when</i> to stop. To tell a
+man <i>how far</i> he is to go into the Western countries of
+America, and <i>when</i> he is to stop, is a very different thing
+from telling him <i>how far</i> he is to go and <i>where</i> he is to
+stop. I have dwelt thus on this distinction for the purpose
+of putting you on the watch and guarding you against confounding
+figures. The less you use them the better, till
+you understand more about them."</p>
+
+<p><b>Humanitarianism.</b> This word, in its original, theological
+sense, means the doctrine that denies the godhead
+of Jesus Christ, and avers that he was possessed of a human
+nature only; a <i>humanitarian</i>, therefore, in the theological
+sense, is one who believes this doctrine. The word
+and its derivatives are, however, nowadays, both in this
+country and in England, most used in a humane, philanthropic
+sense; thus, "The audience enthusiastically endorsed
+the <i>humanitarianism</i> of his eloquent discourse."&mdash;Hatton.</p>
+
+<p><b>Hung.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Hanged">Hanged</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Hurry" id="Hurry"></a>Hurry.</b> Though widely different in meaning, both the
+verb and the noun <i>hurry</i> are continually used for <i>haste</i> and
+<i>hasten</i>. <i>Hurry</i> implies not only <i>haste</i>, but haste with confusion,
+flurry; while <i>haste</i> implies only rapidity of action,
+an eager desire to make progress, and, unlike <i>hurry</i>, is not
+incompatible with deliberation and dignity. It is often
+wise to <i>hasten</i> in the affairs of life; but, as it is never wise
+to proceed without forethought and method, it is never
+wise to <i>hurry</i>. Sensible people, then, may be often in
+<i>haste</i>, but are never in a <i>hurry</i>; and we tell others to <i>make
+haste</i>, and not to <i>hurry up</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Hyperbole.</b> The magnifying of things beyond their<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[Pg 80]</a></span>
+natural limits is called <i>hyperbole</i>. Language that signifies,
+literally, more than the exact truth, more than is really intended
+to be represented, by which a thing is represented
+greater or less, better or worse than it really is, is said to
+be <i>hyperbolical</i>. Hyperbole is exaggeration.</p>
+
+<p>"Our common forms of compliment are almost all of
+them extravagant <i>hyperboles</i>."&mdash;Blair.</p>
+
+<p>Some examples are the following:</p>
+
+<p>"Rivers of blood and hills of slain."</p>
+
+<p>"They were swifter than eagles; they were stronger than lions."</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"The sky shrunk upward with unusual dread,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And trembling Tiber div'd beneath his bed."<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"So frowned the mighty combatants, that hell<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Grew darker at their frown."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"I saw their chief tall as a rock of ice; his spear the
+blasted fir; his shield the rising moon; he sat on the shore
+like a cloud of mist on a hill."</p>
+
+<p><b>Ice-cream&mdash;Ice-water.</b> As for ice-cream, there is no
+such thing, as ice-cream would be the product of frozen
+cream, i. e., cream made from ice by melting. What is
+called ice-cream is cream <i>iced</i>; hence, properly, <i>iced</i> cream
+and not <i>ice</i>-cream. The product of melted ice is <i>ice</i>-water,
+whether it be cold or warm; but water made cold with ice
+is <i>iced</i> water, and not <i>ice</i>-water.</p>
+
+<p><b>If.</b> "I doubt <i>if</i> this will ever reach you": say, "I
+doubt <i>whether</i> this will ever reach you."</p>
+
+<p><b>Ill.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Sick">Sick</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Illy.</b> It will astonish not a few to learn that there is
+no such word as <i>illy</i>. The form of the adverb, as well as
+of the adjective and the noun, is <i>ill</i>. A thing is <i>ill</i> formed,
+or <i>ill</i> done, or <i>ill</i> made, or <i>ill</i> constructed, or <i>ill</i> put together.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[Pg 81]</a></span></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"<i>Ill</i> fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Where wealth accumulates and men decay."&mdash;Goldsmith.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b><a name="Immodest" id="Immodest"></a>Immodest.</b> This adjective and its synonyms, <i>indecent</i>
+and <i>indelicate</i>, are often used without proper discrimination
+being made in their respective meanings. <i>Indecency</i> and
+<i>immodesty</i> are opposed to morality: the former in externals,
+as dress, words, and looks; the latter in conduct and disposition.
+"<i>Indecency</i>," says Crabb, "may be a partial,
+<i>immodesty</i> is a positive and entire breach of the moral law.
+<i>Indecency</i> is less than <i>immodesty</i>, but more than <i>indelicacy</i>."
+It is <i>indecent</i> for a man to marry again very soon after the
+death of his wife. It is <i>indelicate</i> for any one to obtrude
+himself upon another's retirement. It is <i>indecent</i> for women
+to expose their persons as do some whom we can not
+call <i>immodest</i>.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Immodest words admit of no defense,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">For want of decency is want of sense."<br /></span>
+<span class="i9">&mdash;Earl of Roscommon.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b>Impropriety.</b> As a rhetorical term, defined as an
+error in using words in a sense different from their recognized
+signification.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Impute" id="Impute"></a>Impute.</b> Non-painstaking writers not unfrequently use
+<i>impute</i> instead of <i>ascribe</i>. "The numbers [of blunders]
+that have been <i>imputed</i> to him are endless."&mdash;"Appletons'
+Journal." The use of <i>impute</i> in this connection is by no
+means indefensible; still it would have been better to use
+<i>ascribe</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="In_our_midst" id="In_our_midst"></a>In our midst.</b> The phrases <i>in our midst</i> and <i>in their
+midst</i> are generally supposed to be of recent introduction;
+and, though they have been used by some respectable
+writers, they nevertheless find no favor with those who
+study propriety in the use of language. To the phrase
+<i>in the midst</i> no one objects. "Jesus came and stood<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[Pg 82]</a></span>
+in the midst." "There was a hut <i>in the midst</i> of the
+forest."</p>
+
+<p><b>In respect of.</b> "The deliberate introduction of incorrect
+forms, whether by the coinage of new or the revival
+of obsolete and inexpressive syntactical combinations, ought
+to be resisted even in trifles, especially where it leads to
+the confusion of distinct ideas. An example of this is the
+recent use of the adverbial phrases <i>in respect of</i>, <i>in regard
+of</i>, for <i>in</i> or <i>with</i> respect <i>to</i>, or regard <i>to</i>. This innovation
+is without any syntactical ground, and ought to be condemned
+and avoided as a mere grammatical crotchet."&mdash;George
+P. Marsh, "Lectures on the English Language,"
+p. 660.</p>
+
+<p><b>In so far as.</b> A phrase often met with, and in which
+the <i>in</i> is superfluous. "A want of proper opportunity
+would suffice, <i>in</i> so far as the want could be shown." "We
+are to act up to the extent of our knowledge; but, <i>in</i> so far
+as our knowledge falls short," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Inaugurate.</b> This word, which means to install in
+office with certain ceremonies, is made, by many lovers of
+big words, to do service for <i>begin</i>; but the sooner these
+rhetorical high-fliers stop <i>inaugurating</i> and content themselves
+with simply <i>beginning</i> the things they are called
+upon to do in the ordinary routine of daily life, the sooner
+they will cease to set a very bad example.</p>
+
+<p><b>Indecent.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Immodest">Immodest</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Index_expurgatorius" id="Index_expurgatorius"></a>Index expurgatorius.</b> William Cullen Bryant, who
+was a careful student of English, while he was editor of the
+"New York Evening Post," sought to prevent the writers
+for that paper from using "over and above (for 'more
+than'); artiste (for 'artist'); aspirant; authoress; beat (for
+'defeat'); bagging (for 'capturing'); balance (for 'remainder');
+banquet (for 'dinner' or 'supper'); bogus; casket<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[Pg 83]</a></span>
+(for 'coffin'); claimed (for 'asserted'); collided; commence
+(for 'begin'); compete; cort&eacute;ge (for 'procession');
+cotemporary (for 'contemporary'); couple (for 'two');
+darky (for 'negro'); day before yesterday (for 'the day
+before yesterday'); d&eacute;but; decrease (as a verb); democracy
+(applied to a political party); develop (for 'expose');
+devouring element (for 'fire'); donate; employ&eacute;; enacted
+(for 'acted'); indorse (for 'approve'); en route; esq.;
+graduate (for 'is graduated'); gents (for 'gentlemen');
+'Hon.'; House (for 'House of Representatives'); humbug;
+inaugurate (for 'begin'); in our midst; item (for
+'particle, extract, or paragraph'); is being done, and all
+passives of this form; jeopardize; jubilant (for 'rejoicing');
+juvenile (for 'boy'); lady (for 'wife'); last (for 'latest');
+lengthy (for 'long'); leniency (for 'lenity'); loafer; loan
+or loaned (for 'lend' or 'lent'); located; majority (relating
+to places or circumstances, for 'most'); Mrs. President,
+Mrs. Governor, Mrs. General, and all similar titles; mutual
+(for 'common'); official (for 'officer'); ovation; on yesterday;
+over his signature; pants (for 'pantaloons'); parties
+(for 'persons'); partially (for 'partly'); past two weeks
+(for 'last two weeks,' and all similar expressions relating to
+a definite time); poetess; portion (for 'part'); posted (for
+'informed'); progress (for 'advance'); reliable (for 'trustworthy');
+rendition (for 'performance'); repudiate (for
+'reject' or 'disown'); retire (as an active verb); Rev. (for
+'the Rev.'); r&ocirc;le (for 'part'); roughs; rowdies; secesh;
+sensation (for 'noteworthy event'); standpoint (for 'point
+of view'); start, in the sense of setting out; state (for
+'say'); taboo; talent (for 'talents' or 'ability'); talented;
+tapis; the deceased; war (for 'dispute' or 'disagreement')."</p>
+
+<p>This index is offered here as a curiosity rather than as
+a guide, though in the main it might safely be used as<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[Pg 84]</a></span>
+such. No valid reason, however, can be urged for discouraging
+the use of several words in the list; the words aspirant,
+banquet, casket, compete, decrease, progress, start,
+talented, and deceased, for example.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Indicative_and_Subjunctive" id="Indicative_and_Subjunctive"></a>Indicative and Subjunctive.</b> "'I <i>see</i> the signal,' is
+unconditional; '<i>if</i> I <i>see</i> the signal,' is the same fact expressed
+in the form of a condition. The one form is said
+to be in the <i>indicative</i> mood, the mood that simply <i>states
+or indicates</i> the action; the other form is in the <i>subjunctive</i>,
+conditional, or conjunctive mood. There is sometimes a
+slight variation made in English, to show that an affirmation
+is made as a condition. The mood is called 'subjunctive,'
+because the affirmation <i>is subjoined to</i> another affirmation:
+'<i>If I see the signal</i>, I will call out.'</p>
+
+<p>"Such forms as 'I may see,' 'I can see,' have sometimes
+been considered as a variety of mood, to which the name
+'Potential' is given. But this can not properly be maintained.
+There is no trace of any inflection corresponding
+to this meaning, as we find with the subjunctive. Moreover,
+such a mood would have itself to be subdivided into indicative
+and subjunctive forms: 'I may go,' 'if I may go.'
+And further, we might proceed to constitute other moods
+on the same analogy, as, for example, an obligatory mood&mdash;'I
+must go,' or 'I ought to go'; a mood of resolution&mdash;'I
+will go, you shall go'; a mood of gratification&mdash;'I am
+delighted to go'; of deprecation&mdash;'I am grieved to go.'
+The only difference in the two last instances is the use of
+the sign of the infinitive 'to,' which does not occur after
+'may,' 'can,' 'must,' 'ought,' etc.; but that is not an
+essential difference. Some grammarians consider the form
+'I do go' a separate mood, and term it the emphatic mood.
+But all the above objections apply to it likewise, as well as
+many others."&mdash;Bain. See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Subjunctive_Mood">Subjunctive Mood</a></span>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[Pg 85]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Individual" id="Individual"></a>Individual.</b> This word is often most improperly used
+for <i>person</i>; as, "The <i>individual</i> I saw was not over forty";
+"There were several <i>individuals</i> on board that I had never
+seen before." <i>Individual</i> means, etymologically, that which
+can not be divided, and is used, in speaking of things as
+well as of persons, to express unity. It is opposed to the
+whole, or that which is divisible into parts.</p>
+
+<p><b>Indorse.</b> Careful writers generally discountenance the
+use of <i>indorse</i> in the sense of <i>sanction</i>, <i>approve</i>, <i>applaud</i>.
+In this signification it is on the list of prohibited words in
+some of our newspaper offices. "The following rules are
+<i>indorsed</i> by nearly all writers upon this subject."&mdash;Dr.
+Townsend. It is plain that the right word to use here is
+<i>approved</i>. "The public will heartily <i>indorse</i> the sentiments
+uttered by the court."&mdash;New York "Evening Telegram."
+"The public will heartily <i>approve</i> the sentiments <i>expressed</i>
+by the court," is what the sentence should be.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Infinitive_Mood" id="Infinitive_Mood"></a>Infinitive Mood.</b> When we can choose, it is generally
+better to use the verb in the infinitive than in the participial
+form. "Ability being in general the power <i>of doing</i>," etc.
+Say, <i>to do</i>. "I desire to reply ... to the proposal <i>of substituting</i>
+a tax upon land values ... and <i>making</i> this tax, as
+near [nearly] as may be, equal to rent," etc. Say, <i>to substitute</i>
+and <i>to make</i>. "This quality is of prime importance
+when the chief object is <i>the imparting of</i> knowledge." Say,
+<i>to impart</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Initiate.</b> This is a pretentious word, which, with its
+derivatives, many persons&mdash;especially those who like to be
+grandiloquent&mdash;use, when homely English would serve their
+turn much better.</p>
+
+<p><b>Innumerable Number.</b> A repetitional expression to be
+avoided. We may say <i>innumerable</i> times, or <i>numberless</i> times,
+but we should not say an <i>innumerable number</i> of times.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[Pg 86]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Interrogation.</b> The rhetorical figure that asks a question
+in order to emphasize the reverse of what is asked is
+called <i>interrogation</i>; as, "Do we mean to submit to this
+measure? Do we mean to submit, and consent that we ourselves,
+our country and its rights, shall be trampled on?"</p>
+
+<p>"Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty
+pervert justice?"</p>
+
+<p><b>Introduce.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Present">Present</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Irony.</b> That mode of speech in which what is meant
+is contrary to the literal meaning of the words&mdash;in which
+praise is bestowed when censure is intended&mdash;is called <i>irony</i>.
+Irony is a kind of delicate sarcasm or satire&mdash;raillery,
+mockery.</p>
+
+<p>"In writings of humor, figures are sometimes used of so
+delicate a nature that it shall often happen that some people
+will see things in a direct contrary sense to what the author
+and the majority of the readers understand them: to such
+the most innocent <i>irony</i> may appear irreligion."&mdash;Cambridge.</p>
+
+<p><b>Irritate.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Aggravate">Aggravate</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Is_being_built" id="Is_being_built"></a>Is being built.</b> A tolerable idea of the state of the discussion
+regarding the propriety of using the locution <i>is
+being built</i>, and all like expressions, will, it is hoped, be
+obtained from the following extracts. The Rev. Peter
+Bullions, in his "Grammar of the English Language," says:</p>
+
+<p>"There is properly <i>no passive</i> form, in English, <i>corresponding
+to the progressive</i> form in the <i>active</i> voice, except
+where it is made by the participle <i>ing</i>, in a passive sense;
+thus, 'The house is building'; 'The garments are making';
+'Wheat is selling,' etc. An attempt has been made by
+some grammarians, of late, to banish such expressions from
+the language, though they have been used in all time past
+by the best writers, and to justify and defend a clumsy solecism,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[Pg 87]</a></span>
+which has been recently introduced chiefly through
+the newspaper press, but which has gained such currency,
+and is becoming so familiar to the ear, that it seems likely
+to prevail, with all its uncouthness and deformity. I refer
+to such expressions as 'The house is being built'; 'The
+letter is being written'; 'The mine is being worked';
+'The news is being telegraphed,' etc., etc.</p>
+
+<p>"This mode of expression <i>had no existence</i> in the language
+till <i>within the last fifty years</i>.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> This, indeed, would
+not make the expression wrong, were it otherwise unexceptionable;
+but its recent origin shows that it is not, as is
+pretended, a <i>necessary</i> form.</p>
+
+<p>"This form of expression, when analyzed, is found not
+to express what it is intended to express, and would be used
+only by such as are either ignorant of its import or are
+careless and loose in their use of language. To make this
+manifest, let it be considered, first, that there is <i>no progressive
+form</i> of the verb <i>to be</i>, and no need of it; hence, there
+is no such expression in English as <i>is being</i>. Of course the
+expression '<i>is being</i> built,' for example, is not a compound
+of <i>is being</i> and <i>built</i>, but of <i>is</i> and <i>being built</i>; that is, of
+the verb <i>to be</i> and the <i>present participle passive</i>. Now, let
+it be observed that the only verbs in which the present
+participle passive expresses a continued action are those
+mentioned above as the first class, in which the regular
+passive form expresses a <i>continuance</i> of the action; as, <i>is
+loved</i>, <i>is desired</i>, etc., and in which, of course, the form in
+question (<i>is being built</i>) is not required. Nobody would
+think of saying, 'He is being loved'; 'This result is
+being desired.'</p>
+
+<p>"The use of this form is justified only by <i>condemning
+an established usage</i> of the language; namely, the passive<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[Pg 88]</a></span>
+sense in some verbs of the participle in <i>ing</i>. In reference
+to this it is flippantly asked, 'What does the house
+build?' 'What does the letter write?' etc.&mdash;taking for
+granted, without attempting to prove, that the participle in
+<i>ing</i> can not have a passive sense in any verb. The following
+are a few examples from writers of the best reputation,
+which this novelty would condemn: 'While the ceremony
+was performing.'&mdash;Tom. Brown. 'The court was then
+holding.'&mdash;Sir G. McKenzie. 'And still be doing, never
+done.'&mdash;Butler. 'The books are selling.'&mdash;Allen's 'Grammar.'
+'To know nothing of what is transacting in the
+regions above us.'&mdash;Dr. Blair. 'The spot where this new
+and strange tragedy was acting.'&mdash;E. Everett. 'The fortress
+was building.'&mdash;Irving. 'An attempt is making in
+the English parliament.'&mdash;D. Webster. 'The church now
+erecting in the city of New York.'&mdash;'N. A. Review.'
+'These things were transacting in England.'&mdash;Bancroft.</p>
+
+<p>"This new doctrine is in <i>opposition</i> to the almost <i>unanimous
+judgment</i> of the <i>most distinguished grammarians</i>
+and critics, who have considered the subject, and expressed
+their views concerning it. The following are a specimen:
+'Expressions of this kind are condemned by some critics;
+but the usage is unquestionably of far better authority, and
+(according to my apprehension) in far better taste, than the
+more complex phraseology which some late writers adopt
+in its stead; as, "The books are now being sold."'&mdash;Goold
+Brown. 'As to the notion of introducing a new and more
+complex passive form of conjugation, as, "The bridge <i>is
+being built</i>," "The bridge <i>was being built</i>," and so forth, it is
+one of the most absurd and monstrous innovations ever
+thought of. "The work <i>is now being published</i>," is certainly
+no better English than, "The work <i>was being published</i>,
+<i>has been being published</i>, <i>had been being published</i>,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[Pg 89]</a></span>
+<i>shall or will be being published</i>, <i>shall or will have been being
+published</i>," and so on through all the moods and tenses.
+What a language shall we have when our verbs are thus
+conjugated!'&mdash;Brown's 'Gr. of Eng. Gr.,' p. 361. De War
+observes: 'The participle in <i>ing</i> is also passive in many
+instances; as, "The house is building," "I heard of a
+plan forming,"' etc.&mdash;Quoted in 'Frazee's Grammar,' p.
+49. 'It would be an absurdity, indeed, to give up the only
+way we have of denoting the incomplete state of action by
+a passive form (viz., by the participle in <i>ing</i> in the passive
+sense).'&mdash;Arnold's 'English Grammar,' p. 46. 'The present
+participle is often used passively; as, "The ship is
+building." The form of expression, <i>is being built</i>, <i>is being
+committed</i>, etc., is almost universally condemned by grammarians,
+but it is sometimes met with in respectable writers;
+it occurs most frequently in newspaper paragraphs and in
+hasty compositions. See Worcester's "Universal and Critical
+Dictionary."'&mdash;Weld's 'Grammar,' pp. 118 and 180.
+'When we say, "The house is building," the advocates of
+the new theory ask, "Building what?" We might ask, in
+turn, when you say, "The field ploughs well,"&mdash;"Ploughs
+what?" "Wheat sells well,"&mdash;"Sells what?" If usage allows
+us to say, "Wheat sells at a dollar," in a sense that is
+not active, why may we not say, "Wheat is selling at a dollar,"
+in a sense that is not active?'&mdash;Hart's 'Grammar,'
+p. 76. 'The prevailing practice of the best authors is in
+favor of the simple form; as, "The house is building."'&mdash;Wells'
+'School Grammar,' p. 148. 'Several other expressions
+of this sort now and then occur, such as the newfangled
+and most uncouth solecism "<i>is being done</i>," for the
+good old English idiom "<i>is doing</i>"&mdash;an absurd periphrasis
+driving out a pointed and pithy turn of the English language.'&mdash;'N.
+A. Review,' quoted by Mr. Wells, p. 148.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[Pg 90]</a></span>
+'The phrase, "is being built," and others of a similar kind,
+have been for a few years insinuating themselves into our
+language; still they are not English.'&mdash;Harrison's 'Rise,
+Progress, and Present Structure of the English Language.'
+'This mode of expression [the house is being built] is becoming
+quite common. It is liable, however, to several
+important objections. It appears formal and pedantic. It
+has not, as far as I know, the support of any respectable
+grammarian. The easy and natural expression is, "The
+house is building."'&mdash;Prof. J. W. Gibbs."</p>
+
+<p>Mr. Richard Grant White, in his "Words and Their
+Uses," expresses his opinion of the locution <i>is being</i> in this
+wise: "In bad eminence, at the head of those intruders in
+language which to many persons seem to be of established
+respectability, but the right of which to be at all is not fully
+admitted, stands out the form of speech <i>is being done</i>, or
+rather, <i>is being</i>, which, about seventy or eighty years ago,
+began to affront the eye, torment the ear, and assault the
+common sense of the speaker of plain and idiomatic English."
+Mr. White devotes thirty pages of his book to the
+discussion of the subject, and adduces evidence that is
+more than sufficient to convince those who are content with
+an <i>ex parte</i> examination that "it can hardly be that such
+an incongruous and ridiculous form of speech as <i>is being
+done</i> was contrived by a man who, by any stretch of the
+name, should be included among grammarians."</p>
+
+<p>Mr. George P. Marsh, in his "Lectures on the English
+Language," says that the deviser of the locution in question
+was "some grammatical pretender," and that it is "an
+awkward neologism, which neither convenience, intelligibility,
+nor syntactical congruity demands."</p>
+
+<p>To these gentlemen, and to those who are of their way
+of thinking with regard to <i>is being</i>, Dr. Fitzedward Hall<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[Pg 91]</a></span>
+replies at some length, in an article published in "Scribner's
+Monthly" for April, 1872. Dr. Hall writes:</p>
+
+<p>"'All really well educated in the English tongue lament
+the many innovations introduced into our language
+from America; and I doubt if more than one of these
+novelties deserve acceptation. That one is, substituting a
+compound participle for an active verb used in a neuter
+signification: for instance, "The house is <i>being built</i>," instead
+of, "The house is <i>building</i>."' Such is the assertion
+and such is the opinion of some anonymous luminary,<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a>
+who, for his liberality in welcoming a supposed Americanism,
+is somewhat in advance of the herd of his countrymen.
+Almost any popular expression which is considered as a
+novelty, a Briton is pretty certain to assume, off-hand, to
+have originated on our side of the Atlantic. Of the assertion
+I have quoted, no proof is offered; and there is little
+probability that its author had any to offer. 'Are being,'
+in the phrase 'are being thrown up,'<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> is spoken of in 'The
+North American Review'<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> as 'an outrage upon English
+idiom, "to be detested, abhorred, execrated, and given
+over to six thousand" penny-paper editors'; and the fact
+is, that phrases of the form here pointed at have hitherto
+enjoyed very much less favor with us than with the English.</p>
+
+<p>"As lately as 1860, Dr. Worcester, referring to <i>is being
+built</i>, etc., while acknowledging that 'this new form has<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[Pg 92]</a></span>
+been used by some respectable writers,' speaks of it as
+having 'been introduced' 'within a few years.' Mr.
+Richard Grant White, by a most peculiar process of ratiocination,
+endeavors to prove that what Dr. Worcester
+calls 'this new form' came into existence just fifty-six
+years ago. He premises that in Jarvis's translation of
+'Don Quixote,' published in 1742, there occurs 'were carrying,'
+and that this, in the edition of 1818, is sophisticated
+into 'were being carried.' 'This change,' continues our
+logician, 'and the appearance of <i>is being</i> with a perfect
+participle in a very few books published between <span class="smcap">a. d.</span> 1815
+and 1820, indicate the former period as that of the origin
+of this phraseology, which, although more than half a century
+old, is still pronounced a novelty as well as a nuisance.'</p>
+
+<p>"Who, in the next place, devised our modern imperfects
+passive? The question is not, originally, of my
+asking; but, as the learned are at open feud on the subject,
+it should not be passed by in silence. Its deviser is,
+more than likely, as undiscoverable as the name of the
+valiant antediluvian who first tasted an oyster. But the
+deductive character of the miscreant is another thing; and
+hereon there is a war between the philosophers. Mr. G. P.
+Marsh, as if he had actually spotted the wretched creature,
+passionately and categorically denounces him as 'some
+grammatical pretender.' 'But,' replies Mr. White, 'that
+it is the work of any grammarian is more than doubtful.
+Grammarians, with all their faults, do not deform language
+with fantastic solecisms, or even seek to enrich it with new
+and startling verbal combinations. They rather resist
+novelty, and devote themselves to formulating that which
+use has already established.' In the same page with this,
+Mr. White compliments the great unknown as 'some precise<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[Pg 93]</a></span>
+and feeble-minded soul,' and elsewhere calls him 'some
+pedantic writer of the last generation.' To add even one
+word toward a solution of the knotty point here indicated
+transcends, I confess, my utmost competence. It is painful
+to picture to one's self the agonizing emotions with
+which certain philologists would contemplate an authentic
+effigy of the Attila of speech who, by his <i>is being built</i> or
+<i>is being done</i>, first offered violence to the whole circle of
+the proprieties. So far as I have observed, the first grammar
+that exhibits them is that of Mr. R. S. Skillern, M. A.,
+the first edition of which was published at Gloucester in
+1802. Robert Southey had not, on the 9th of October,
+1795, been out of his minority quite two months when,
+evidently delivering himself in a way that had already become
+familiar enough, he wrote of 'a fellow whose uttermost
+upper grinder <i>is being torn out</i> by the roots by a
+mutton-fisted barber.'<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> This is in a letter. But repeated
+instances of the same kind of expression are seen in Southey's
+graver writings. Thus, in his 'Colloquies,' etc.,<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> we read
+of 'such [nunneries] as at this time <i>are being re&euml;stablished</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"'While my hand <i>was being drest</i> by Mr. Young, I
+spoke for the first time,' wrote Coleridge, in March, 1797.</p>
+
+<p>"Charles Lamb speaks of realities which '<i>are being
+acted</i> before us,' and of 'a man who <i>is being strangled</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"Walter Savage Landor, in an imaginary conversation,
+represents Pitt as saying: 'The man who possesses them
+may read Swedenborg and Kant while he <i>is being tossed</i> in
+a blanket.' Again: 'I have seen nobles, men and women,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[Pg 94]</a></span>
+kneeling in the street before these bishops, when no ceremony
+of the Catholic Church <i>was being performed</i>.' Also,
+in a translation from Catullus: 'Some criminal <i>is being
+tried</i> for murder.'</p>
+
+<p>"Nor does Mr. De Quincey scruple at such English as
+'made and <i>being made</i>,' 'the bride that <i>was being married</i>
+to him,' and 'the shafts of Heaven <i>were</i> even now <i>being
+forged</i>.' On one occasion he writes, 'Not done, not even
+(according to modern purism) <i>being done</i>'; as if 'purism'
+meant exactness, rather than the avoidance of neoterism.</p>
+
+<p>"I need, surely, name no more, among the dead, who
+found <i>is being built</i>, or the like, acceptable. 'Simple-minded
+common people and those of culture were alike
+protected against it by their attachment to the idiom of
+their mother tongue, with which they felt it to be directly
+at variance.' So Mr. White informs us. But the writers
+whom I have quoted are formidable exceptions. Even
+Mr. White will scarcely deny to them the title of 'people
+of culture.'</p>
+
+<p>"So much for offenders past repentance; and we all
+know that the sort of phraseology under consideration is
+daily becoming more and more common. The best written
+of the English reviews, magazines, and journals are perpetually
+marked by it; and some of the choicest of living
+English writers employ it freely. Among these, it is
+enough if I specify Bishop Wilberforce and Mr. Charles
+Reade.<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></p>
+
+<p>"Extracts from Bishop Jewel downward being also given,
+Lord Macaulay, Mr. Dickens, 'The Atlantic Monthly,' and
+'The Brooklyn Eagle' are alleged by Mr. White in proof<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[Pg 95]</a></span>
+that people still use such phrases as 'Chelsea Hospital <i>was
+building</i>,' and 'the train <i>was preparing</i>.' 'Hence we see,'
+he adds,<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> 'that the form <i>is being done</i>, <i>is being made</i>, <i>is
+being built</i>, lacks the support of authoritative usage from
+the period of the earliest classical English to the present
+day.' I fully concur with Mr. White in regarding 'neither
+"The Brooklyn Eagle" nor Mr. Dickens as a very high
+authority in the use of language'; yet, when he has renounced
+the aid of these contemned straws, what has he to
+rest his inference on, as to the present day, but the practice
+of Lord Macaulay and 'The Atlantic Monthly'? Those
+who think fit will bow to the dictatorship here prescribed
+to them; but there may be those with whom the classic
+sanction of Southey, Coleridge, and Landor will not be
+wholly void of weight. All scholars are aware that, to
+convey the sense of the imperfects passive, our ancestors,
+centuries ago, prefixed, with <i>is</i>, etc., <i>in</i>, afterward corrupted
+into <i>a</i>, to a verbal substantive. 'The house <i>is in building</i>'
+could be taken to mean nothing but <i>&aelig;des &aelig;dificantur</i>;
+and, when the <i>in</i> gave place to <i>a</i>,<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> it was still manifest
+enough, from the context, that <i>building</i> was governed by a
+preposition. The second stage of change, however, namely,
+when the <i>a</i> was omitted, entailed, in many cases, great
+danger of confusion. In the early part of the last century,
+when English was undergoing what was then thought to
+be purification, the polite world substantially resigned <i>is
+a-building</i> to the vulgar. Toward the close of the same
+century, when, under the influence of free thought, it began
+to be felt that even ideas had a right to faithful and unequivocal<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[Pg 96]</a></span>
+representation, a just resentment of ambiguity was
+evidenced in the creation of <i>is being built</i>. The lament is
+too late that the instinct of reformation did not restore the
+old form. It has gone forever; and we are now to make
+the best of its successors. '"The brass <i>is forging</i>,"' in the
+opinion of Dr. Johnson, is 'a vicious expression, probably
+corrupted from a phrase more pure, but now somewhat
+obsolete, ... "the brass <i>is a-forging</i>."' Yet, with a true
+Tory's timidity and aversion to change, it is not surprising
+that he went on preferring what he found established,
+vicious as it confessedly was, to the end. But was the
+expression 'vicious' solely because it was a corruption?
+In 1787 William Beckford wrote as follows of the fortune-tellers
+of Lisbon: '<i>I saw one dragging into light</i>, as I
+passed by the ruins of a palace thrown down by the earthquake.
+Whether a familiar of the Inquisition was griping
+her in his clutches, or <i>whether she was taking to account by
+some disappointed votary</i>, I will not pretend to answer.'
+Are the expressions here italicized either perspicuous or
+graceful? Whatever we are to have in their place, we
+should be thankful to get quit of them.</p>
+
+<p>"Inasmuch as, concurrently with <i>building</i> for the active
+participle, and <i>being built</i> for the corresponding passive
+participle, we possessed the former, with <i>is</i> prefixed, as the
+active present imperfect, it is in rigid accordance with the
+symmetry of our verb that, to construct the passive present-imperfect,
+we prefix <i>is</i> to the latter, producing the form <i>is
+being built</i>. Such, in its greatest simplicity, is the procedure
+which, as will be seen, has provoked a very levanter
+of ire and vilification. But anything that is new will be
+excepted to by minds of a certain order. Their tremulous
+and impatient dread of removing ancient landmarks even
+disqualifies them for thoroughly investigating its character<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[Pg 97]</a></span>
+and pretensions. In <i>has built</i> and <i>will build</i>, we find the
+active participle perfect and the active infinitive subjoined
+to auxiliaries; and so, in <i>has been built</i> and <i>will be built</i>,
+the passive participle perfect and the passive infinitive are
+subjoined to auxiliaries. In <i>is building</i> and <i>is being built</i>,
+we have, in strict harmony with the constitution of the perfect
+and future tenses, an auxiliary followed by the active
+participle present and the passive participle present. <i>Built</i>
+is determined as active or passive by the verbs which qualify
+it, <i>have</i> and <i>be</i>; and the grammarians are right in considering
+it, when embodied in <i>has built</i>, as active, since its
+analogue, embodied in <i>has been built</i>, is the exclusively
+passive <i>been built</i>. Besides this, <i>has been</i> + <i>built</i> would
+signify something like <i>has existed, built</i>,<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> which is plainly
+neuter. We are debarred, therefore, from such an analysis;
+and, by parity of reasoning, we may not resolve <i>is being
+built</i> into <i>is being</i> + <i>built</i>. It must have been an inspiration
+of analogy, felt or unfelt, that suggested the form I
+am discussing. <i>Is being</i> + <i>built</i>, as it can mean, pretty
+nearly, only <i>exists, built</i>, would never have been proposed
+as adequate to convey any but a neuter sense; whereas it
+was perfectly natural for a person aiming to express a passive
+sense to prefix <i>is</i> to the passive concretion <i>being built</i>.<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The analogical justification of <i>is being built</i> which I
+have brought forward is so obvious that, as it occurred to<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[Pg 98]</a></span>
+myself more than twenty years ago, so it must have occurred
+spontaneously to hundreds besides. It is very singular that
+those who, like Mr. Marsh and Mr. White, have pondered
+long and painfully over locutions typified by <i>is being built</i>,
+should have missed the real ground of their grammatical
+defensibleness, and should have warmed themselves, in their
+opposition to them, into uttering opinions which no calm
+judgment can accept.</p>
+
+<p>"'One who <i>is being beaten</i>' is, to Archbishop Whately,
+'uncouth English.' '"The bridge <i>is being built</i>," and other
+phrases of the like kind, have pained the eye' of Mr. David
+Booth. Such phrases, according to Mr. M. Harrison, 'are
+not English.' To Professor J. W. Gibbs 'this mode of expression
+... appears formal and pedantic'; and 'the easy
+and natural expression is, "The house <i>is building</i>."'<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> In
+all this, little or nothing is discernible beyond sheer prejudice,
+the prejudice of those who resolve to take their stand
+against an innovation, regardless of its utility, and who are
+ready to find an argument against it in any random epithet
+of disparagement provoked by unreasoning aversion. And
+the more recent denouncers in the same line have no more
+reason on their side than their elder brethren.</p>
+
+<p>"In Mr. Marsh's estimation, <i>is being built</i> illustrates
+'corruption of language'; it is 'clumsy and unidiomatic';
+it is 'at best but a philological coxcombry'; it 'is an awkward
+neologism, which neither convenience, intelligibility,
+nor syntactical congruity demands, and the use of which
+ought, therefore, to be discountenanced, as an attempt at
+the artificial improvement of the language in a point which
+needed no amendment.' Again, 'To reject' <i>is building</i> in
+favor of the modern phrase 'is to violate the laws of language<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[Pg 99]</a></span>
+by an arbitrary change; and, in this particular case,
+the proposed substitute is at war with the genius of the
+English tongue.' Mr. Marsh seems to have fancied that,
+wherever he points out a beauty in <i>is building</i>, he points
+out, inclusively, a blemish in <i>is being built</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"The fervor and feeling with which Mr. White advances
+to the charge are altogether tropical. 'The full absurdity
+of this phrase, the essence of its nonsense, seems not to
+have been hitherto pointed out.' It is not 'consistent with
+reason'; and it is not 'conformed to the normal development
+of the language.' It is 'a monstrosity, the illogical,
+confusing, inaccurate, unidiomatic character of which I
+have at some length, but yet imperfectly, set forth.' Finally,
+'In fact, it means nothing, and is the most incongruous
+combination of words and ideas that ever attained respectable
+usage in any civilized language.' These be 'prave
+'ords'; and it seems a pity that so much sterling vituperative
+ammunition should be expended in vain. And that it
+is so expended thinks Mr. White himself; for, though passing
+sentence in the spirit of a Jeffreys, he is not really on
+the judgment-seat, but on the lowest hassock of despair.
+As concerns the mode of expression exemplified by <i>is being
+built</i>, he owns that 'to check its diffusion would be a hopeless
+undertaking.' If so, why not reserve himself for service
+against some evil not avowedly beyond remedy?</p>
+
+<p>"Again we read, 'Some precise and feeble-minded
+soul, having been taught that there is a passive voice in
+English, and that, for instance, <i>building</i> is an active participle,
+and <i>builded</i> or <i>built</i> a passive, felt conscientious
+scruples at saying "the house <i>is building</i>." For what could
+the house build?' As children say at play, Mr. White
+burns here. If it had occurred to him that the 'conscientious
+scruples' of his hypothetical, 'precise, and feeble-minded<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[Pg 100]</a></span>
+soul' were roused by <i>been built</i>, not by <i>built</i>, I suspect
+his chapter on <i>is being built</i> would have been much
+shorter than it is at present, and very different. 'The
+fatal absurdity in this phrase consists,' he tells us, 'in the
+combination of <i>is</i> with <i>being</i>; in the making of the verb <i>to
+be</i> a supplement, or, in grammarians' phrase, an auxiliary
+to itself&mdash;an absurdity so palpable, so monstrous, so ridiculous,
+that it should need only to be pointed out to be
+scouted.'<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> Lastly, 'The question is thus narrowed simply
+to this, Does <i>to be being</i> (<i>esse ens</i>) mean anything more or
+other than <i>to be</i>?'</p>
+
+<p>"Having convicted Mr. White of a mistaken analysis, I
+am not concerned with the observations which he founds
+on his mistake. However, even if his analysis had been
+correct, some of his arguments would avail him nothing.
+For instance, <i>is being built</i>, on his understanding of it, that
+is to say, <i>is being</i> + <i>built</i>, he represents by <i>ens &aelig;dificatus est</i>,
+as 'the supposed corresponding Latin phrase.'<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> The Latin
+is illegitimate; and he infers that, therefore, the English is
+the same. But <i>&aelig;dificans est</i>, a translation, on the model
+which he offers, of the active <i>is building</i>, is quite as illegitimate
+as <i>ens &aelig;edificatus est</i>. By parity of <i>non-sequitur</i>, we
+are, therefore, to surrender the active <i>is building</i>. Assume
+that a phrase in a given language is indefensible unless it<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[Pg 101]</a></span>
+has its counterpart in some other language; from the very
+conception and definition of an idiom every idiom is illegitimate.</p>
+
+<p>"I now pass to another point. '<i>To be</i> and <i>to exist</i> are,'
+to Mr. White's apprehension, 'perfect synonyms, or more
+nearly perfect, perhaps, than any two verbs in the language.
+In some of their meanings there is a shade of difference,
+but in others there is none whatever; and the latter are
+those which serve our present purpose. When we say, "He,
+<i>being</i> forewarned of danger, fled," we say, "He, <i>existing</i>
+forewarned of danger, fled." When we say that a thing <i>is</i>
+done, we say that it <i>exists</i> done.... <i>Is being done</i> is simply
+<i>exists existing done</i>.' But, since <i>is</i> and <i>exists</i> are equipollent,
+and so <i>being</i> and <i>existing, is being</i> is the same as
+the unimpeachable <i>is existing</i>. Q. <i>non</i> E. D. <i>Is existing</i>
+ought, of course, to be no less objectionable to Mr. White
+than <i>is being</i>. Just as absurd, too, should he reckon the
+Italian <i>sono stato</i>, <i>era stato</i>, <i>sia stato</i>, <i>fossi stato</i>, <i>saro stato</i>,
+<i>sarei stato</i>, <i>essere stato</i>, and <i>essendo stato</i>. For in Italian
+both <i>essere</i> and <i>stare</i> are required to make up the verb substantive,
+as in Latin both <i>esse</i> and the offspring of <i>fuere</i> are
+required; and <i>stare</i>, primarily 'to stand,' is modified into
+a true auxiliary. The alleged 'full absurdity of this phrase,'
+to wit, <i>is being built</i>, 'the essence of its nonsense,' vanishes
+thus into thin air. So I was about to comment bluntly, not
+forgetting to regret that any gentleman's cultivation of logic
+should fructify in the shape of irrepressible tendencies to
+suicide. But this would be precipitate. Agreeably to one
+of Mr. White's judicial placita, which I make no apology
+for citing twice, 'no man who has preserved all his senses
+will doubt for a moment that "to exist a mastiff or a mule"
+is absolutely the same as "to be a mastiff or a mule."'
+Declining to admit their identity, I have not preserved all<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[Pg 102]</a></span>
+my senses; and, accordingly&mdash;though it may be in me the
+very superfetation of lunacy&mdash;I would caution the reader to
+keep a sharp eye on my arguments, hereabouts particularly.
+The Cretan, who, in declaring all Cretans to be liars, left
+the question of his veracity doubtful to all eternity, fell into
+a pit of his own digging. Not unlike the unfortunate Cretan,
+Mr. White has tumbled headlong into his own snare.
+It was, for the rest, entirely unavailing that he insisted on
+the insanity of those who should gainsay his fundamental
+postulate. Sanity, of a crude sort, may accept it; and
+sanity may put it to a use other than its propounder's.</p>
+
+<p>"Mr. Marsh, after setting forth the all-sufficiency of <i>is
+building</i>, in the passive sense, goes on to say: 'The reformers
+who object to the phrase I am defending must, in
+consistency, employ the proposed substitute with all passive
+participles, and in other tenses as well as the present. They
+must say, therefore, "The subscription-paper <i>is being missed</i>,
+but I know that a considerable sum <i>is being wanted</i> to make
+up the amount"; "the great Victoria Bridge <i>has been being
+built</i> more than two years"; "when I reach London, the
+ship Leviathan <i>will be being built</i>"; "if my orders had
+been followed, the coat <i>would have been being made yesterday</i>";
+"if the house <i>had</i> then <i>been being built</i>, the mortar
+<i>would have been being mixed</i>."' We may reply that, while
+awkward instances of the old form are most abundant in
+our literature, there is no fear that the repulsive elaborations
+which have been worked out in ridicule of the new
+forms will prove to have been anticipations of future usage.
+There was a time when, as to their adverbs, people compared
+them, to a large extent, with <i>-er</i> and <i>-est</i>, or with
+<i>more</i> and <i>most</i>, just as their ear or pleasure dictated. They
+wrote <i>plainlier</i> and <i>plainliest</i>, or <i>more plainly</i> and <i>most
+plainly</i>; and some adverbs, as <i>early</i>, <i>late</i>, <i>often</i>, <i>seldom</i>, and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[Pg 103]</a></span>
+<i>soon</i>, we still compare in a way now become anomalous.
+And as our forefathers treated their adverbs we still treat
+many adjectives. <i>Furthermore</i>, <i>obligingness</i>, <i>preparedness</i>,
+and <i>designedly</i> seem quite natural; yet we do not feel that
+they authorize us to talk of 'the <i>seeingness</i> of the eye,' 'the
+<i>understoodness</i> of a sentence,' or of 'a statement <i>acknowledgedly</i>
+correct.' 'The now too notorious fact' is tolerable;
+but 'the never to be sufficiently execrated monster
+Bonaparte' is intolerable. The sun may be <i>shorn</i> of his
+splendor; but we do not allow cloudy weather to <i>shear</i> him
+of it. How, then, can any one claim that a man who prefers
+to say <i>is being built</i> should say <i>has been being built</i>?
+Are not awkward instances of the old form, typified by <i>is
+building</i>, as easily to be picked out of extant literature as
+such instances of the new form, likely ever to be used, are
+to be invented? And 'the reformers' have not forsworn
+their ears. Mr. Marsh, at p. 135 of his admirable 'Lectures,'
+lays down that 'the adjective <i>reliable</i>, in the sense of
+<i>worthy of confidence</i>, is altogether unidiomatic'; and yet,
+at p. 112, he writes '<i>reliable</i> evidence.' Again, at p. 396 of
+the same work, he rules that <i>whose</i>, in 'I passed a house
+<i>whose</i> windows were open,' is 'by no means yet fully established';
+and at p. 145 of his very learned 'Man and Nature'
+he writes 'a quadrangular pyramid, the perpendicular
+of <i>whose</i> sides,' etc. Really, if his own judgments sit so
+very loose on his practical conscience, we may, without being
+chargeable with exaction, ask of him to relax a little
+the rigor of his requirements at the hands of his neighbors.</p>
+
+<p>"Beckford's Lisbon fortune-teller, before had into court,
+was '<i>dragging</i> into light,' and, perchance, '<i>was taking</i> to account.'
+Many moderns would say and write '<i>being dragged</i>
+into light,' and '<i>was being taken</i> to account.' But, if we<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[Pg 104]</a></span>
+are to trust the conservative critics, in comparison with expressions
+of the former pattern, those of the latter are
+'uncouth,' 'clumsy,' 'awkward neologisms,' 'philological
+coxcombries,' 'formal and pedantic,' 'incongruous and ridiculous
+forms of speech,' 'illogical, confusing, inaccurate
+monstrosities.' Moreover, they are neither 'consistent with
+reason' nor 'conformed to the normal development of the
+language'; they are 'at war with the genius of the English
+tongue'; they are 'unidiomatic'; they are 'not English.'
+In passing, if Mr. Marsh will so define the term <i>unidiomatic</i>
+as to evince that it has any applicability to the
+case in hand, or if he will arrest and photograph 'the genius
+of the English tongue,' so that we may know the original
+when we meet with it, he will confer a public favor.
+And now I submit for consideration whether the sole
+strength of those who decry <i>is being built</i> and its congeners
+does not consist in their talent for calling hard names. If
+they have not an uneasy subconsciousness that their cause
+is weak, they would, at least, do well in eschewing the violence
+to which, for want of something better, the advocates
+of weak causes proverbially resort.</p>
+
+<p>"I once had a friend who, for some microscopic penumbra
+of heresy, was charged, in the words of his accuser,
+with 'as near an approach to the sin against the Holy
+Ghost as is practicable to human infirmity.' Similarly, on
+one view, the feeble potencies of philological turpitude
+seem to have exhibited their most consummate realization
+in engendering <i>is being built</i>. The supposed enormity perpetrated
+in its production, provided it had fallen within the
+sphere of ethics, would, at the least, have ranked, with its
+denunciators, as a brand-new exemplification of total depravity.
+But, after all, what incontestable defect in it has
+any one succeeded in demonstrating? Mr. White, in opposing<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[Pg 105]</a></span>
+to the expression objections based on an erroneous
+analysis, simply lays a phantom of his own evoking; and,
+so far as I am informed, other impugners of <i>is being built</i>
+have, absolutely, no argument whatever against it over and
+beyond their repugnance to novelty. Subjected to a little
+untroubled contemplation, it would, I am confident, have
+ceased long ago to be matter of controversy; but the dust
+of prejudice and passion, which so distempers the intellectual
+vision of theologians and politicians, is seen to make,
+with ruthless impartiality, no exception of the perspicacity
+of philologists.</p>
+
+<p>"Prior to the evolution of <i>is being built</i> and <i>was being
+built</i>, we possessed no discriminate equivalents to <i>&aelig;dificatur</i>
+and <i>&aelig;dificabatur</i>; <i>is built</i> and <i>was built</i>, by which they
+were rendered, corresponding exactly to <i>&aelig;dificatus est</i> and
+<i>&aelig;dificatus erat</i>. <i>Cum &aelig;dificaretur</i> was to us the same as
+<i>&aelig;dificabatur</i>. On the wealth of the Greek in expressions
+of imperfect passive I need not dwell. With rare exceptions,
+the Romans were satisfied with the present-imperfect
+and the past-imperfect; and we, on the comparatively few
+occasions which present themselves for expressing other imperfects,
+shall be sure to have recourse to the old forms
+rather than to the new, or else to use periphrases.<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> The
+purists may, accordingly, dismiss their apprehensions, especially
+as the neoterists have, clearly, a keener horror of
+phraseological ungainliness than themselves. One may<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[Pg 106]</a></span>
+have no hesitation about saying 'the house <i>is being built</i>,'
+and may yet recoil from saying that 'it <i>should have been
+being built</i> last Christmas'; and the same person&mdash;just as,
+provided he did not feel a harshness, inadequacy, and ambiguity
+in the passive 'the house <i>is building</i>,' he would use
+the expression&mdash;will, more likely than not, elect <i>is in preparation</i>
+preferentially to <i>is being prepared</i>. If there are any
+who, in their zealotry for the congruous, choose to adhere
+to the new form in its entire range of exchangeability for
+the old, let it be hoped that they will find, in Mr. Marsh's
+speculative approbation of consistency, full amends for the
+discomfort of encountering smiles or frowns. At the same
+time, let them be mindful of the career of Mr. White, with
+his black flag and no quarter. The dead Polonius was, in
+Hamlet's phrase, at supper, 'not where he eats, but where
+he <i>is eaten</i>.' Shakespeare, to Mr. White's thinking, in this
+wise expressed himself at the best, and deserves not only
+admiration therefor, but to be imitated. 'While the ark
+<i>was built</i>,' 'while the ark <i>was prepared</i>,' writes Mr. White
+himself.<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> Shakespeare is commended for his ambiguous
+<i>is eaten</i>, though <i>in eating</i> or <i>an eating</i> would have been not
+only correct in his day, but, where they would have come
+in his sentence, univocal. With equal reason a man would
+be entitled to commendation for tearing his mutton-chops
+with his fingers, when he might cut them up with a knife
+and fork. '<i>Is eaten</i>,' says Mr. White, 'does not mean <i>has
+been eaten</i>.' Very true; but a continuous unfinished passion&mdash;Polonius's
+still undergoing manducation, to speak
+Johnsonese&mdash;was in Shakespeare's mind; and his words
+describe a passion no longer in generation. The King of
+Denmark's lord chamberlain had no precedent in Herod,
+when 'he <i>was eaten</i> of worms'; the original, <span title="genomenos sk&ocirc;l&ecirc;kobr&ocirc;tos">&#947;&#949;&#957;&#8057;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#959;&#962; &#963;&#954;&#969;&#955;&#951;&#954;&#8057;&#946;&#961;&#969;&#964;&#959;&#962;</span><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[Pg 107]</a></span>, yielding, but for its participle, 'he became
+worm-eaten.'</p>
+
+<p>"Having now done with Mr. White, I am anxious, before
+taking leave of him, to record, with all emphasis, that
+it would be the grossest injustice to write of his elegant
+'Life and Genius of Shakespeare,' a book which does
+credit to American literature, in the tone which I have
+found unavoidable in dealing with his 'Words and their
+Uses.'"</p>
+
+<p>The student of English who has honestly weighed the
+arguments on both sides of the question, must, I believe,
+be of opinion that our language is the richer for having
+two forms for expressing the Progressive Passive. Further,
+he must, I believe, be of opinion that in very many cases
+he conforms to the most approved usage of our time by
+employing the old form; that, however, if he were to employ
+the old form in all cases, his meaning would sometimes
+be uncertain.</p>
+
+<p><b>It.</b> Cobbett discourses of this little neuter pronoun in
+this wise: "The word <i>it</i> is the greatest troubler that I
+know of in language. It is so small and so convenient that
+few are careful enough in using it. Writers seldom spare
+this word. Whenever they are at a loss for either a nominative
+or an objective to their sentence, they, without any
+kind of ceremony, clap in an <i>it</i>. A very remarkable instance
+of this pressing of poor <i>it</i> into actual service, contrary
+to the laws of grammar and of sense, occurs in a
+piece of composition, where we might, with justice, insist
+on correctness. This piece is on the subject of grammar;
+it is a piece written by a <i>Doctor of Divinity</i> and read by
+him to students in grammar and language in an academy;
+and the very sentence that I am now about to quote is
+selected by the author of a grammar as testimony of high<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[Pg 108]</a></span>
+authority in favor of the excellence of his work. Surely,
+if correctness be ever to be expected, it must be in a case
+like this. I allude to two sentences in the 'Charge of the
+Reverend Doctor Abercrombie to the Senior Class of the
+Philadelphia Academy,' published in 1806; which sentences
+have been selected and published by Mr. Lindley
+Murray as a testimonial of the <i>merits</i> of his grammar; and
+which sentences are by Mr. Murray given to us in the following
+words: 'The unwearied exertions of this gentleman
+<i>have</i> done more toward elucidating the obscurities
+and embellishing the structure of our language than any
+<i>other writer</i> on the subject. <i>Such a work</i> has long been
+wanted, and from the success with which <i>it</i> is executed,
+can not be too highly appreciated.'</p>
+
+<p>"As in the learned Doctor's opinion obscurities can be
+elucidated, and as in the same opinion Mr. Murray is an
+able hand at this kind of work, it would not be amiss were
+the grammarian to try his skill upon this article from the
+hand of his dignified eulogist; for here is, if one may use
+the expression, a constellation of obscurities. Our poor
+oppressed <i>it</i>, which we find forced into the Doctor's service
+in the second sentence, relates to '<i>such a work</i>,' though this
+work is nothing that has an existence, notwithstanding it
+is said to be '<i>executed</i>.' In the first sentence, the 'exertions'
+become, all of a sudden, a '<i>writer</i>': the <i>exertions</i>
+have done more than 'any <i>other</i> writer'; for, mind you,
+it is not the <i>gentleman</i> that has done anything; it is 'the
+<i>exertions</i>' that <i>have</i> done what is said to be done. The
+word <i>gentleman</i> is in the possessive case, and has nothing
+to do with the action of the sentence. Let us give the sentence
+a turn, and the Doctor and the grammarian will hear
+how it will sound. 'This gentleman's <i>exertions</i> have done
+more than any <i>other writer</i>.' This is on a level with 'This<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[Pg 109]</a></span>
+gentleman's <i>dog</i> has killed more hares than any <i>other sportsman</i>.'
+No doubt Doctor Abercrombie <i>meant</i> to say, 'The
+exertions of this gentleman have done more <i>than those</i> of
+any other writer. Such a work as this gentleman's has
+long been wanted; his work, seeing the successful manner
+of its execution, can not be too highly commended.'
+<i>Meant!</i> No doubt at all of that! And when we hear a
+Hampshire ploughboy say, 'Poll Cherrycheek have giv'd
+a thick handkecher,' we know very well that he <i>means</i> to
+say, 'Poll Cherrycheek has given me this handkerchief';
+and yet we are too apt to <i>laugh at him</i> and to call him
+<i>ignorant</i>; which is wrong, because he has no pretensions
+to a knowledge of grammar, and he may be very skillful as
+a ploughboy. However, we will not laugh at Doctor Abercrombie,
+whom I knew, many years ago, for a very kind
+and worthy man. But, if we may, in any case, be allowed
+to laugh at the ignorance of our fellow-creatures, that case
+certainly does arise when we see a professed grammarian,
+the author of voluminous precepts and examples on the
+subject of grammar, producing, in imitation of the possessors
+of valuable medical secrets, testimonials vouching for
+the efficacy of his literary panacea, and when, in those
+testimonials, we find most flagrant instances of bad grammar.</p>
+
+<p>"However, my dear James, let this strong and striking
+instance of the misuse of the word <i>it</i> serve you in the way
+of caution. Never put an <i>it</i> upon paper without thinking
+well of what you are about. When I see many <i>its</i> in a
+page, I always tremble for the writer."</p>
+
+<p><b>Jeopardize.</b> This is a modern word which we could
+easily do without, as it means neither more nor less than
+its venerable progenitor <i>to jeopard</i>, which is greatly preferred
+by all careful writers.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[Pg 110]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Just going to.</b> Instead of "I am <i>just going to</i> go," it is
+better to say, "I am just <i>about</i> to go."</p>
+
+<p><b>Kids.</b> "This is another vile contraction. Habit blinds
+people to the unseemliness of a term like this. How would
+it sound if one should speak of silk gloves as <i>silks</i>?"</p>
+
+<p><b>Kind.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Polite">Polite</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Knights Templars.</b> The name of this ancient body
+has been adopted by a branch of the Masonic fraternity,
+but in a perverted form&mdash;<i>Knights Templar</i>; and this form
+is commonly seen in print, whether referring to the old
+knights or to their modern imitators. This doubtless is
+due to the erroneous impression that <i>Templar</i> is an adjective,
+and so can not take the plural form; while in fact
+it is a case of two nouns in apposition&mdash;a double designation&mdash;meaning
+Knights of the order of Templars. Hence
+the plural should be <i>Knights Templars</i>, and not <i>Knights
+Templar</i>. Members of the contemporaneous order of St.
+John of Jerusalem were commonly called Knights Hospitallers.</p>
+
+<p><b>Lady.</b> To use the term <i>lady</i>, whether in the singular
+or in the plural, simply to designate the sex, is in the worst
+possible taste. There is a kind of pin-feather gentility
+which seems to have a settled aversion to using the terms
+<i>man</i> and <i>woman</i>. Gentlemen and ladies establish their
+claims to being called such by their bearing, and not by
+arrogating to themselves, <i>even indirectly</i>, the titles. In
+England, the title <i>lady</i> is properly correlative to <i>lord</i>; but
+there, as in this country, it is used as a term of complaisance,
+and is appropriately applied to women whose lives are exemplary,
+and who have received that school and home education
+which enables them to appear to advantage in the
+better circles of society. Such expressions as "She is a
+fine <i>lady</i>, a clever <i>lady</i>, a well-dressed <i>lady</i>, a good <i>lady</i>, a<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[Pg 111]</a></span>
+modest <i>lady</i>, a charitable <i>lady</i>, an amiable <i>lady</i>, a handsome
+<i>lady</i>, a fascinating <i>lady</i>," and the like, are studiously avoided
+by persons of refinement. <i>Ladies</i> say, "we <i>women</i>, the
+<i>women</i> of America, <i>women's</i> apparel," and so on; <i>vulgar</i>
+women talk about "us <i>ladies</i>, the <i>ladies</i> of America,
+<i>ladies'</i> apparel," and so on. If a woman of culture and
+refinement&mdash;in short, a lady&mdash;is compelled from any cause
+soever to work in a store, she is quite content to be called
+a sales-<i>woman</i>; not so, however, with your young woman
+who, being in a store, is in a better position than ever
+before. She, Heaven bless her! boils with indignation
+if she is not denominated a sales-<i>lady</i>. Lady is often the
+proper term to use, and then it would be very improper to
+use any other; but it is very certain that the terms <i>lady</i>
+and <i>gentleman</i> are least used by those persons who are
+most worthy of being designated by them. With a nice
+discrimination worthy of special notice, one of our daily
+papers recently said: "Miss Jennie Halstead, daughter of
+the proprietor of the 'Cincinnati Commercial,' is one of the
+most brilliant young <i>women</i> in Ohio."</p>
+
+<p>In a late number of the "London Queen" was the following:
+"The terms <i>ladies</i> and <i>gentlemen</i> become in themselves
+vulgarisms when misapplied, and the improper application
+of the wrong term at the wrong time makes all the
+difference in the world to ears polite. Thus, calling a man
+a <i>gentleman</i> when he should be called a <i>man</i>, or speaking
+of a man as a <i>man</i> when he should be spoken of as a
+<i>gentleman</i>; or alluding to a lady as a <i>woman</i> when she
+should be alluded to as a <i>lady</i>, or speaking of a woman
+as a <i>lady</i> when she should properly be termed a <i>woman</i>.
+Tact and a sense of the fitness of things decide these points,
+there being no fixed rule to go upon to determine when a
+man is a <i>man</i> or when he is a <i>gentleman</i>; and, although he<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[Pg 112]</a></span>
+is far oftener termed the one than the other, he does not
+thereby lose his attributes of a gentleman. In common
+parlance, a man is always a <i>man</i> to a man, and never a
+<i>gentleman</i>; to a woman, he is occasionally a <i>man</i> and occasionally
+a <i>gentleman</i>; but a man would far oftener term
+a woman a <i>woman</i> than he would term her a <i>lady</i>. When
+a man makes use of an adjective in speaking of a lady, he
+almost invariably calls her a <i>woman</i>. Thus, he would say,
+'I met a rather agreeable <i>woman</i> at dinner last night';
+but he would <i>not</i> say, 'I met an agreeable <i>lady</i>'; but he
+might say, 'A <i>lady</i>, a friend of mine, told me,' etc., when
+he would <i>not</i> say, 'A <i>woman</i>, a friend of mine, told me,'
+etc. Again, a man would say, 'Which of the <i>ladies</i> did
+you take in to dinner?' He would certainly not say, 'Which
+of the <i>women</i>,' etc.</p>
+
+<p>"Speaking of people <i>en masse</i>, it would be to belong to
+a very advanced school to refer to them in conversation as
+'men and women,' while it would be all but vulgar to style
+them 'ladies and gentlemen,' the compromise between the
+two being to speak of them as 'ladies and men.' Thus a
+lady would say, 'I have asked two or three ladies and several
+men'; she would not say, 'I have asked several men
+and women'; neither would she say, 'I have asked several
+ladies and gentlemen.' And, speaking of numbers, it would
+be very usual to say, 'There were a great many ladies, and
+but very few men present,' or, 'The ladies were in the
+majority, so few men being present.' Again, a lady would
+not say, 'I expect two or three men,' but she would say,
+'I expect two or three gentlemen.' When people are on
+ceremony with each other [<i>one another</i>], they might, perhaps,
+in speaking of a man, call him a <i>gentleman</i>; but,
+otherwise, it would be more usual to speak of him as a <i>man</i>.
+Ladies, when speaking of each other [<i>one another</i>], usually<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[Pg 113]</a></span>
+employ the term <i>woman</i> in preference to that of <i>lady</i>. Thus
+they would say, 'She is a very good-natured <i>woman</i>,' 'What
+sort of a <i>woman</i> is she?' the term <i>lady</i> being entirely out
+of place under such circumstances. Again, the term young
+<i>lady</i> gives place as far as possible to the term <i>girl</i>, although
+it greatly depends upon the amount of intimacy existing as
+to which term is employed."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Language" id="Language"></a>Language.</b> A note in Worcester's Dictionary says:
+"<i>Language</i> is a very general term, and is not strictly confined
+to utterance by words, as it is also expressed by the
+countenance, by the eyes, and by signs. <i>Tongue</i> refers
+especially to an original language; as, 'the Hebrew
+<i>tongue</i>.' The modern languages are derived from the
+original <i>tongues</i>." If this be correct, then he who speaks
+French, German, English, Spanish, and Italian, may properly
+say that he speaks five <i>languages</i>, but only one
+<i>tongue</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Lay" id="Lay"></a>Lay&mdash;Lie.</b> Errors are frequent in the use of these two
+irregular verbs. <i>Lay</i> is often used for <i>lie</i>, and <i>lie</i> is sometimes
+used for <i>lay</i>. This confusion in their use is due in
+some measure, doubtless, to the circumstance that <i>lay</i> appears
+in both verbs, it being the imperfect tense of <i>to lie</i>.
+We say, "A mason <i>lays</i> bricks," "A ship <i>lies</i> at anchor,"
+etc. "I must <i>lie</i> down"; "I must <i>lay</i> myself down";
+"I must <i>lay</i> this book on the table"; "He <i>lies</i> on the
+grass"; "He <i>lays</i> his plans well"; "He <i>lay</i> on the grass";
+"He <i>laid</i> it away"; "He has <i>lain</i> in bed long enough";
+"He has <i>laid up</i> some money," "<i>in</i> a stock," "<i>down</i> the
+law"; "He is <i>laying</i> out the grounds"; "Ships <i>lie</i> at the
+wharf"; "Hens <i>lay</i> eggs"; "The ship <i>lay</i> at anchor";
+"The hen <i>laid</i> an egg." It will be seen that <i>lay</i> always
+expresses transitive action, and that <i>lie</i> expresses
+rest.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[Pg 114]</a></span></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Here <i>lies</i> our sovereign lord, the king,<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Whose word no man relies on;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">He never says a foolish thing,<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Nor ever does a wise one."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>&mdash;Written on the bedchamber door of Charles II, by the
+Earl of Rochester.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Learn" id="Learn"></a>Learn.</b> This verb was long ago used as a synonym of
+<i>teach</i>, but in this sense it is now obsolete. To <i>teach</i> is to
+give instruction; to <i>learn</i> is to take instruction. "I will
+<i>learn</i>, if you will <i>teach</i> me." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Teach">Teach</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Leave.</b> There are grammarians who insist that this
+verb should not be used without an object, as, for example,
+it is used in such sentences as, "When do you leave?" "I
+leave to-morrow." The object of the verb&mdash;home, town,
+or whatever it may be&mdash;is, of course, understood; but this,
+say these gentlemen, is not permissible. On this point
+opinions will, I think, differ; they will, however, not differ
+with regard to the vulgarity of using <i>leave</i> in the sense of
+<i>let</i>; thus, "<i>Leave</i> me be"; "<i>Leave</i> it alone"; "<i>Leave</i> her
+be&mdash;don't bother her"; "<i>Leave</i> me see it."</p>
+
+<p><b>Lend.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Loan">Loan</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Lengthy.</b> This word is of comparatively recent origin,
+and, though it is said to be an Americanism, it is a good
+deal used in England. The most careful writers, however,
+both here and elsewhere, much prefer the word <i>long</i>: "a
+<i>long</i> discussion," "a <i>long</i> discourse," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Leniency.</b> Mr. Gould calls this word and <i>lenience</i>
+"two philological abortions." <i>Lenity</i> is undoubtedly the
+proper word to use, though both Webster and Worcester
+do recognize <i>leniency</i> and <i>lenience</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Less" id="Less"></a>Less.</b> This word is much used instead of <i>fewer</i>. <i>Less</i>
+relates to quantity; <i>fewer</i> to number. Instead of, "There
+were not <i>less</i> than twenty persons present," we should<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[Pg 115]</a></span>
+say, "There were not <i>fewer</i> than twenty persons present."</p>
+
+<p><b>Lesser.</b> This form of the comparative of <i>little</i> is accounted
+a corruption of <i>less</i>. It may, however, be used
+instead of <i>less</i> with propriety in verse, and also, in some
+cases, in prose. We may say, for example, "Of two evils
+choose the <i>less</i>," or "the <i>lesser</i>." The latter form, in sentences
+like this, is the more euphonious.</p>
+
+<p><b>Liable.</b> Richard Grant White, in inveighing against
+the misuse of this word, cites the example of a member from
+a rural district, who called out to a man whom he met in
+the village, where he was in the habit of making little purchases:
+"I say, mister, kin yer tell me whar I'd be <i>li'ble</i>
+to find some beans?" See, also, <span class="smcap"><a href="#Apt">Apt</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Lie.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Lay">Lay</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Like" id="Like"></a>Like&mdash;As.</b> Both these words express similarity; <i>like</i>
+(adjective) comparing things, <i>as</i> (adverb) comparing action,
+existence, or quality. Like is followed by an object only,
+and does not admit of a verb in the same construction.
+<i>As</i> must be followed by a verb expressed or understood.
+We say, "He looks <i>like</i> his brother," or "He looks <i>as</i>
+his brother <i>looks</i>." "Do <i>as</i> I do," not "<i>like</i> I do." "You
+must speak <i>as</i> James does," not "<i>like</i> James does." "He
+died <i>as</i> he had lived, <i>like</i> a dog." "It is <i>as</i> blue <i>as</i> indigo";
+i. e., "as indigo is."</p>
+
+<p><b>Like, To.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Love">Love</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Likely.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Apt">Apt</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Lit.</b> This form of the past participle of the verb <i>to
+light</i> is now obsolete. "Have you <i>lighted</i> the fire?" "The
+gas is <i>lighted</i>." <i>Het</i> for <i>heated</i> is a similar, but much greater,
+vulgarism.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Loan" id="Loan"></a>Loan&mdash;Lend.</b> There are those who contend that there
+is no such verb as <i>to loan</i>, although it has been found in<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[Pg 116]</a></span>
+our literature for more than three hundred years. Whether
+there is properly such a verb or not, it is quite certain that
+it is only those having a vulgar <i>penchant</i> for big words who
+will prefer it to its synonym <i>lend</i>. Better far to say "<i>Lend</i>
+me your umbrella" than "<i>Loan</i> me your umbrella."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Locate" id="Locate"></a>Locate&mdash;Settle.</b> The use of the verb <i>to locate</i> in the
+sense of <i>to settle</i> is said to be an Americanism. Although
+the dictionaries recognize <i>to locate</i> as a neuter verb, as such
+it is marked "rarely used," and, in the sense of <i>to settle</i>, it
+is among the vulgarisms that careful speakers and writers
+are studious to avoid. A man <i>settles</i>, not <i>locates</i>, in Nebraska.
+"Where do you intend to <i>settle</i>?" not <i>locate</i>. See, also,
+<span class="smcap"><a href="#Settle">Settle</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Loggerheads.</b> "In the mean time France is at <i>loggerheads
+internally</i>."&mdash;"New York Herald," April 29, 1881.
+Loggerheads <i>internally</i>?!</p>
+
+<p><b>Looks beautifully.</b> It is sometimes interesting to note
+the difference between <i>vulgar</i> bad grammar and <i>genteel</i> bad
+grammar, or, more properly, between non-painstaking and
+painstaking bad grammar. The former uses, for example,
+adjectives instead of adverbs; the latter uses adverbs instead
+of adjectives. The former says, "This bonnet is
+trimmed <i>shocking</i>"; the latter says, "This bonnet looks
+<i>shockingly</i>." In the first sentence the epithet qualifies the
+verb <i>is trimmed</i>, and consequently should have its adverbial
+form&mdash;<i>shockingly</i>; in the second sentence the epithet qualifies
+the <i>appearance</i>&mdash;a noun&mdash;of the bonnet, and consequently
+should have its adjectival form&mdash;<i>shocking</i>. The
+second sentence means to say, "This bonnet presents a
+shocking appearance." The bonnet certainly does not really
+<i>look</i>; it is <i>looked at</i>, and to the <i>looker</i> its appearance is
+<i>shocking</i>. So we say, in like manner, of a person, that he
+or she looks <i>sweet</i>, or <i>charming</i>, or <i>beautiful</i>, or <i>handsome</i>,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[Pg 117]</a></span>
+or <i>horrid</i>, or <i>graceful</i>, or <i>timid</i>, and so on, always using an
+adjective. "Miss Coghlan, as Lady Teazle, looked <i>charmingly</i>."
+The grammar of the "New York Herald" would
+not have been any more incorrect if it had said that Miss
+Coghlan looked <i>gladly</i>, or <i>sadly</i>, or <i>madly</i>, or <i>delightedly</i>, or
+<i>pleasedly</i>. A person may look <i>sick</i> or <i>sickly</i>, but in both
+cases the qualifying word is an adjective. The verbs to
+<i>smell</i>, to <i>feel</i>, to <i>sound</i>, and to <i>appear</i> are also found in sentences
+in which the qualifying word must be an adjective
+and not an adverb. We say, for example, "The rose smells
+<i>sweet</i>"; "The butter smells <i>good</i>, or <i>bad</i>, or <i>fresh</i>"; "I
+feel <i>glad</i>, or <i>sad</i>, or <i>bad</i>, or <i>despondent</i>, or <i>annoyed</i>, or <i>nervous</i>";
+"This construction sounds <i>harsh</i>"; "How <i>delightful</i>
+the country appears!"</p>
+
+<p>On the other hand, to <i>look</i>, to <i>feel</i>, to <i>smell</i>, to <i>sound</i>,
+and to <i>appear</i> are found in sentences where the qualifying
+word must be an adverb; thus, "He feels his loss <i>keenly</i>";
+"The king looked <i>graciously</i> on her"; "I smell it <i>faintly</i>."
+We might also say, "He feels <i>sad</i> [adjective], because he
+feels his loss <i>keenly</i>" (adverb); "He appears <i>well</i>" (adverb).</p>
+
+<p>The expression, "<i>She seemed confusedly</i>, or <i>timidly</i>," is
+not a whit more incorrect than "<i>She looked beautifully</i>, or
+<i>charmingly</i>." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Adjectives">Adjectives</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Love" id="Love"></a>Love&mdash;Like.</b> Men who are at all careful in the selection
+of language to express their thoughts, and have not an
+undue leaning toward the superlative, <i>love</i> few things: their
+wives, their sweethearts, their kinsmen, truth, justice, and
+their country. Women, on the contrary, as a rule, <i>love</i> a
+multitude of things, and, among their loves, the thing they
+perhaps love most is&mdash;taffy.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Luggage" id="Luggage"></a>Luggage&mdash;Baggage.</b> The former of these words is
+generally used in England, the latter in America.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[Pg 118]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Lunch.</b> This word, when used as a substantive, may
+at the best be accounted an inelegant abbreviation of <i>luncheon</i>.
+The dictionaries barely recognize it. The proper
+phraseology to use is, "Have you <i>lunched</i>?" or, "Have
+you had your <i>luncheon</i>?" or, better, "Have you had <i>luncheon</i>?"
+as we may in most cases presuppose that the person
+addressed would hardly take anybody's else luncheon.</p>
+
+<p><b>Luxurious&mdash;Luxuriant.</b> The line is drawn much more
+sharply between these two words now than it was formerly.
+Luxurious was once used, to some extent at least, in the
+sense of <i>rank growth</i>, but now all careful writers and speakers
+use it in the sense of <i>indulging</i> or <i>delighting in luxury</i>.
+We talk of a <i>luxurious</i> table, a <i>luxurious</i> liver, <i>luxurious</i>
+ease, <i>luxurious</i> freedom. Luxuriant, on the other hand, is
+restricted to the sense of <i>rank</i>, or <i>excessive</i>, growth or production;
+thus, <i>luxuriant</i> weeds, <i>luxuriant</i> foliage or
+branches, <i>luxuriant</i> growth.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Prune the <i>luxuriant</i>, the uncouth refine,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">But show no mercy to an empty line."&mdash;Pope.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b>Mad.</b> Professor Richard A. Proctor, in a recent number
+of "The Gentleman's Magazine," says: "The word
+<i>mad</i> in America seems nearly always to mean <i>angry</i>. For
+<i>mad</i>, as we use the word, Americans say <i>crazy</i>. Herein
+they have manifestly impaired the language." Have they?</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i5">"Now, in faith, Gratiano,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">You give your wife too unkind a cause of grief;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">An 'twere, to me, I would be <i>mad at</i> it."<br /></span>
+<span class="i10">&mdash;"Merchant of Venice."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"And being exceedingly <i>mad</i> against them, I persecuted
+them even unto strange cities."&mdash;Acts xxvi, II.</p>
+
+<p><b>Make a visit.</b> The phrase "<i>make</i> a visit," according
+to Dr. Hall, whatever it once was, is no longer English.</p>
+
+<p><b>Male.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Female">Female</a></span>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[Pg 119]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Marry.</b> There has been some discussion, at one time
+and another, with regard to the use of this word. Is John
+Jones married <i>to</i> Sally Brown or <i>with</i> Sally Brown, or are
+they married to each other? Inasmuch as the woman loses
+her name in that of the man to whom she is wedded, and
+becomes a member of his family, not he of hers&mdash;inasmuch
+as, with few exceptions, it is her life that is merged in his&mdash;it
+would seem that, <i>properly</i>, Sally Brown is married <i>to</i> John
+Jones, and that this would be the proper way to make the
+announcement of their having been wedded, and not John
+Jones <i>to</i> Sally Brown.</p>
+
+<p>There is also a difference of opinion as to whether the
+active or the passive form is preferable in referring to a person's
+wedded state. In speaking definitely of the <i>act</i> of
+marriage, the passive form is necessarily used with reference
+to either spouse. "John Jones was married to Sally
+Brown on Dec. 1, 1881"; not, "John Jones <i>married</i> Sally
+Brown" on such a date, for (unless they were Quakers)
+some third person married him to her and her to him.
+But, in speaking indefinitely of the <i>fact</i> of marriage, the
+active form is a matter of course. "Whom did John Jones
+marry?" "He married Sally Brown." "John Jones, when
+he had sown his wild oats, married [married himself, as the
+French say] and settled down." <i>Got married</i> is a vulgarism.</p>
+
+<p><b>May.</b> In the sense of <i>can</i>, <i>may</i>, in a negative clause,
+has become obsolete. "Though we <i>may</i> say a horse, we
+<i>may</i> not say a ox." The first <i>may</i> here is permissible; not
+so, however, the second, which should be <i>can</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Meat.</b> At table, we ask for and offer beef, mutton,
+veal, steak, turkey, duck, etc., and do not ask for nor offer
+<i>meat</i>, which, to say the least, is inelegant. "Will you have
+[not, take] another piece of <i>beef</i> [not, of <i>the</i> beef]?" not,
+"Will you have another piece of <i>meat</i>?"<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[Pg 120]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Memorandum.</b> The plural is <i>memoranda</i>, except when
+the singular means a book; then the plural is <i>memorandums</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Mere.</b> This word is not unfrequently misplaced, and
+sometimes, as in the following sentence, in consequence of
+being misplaced, it is changed to an adverb: "It is true of
+men as of God, that words <i>merely</i> meet with no response."
+What the writer evidently intended to say is, that <i>mere</i>
+words meet with no response.</p>
+
+<p><b>Metaphor.</b> An <i>implied</i> comparison is called a metaphor;
+it is a more terse form of expression than the simile.
+Take, for example, this sentence from Spenser's "Philosophy
+of Style": "As, in passing through the crystal, beams
+of white light are decomposed into the colors of the rainbow;
+so, in traversing the soul of the poet, the colorless
+rays of truth are transformed into brightly-tinted poetry."
+Expressed in metaphors, this becomes: "The white light
+of truth, in traversing the many-sided, transparent soul of
+the poet, is refracted into iris-hued poetry."</p>
+
+<p>Worcester's definition of a <i>metaphor</i> is: "A figure of
+speech founded on the resemblance which one object is
+supposed to bear, in some respect, to another, or a figure
+by which a word is transferred from a subject to which it
+properly belongs to another, in such a manner that a <i>comparison
+is implied, though not formally expressed</i>; a comparison
+or simile comprised in a word; as, 'Thy word is a
+<i>lamp</i> to my feet.'" A <i>metaphor</i> differs from a <i>simile</i> in being
+expressed without any sign of comparison; thus, "the
+<i>silver</i> moon" is a <i>metaphor</i>; "the moon is bright as silver"
+is a simile. Examples:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"But look, the morn, in russet mantle clad,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Walks o'er the dew of yon high eastern hill."<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased&mdash;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow?"<br /></span><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[Pg 121]</a></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i7">"At length Erasmus<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Stemmed the wild torrent of a barbarous age,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And drove those holy Vandals off the stage."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"Censure is the tax a man pays to the public for being
+eminent."</p>
+
+<p><b>Metonymy.</b> The rhetorical figure that puts the effect
+for the cause, the cause for the effect, the container for the
+thing contained, the sign, or symbol, for the thing signified,
+or the instrument for the agent, is called <i>metonymy</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"One very common species of <i>metonymy</i> is, when the
+badge is put for the office. Thus we say the <i>miter</i> for the
+priesthood; the <i>crown</i> for royalty; for military occupation
+we say the <i>sword</i>; and for the literary professions, those
+especially of theology, law, and physic, the common expression
+is the <i>gown</i>."&mdash;Campbell.</p>
+
+<p>Dr. Quackenbos, in his "Course of Composition and
+Rhetoric," says: "<i>Metonymy</i> is the exchange of names between
+things related. It is founded, not on resemblance,
+but on the relation of, 1. Cause and effect; as,'They have
+<i>Moses</i> and <i>the prophets</i>,' i. e., their writings; '<i>Gray hairs</i>
+should be respected,' i. e., <i>old age</i>. 2. Progenitor and posterity;
+as, 'Hear, O Israel!' i. e., <i>descendants of Israel</i>.
+3. Subject and attribute; as, '<i>Youth</i> and <i>beauty</i> shall be
+laid in dust,' i. e., <i>the young</i> and <i>beautiful</i>. 4. Place and
+inhabitant; as, 'What <i>land</i> is so barbarous as to allow this
+injustice?' i. e., what <i>people</i>. 5. Container and thing contained;
+as, 'Our <i>ships</i> next opened fire,' i. e., our <i>sailors</i>.
+6. Sign and thing signified; as, 'The <i>scepter</i> shall not depart
+from Judah,' i. e., <i>kingly</i> power. 7. Material and
+thing made of it; as, 'His <i>steel</i> gleamed on high,' i. e., his
+<i>sword</i>."</p>
+
+<p>"Petitions having proved unsuccessful, it was determined
+to approach the throne more boldly."<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[Pg 122]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Midst, The.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#In_our_midst">In our midst</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Mind&mdash;Capricious.</b> "Lord Salisbury's <i>mind</i> is <i>capricious</i>."&mdash;"Tribune,"
+April 3, 1881. See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Equanimity_of_mind">Equanimity of
+Mind</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Misplaced Clauses.</b> In writing and speaking, it is as
+important to give each clause its proper place as it is to
+place the words properly. The following are a few instances
+of misplaced clauses and adjuncts: "All these circumstances
+brought close to us a state of things which we
+never thought to have witnessed [<i>to witness</i>] in peaceful
+England. <i>In the sister island, indeed, we had read of such
+horrors</i>, but now they were brought home to our very
+household hearth."&mdash;Swift. Better: "We had read, indeed,
+of such horrors occurring in the sister island," etc.</p>
+
+<p>"The savage people in many places in America, except
+the government of families, have no government at all, and
+live at this day in that savage manner as I have said
+before."&mdash;Hobbes. Better: "The savage people ... in
+America have no government at all, except the government
+of families," etc.</p>
+
+<p>"I shall have a comedy for you, in a season or two at
+farthest, that I believe will be worth your acceptance."&mdash;Goldsmith.
+Bettered: "In a season or two at farthest, I
+shall have a comedy for you that I believe will be worth
+your acceptance."</p>
+
+<p>Among the following examples of the wrong placing of
+words and clauses, there are some that are as amusing as
+they are instructive: "This orthography is regarded as normal
+<i>in England</i>." What the writer intended was, "in England
+<i>as normal</i>"&mdash;a very different thought. "The Normal
+School is a commodious building capable of accommodating
+three hundred students four stories high." "<span class="smcap">Housekeeper.</span>&mdash;A
+highly respectable middle-aged Person who has been<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[Pg 123]</a></span>
+filling the above Situation with a gentleman for upwards of
+eleven years and who is now deceased is anxious to meet a
+similar one." "<span class="smcap">To Piano-Forte Makers.</span>&mdash;A lady keeping
+a first-class school requiring a good piano, is desirous of
+receiving a daughter of the above in exchange for the same."
+"The Moor, seizing a bolster boiling over with rage and
+jealousy, smothers her." "The Dying Zouave the most
+wonderful mechanical representation ever seen of the last
+breath of life being shot in the breast and life's blood leaving
+the wound." "Mr. T&mdash;&mdash; presents his compliments to
+Mr. H&mdash;&mdash;, and I have got a hat that is not his, and, if he
+have a hat that is not yours, no doubt they are the expectant
+ones." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Only">Only</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Misplaced Words.</b> "Of all the faults to be found
+in writing," says Cobbett, "this is one of the most common,
+and perhaps it leads to the greatest number of misconceptions.
+All the words may be the proper words to
+be used upon the occasion, and yet, by a <i>misplacing</i> of a
+part of them, the meaning may be wholly destroyed; and
+even made to be the contrary of what it ought to be."</p>
+
+<p>"I asked the question with no other intention than to
+set the gentleman free from the necessity of silence, and to
+give him an opportunity of mingling on equal terms with a
+polite assembly from which, <i>however uneasy</i>, he could not
+then <i>escape</i>, <i>by a kind introduction</i> of the only subject on
+which I believed him to be able to speak with propriety."&mdash;Dr.
+Johnson.</p>
+
+<p>"This," says Cobbett, "is a very bad sentence altogether.
+'<i>However uneasy</i>' applies to <i>assembly</i> and not to
+<i>gentleman</i>. Only observe how easily this might have been
+avoided. 'From which <i>he</i>, <i>however uneasy</i>, could not then
+escape.' After this we have, '<i>he</i> could not then <i>escape</i>, <i>by
+a kind introduction</i>.' We know what is <i>meant</i>; but the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[Pg 124]</a></span>
+Doctor, with all his <i>commas</i>, leaves the sentence confused.
+Let us see whether we can not make it clear. 'I asked the
+question with no other intention than, by a kind introduction
+of the only subject on which I believed him to be able
+to speak with propriety, to set the gentleman free from the
+necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of
+mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly from which
+he, however uneasy, could not then escape.'"</p>
+
+<p>"Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the
+chief eminences whereby we are raised above our fellow-creatures,
+the brutes, <i>in this lower world</i>."&mdash;Doctor Watts'
+"Logic."</p>
+
+<p>"I have before showed an error," Cobbett remarks, "in
+the <i>first</i> sentence of Doctor Watts' work. This is the
+<i>second</i> sentence. The words <i>in this lower world</i> are not
+words <i>misplaced</i> only; they are wholly <i>unnecessary</i>, and
+they do great harm; for they do these two things: first,
+they imply <i>that there are brutes in the higher world</i>; and,
+second, they excite a doubt <i>whether we are raised above
+those brutes</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"I might greatly extend the number of my extracts from
+these authors; but here, I trust, are enough. I had noted
+down about <i>two hundred errors</i> in Dr. Johnson's 'Lives of
+the Poets'; but, afterward perceiving that he had revised
+and corrected 'The Rambler' with <i>extraordinary care</i>, I
+chose to make my extracts from that work rather than from
+the 'Lives of the Poets.'"</p>
+
+<p>The position of the adverb should be as near as possible
+to the word it qualifies. Sometimes we place it before the
+auxiliary and sometimes after it, according to the thought
+we wish to express. The difference between "The fish
+should <i>properly</i> be broiled" and "The fish should be <i>properly</i>
+broiled" is apparent at a glance. "The colon may be<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[Pg 125]</a></span>
+<i>properly</i> used in the following cases": should be, "may
+<i>properly</i> be used." "This mode of expression <i>rather suits</i>
+a familiar than a grave style": should be, "suits a familiar
+<i>rather than</i> a grave style." "It is a frequent error <i>in the
+writings even</i> of some good authors": should be, "in the
+writings of <i>even some good</i> authors." "<i>Both</i> the circumstances
+of contingency and futurity are necessary": should
+be, "The circumstances of contingency and futurity are <i>both</i>
+necessary." "He has made charges ... which he has
+failed <i>utterly</i> to sustain."&mdash;"New York Tribune." Here
+it is uncertain at first sight which verb the adverb is intended
+to qualify; but the nature of the case makes it
+probable that the writer meant "has utterly failed to sustain."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Mistaken" id="Mistaken"></a>Mistaken.</b> "If I am not <i>mistaken</i>, you are in the
+wrong": say, "If I <i>mistake not</i>." "I tell you, you are
+<i>mistaken</i>." Here <i>mistaken</i> means, "You are wrong; you
+do not understand"; but it might be taken to mean, "I
+<i>mistake you</i>." For "you are <i>mistaken</i>," say, "you <i>mistake</i>."
+If, as Horace and Professor Davidson aver, usage
+in language makes right, then the grammarians ought long
+ago to have invented some theory upon which the locution
+<i>you are mistaken</i> could be defended. Until they do invent
+such a theory, it will be better to say <i>you mistake</i>, <i>he mistakes</i>,
+and so on; or <i>you are</i>, or <i>he is</i>&mdash;as the case may be&mdash;<i>in
+error</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>More perfect.</b> Such expressions as, "the <i>more</i> perfect
+of the two," "the <i>most</i> perfect thing of the kind I have
+ever seen," "the <i>most</i> complete cooking-stove ever invented,"
+and the like, can not be defended logically, as nothing
+can be more perfect than perfection, or more complete
+than completeness. Still such phrases are, and probably
+will continue to be, used by good writers.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[Pg 126]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Most.</b> "Everybody abuses this word," says Mr. Gould
+in his "Good English"; and then, in another paragraph, he
+adds: "If a man would cross out <i>most</i> wherever he can
+find it in any book in the English language, he would in
+<i>al</i>most every instance improve the style of the book."
+That this statement may appear within bounds, he gives
+many examples from good authors, some of which are the
+following: "a <i>most</i> profound silence"; "a <i>most</i> just idea";
+"a <i>most</i> complete orator"; "this was <i>most</i> extraordinary";
+"an object of <i>most</i> perfect esteem"; "a <i>most</i> extensive
+erudition"; "he gave it <i>most</i> liberally away"; "it is, <i>most</i>
+assuredly, not because I value his services least"; "would
+<i>most</i> seriously affect us"; "that such a system must <i>most</i>
+widely and <i>most</i> powerfully," etc.; "it is <i>most</i> effectually
+nailed to the counter"; "it is <i>most</i> undeniable that," etc.</p>
+
+<p>This word is much, and very erroneously, used for <i>almost</i>.
+"He comes here <i>most</i> every day." The user of
+such a sentence as this means to say that he comes <i>nearly</i>
+every day, but he <i>really says</i>, if he says anything, that he
+comes more every day than he does every night. In such
+sentences <i>almost</i>, and not <i>most</i>, is the word to use.</p>
+
+<p><b>Mutual.</b> This word is much misused in the phrase
+"our <i>mutual</i> friend." Macaulay says: "<i>Mutual</i> friend is
+a low vulgarism for <i>common</i> friend." <i>Mutual</i> properly relates
+to two persons, and implies reciprocity of sentiment&mdash;sentiment,
+be it what it may, received and returned. Thus,
+we say properly, "John and James have a <i>mutual</i> affection,
+or a <i>mutual</i> aversion," i. e., they like or dislike each
+other; or, "John and James are <i>mutually</i> dependent," i. e.,
+they are dependent on each other. In using the word <i>mutual</i>,
+care should be taken not to add the words <i>for each
+other</i> or <i>on each other</i>, the thought conveyed by these words
+being already expressed in the word <i>mutual</i>. "Dependent<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[Pg 127]</a></span>
+on each other" is the exact equivalent of "mutually dependent";
+hence, saying that John and James are <i>mutually</i>
+dependent <i>on each other</i> is as redundant in form as it would
+be to say that the editors of "The Great Vilifier" are the
+biggest, greatest mud-slingers in America.</p>
+
+<p><b>Myself.</b> This form of the personal pronoun is properly
+used in the nominative case only where <i>increased emphasis</i>
+is aimed at.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"I had as lief not be as live to be<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In awe of such a thing as I <i>myself</i>."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"I will do it <i>myself</i>," "I saw it <i>myself</i>." It is, therefore,
+incorrect to say, "Mrs. Brown and myself were both very
+much pleased."</p>
+
+<p><b>Name.</b> This word is sometimes improperly used for
+<i>mention</i>; thus, "I never <i>named</i> the matter to any one":
+should be, "I never <i>mentioned</i> the matter to any one."</p>
+
+<p><b>Neighborhood.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Vicinity">Vicinity</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Neither.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Either">Either</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Neither&mdash;Nor.</b> "He would <i>neither</i> give wine, <i>nor</i> oil,
+<i>nor</i> money."&mdash;Thackeray. The conjunction should be
+placed before the excluded object; "neither <i>give</i>" implies
+neither some other <i>verb</i>, a meaning not intended. Rearrange
+thus, taking all the common parts of the contracted
+sentences together: "He would give <i>neither</i> wine, <i>nor</i> oil,
+<i>nor</i> money." So, "She can <i>neither</i> help her beauty, <i>nor</i>
+her courage, <i>nor</i> her cruelty" (Thackeray), should be, "She
+can help <i>neither</i>," etc. "He had <i>neither</i> time to intercept
+<i>nor</i> to stop her" (Scott), should be, "He had time <i>neither</i>
+to intercept," etc. "Some <i>neither</i> can for wits <i>nor</i> critics
+pass" (Pope), should be, "Some can <i>neither</i> for wits <i>nor</i>
+critics pass."</p>
+
+<p><b>Never.</b> Grammarians differ with regard to the correctness
+of using <i>never</i> in such sentences as, "He is in error,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[Pg 128]</a></span>
+though <i>never</i> so wise," "Charm he <i>never</i> so wisely." In
+sentences like these, to say the least, it is better, in common
+with the great majority of writers, to use <i>ever</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>New.</b> This adjective is often misplaced. "He has a
+<i>new</i> suit of clothes and a <i>new</i> pair of gloves." It is not
+the <i>suit</i> and the <i>pair</i> that are new, but the <i>clothes</i> and the
+<i>gloves</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Nice.</b> Archdeacon Hare remarks of the use, or rather
+misuse, of this word: "That stupid vulgarism by which we
+use the word <i>nice</i> to denote almost every mode of approbation,
+for almost every variety of quality, and, from sheer
+poverty of thought, or fear of saying anything definite,
+wrap up everything indiscriminately in this characterless
+domino, speaking at the same breath of a <i>nice</i> cheese-cake,
+a <i>nice</i> tragedy, a <i>nice</i> sermon, a <i>nice</i> day, a <i>nice</i> country,
+as if a universal deluge of <i>niaiserie</i>&mdash;for <i>nice</i> seems originally
+to have been only <i>niais</i>&mdash;had whelmed the whole island."
+Nice is as good a word as any other in its place,
+but its place is not everywhere. We talk very properly
+about a <i>nice</i> distinction, a <i>nice</i> discrimination, a <i>nice</i> calculation,
+a <i>nice</i> point, and about a person's being <i>nice</i>, and
+over-<i>nice</i>, and the like; but we certainly ought not to talk
+about "Othello's" being a <i>nice</i> tragedy, about Salvini's being
+a <i>nice</i> actor, or New York bay's being a <i>nice</i> harbor.<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p>
+
+<p><b>Nicely.</b> The very quintessence of popinjay vulgarity is
+reached when <i>nicely</i> is made to do service for <i>well</i>, in this
+wise: "How do you do?" "<i>Nicely</i>." "How are you?"
+"<i>Nicely</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>No.</b> This word of negation is responded to by <i>nor</i> in<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[Pg 129]</a></span>
+sentences like this: "Let your meaning be obscure, and
+<i>no</i> grace of diction <i>nor</i> any music of well-turned sentences
+will make amends."</p>
+
+<p>"Whether he is there or <i>no</i>." Supply the ellipsis, and
+we have, "Whether he is there or <i>no</i> there." Clearly,
+the word to use in sentences like this is not <i>no</i>, but <i>not</i>.
+And yet our best writers sometimes inadvertently use <i>no</i>
+with <i>whether</i>. Example: "But perhaps some people are
+quite indifferent <i>whether</i> or <i>no</i> it is said," etc.&mdash;Richard
+Grant White, in "Words and Their Uses," p. 84. Supply
+the ellipsis, and we have, "said or <i>no</i> said." In a little
+book entitled "Live and Learn," I find, "No <i>less</i> than
+fifty persons were there; No <i>fewer</i>," etc. In correcting
+one mistake, the writer himself makes one. It should be,
+"<i>Not</i> fewer," etc. If we ask, "There were fifty persons
+there, were there or were there <i>not</i>?" the reply clearly
+would be, "There were <i>not</i> fewer than fifty." "There
+was <i>no</i> one of them who would not have been proud," etc.,
+should be, "There was <i>not</i> one of them."</p>
+
+<p><b>Not.</b> The correlative of <i>not</i>, when it stands in the first
+member of a sentence, is <i>nor</i> or <i>neither</i>. "<i>Not</i> for thy
+ivory <i>nor</i> thy gold will I unbind thy chain." "I will <i>not</i>
+do it, <i>neither</i> shall you."</p>
+
+<p>The wrong placing of <i>not</i> often gives rise to an imperfect
+negation; thus, "John and James were <i>not</i> there,"
+means that John and James were not there <i>in company</i>. It
+does not exclude the presence of one of them. The negative
+should precede in this case: "Neither John <i>nor</i> James
+was there." "Our company was <i>not</i> present" (as a company,
+but some of us might have been), should be, "No
+member of our company was present."</p>
+
+<p><b>Not&mdash;but only.</b> "Errors frequently arise in the use
+of <i>not</i>&mdash;but <i>only</i>, to understand which we must attend to<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[Pg 130]</a></span>
+the force of the whole expression. 'He did <i>not</i> pretend to
+extirpate French music, <i>but only</i> to cultivate and civilize it.'
+Here the <i>not</i> is obviously misplaced. 'He pretended, or
+professed, <i>not</i> to extirpate.'"&mdash;Bain.</p>
+
+<p><b>Notorious.</b> Though this word can not be properly
+used in any but a bad sense, we sometimes see it used
+instead of <i>noted</i>, which may be used in either a good or a
+bad sense. <i>Notorious</i> characters are always persons to be
+shunned, whereas <i>noted</i> characters may or may not be persons
+to be shunned.</p>
+
+<p>"This is the tax a man must pay for his virtues&mdash;they
+hold up a torch to his vices and render those frailties <i>notorious</i>
+in him which would pass without observation in another."&mdash;Lacon.</p>
+
+<p><b>Novice.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Amateur">Amateur</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Number.</b> It is not an uncommon thing for a pronoun
+in the plural number to be used in connection with an
+antecedent in the singular. At present, the following notice
+may be seen in some of our Broadway omnibuses: "Fifty
+dollars reward for the conviction of any person caught collecting
+or keeping fares given to <i>them</i> to deposit in the
+box." Should be, to <i>him</i>. "A person may be very near-sighted
+if <i>they</i> can not recognize an acquaintance ten feet
+off." Should be, if <i>he</i>.</p>
+
+<p>The verb <i>to be</i> is often used in the singular instead of
+in the plural; thus, "There <i>is</i> several reasons why it would
+be better": say, <i>are</i>. "How many <i>is</i> there?" say, <i>are</i>.
+"There <i>is</i> four": say, <i>are</i>. "<i>Was</i> there many?" say, <i>were</i>.
+"No matter how many there <i>was</i>": say, <i>were</i>.</p>
+
+<p>A verb should agree in number with its subject, and not
+with its predicate. We say, for example, "Death <i>is</i> the
+wages of sin," and "The wages of sin <i>are</i> death."</p>
+
+<p>"When singular nouns connected by <i>and</i> are preceded<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[Pg 131]</a></span>
+by <i>each</i>, <i>every</i>, or <i>no</i>, the verb must be singular." We say,
+for example, "<i>Each</i> boy and <i>each</i> girl <i>studies</i>." "<i>Every</i> leaf,
+and <i>every</i> twig, and <i>every</i> drop of water <i>teems</i> with life."
+"<i>No</i> book and <i>no</i> paper <i>was</i> arranged."</p>
+
+<p><i>Each</i> being singular, a pronoun or verb to agree with
+it must also be singular; thus, "Let them depend each on
+<i>his</i> own exertions"; "Each city has <i>its</i> peculiar privileges";
+"Everybody has a right to look after <i>his</i> own interest."</p>
+
+<p>Errors are often the result of not repeating the verb;
+thus, "Its significance is as varied as the passions": correctly,
+"as <i>are</i> the passions." "The words are as incapable
+of analysis as the thing signified": correctly, "as <i>is</i>
+the thing signified."</p>
+
+<p><b>Observe.</b> The dictionaries authorize the use of this
+word as a synonym of <i>say</i> and <i>remark</i>; as, for example,
+"What did you <i>observe</i>?" for "What did you <i>say</i>, or <i>remark</i>?"
+In this sense, however, it is better to leave <i>observe</i>
+to the exclusive use of those who delight in being
+fine.</p>
+
+<p><b>O'clock.</b> "It is a quarter <i>to</i> ten o'clock." What does
+this statement mean, literally? We <i>understand</i> by it that
+it lacks a quarter of ten, i. e., of being ten; but it does not
+really mean that. Inasmuch as <i>to</i> means toward, it <i>really</i>
+means a quarter after nine. We should say, then, a quarter
+<i>of</i>, which means, literally, a quarter <i>out of</i> ten.</p>
+
+<p><b>Of all others.</b> "The vice of covetousness, <i>of all others</i>,
+enters deepest into the soul." This sentence says that
+covetousness is one of the <i>other</i> vices. A thing can not be
+<i>another</i> thing, nor can it be one of a number of <i>other</i> things.
+The sentence should be, "Of all the vices, covetousness enters
+deepest into the soul"; or, "The vice of covetousness,
+of all the vices, enters," etc.; or, "The vice of covetousness,
+<i>above</i> all others, enters," etc.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[Pg 132]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Of any.</b> This phrase is often used when <i>of all</i> is
+meant; thus, "This is the largest <i>of any</i> I have seen."
+Should be, "the largest <i>of all</i>," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Off of.</b> In such sentences as, "Give me a yard <i>off of</i>
+this piece of calico," either the <i>off</i> or the <i>of</i> is vulgarly superfluous.
+The sentence would be correct with either one,
+but not with both of them. "The apples fell <i>off of</i> the
+tree": read, "fell <i>off</i> the tree."</p>
+
+<p><b>Often.</b> This adverb is properly compared by changing
+its termination: often, oftener, oftenest. Why some writers
+use <i>more</i> and <i>most</i> to compare it, it is not easy to see; this
+mode of comparing it is certainly not euphonious.</p>
+
+<p><b>Oh&mdash;O.</b> It is only the most careful writers who use
+these two interjections with proper discrimination. The
+distinction between them is said to be modern. <i>Oh</i> is
+simply an exclamation, and should always be followed by
+some mark of punctuation, usually by an exclamation point.
+"Oh! you are come at last." "Oh, help him, you sweet
+heavens!" "Oh, woe is me!" "Oh! I die, Horatio."
+<i>O</i>, in addition to being an exclamation, denotes a calling to
+or adjuration; thus, "Hear, O heavens, and give ear, O
+earth!" "O grave, where is thy victory?" "O heavenly
+powers, restore him!" "O shame! where is thy blush?"</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Older" id="Older"></a>Older&mdash;Elder.</b> "He is the <i>older</i> man of the two, and
+the <i>oldest</i> in the neighborhood." "He is the <i>elder</i> of the
+two sons, and the <i>eldest</i> of the family." "The <i>elder</i> son is
+heir to the estate; he is <i>older</i> than his brother by ten years."</p>
+
+<p><b>On to.</b> We get <i>on</i> a chair, <i>on</i> an omnibus, <i>on</i> a stump,
+and <i>on</i> a spree, and not on <i>to</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>One.</b> Certain pronouns of demonstrative signification
+are called indefinite because they refer to no particular
+subject. This is one of them. If we were putting a supposition
+by way of argument or illustration, we might say,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[Pg 133]</a></span>
+"Suppose <i>I</i> were to lose my way in a wood"; or, "Suppose
+<i>you</i> were to lose your way in a wood"; or, "Suppose <i>one</i>
+were to lose <i>one's</i> way in a wood." All these forms are
+used, but, as a rule, the last is to be preferred. The first
+verges on egotism, and the second makes free with another's
+person, whereas the third is indifferent. "If <i>one's</i> honesty
+were impeached, what should <i>one</i> do?" is more courtly than
+to take either one's self or the person addressed for the
+example.</p>
+
+<p><i>One</i> should be followed by <i>one</i>, and not by <i>he</i>. "The
+better acquainted <i>one</i> is with any kind of rhetorical trick,
+the less liable <i>he</i> is to be misled by it." Should be, "the
+less liable <i>one</i> is to be misled by it."</p>
+
+<p>In the phrase, "any of the little <i>ones</i>," <i>one</i> is the numeral
+employed in the manner of a pronoun, by indicating something
+that has gone before, or, perhaps, has to come after.
+"I like peaches, but I must have a ripe <i>one</i>, or ripe <i>ones</i>."</p>
+
+<p>Professor Bain says, in his "Composition Grammar":</p>
+
+<p>"This pronoun continually lands writers in difficulties.
+English idiom requires that, when the pronoun has to be
+again referred to, it should be used itself a second time.
+The correct usage is shown by Pope: '<i>One</i> may be ashamed
+to consume half <i>one's</i> days in bringing sense and rhyme together.'
+It would be against idiom to say 'half <i>his</i> days.'</p>
+
+<p>"Still, the repetition of the pronoun is often felt to be
+heavy, and writers have recourse to various substitutions.
+Even an ear accustomed to the idiom can scarcely accept
+with unmixed pleasure this instance from Browning:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i8">"'Alack! <i>one</i> lies <i>oneself</i><br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Even in the stating that <i>one's</i> end was truth,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Truth only, if <i>one</i> states so much in words.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"The representative 'I' or 'we' occasionally acts the
+part of 'one.' The following sentence presents a curious<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[Pg 134]</a></span>
+alternation of 'we' with 'one'&mdash;possibly not accidental
+(George Eliot): 'It's a desperately vexatious thing that,
+after all <i>one's</i> reflections and quiet determinations, <i>we</i> should
+be ruled by moods that <i>one</i> can't calculate on beforehand.'
+By the use of 'we' here, a more pointed reference is suggested,
+while the vagueness actually remains.</p>
+
+<p>"Fenimore Cooper, like Scott, is not very particular; an
+example may be quoted: 'Modesty is a poor man's wealth;
+but, as <i>we</i> grow substantial in the world, patroon, <i>one</i> can
+afford to begin to speak truth of <i>himself</i> as well as of <i>his</i>
+neighbor.' Were Cooper a careful writer, we might persuade
+ourselves that he chose 'we' and 'one' with a purpose:
+'we' might indicate that the speaker had himself
+and the patroon directly in his eye, although at the same
+time he wanted to put it generally; and 'one' might hint
+that modesty succeeded in getting the better of him. But
+'himself' and 'his' would alone show that such speculations
+are too refined for the occasion.</p>
+
+<p>"The form 'a man,' which was at one time common,
+seems to be reviving. In 'Adam Bede' we have, '<i>A man</i>
+can never do anything at variance with his own nature.'
+We might substitute 'one.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Men' was more frequent in good writing formerly
+than now. 'Neither do <i>men</i> light a candle, and put it
+under a bushel.' 'Do <i>men</i> gather grapes of thorns?'
+Hume is fond of expressing a general subject by 'men.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Small birds are much more exposed to the cold than
+large <i>ones</i>.' This usage is hardly 'indefinite'; and it
+needs no further exemplification."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Only" id="Only"></a>Only.</b> This word, when used as an adjective, is more
+frequently misplaced than any other word in the language.
+Indeed, I am confident that it is not correctly placed half
+the time, either in conversation or in writing. Thus, "In<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[Pg 135]</a></span>
+its pages, papers of sterling merit [only] will <i>only</i> appear"
+(Miss Braddon); "Things are getting dull down in Texas;
+they <i>only</i> shot [only] three men down there last week";
+"I have <i>only</i> got [only] three." <i>Only</i> is sometimes improperly
+used for <i>except</i> or <i>unless</i>; thus, "The trains will
+not stop <i>only</i> when the bell rings." The meaning here is
+clearly "<i>except</i> when the bell rings."</p>
+
+<p>Dr. Bain, in his "Higher English Grammar," speaking
+of the order of words, says:</p>
+
+<p>"The word requiring most attention is <i>only</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"According to the position of <i>only</i>, the same words may
+be made to express very different meanings.</p>
+
+<p>"'He <i>only</i> lived for their sakes.' Here <i>only</i> must be
+held as qualifying '<i>lived</i> for their sakes,' the emphasis being
+on <i>lived</i>, the word immediately adjoining. The meaning
+then is 'he <i>lived</i>,' but did not <i>work</i>, did not <i>die</i>, did not do
+any other thing for their sakes.</p>
+
+<p>"'He lived <i>only</i> for their sakes.' <i>Only</i> now qualifies
+'for their sakes,' and the sentence means he lived for this
+one reason, namely, for their sakes, and not for any other
+reason.</p>
+
+<p>"'He lived for their sakes <i>only</i>.' The force of the word
+when placed at the end is peculiar. Then it often has a
+diminutive or disparaging signification. 'He lived for their
+sakes,' and not for any more worthy reason. 'He gave
+sixpence <i>only</i>,' is an insinuation that more was expected.</p>
+
+<p>"By the use of <i>alone</i>, instead of <i>only</i>, other meanings
+are expressed. 'He <i>alone</i> lived for their sakes'; that is,
+<i>he, and nobody else</i>, did so. 'He lived for their sakes <i>alone</i>,'
+or, 'for the sake of them <i>alone</i>'; that is, not for the sake
+of any other persons. 'It was <i>alone</i> by the help of the Confederates
+that any such design could be carried out.' Better
+<i>only</i>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[Pg 136]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>"'When men grow virtuous in their old age, they <i>only</i>
+make a sacrifice to God of the devil's leavings.'&mdash;Pope.
+Here <i>only</i> is rightly placed. 'Think <i>only</i> of the past as its
+remembrance gives you pleasure,' should be, 'think of the
+past, <i>only</i> as its remembrance,' etc. 'As he did not leave
+his name, it was <i>only</i> known that a gentleman had called
+on business': it was known <i>only</i>. 'I can <i>only</i> refute the
+accusation by laying before you the whole': this would
+mean, 'the only thing I am able to do is to refute; I may
+not retaliate, or let it drop, I must <i>refute</i> it.' 'The negroes
+are to appear at church <i>only</i> in boots'; that is, when the
+negroes go to church they are to have no clothing but boots.
+'The negroes are to appear <i>only</i> at church in boots' might
+mean that they are not to appear anywhere but at church,
+whether in boots or out of them. The proper arrangement
+would be to connect the adverbial adjunct, <i>in boots</i>, with
+its verb, <i>appear</i>, and to make <i>only</i> qualify <i>at church</i> and
+no more: 'the negroes are to appear in boots <i>only</i> at
+church.'"</p>
+
+<p>It thus appears very plain that we should look well to
+our <i>onlys</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Ought" id="Ought"></a>Ought&mdash;Should.</b> These two words, though they both
+imply obligation, should not be used indiscriminately. <i>Ought</i>
+is the stronger term; what we <i>ought</i> to do, we are morally
+bound to do. We <i>ought</i> to be truthful and honest, and
+<i>should</i> be respectful to our elders and kind to our inferiors.</p>
+
+<p><b>Overflown.</b> <i>Flown</i> is the past participle of <i>to fly</i>, and
+<i>flowed</i> of <i>to flow</i>. As, therefore, a river does not <i>fly</i> over
+its banks, but <i>flows</i> over them, we should say of it that it
+has over<i>flowed</i>, and not that it has over<i>flown</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Overly.</b> This word is now used only by the unschooled.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[Pg 137]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Owing.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Due">Due</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Pants.</b> This abbreviation is not used by those who are
+careful in the choice of words. The purist does not use
+the word <i>pantaloons</i> even, but <i>trousers</i>. <i>Pants</i> are worn
+by <i>gents</i> who eat <i>lunches</i> and <i>open</i> wine, and <i>trousers</i> are
+worn by <i>gentlemen</i> who eat <i>luncheons</i> and <i>order</i> wine.</p>
+
+<p><b>Paraphernalia.</b> This is a law term. In Roman law,
+it meant the goods which a woman brought to her husband
+besides her dowry. In English law, it means the goods
+which a woman is allowed to have after the death of her
+husband, besides her dower, consisting of her apparel and
+ornaments suitable to her rank. When used in speaking
+of the affairs of every-day life, it is generally misused.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Parlor" id="Parlor"></a>Parlor.</b> This word, in the sense of <i>drawing-room</i>, according
+to Dr. Hall, except in the United States and some
+of the English colonies, is obsolete.</p>
+
+<p><b>Partake.</b> This is a very fine word to use for <i>eat</i>;
+just the word for young women who hobble on French
+heels.</p>
+
+<p><b>Partially&mdash;Partly.</b> "It is only <i>partially</i> done." This
+use of the adverb <i>partially</i> is sanctioned by high authority,
+but that does not make it correct. A thing done in part
+is <i>partly</i>, not <i>partially</i>, done.</p>
+
+<p><b>Participles.</b> When the present participle is used substantively,
+in sentences like the following, it is preceded
+by the definite article and followed by the preposition <i>of</i>.
+The omitting of the preposition is a common error. Thus,
+"Or, it is <i>the drawing</i> a conclusion which was before either
+unknown or dark," should be, "the drawing <i>of</i> a conclusion."
+"Prompted by the most extreme vanity, he persisted
+in the writing bad verses," should be, "in writing
+bad verses," or "in the writing <i>of</i> bad verses." "There
+is a misuse of the article <i>a</i> which is very common. It is<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[Pg 138]</a></span>
+the using it before the word <i>most</i>."&mdash;Moon. Most writers
+would have said "the using <i>of</i> it." Mr. Moon argues for
+his construction.</p>
+
+<p><b>Particles.</b> "Nothing but study of the best writers and
+practice in composition will enable us to decide what are
+the prepositions and conjunctions that ought to go with
+certain verbs. The following examples illustrate some
+common blunders:</p>
+
+<p>"'It was characterized <i>with</i> eloquence': read, 'by.'</p>
+
+<p>"'A testimonial <i>of</i> the merits of his grammar': read,
+'to.'</p>
+
+<p>"'It was an example of the love <i>to form</i> comparisons':
+read, 'of forming.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Repetition is always to be preferred <i>before</i> obscurity':
+read, 'to.'</p>
+
+<p>"'He made an effort <i>for meeting</i> them': read, 'to
+meet.'</p>
+
+<p>"'They have no <i>other</i> object <i>but</i> to come': read, 'other
+object than,' or omit 'other.'</p>
+
+<p>"Two verbs are not unfrequently followed by a single
+preposition, which accords with one only; e. g., 'This
+duty <i>is repeated</i> and inculcated <i>upon</i> the reader.' 'Repeat
+<i>upon</i>' is nonsense; we must read 'is repeated <i>to</i> and inculcated
+upon.'"&mdash;Nichol's "English Composition," p. 39.
+We often see <i>for</i> used with the substantive <i>sympathy</i>; the
+best practice, however, uses <i>with</i>; thus, "Words can not
+express the deep sympathy I feel <i>with</i> you."&mdash;Queen Victoria.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Party" id="Party"></a>Party.</b> This is a very good word in its place, but it
+is very much out of its place when used&mdash;as it often is
+by the vulgar&mdash;where good taste would use the word
+<i>person</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Patronize.</b> This word and its derivatives would be<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[Pg 139]</a></span>
+much less used by the American tradesman than they are,
+if he were better acquainted with their true meaning. Then
+he would solicit his neighbors' <i>custom</i>, not their <i>patronage</i>.
+A man can have no <i>patrons</i> without incurring obligations&mdash;without
+becoming a <i>prot&eacute;g&eacute;</i>; while a man may have customers
+innumerable, and, instead of placing himself under
+obligations to them, he may place them under obligations
+to him. Princes are the <i>patrons</i> of those tradesmen whom
+they allow to call themselves their purveyors; as, "John
+Smith, Haberdasher to H. R. H. the Prince of Wales."
+Here the Prince <i>patronizes</i> John Smith.</p>
+
+<p><b>Pell-mell.</b> This adverb means mixed or mingled together;
+as, "Men, horses, chariots, crowded <i>pell-mell</i>." It
+can not properly be applied to an individual. To say, for
+example, "He rushed pell-mell down the stairs," is as incorrect
+as it would be to say, "He rushed down the stairs
+<i>mixed together</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Per.</b> This Latin preposition is a good deal used in
+English, as, for example, in such phrases as <i>per</i> day, <i>per</i>
+man, <i>per</i> pound, <i>per</i> ton, and so on. In all such cases it
+is better to use plain English, and say, <i>a</i> day, <i>a</i> man, <i>a</i>
+pound, <i>a</i> ton, etc. <i>Per</i> is correct before Latin nouns only;
+as, per annum, per diem, per cent., etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Perform.</b> "She <i>performs</i> on the piano beautifully."
+In how much better taste it is to say simply, "She <i>plays</i>
+the piano well," or, more superlatively, "exceedingly well,"
+or "admirably"! If we talk about <i>performing</i> on musical
+instruments, to be consistent, we should call those who
+<i>perform</i>, piano-performers, cornet-performers, violin-performers,
+and so on.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Perpetually" id="Perpetually"></a>Perpetually.</b> This word is sometimes misused for
+<i>continually</i>. Dr. William Mathews, in his "Words, their
+Use and Abuse," says: "The Irish are <i>perpetually</i> using<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[Pg 140]</a></span>
+<i>shall</i> for <i>will</i>." <i>Perpetual</i> means never ceasing, continuing
+without intermission, uninterrupted; while <i>continual</i>
+means that which is constantly renewed and recurring with
+perhaps frequent stops and interruptions. As the Irish
+do something <i>besides</i> misuse <i>shall</i>, the Doctor should have
+said that they <i>continually</i> use <i>shall</i> for <i>will</i>. I might perhaps
+venture to intimate that <i>perpetually</i> is likewise misused
+in the following sentence, which I copy from the "London
+Queen," if I were not conscious that the monster who can
+write and print such a sentence would not hesitate to cable
+a thunderbolt at an offender on the slightest provocation.
+Judge, if my fears are groundless: "But some few people
+contract the ugly habit of making use of these expressions
+unconsciously and continuously, <i>perpetually</i> interlarding
+their conversation with them."</p>
+
+<p><b>Person.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Party">Party</a></span>; also, <span class="smcap"><a href="#Individual">Individual</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Personalty.</b> This word does not, as some persons
+think, mean the articles worn on one's person. It is properly
+a law term, and means <i>personal property</i>. "There is
+but one case on record of a peer of England leaving over
+$7,500,000 personalty."</p>
+
+<p><b>Personification.</b> That rhetorical figure which attributes
+sex, life, or action to inanimate objects, or ascribes to
+objects and brutes the acts and qualities of rational beings,
+is called <i>personification</i> or <i>prosopop&#339;ia</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"The mountains <i>sing together</i>, the hills rejoice and <i>clap
+their hands</i>." "The worm, <i>aware</i> of his intent, <i>harangued</i>
+him thus."</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"See, <i>Winter</i> comes to <i>rule</i> the varied year,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Sullen</i> and <i>sad</i> with all his rising train."&mdash;Thomson.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"So saying, her rash hand, in evil hour,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she ate!<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Earth felt the wound; and Nature from her seat,</i><br /></span><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[Pg 141]</a></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe,</i><br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>That all was lost.</i>"&mdash;Milton.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"War and Love are strange compeers.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">War sheds blood, and Love sheds tears;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">War has swords, and Love has darts;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">War breaks heads, and Love breaks hearts."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"Levity is often less foolish and gravity less wise than
+each of them appears."</p>
+
+<p>"The English language, by reserving the distinction
+of gender for living beings that have sex, gives especial
+scope for personification. The highest form of personification
+should be used seldom, and only when justified by the
+presence of strong feeling."&mdash;Bain.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Knowledge and wisdom, far from being one,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Have ofttimes no connection. Knowledge dwells<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In heads replete with thoughts of other men;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Wisdom in minds attentive to their own.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Knowledge is proud that he has learned so much;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Wisdom is humble that he knows no more."&mdash;Cowper.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b>Phenomenon.</b> Plural, <i>phenomena</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Plead.</b> The imperfect tense and the perfect participle
+of the verb <i>to plead</i> are both <i>pleaded</i> and not <i>plead</i>. "He
+<i>pleaded</i> not guilty." "You should have <i>pleaded</i> your cause
+with more fervor."</p>
+
+<p><b>Plenty.</b> In Worcester's Dictionary we find the following
+note: "<i>Plenty</i> is much used colloquially as an adjective,
+in the sense of <i>plentiful</i>, both in this country and in
+England; and this use is supported by respectable authorities,
+though it is condemned by various critics. Johnson
+says: 'It is used barbarously, I think, for <i>plentiful</i>'; and
+Dr. Campbell, in his 'Philosophy of Rhetoric,' says: '<i>Plenty</i>
+for <i>plentiful</i> appears to me so gross a vulgarism that I
+should not have thought it worthy of a place here if I had<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[Pg 142]</a></span>
+not sometimes found it in works of considerable merit.'"
+We should say, then, that money is <i>plentiful</i>, and not that
+it is <i>plenty</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Pleonasm" id="Pleonasm"></a>Pleonasm.</b> Redundancy or pleonasm is the use of more
+words than are necessary to express the thought clearly.
+"They returned <i>back again</i> to the <i>same</i> city <i>from</i> whence
+they came <i>forth</i>": the five words in italics are <i>redundant</i>
+or <i>pleonastic</i>. "The different departments of science and
+of art <i>mutually</i> reflect light <i>on each other</i>": either of the
+expressions in italics embodies the whole idea. "The <i>universal</i>
+opinion of <i>all</i> men" is a pleonastic expression often
+heard. "I wrote you <i>a letter</i> yesterday": here <i>a letter</i> is
+redundant.</p>
+
+<p>Redundancy is <i>sometimes</i> permissible for the surer conveyance
+of meaning, for emphasis, and in the language of
+poetic embellishment.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Polite" id="Polite"></a>Polite.</b> This word is much used by persons of doubtful
+culture, where those of the better sort use the word
+<i>kind</i>. We accept <i>kind</i>, not <i>polite</i> invitations; and, when
+any one has been obliging, we tell him that he has been
+<i>kind</i>; and, when an interviewing reporter tells us of his
+having met with a <i>polite</i> reception, we may be sure that the
+person by whom he has been received deserves well for his
+considerate kindness. "I thank you and Mrs. Pope for
+my <i>kind</i> reception."&mdash;Atterbury.</p>
+
+<p><b>Portion.</b> This word is often incorrectly used for <i>part</i>.
+A <i>portion</i> is properly a part assigned, allotted, set aside for
+a special purpose; a share, a division. The verb <i>to portion</i>
+means to divide, to parcel, to endow. We ask, therefore,
+"In what <i>part</i> [not, in what <i>portion</i>] of the country,
+state, county, town, or street do you live?"&mdash;or, if we prefer
+grandiloquence to correctness, <i>reside</i>. In the sentence,
+"A large <i>portion</i> of the land is unfilled," the right word<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[Pg 143]</a></span>
+would be either <i>part</i> or <i>proportion</i>, according to the intention
+of the writer.</p>
+
+<p><b>Posted.</b> A word very much and very inelegantly used
+for <i>informed</i>. Such expressions as, "I will <i>post</i> you," "I
+must <i>post</i> myself up," "If I had been better <i>posted</i>," and
+the like, are, at the best, but one remove from slang.</p>
+
+<p><b>Predicate.</b> This word is often very incorrectly used
+in the sense of <i>to base</i>; as, "He <i>predicates</i> his opinion on
+insufficient data." Then we sometimes hear people talk
+about predicating an action upon certain information or
+upon somebody's statement. To predicate means primarily
+<i>to speak before</i>, and has come to be properly used in the
+sense of <i>assumed</i> or believed to be the consequence of.
+Examples: "Contentment is <i>predicated</i> of virtue"; "Good
+health may be <i>predicated</i> of a good constitution." He who
+is not very sure that he uses the word correctly would do
+better not to use it at all.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Prejudice" id="Prejudice"></a>Prejudice&mdash;Prepossess.</b> Both these words mean, to
+incline in one direction or the other for some reason
+not founded in justice; but by common consent <i>prejudice</i>
+has come to be used in an unfavorable sense, and <i>prepossess</i>
+in a favorable one. Thus, we say, "He is <i>prejudiced</i>
+against him," and "He is <i>prepossessed</i> in his favor." We
+sometimes hear the expression, "He is <i>prejudiced</i> in his
+favor," but this can not be accounted a good use of the
+word.</p>
+
+<p><b>Prepositions.</b> The errors made in the use of the prepositions
+are very numerous. "The indolent child is one
+who [that?] has a strong aversion <i>from</i> action of any sort."&mdash;Graham's
+"English Synonymes," p. 236. The prevailing
+and best modern usage is in favor of <i>to</i> instead of <i>from</i>
+after <i>averse</i> and <i>aversion</i>, and before the object. "Clearness
+... enables the reader to see thoughts without noticing<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[Pg 144]</a></span>
+the language <i>with</i> which they are clothed."&mdash;Townsend's
+"Art of Speech." We clothe thoughts <i>in</i> language.
+"Shakespeare ... and the Bible are ... models <i>for</i> the
+English-speaking tongue."&mdash;Ibid. If this means models of
+English, then it should be <i>of</i>; but if it means models for
+English organs of speech to practice on, then it should be
+<i>for</i>; or if it means models to model English tongues after,
+then also it should be <i>for</i>. "If the resemblance is too
+faint, the mind is fatigued <i>while</i> attempting to trace the
+analogies." "Aristotle is in error <i>while</i> thus describing
+governments."&mdash;Ibid. Here we have two examples, not
+of the misuse of the preposition, but of the erroneous use
+of the adverb <i>while</i> instead of the preposition <i>in</i>. "For
+my part I can not think that Shelley's poetry, except <i>by</i>
+snatches and fragments, has the value of the good work of
+Wordsworth or Byron."&mdash;Matthew Arnold. Should be,
+"except <i>in</i> snatches." "Taxes with us are collected nearly
+[almost] solely <i>from</i> real and personal estate."&mdash;"Appletons'
+Journal." Taxes are levied <i>on</i> estates and collected
+<i>from</i> the owners.</p>
+
+<p>"If I am not commended <i>for</i> the beauty of my works,
+I may hope to be pardoned for their brevity." Cobbett
+comments on this sentence as follows: "We may commend
+him <i>for</i> the beauty of his works, and we may <i>pardon</i>
+him <i>for</i> their brevity, if we deem the brevity <i>a fault</i>; but
+this is not what he means. He means that, at any rate, he
+shall have the <i>merit</i> of brevity. 'If I am not commended
+for the beauty of my works, I may hope to be pardoned <i>on
+account of</i> their brevity.' This is what the Doctor meant;
+but this would have marred a little the antithesis: it would
+have unsettled a little of the balance of that <i>seesaw</i> in
+which Dr. Johnson so much delighted, and which, falling
+into the hands of novel-writers and of members of Parliament,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[Pg 145]</a></span>
+has, by moving unencumbered with any of the Doctor's
+reason or sense, lulled so many thousands asleep!
+Dr. Johnson created a race of writers and speakers. 'Mr.
+Speaker, that the state of the nation is very critical, all men
+will allow; but that it is wholly desperate, few will believe.'
+When you hear or see a sentence like this, be sure
+that the person who speaks or writes it has been reading
+Dr. Johnson, or some of his imitators. But, observe, these
+imitators go no further than the frame of the sentences.
+They, in general, take care not to imitate the Doctor in
+knowledge and reasoning."</p>
+
+<p>The rhetoricians would have us avoid such forms of expression
+as, "The boy went <i>to</i> and asked the advice <i>of</i> his
+teacher"; "I called <i>on</i> and had a conversation <i>with</i> my
+brother."</p>
+
+<p>Very often the preposition is not repeated in a sentence,
+when it should be. We say properly, "He comes from
+Ohio or <i>from</i> Indiana"; or, "He comes <i>either</i> from Ohio
+or Indiana."</p>
+
+<p><b>Prepossess.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Prejudice">Prejudice</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Present" id="Present"></a>Present&mdash;Introduce.</b> Few errors are more common,
+especially among those who are always straining to be fine,
+than that of using <i>present</i>, in the social world, instead of
+<i>introduce</i>. <i>Present</i> means to place in the presence of a
+superior; <i>introduce</i>, to bring to be acquainted. A person is
+presented at court, and on an official occasion to our President;
+but persons who are unknown to each other are
+<i>introduced</i> by a common acquaintance. And in these introductions,
+it is the younger who is introduced to the
+older; the lower to the higher in place or social position;
+the gentleman to the lady. A lady should say, as a rule,
+that Mr. Blank was introduced to her, not that she was
+introduced to Mr. Blank.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[Pg 146]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Presumptive.</b> This word is sometimes misused by the
+careless for <i>presumptuous</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Preventive.</b> A useless and unwarranted syllable is
+sometimes added to this word&mdash;<i>preventative</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Previous.</b> This adjective is much used in an adverbial
+sense; thus, "<i>Previous</i> to my return," etc. Until <i>previous</i>
+is recognized as an adverb, if we would speak grammatically,
+we must say, "<i>Previously</i> to my return." "<i>Previously</i>
+to my leaving England, I called on his lordship."</p>
+
+<p><b>Procure.</b> This is a word much used by people who
+strive to be fine. "Where did you <i>get</i> it?" with them is,
+"Where did you <i>procure</i> it?"</p>
+
+<p><b>Profanity.</b> The extent to which some men habitually
+interlard their talk with oaths is disgusting even to many
+who, on occasion, do not themselves hesitate to give expression
+to their feelings in oaths portly and unctuous. If
+these fellows could be made to know how offensive to
+decency they make themselves, they would, perhaps, be
+less profane.</p>
+
+<p><b>Promise.</b> This word is sometimes very improperly
+used for <i>assure</i>; thus, "I <i>promise</i> you I was very much
+astonished."</p>
+
+<p><b>Pronouns of the First Person.</b> "The ordinary uses
+of 'I' and 'we,' as the singular and plural pronouns of the
+first person, would appear to be above all ambiguity, uncertainty,
+or dispute. Yet when we consider the force of
+the plural 'we,' we are met with a contradiction; for, as
+a rule, only one person can speak at the same time to the
+same audience. It is only by some exceptional arrangement,
+or some latitude or license of expression, that several
+persons can be conjoint speakers. For example, a plurality
+may sing together in chorus, and may join in the responses
+at church, or in the simultaneous repetition of the Lord's<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[Pg 147]</a></span>
+Prayer or the Creed. Again, one person may be the authorized
+spokesman in delivering a judgment or opinion
+held by a number of persons in common. Finally, in written
+compositions, the 'we' is not unsuitable, because a
+plurality of persons may append their names to a document.</p>
+
+<p>"A speaker using 'we' may speak for himself and one
+or more others; commonly he stands forward as the representative
+of a class, more or less comprehensive. 'As soon
+as my companion and I had entered the field, <i>we</i> saw a
+man coming toward <i>us</i>'; '<i>we</i> like <i>our</i> new curate'; 'you
+do <i>us</i> poets the greatest injustice'; '<i>we</i> must see to the
+efficiency of <i>our</i> forces.' The widest use of the pronoun
+will be mentioned presently.</p>
+
+<p>"'We' is used for 'I' in the decrees of persons in authority;
+as when King Lear says:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i2">'Know that <i>we</i> have divided<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In three <i>our</i> kingdom.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>By the fiction of plurality a veil of modesty is thrown over
+the assumption of vast superiority over human beings generally.
+Or, 'we' may be regarded as an official form whereby
+the speaker personally is magnified or enabled to rise to
+the dignity of the occasion.</p>
+
+<p>"The editorial 'we' is to be understood on the same
+principle. An author using 'we' appears as if he were not
+alone, but sharing with other persons the responsibility of
+his views.</p>
+
+<p>"This representative position is at its utmost stretch in
+the practice of using 'we' for human beings generally; as
+in discoursing on the laws of human nature. The preacher,
+the novelist, or the philosopher, in dwelling upon the
+peculiarity of our common constitution, being himself an
+example of what he is speaking of, associates the rest of
+mankind with him, and speaks collectively by means of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[Pg 148]</a></span>
+'we.' '<i>We</i> are weak and fallible'; '<i>we</i> are of yesterday';
+'<i>we</i> are doomed to dissolution.' 'Here have <i>we</i> no continuing
+city, but <i>we</i> seek one to come.'</p>
+
+<p>"It is not unfrequent to have in one sentence, or in
+close proximity, both the editorial and the representative
+meaning, the effect being ambiguity and confusion. 'Let
+<i>us</i> [the author] now consider why <i>we</i> [humanity generally]
+overrate distant good.' In such a case the author should
+fall back upon the singular for himself&mdash;'<i>I</i> will now consider&mdash;.'
+'<i>We</i> [speaker] think <i>we</i> [himself and hearers
+together] should come to the conclusion.' Say, either '<i>I</i>
+think,' or '<i>you</i> would.'</p>
+
+<p>"The following extract from Butler exemplifies a similar
+confusion: 'Suppose <i>we</i> [representative] are capable of
+happiness and of misery in degrees equally intense and
+extreme, yet <i>we</i> [rep.] are capable of the latter for a much
+longer time, beyond all comparison. <i>We</i> [change of subject
+to a limited class] see men in the tortures of pain&mdash;.
+Such is <i>our</i> [back to representative] make that anything
+may become the instrument of pain and sorrow to <i>us</i>.'
+The 'we' at the commencement of the second sentence&mdash;'<i>We</i>
+see men in the tortures'&mdash;could be advantageously
+changed to 'you,' or the passive construction could be
+substituted; the remaining <i>we</i>'s would then be consistently
+representative.</p>
+
+<p>"From the greater emphasis of singularity, energetic
+speakers and writers sometimes use 'I' as representative of
+mankind at large. Thus: 'The current impressions received
+through the senses are not voluntary in origin. What
+<i>I</i> see in walking is seen because <i>I</i> have an organ of vision.'
+The question of general moral obligation is forcibly stated
+by Paley in the individual form, 'Why am <i>I</i> obliged to
+keep my word?' It is sometimes well to confine the attention<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[Pg 149]</a></span>
+of the hearer or reader to his own relation to the
+matter under consideration, more especially in difficult or
+non-popular argument or exposition. The speaker, by
+using 'I,' does the action himself, or makes himself the
+example, the hearer being expected to put himself in the
+same position."&mdash;Bain's "Composition Grammar."</p>
+
+<p><b>Pronouns of the Second Person.</b> "Anomalous usages
+have sprung up in connection with these pronouns. The
+plural form has almost wholly superseded the singular; a
+usage more than five centuries old.<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></p>
+
+<p>"The motive is courtesy. The singling out of one person
+for address is supposed to be a liberty or an excess of
+familiarity; and the effect is softened or diluted by the
+fiction of taking in others. If our address is uncomplimentary,
+the sting is lessened by the plural form; and if the
+reverse, the shock to modesty is not so great. This is a
+refinement that was unknown to the ancient languages.
+The orators of Greece delighted in the strong, pointed,
+personal appeal implied in the singular 'thou.' In modern
+German, 'thou' (<i>du</i>) is the address of familiarity and intimacy;
+while the ordinary pronoun is the curiously indirect
+'they' (<i>Sie</i>). On solemn occasions, we may revert
+to 'thou.' Cato, in his meditative soliloquy on reading
+Plato's views on the immortality of the soul before killing
+himself, says: 'Plato, <i>thou</i> reasonest well.' So in the
+Commandments, 'thou' addresses to each individual an
+unavoidable appeal: '<i>Thou</i> shall not&mdash;&mdash;.' But our ordinary
+means of making the personal appeal is, 'you, <i>sir</i>,'
+'you, <i>madam</i>,' 'my <i>Lord</i>, you&mdash;&mdash;,' etc.; we reserve 'thou'
+for the special case of addressing the Deity. The application
+of the motive of courtesy is here reversed; it would be<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[Pg 150]</a></span>
+irreverent to merge this vast personality in a promiscuous
+assemblage.</p>
+
+<p>"'You' is not unfrequently employed, like 'we,' as a
+representative pronoun. The action is represented with
+great vividness, when the person or persons addressed may
+be put forward as the performers: 'There is such an echo
+among the old ruins, and vaults, that if <i>you</i> stamp a little
+louder than ordinary, <i>you</i> hear the sound repeated'; 'Some
+practice is required to see these animals in the thick forest,
+even when <i>you</i> hear them close by <i>you</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"There should not be a mixture of 'thou' and 'you'
+in the same passage. Thus, Thackeray (Adventures of
+Philip): 'So, as <i>thy</i> sun rises, friend, over the humble
+house-tops round about <i>your</i> home, shall <i>you</i> wake many
+and many a day to duty and labor.' So, Cooper (Water-Witch):
+'<i>Thou</i> hast both master and mistress? <i>You</i> have
+told us of the latter, but we would know something of the
+former. Who is <i>thy</i> master?' Shakespeare, Scott, and
+others might also be quoted.</p>
+
+<p>"'Ye' and 'you' were at one time strictly distinguished
+as different cases; 'ye' was nominative, 'you' objective
+(dative or accusative). But the Elizabethan dramatists confounded
+the forms irredeemably; and 'you' has gradually
+ousted 'ye' from ordinary use. 'Ye' is restricted to the
+expression of strong feeling, and in this employment occurs
+chiefly in the poets."&mdash;Bain's "Composition Grammar."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Proof" id="Proof"></a>Proof.</b> This word is much and very improperly used
+for <i>evidence</i>, which is only the medium of <i>proof</i>, <i>proof</i> being
+the effect of <i>evidence</i>. "What <i>evidence</i> have you to offer in
+<i>proof</i> of the truth of your statement?" See also <span class="smcap"><a href="#Evidence">Evidence</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Propose" id="Propose"></a>Propose&mdash;Purpose.</b> Writers and speakers often fail to
+discriminate properly between the respective meanings of
+these two verbs. <i>Propose</i>, correctly used, means, to put<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[Pg 151]</a></span>
+forward or to offer for <i>the consideration of others</i>; hence, <i>a
+proposal</i> is a scheme or design offered for acceptance or consideration,
+a proposition. <i>Purpose</i> means, to intend, to
+design, to resolve; hence, <i>a purpose</i> is an intention, an aim,
+that which one sets <i>before one's self</i>. Examples: "What
+do you <i>purpose</i> doing in the matter?" "What do you
+<i>propose</i> that we shall do in the matter?" "I will do" means
+"I <i>purpose</i> doing, or to do." "I <i>purpose</i> to write a history
+of England from the accession of King James the Second
+down to a time which is within the memory of men still
+living."&mdash;Macaulay. It will be observed that Macaulay
+says, "I purpose <i>to write</i>" and not, "I purpose <i>writing</i>,"
+using the verb in the infinitive rather than in the participial
+form. "On which he <i>purposed</i> to mount one of his little
+guns." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Infinitive_Mood">Infinitive</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Proposition.</b> This word is often used when <i>proposal</i>
+would be better, for the reason that <i>proposal</i> has but one
+meaning, and is shorter by one syllable. "He demonstrated
+the <i>proposition</i> of Euclid, and rejected the <i>proposal</i>
+of his friend."</p>
+
+<p><b>Prosaist.</b> Dr. Hall is of opinion that this is a word
+we shall do well to encourage. It is used by good writers.</p>
+
+<p><b>Proven.</b> This form for the past participle of the verb
+<i>to prove</i> is said to be a Scotticism. It is not used by careful
+writers and speakers. The correct form is <i>proved</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Providing.</b> The present participle of the verb <i>to provide</i>
+is sometimes vulgarly used for the conjunction <i>provided</i>,
+as in this sentence from the "London Queen": "Society
+may be congratulated, ... <i>providing</i> that," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Provoke.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Aggravate">Aggravate</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Punctuation.</b> The importance of punctuation can not
+be overestimated; it not only helps to make plain the meaning
+of what one writes, but it may prevent one's being misconstrued.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[Pg 152]</a></span>
+Though no two writers could be found who
+punctuate just alike, still in the main those who pay attention
+to the art put in their stops in essentially the same
+manner. The difference that punctuation may make in the
+meaning of language is well illustrated by the following
+anecdote:</p>
+
+<p>At Ramessa there lived a benevolent and hospitable
+prior, who caused these lines to be painted over his door:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Be open evermore,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">O thou my door!<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">To none be shut&mdash;to honest or to poor!"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>In time the good prior was succeeded by a man as selfish
+as his predecessor was generous. The lines over the door
+of the priory were allowed to remain; one stop, however,
+was altered, which made them read thus:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Be open evermore,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">O thou my door!<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">To none&mdash;be shut to honest or to poor!"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>He punctuates best who makes his punctuation contribute
+most to the clear expression of his thought; and
+that construction is best that has least need of being punctuated.</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">The Comma.</span>&mdash;The chief difference in the punctuation
+of different writers is usually in their use of the comma, in
+regard to which there is a good deal of latitude; much is
+left to individual taste. Nowadays the best practice uses
+it sparingly. An idea of the extent to which opinions
+differ with regard to the use of the comma may be formed
+from the following excerpt from a paper prepared for
+private use:</p>
+
+<p>"In the following examples, gathered from various
+sources&mdash;chiefly from standard books&mdash;the superfluous commas
+are inclosed in parentheses:<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[Pg 153]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>"1. 'It remains(,) perhaps(,) to be said(,) that, if any
+lesson at all(,) as to these delicate matters(,) is needed(,) in
+this period, it is not so much a lesson,' etc. 2. 'The obedience
+is not due to the power of a right authority, but to
+the spirit of fear, and(,) therefore(,) is(,) in reality(,) no
+obedience at all.' 3. 'The patriot disturbances in Canada
+... awakened deep interest among the people of the United
+States(,) who lived adjacent to the frontier.' 4. 'Observers(,)
+who have recently investigated this point(,) do not all agree,'
+etc. 5. 'The wind did(,) in an instant(,) what man and
+steam together had failed to do in hours.' 6. 'All the cabin
+passengers(,) situated beyond the center of the boat(,) were
+saved.' 7. 'No other writer has depicted(,) with so much
+art or so much accuracy(,) the habits, the manners,' etc. 8.
+'If it shall give satisfaction to those who have(,) in any way(,)
+befriended it, the author will feel,' etc. 9. 'Formed(,) or
+consisting of(,) clay.' 10. 'The subject [witchcraft] grew
+interesting; and(,) to examine Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth
+Proctor, the deputy-governor(,) and five other magistrates(,)
+went to Salem.' 11. 'The Lusitanians(,) who had not left
+their home(,) rose as a man,' etc. 12. 'Vague reports ... had
+preceded him to Washington, and his Mississippi friends(,)
+who chanced to be at the capital(,) were not backward to
+make their boast of him.' 13. 'Our faith has acquired a
+new vigor(,) and a clearer vision.' 14. 'In 1819(,) he removed
+to Cambridge.' 15. 'Dor&eacute; was born at Strasburg(,)
+in 1832, and labors,' etc. 16. 'We should never apply dry
+compresses, charpie, or wadding(,) to the wound.' 17. '&mdash;to
+stand idle, to look, act, or think(,) in a leisurely way.' 18.
+'&mdash;portraits taken from the farmers, schoolmasters, and
+peasantry(,) of the neighborhood.' 19. '&mdash;gladly welcomed
+painters of Flanders, Holland, and Spain(,) to their
+shores.'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[Pg 154]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>"In all these cases, the clauses between or following the
+inclosed commas are so closely connected grammatically
+with the immediately preceding words or phrases, that they
+should be read without a perceptible pause, or with only a
+slight one for breath, without change of voice. Some of
+the commas would grossly pervert the meaning if strictly
+construed. Thus, from No. 3 it would appear that the
+people of the United States in general lived adjacent to the
+frontier; from No. 4, that all observers have recently investigated
+the point in question; from No. 6, that all the
+cabin passengers were so situated that they were saved,
+whereas it is meant that only a certain small proportion of
+them were saved; from No. 10 (Bancroft), that somebody
+whose name is accidentally omitted went to Salem 'to examine
+Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth Proctor, the deputy-governor,
+and five other magistrates'; from No. 11, that
+none of the Lusitanians had left their home, whereas it was
+the slaughter by the Romans of a great number of them who
+<i>had</i> left their home that caused the rising.</p>
+
+<p>"Commas are frequently omitted, and in certain positions
+very generally, where the sense and correct reading
+require a pause. In the following examples, such commas,
+omitted in the works from which they were taken, are inclosed
+in brackets:</p>
+
+<p>"1. 'The modes of thought[,] and the types of character
+which those modes produce[,] are essentially and universally
+transformed.' 2. 'Taken by itself[,] this doctrine
+could have no effect whatever; indeed[,] it would amount
+to nothing but a verbal proposition.' 3. 'Far below[,] the
+little stream of the Oder foamed over the rocks.' 4. 'When
+the day returned[,] the professor, the artist[,] and I rowed
+to within a hundred yards of the shore.' 5. 'Proceeding
+into the interior of India[,] they passed through Belgaum.'<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[Pg 155]</a></span>
+6. 'If Loring is defeated in the Sixth District[,] it can be
+borne.'</p>
+
+<p>"In No. 3, the reader naturally enunciates 'the little
+stream of the Oder' as in the objective case after 'below';
+but there he comes to a predicate which compels him to go
+back and read differently. In No. 4, it appears that 'the
+day returned the professor,' and then 'the artist and I
+rowed,' etc."</p>
+
+<p>All clauses should generally be isolated by commas;
+where, however, the connection is very close or the clause
+is very short, no point may be necessary. "But his pride
+is greater than his ignorance, and what he wants in knowledge
+he supplies by sufficiency." "A man of polite imagination
+can converse with a picture, and find an agreeable
+companion in a statue." "Though he slay me, yet will I
+trust him." "The prince, his father being dead, succeeded."
+"To confess the truth, I was much at fault."
+"As the heart panteth after the water-brooks, so panteth
+my soul after thee." "Where the bee sucks, there suck
+I." "His father dying, he succeeded to the estate."
+"The little that is known, and the circumstance that little
+is known, must be considered as honorable to him."</p>
+
+<p>The comma is used before and after a phrase when co&ouml;rdinating
+and not restrictive. "The jury, having retired
+for half an hour, brought in a verdict." "The stranger,
+unwilling to obtrude himself on our notice, left in the
+morning." "Rome, the city of the Emperors, became the
+city of the Popes." "His stories, which made everybody
+laugh, were often made to order." "He did not come,
+which I greatly regret." "The younger, who was yet a
+boy, had nothing striking in his appearance." "They
+passed the cup to the stranger, who drank heartily."
+"Peace at any price, which these orators seem to advocate,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[Pg 156]</a></span>
+means war at any cost." "Sailors, who are generally
+superstitious, say it is unlucky to embark on Friday."</p>
+
+<p>Adverbs and short phrases, <i>when they break the connection</i>,
+should be between commas. Some of the most
+common words and phrases so used are the following:
+Also, too, there, indeed, perhaps, surely, moreover, likewise,
+however, finally, namely, therefore, apparently, meanwhile,
+consequently, unquestionably, accordingly, notwithstanding,
+in truth, in fact, in short, in general, in reality,
+no doubt, of course, as it were, at all events, to be brief,
+to be sure, now and then, on the contrary, in a word, by
+chance, in that case, in the mean time, for the most part.
+"History, in a word, is replete with moral lessons." "As
+an orator, however, he was not great." "There is, remember,
+a limit at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue."
+"Our civilization, therefore, is not an unmixed
+good." "This, I grant you, is not of great importance."</p>
+
+<p>If, however, the adverb does not break the connection,
+but readily coalesces with the rest of the sentence, the
+commas are omitted. "Morning will come at last, however
+dark the night may be." "We then proceeded on
+our way." "Our civilization is therefore not an unmixed
+good." "Patience, I say; your mind perhaps may
+change."</p>
+
+<p>Adverbial phrases and clauses beginning a sentence are
+set off by commas. "In truth, I could not tell." "To
+sum up, the matter is this." "Everything being ready,
+they set out." "By looking a little deeper, the reason
+will be found." "Finally, let me sum up the argument."
+"If the premises were admitted, I should deny the conclusion."
+"Where your treasure is, there will your heart be
+also."</p>
+
+<p>Words used in apposition should be isolated by commas.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[Pg 157]</a></span>
+"Newton, the great mathematician, was very modest."
+"And he, their prince, shall rank among my peers."
+In such sentences, however, as, "The mathematician Newton
+was very modest," and "The Emperor Napoleon was
+a great soldier," commas are not used.</p>
+
+<p>The name or designation of a person addressed is isolated
+by commas. "It touches you, my lord, as well as
+me." "John, come here." "Mr. President, my object is
+peace." "Tell me, boy, where do you live?" "Yes, sir,
+I will do as you say." "Mr. Brown, what is your number?"</p>
+
+<p>Pairs of words.&mdash;"Old and young, rich and poor, wise
+and foolish, were involved." "Sink or swim, live or die,
+survive or perish, I give my hand and heart to this vote."
+"Interest and ambition, honor and shame, friendship and
+enmity, gratitude and revenge, are the prime movers in
+public transactions."</p>
+
+<p>A restrictive clause is not separated by a comma from
+the noun. "Every one must love a boy who [that] is attentive
+and docile." "He preaches sublimely who [that]
+lives a holy life." "The things which [that] are seen are
+temporal." "A king depending on the support of his subjects
+can not rashly go to war." "The sailor who [that] is
+not superstitious will embark any day."</p>
+
+<p>The comma is used after adjectives, nouns, and verbs
+in sentences like the following:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Are all thy conquests, glories, triumphs, spoils<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Shrunk to this little measure?"<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"He fills, he bounds, connects and equals all."<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Who to the enraptured heart, and ear, and eye<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Teach beauty, virtue, truth, and love, and melody."<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[Pg 158]</a></span></p>
+<p>"He rewarded his friends, chastised his foes, set
+Justice on her seat, and made his conquest secure."</p>
+
+<p>The comma is used to separate adjectives in opposition,
+but closely connected. "Though deep, yet clear; though
+gentle, yet not dull." "Liberal, not lavish, is kind Nature's
+hand." "Though black, yet comely; and though
+rash, benign."</p>
+
+<p>After a nominative, where the verb is understood.
+"To err is human; to forgive, divine." "A wise man
+seeks to shine in himself; a fool, in others." "Conversation
+makes a ready man; writing, an exact man; reading,
+a full man."</p>
+
+<p>A long subject is often separated from the predicate by
+a comma. "Any one that refuses to earn an honest livelihood,
+is not an object of charity." "The circumstance of
+his being unprepared to adopt immediate and decisive
+measures, was represented to the Government." "That
+he had persistently disregarded every warning and persevered
+in his reckless course, had not yet undermined
+his credit with his dupes." "That the work of forming
+and perfecting the character is difficult, is generally allowed."</p>
+
+<p>In a series of adjectives that precede their noun, a
+comma is placed after each except the last; there usage
+omits the point. "A beautiful, tall, willowy, sprightly
+girl." "A quick, brilliant, studious, learned man."<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p>
+
+<p>A comma is placed between short members of compound<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[Pg 159]</a></span>
+sentences, connected by <i>and</i>, <i>but</i>, <i>for</i>, <i>nor</i>, <i>or</i>, <i>because</i>,
+<i>whereas</i>, <i>that</i> expressing purpose (so that, in order that),
+and other conjunctions. "Be virtuous, that you may be
+respected." "Love not sleep, lest you come to poverty."
+"Man proposes, but God disposes."</p>
+
+<p>A comma must not be placed before <i>that</i> except when
+it is equivalent to <i>in order that</i>. "He says that he will be
+here."</p>
+
+<p>A comma must not be placed before <i>and</i> when it connects
+two words only. "Time and tide wait for no man."
+"A rich and prosperous people." "Plain and honest truth
+wants no artificial covering."</p>
+
+<p>A comma is sometimes necessary to prevent ambiguity.
+"He who pursues pleasure only defeats the object of his
+creation." Without a comma before or after <i>only</i>, the
+meaning of this sentence is doubtful.</p>
+
+<p>The following sentences present some miscellaneous
+examples of the use of the comma by writers on punctuation:
+"Industry, as well as genius, is essential to the
+production of great works." "Prosperity is secured to a
+state, not by the acquisition of territory or riches, but by
+the encouragement of industry." "Your manners are affable,
+and, for the most part, pleasing."<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a></p>
+
+<p>"However fairly a bad man may appear to act, we
+distrust him." "Why, this is rank injustice." "Well,
+follow the dictates of your inclination." "The comma
+may be omitted in the case of <i>too</i>, <i>also</i>, <i>therefore</i>, and <i>perhaps</i>,
+when introduced so as not to interfere with the harmonious
+flow of the period; and, particularly, when the
+sentence is short."<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> "Robert Horton, M. D., F. R. S."
+"To those who labor, sleep is doubly pleasant"; "Sleep<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[Pg 160]</a></span>
+is doubly pleasant to those who labor." "Those who
+persevere, succeed." "To be overlooked, slighted, and
+neglected; to be misunderstood, misrepresented, and slandered;
+to be trampled under foot by the envious, the ignorant,
+and the vile; to be crushed by foes, and to be distrusted
+and betrayed even by friends&mdash;such is too often the
+fate of genius." "She is tall, though not so handsome as
+her sister." "Verily, verily, I say unto you." "Whatever
+is, is right." "What is foreordained to be, will be." "The
+Emperor Augustus was a patron of the fine arts." "Augustus,
+the Emperor, was a patron of the fine arts."
+"United, we stand; divided, we fall." "God said, Let
+there be light." "July 21, 1881." "President Garfield
+was shot, Saturday morning, July 2, 1881; he died, Monday
+night, Sept. 19, 1881." "I am, sir, very respectfully, your
+obedient servant, John Jones." "New York, August,
+1881." "Room 20, Equitable Building, Broadway, New
+York."</p>
+
+<p>"<i>When you are in doubt as to the propriety of inserting
+commas, omit them</i>; <span class="smcap">it is better to have too few than
+too many</span>."&mdash;Quackenbos.</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">The Semicolon.</span>&mdash;Reasons are preceded by semicolons;
+"Economy is no disgrace; for it is better to live on a little
+than to outlive a great deal." Clauses in opposition are
+separated by a semicolon when the second is introduced by
+an adversative: "Straws swim at the surface; but pearls
+lie at the bottom"; "Lying lips are an abomination to the
+Lord; but they that deal truly are his delight." Without
+the adversative, the colon is to be preferred: "Prosperity
+showeth vice: adversity, virtue." The great divisions of a
+sentence must be pointed with a semicolon when the minor
+divisions are pointed with commas: "Mirth should be the
+embroidery of conversation, not the web; and wit the ornament<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[Pg 161]</a></span>
+of the mind, not the furniture." The things enumerated
+must be separated by semicolons, when the enunciation
+of particulars is preceded by a colon: "The value
+of a maxim depends on four things: the correctness of the
+principle it embodies; the subject to which it relates; the
+extent of its application; and the ease with which it may
+be practically carried out." When <i>as</i> introduces an example,
+it is preceded by a semicolon. When several
+successive clauses have a common connection with a preceding
+or following clause, they are separated by semicolons;
+as, "Children, as they gamboled on the beach;
+reapers, as they gathered the harvest; mowers, as they
+rested from using the scythe; mothers, as they busied themselves
+about the household&mdash;were victims to an enemy,
+who disappeared the moment a blow was struck." "Reason
+as we may, it is impossible not to read in such a fate much
+that we know not how to interpret; much of provocation
+to cruel deeds and deep resentment; much of apology for
+wrong and perfidy; much of doubt and misgiving as to the
+past; much of painful recollections; much of dark foreboding."
+"Philosophers assert that Nature is unlimited;
+that her treasures are endless; that the increase of knowledge
+will never cease."</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">The Colon.</span>&mdash;This point is less used now than formerly:
+its place is supplied by the period, the semicolon, or
+the dash; and sometimes, even by the comma. The colon
+is used very differently by different writers. "He was
+heard to say, 'I have done with this world.'" Some writers
+would put a colon, some a comma, after <i>say</i>. "When the
+quoted passage is brought in without any introductory
+word, if short," says Quackenbos, "it is generally preceded
+by a comma; if long, by a colon; as, 'A simpleton, meeting
+a philosopher, asked him, "What affords wise men the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[Pg 162]</a></span>
+greatest pleasure?" Turning on his heel, the sage replied,
+"To get rid of fools."'"</p>
+
+<p>Formal enumerations of particulars, and direct quotations,
+when introduced by such phrases as <i>in these words</i>,
+<i>as follows</i>, <i>the following</i>, <i>namely</i>, <i>this</i>, <i>these</i>, <i>thus</i>, etc., are
+properly preceded by a colon. "We hold these truths to
+be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they
+are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable
+rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit
+of happiness." "Lord Bacon has summed up the whole
+matter in the following words: 'A little philosophy inclineth
+men's minds to atheism; but depth in philosophy
+bringeth men's minds to religion.'" "The human family
+is composed of five races: first, the Caucasian; second,
+the Mongolian; third, the," etc.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"All were attentive to the godlike man<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">When from his lofty couch he thus began:<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">'Great queen,'" etc.&mdash;Dryden.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>When the quotation, or other matter, begins a new
+paragraph, the colon is, by many writers, followed with a
+dash; as, "The cloth being removed, the President rose
+and said:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Ladies and gentlemen, we are,'" etc.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The colon is used to mark the greater breaks in sentences,
+when the lesser breaks are marked by semicolons.
+"You have called yourself an atom in the universe; you
+have said that you are but an insect in the solar blaze: is
+your present pride consistent with these professions?" "A
+clause is either independent or dependent: independent,
+if it forms an assertion by itself; dependent, if it enters
+into some other clause with the value of a part of speech."
+A colon is sometimes used instead of a period to separate
+two short sentences, which are closely connected. "Never<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[Pg 163]</a></span>
+flatter people: leave that to such as mean to betray them."
+"Some things we can, and others we can not do: we can
+walk, but we can not fly."</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">The Period.</span>&mdash;Complete sentences are always followed
+either by a period, or by an exclamation or an interrogation
+point.<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a></p>
+
+<p>The period is also used after abbreviations; as, R. D.
+Van Nostrand, St. Louis, Mo.; Jno. B. Morris, M. D.,
+F. R. S., London, Eng.; Jas. W. Wallack, Jr., New York
+City, N. Y.; Jas. B. Roberts, Elocutionist, Phila., Pa.</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Interrogation-point.</span>&mdash;This point is used after questions
+put by the writer, and after questions reported directly.
+"What can I do for you?" "Where are you going?"
+"What do you say?" cried the General. "The child still
+lives?" It should not be used when the question is reported
+indirectly. "He asked me where I was going."
+"The Judge asked the witness if he believed the man to
+be guilty."</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Exclamation-point.</span>&mdash;This mark is placed after interjections,
+after sentences and clauses of sentences of passionate
+import, and after solemn invocations and addresses.
+"Zounds! the man's in earnest." "Pshaw! what can we
+do?" "Bah! what's that to me?" "Indeed! then I must
+look to it." "Look, my lord, it comes!" "Rest, rest,
+perturbed spirit!" "O heat, dry up my brains!" "Dear
+maid, kind sister, sweet Ophelia!" "While in this part
+of the country, I once more revisited&mdash;and, alas, with what
+melancholy presentiments!&mdash;the home of my youth." "O
+rose of May!" "Oh, from this time forth, my thoughts
+be bloody or be nothing worth!" "O heavens! die two
+months ago, and not forgotten yet?"<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[Pg 164]</a></span></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Night, sable goddess! from her ebon throne,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In rayless majesty now stretches forth<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Her leaden scepter o'er a slumbering world.<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Silence, how dead! and darkness, how profound!"&mdash;Young.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Hail, holy light! offspring of heaven just born!"&mdash;Milton.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"But thou, O Hope! with eyes so fair,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">What was thy delighted measure?"&mdash;Collins.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>It will be observed that the interjection O is an exception
+to the rule: it is often followed by a comma, but never
+by an exclamation-point.</p>
+
+<p>An exclamation-point sometimes gives the same words
+quite another meaning. The difference between "What's
+that?" and "What's that!" is obvious.</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">The Dash.</span>&mdash;Cobbett did not favor the use of this mark,
+as we see from the following: "Let me caution you against
+the use of what, by some, is called the <i>dash</i>. The dash is
+a stroke along the line; thus, 'I am rich&mdash;I was poor&mdash;I
+shall be poor again.' This is wild work indeed! Who is
+to know what is intended by these <i>dashes</i>? Those who
+have thought proper, like Mr. Lindley Murray, to place the
+<i>dash</i> amongst the <i>grammatical points</i>, ought to give us some
+rule relative to its different longitudinal dimensions in different
+cases. The <i>inch</i>, the <i>three-quarter-inch</i>, the <i>half-inch</i>,
+the <i>quarter-inch</i>: these would be something determinate;
+but '<i>the dash</i>,' without measure, must be a perilous
+thing for the young grammarian to handle. In short, '<i>the
+dash</i>' is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points, and it
+can answer no other purpose."</p>
+
+<p>This is one of the few instances in which Cobbett was
+wrong. The <i>dash</i> is the proper point with which to mark
+an unexpected or emphatic pause, or a sudden break or transition.
+It is very often preceded by another point. "And<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[Pg 165]</a></span>
+Huitzilopochtli&mdash;a sweet name to roll under one's tongue&mdash;for
+how many years has this venerable war-god blinked in
+the noonday sun!" "Crowds gathered about the newspaper
+bulletins, recalling the feverish scenes that occurred
+when the President's life was thought to be hanging by a
+thread. 'Wouldn't it be too bad,' said one, 'if, after all&mdash;no,
+I won't allow myself to think of it.'" "Was there
+ever&mdash;but I scorn to boast." "You are&mdash;no, I'll not tell
+you what you are."</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"He suffered&mdash;but his pangs are o'er;<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Enjoyed&mdash;but his delights are fled;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Had friends&mdash;his friends are now no more;<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">And foes&mdash;his foes are dead."&mdash;Montgomery.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"Greece, Carthage, Rome,&mdash;where are they?" "He chastens;&mdash;but
+he chastens to save."</p>
+
+<p>Dashes are much used where parentheses were formerly
+employed. "In the days of Tweed the expression to divide
+fair&mdash;forcible, if not grammatical&mdash;acquired much currency."
+"In truth, the character of the great chief was depicted
+two thousand five hundred years before his birth, and depicted&mdash;such
+is the power of genius&mdash;in colors which will
+be fresh as many years after his death." "To render the
+Constitution perpetual&mdash;which God grant it may be!&mdash;it is
+necessary that its benefits should be practically felt by all
+parts of the country."</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Parenthesis.</span>&mdash;This mark is comparatively little used
+nowadays. The dash is preferred, probably because it
+disfigures the page less. The office of the parenthesis is
+to isolate a phrase which is merely incidental, and which
+might be omitted without detriment to the grammatical
+construction.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Know then this truth (enough for man to know),<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Virtue alone is happiness below."&mdash;Pope.<br /></span><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[Pg 166]</a></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"The bliss of man (could pride that blessing find)<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Is not to act or think beyond mankind."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Brackets.</span>&mdash;This mark is used principally to inclose
+words improperly omitted by the writer, or words introduced
+for the purpose of explanation or to correct an error.
+The bracket is often used in this book.</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">The Apostrophe.</span>&mdash;This point is used to denote the
+omission of letters and sometimes of figures; as, Jan'y, '81;
+<i>I've</i> for <i>I have</i>; <i>you'll</i> for <i>you will</i>; <i>'tis</i> for <i>it is</i>; <i>don't</i> for
+<i>do not</i>; <i>can't</i> for <i>can not</i>; It was in the year '93; the spirit
+of '76; It was in the years 1812, '13, and '14.</p>
+
+<p>Also to denote the possessive case; as, Brown's house;
+the king's command; Moses' staff; for conscience' sake;
+the boys' garden.</p>
+
+<p>Also with <i>s</i> to denote the plural of letters, figures, and
+signs; as, Cross your <i>t</i>'s, dot your <i>i</i>'s, and mind your <i>p</i>'s and
+<i>q</i>'s; make your 5's better, and take out the <i>x</i>'s.</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Capitals.</span>&mdash;A capital letter should begin every sentence,
+every line of verse, and every direct quotation.</p>
+
+<p>All names of the Deity, of Jesus Christ, of the Trinity,
+and of the Virgin Mary must begin with a capital. Pronouns
+are usually capitalized when they refer to the Deity.</p>
+
+<p>Proper names, and nouns and adjectives formed from
+proper names, names of streets, of the months, of the days
+of the week, and of the holidays, are capitalized.</p>
+
+<p>Titles of nobility and of high office, when used to designate
+particular persons, are capitalized; as, the Earl of
+Dunraven, the Mayor of Boston, the Baron replied, the
+Cardinal presided.</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">The Paragraph.</span>&mdash;In writing for the press, the division
+of matter into paragraphs is often quite arbitrary; in letter-writing,
+on the contrary, the several topics treated of should,
+as a rule, be isolated by paragraphic divisions. These divisions<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[Pg 167]</a></span>
+give one's letters a shapely appearance that they
+otherwise never have.</p></div>
+
+<p><b>Purchase.</b> This word is much preferred to its synonym
+<i>buy</i>, by that class of people who prefer the word <i>reside</i> to
+<i>live</i>, <i>procure</i> to <i>get</i>, <i>inaugurate</i> to <i>begin</i>, and so on. They
+are generally of those who are great in pretense, and who
+would be greater still if they were to pretend to all they
+have to pretend to.</p>
+
+<p><b>Purpose.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Propose">Propose</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Quantity.</b> This word is often improperly used for
+<i>number</i>. <i>Quantity</i> should be used in speaking of what is
+measured or weighed; <i>number</i>, of what is counted. Examples:
+"What <i>quantity</i> of apples have you, and what
+<i>number</i> of pineapples?" "Delaware produces a large
+<i>quantity</i> of peaches and a large <i>number</i> of melons."</p>
+
+<p><b>Quit.</b>&mdash;This word means, properly, to leave, to go away
+from, to forsake; as, "Avaunt! <i>quit</i> my sight." This is
+the only sense in which the English use it. In America,
+it is generally used in the sense of to leave off, to stop; as,
+"<i>Quit</i> your nonsense"; "<i>Quit</i> laughing"; "<i>Quit</i> your
+noise"; "He has <i>quit</i> smoking," and so on.</p>
+
+<p><b>Quite.</b> This word originally meant completely, perfectly,
+totally, entirely, fully; and this is the sense in
+which it was used by the early writers of English. It is
+now often used in the sense of <i>rather</i>; as, "It is <i>quite</i>
+warm"; "She is <i>quite</i> tall"; "He is <i>quite</i> proficient."
+Sometimes it is incorrectly used in the sense of <i>considerable</i>;
+as, <i>quite</i> an amount, <i>quite</i> a number, <i>quite</i> a fortune.
+<i>Quite</i>, according to good modern usage, may qualify an
+adjective, but not a noun. "She is quite the lady," is a
+vile phrase, meaning, "She is very or <i>quite</i> ladylike."</p>
+
+<p><b>Railroad Depot.</b> Few things are more offensive to
+fastidious ears than to hear a railway <i>station</i> called a <i>depot</i>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[Pg 168]</a></span>
+A depot is properly a place where goods or stores of any
+kind are kept; and the places at which the trains of a railroad&mdash;or,
+better, rail<i>way</i>&mdash;stop for passengers, or the points
+from which they start and at which they arrive, are, properly,
+the <i>stations</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Railway.</b> The English prefer this word to rail<i>road</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Raise the rent.</b> An expression incorrectly used for
+<i>increase the rent</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Rarely.</b> It is no uncommon thing to see this adverb
+improperly used in such sentences as, "It is very <i>rarely</i>
+that the puppets of the romancer assume," etc.&mdash;"Appletons'
+Journal," February, 1881, p. 177. "But," says the
+defender of this phraseology, "<i>rarely</i> qualifies a verb&mdash;the
+verb <i>to be</i>." Not at all. The sentence, if written out in
+full, would be, "It is a very rare thing that," etc., or "The
+circumstance is a very rare one that," etc., or "It is a very
+rare occurrence that," etc. To those who contend for
+"It is very <i>rarely</i> that," etc., I would say, It is very <i>sadly</i>
+that persons of culture will write and then defend&mdash;or
+rather try to defend&mdash;such grammar.</p>
+
+<p><b>Ratiocinate.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Effectuate">Effectuate</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Real.</b>&mdash;This adjective is often vulgarly used in the
+sense of the adverb <i>very</i>; thus, <i>real</i> nice, <i>real</i> pretty, <i>real</i>
+angry, <i>real</i> cute, and so on.</p>
+
+<p><b>Recommend.</b> This word, which means to commend
+or praise to another, to declare worthy of esteem, trust, or
+favor, is sometimes put to strange uses. Example: "Resolved,
+that the tax-payers of the county be <i>recommended</i> to
+meet," etc. What the resolving gentlemen meant was,
+that the tax-payers should be <i>counseled</i> to meet.</p>
+
+<p><b>Redundancy.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Pleonasm">Pleonasm</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Reliable" id="Reliable"></a>Reliable.</b> This is a modern word which is often met<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[Pg 169]</a></span>
+with; but it is not used by our careful writers. They
+prefer its synonym <i>trustworthy</i>, and argue that, in consequence
+of being ill-formed, <i>reliable</i> can not possibly have
+the signification in which it is used.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remainder.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Balance">Balance</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Rendition.</b> This word is much misused for <i>rendering</i>.
+Example: "The excellence of Mr. Gilbert's <i>rendition</i> of
+certain characters, Sir Peter and Sir Antony, for instance,
+is not equaled," etc. <i>Rendition</i> means the act of yielding
+possession, surrender, as the <i>rendition</i> of a town or
+fortress. The sentence above should read, "The excellence
+of Mr. Gilbert's <i>rendering</i>," etc. <i>Rendition</i> is also
+sometimes improperly used for <i>performance</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Reply.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Answer">Answer</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Reputation.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Character">Character</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Reside.</b> A big word that Mr. Wouldbe uses where
+Mr. Is uses the little word <i>live</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Residence.</b> In speaking of a man's domicile, it is not
+only in better taste but more correct to use the term <i>house</i>
+than <i>residence</i>. A man has a <i>residence</i> in New York, when
+he has lived here long enough to have the right to exercise
+the franchise here; and he may have a <i>house</i> in Fifth
+Avenue where he <i>lives</i>. People who <i>are</i> live in houses;
+people who <i>would be</i> reside in residences. The former
+<i>buy</i> things; the latter <i>purchase</i> them.</p>
+
+<p><b>Rest.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Balance">Balance</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Restive.</b> Some of the dictionaries, Richard Grant
+White, and some other writers, contend that this word, when
+properly used, means unwilling to go, standing still stubbornly,
+obstinate, stubborn, and nothing else. In combating
+this opinion, Fitzedward Hall says: "Very few
+instances, I apprehend, can be produced, from our literature,
+of this use of <i>restive</i>." Webster gives impatient, uneasy,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[Pg 170]</a></span>
+as a second meaning; and this is the sense in which
+the word is nearly always used.</p>
+
+<p><b>Retire.</b> It is only the over-nice who use <i>retire</i> in the
+sense of <i>go to bed</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Reverend" id="Reverend"></a>Reverend&mdash;Honorable.</b> Many persons are in doubt
+whether they should or should not put <i>the</i> before these
+adjectives. Emphatically, yes, they should. See "Words
+and Their Uses," by Richard Grant White, for a full discussion
+of the question; also "Good English," by Edward
+S. Gould.</p>
+
+<p><b>Rhetoric.</b> The art which has for its object the rendering
+of language effective is called <i>rhetoric</i>. Without
+some study of the art of composition, no one can expect to
+write well, or to judge the literary work of others.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"True ease in writing comes from art, not chance,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">As those move easiest who have learned to dance."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b><a name="Ride" id="Ride"></a>Ride&mdash;Drive.</b> Fashion, both in England and in this
+country, says that we must always use the second of these
+words when we speak of going out in a carriage, although
+<i>ride</i> means, according to all the lexicographers, "to be carried
+on a horse or other animal, or in any kind of vehicle
+or carriage."</p>
+
+<p><b>Right.</b> Singularly enough, this word is made, by some
+people, to do service for <i>ought</i>, <i>in duty bound</i>, under
+<i>obligation</i> to; thus, "You had a <i>right</i> to tell me," meaning,
+"You should have told me." "The Colonists contended
+that they <i>had no right</i> to pay taxes," meaning, "They were
+<i>under no obligation</i> to pay taxes," i. e., that it was unjust to
+tax them.</p>
+
+<p><b>Right here.</b> The expressions "right here" and "right
+there" are Americanisms. Correctly, "just here" and "just
+there."</p>
+
+<p><b>Rolling.</b> The use of this participial adjective in the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[Pg 171]</a></span>
+sense of undulating is said to be an Americanism.
+Whether an Americanism or not, it would seem to be
+quite unobjectionable.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Rubbers" id="Rubbers"></a>Rubbers.</b> This word, in common with <i>gums</i> and
+<i>arctics</i>, is often, in defiance of good taste, used for <i>overshoes</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Sabbath.</b> This term was first used in English for Sunday,
+or Lord's day, by the Puritans. Nowadays it is little
+used in this sense. The word to use is <i>Sunday</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Sarcasm.</b> Bain says that <i>sarcasm</i> is vituperation softened
+in the outward expression by the arts and figures of
+disguise&mdash;epigram, innuendo, irony&mdash;and embellished with
+the figures of illustration. Crabb says that <i>sarcasm</i> is the
+indulgence only of personal resentment, and is never justifiable.</p>
+
+<p><b>Satire.</b> The holding up to ridicule of the follies and
+weaknesses of mankind, by way of rebuke, is called <i>satire</i>.
+Satire is general rather than individual, its object being
+the reformation of abuses. A <i>lampoon</i>, which has
+been defined as a <i>personal satire</i>, attacks the individual
+rather than his fault, and is intended to injure rather than
+to reform.</p>
+
+<p>Said Sheridan: "Satires and lampoons on particular
+people circulate more by giving copies in confidence to the
+friends of the parties than by printing them."</p>
+
+<p><b>Saw.</b> The imperfect tense of the verb <i>to see</i> is carelessly
+used by good writers and speakers when they should
+use the perfect; thus, "I never <i>saw</i> anything like it before,"
+when the meaning intended is, "I <i>have</i> never [in all
+my life] <i>seen</i> anything like it before [until now]." We say
+properly, "I never <i>saw</i> anything like it <i>when I was in
+Paris</i>"; but, when the period of time referred to extends to
+the time when the statement is made, it must be <i>have seen</i>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[Pg 172]</a></span>
+Like mistakes are made in the use of other verbs, but they
+are hardly as common; yet we often hear such expressions
+as, "I <i>was</i> never in Philadelphia," "I never <i>went</i> to the
+theatre in my life," instead of <i>have been</i> in Philadelphia,
+and <i>have gone</i> to the theatre.</p>
+
+<p><b>Section.</b> The use of this word for region, neighborhood,
+vicinity, part (of the town or country), is said to be a
+Westernism. A <i>section</i> is a division of the public lands
+containing six hundred and forty acres.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Seem" id="Seem"></a>Seem&mdash;Appear.</b> Graham, in his "English Synonymes,"
+says of these two words: "What <i>seems</i> is in the mind;
+what <i>appears</i> is external. Things <i>appear</i> as they present
+themselves to the eye; they <i>seem</i> as they are represented to
+the mind. Things <i>appear</i> good or bad, as far as we can
+judge by our senses. Things <i>seem</i> right or wrong as we
+determine by reflection. Perception and sensation have to
+do with appearing; reflection and comparison, with seeming.
+When things are not what they <i>appear</i>, our senses are
+deceived; when things are not what they <i>seem</i>, our judgment
+is at fault."</p>
+
+<p>"No man had ever a greater power over himself, or
+was less the man he <i>seemed</i> to be, which shortly after <i>appeared</i>
+to everybody, when he cared less to keep on the
+mask."&mdash;Clarendon.</p>
+
+<p><b>Seldom or ever.</b> This phrase should be "seldom <i>if</i>
+ever," or "seldom or <i>never</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Seraphim.</b> This is the plural of <i>seraph</i>. "One of the
+<i>seraphim</i>." "To Thee cherubim and seraphim continually
+do cry." See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Cherubim">Cherubim</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Set" id="Set"></a>Set&mdash;Sit.</b> The former of these two verbs is often incorrectly
+used for the latter. To <i>set</i>; imperfect tense, <i>set</i>;
+participles, <i>setting</i>, <i>set</i>. To <i>sit</i>; imperfect tense, <i>sat</i>; participles,
+<i>sitting</i>, <i>sat</i>. To <i>set</i> means to put, to place, to plant;<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[Pg 173]</a></span>
+to put in any place, condition, state, or posture. We say,
+to <i>set</i> about, to <i>set</i> against, to <i>set</i> out, to <i>set</i> going, to
+<i>set</i> apart, to <i>set</i> aside, to <i>set</i> down (to put in writing). To
+<i>sit</i> means to rest on the lower part of the body, to repose
+on a seat, to perch, as a bird, etc. We say, "<i>Sit</i> up," i. e.,
+rise from lying to sitting; "We will <i>sit</i> up," i. e., will not go
+to bed; "<i>Sit</i> down," i. e., place yourself on a seat. We <i>sit</i> a
+horse and we <i>sit</i> for a portrait. Garments <i>sit</i> well or otherwise.
+Congress <i>sits</i>, so does a court. "I have <i>sat</i> up long
+enough." "I have <i>set</i> it on the table." We <i>set</i> down figures,
+but we <i>sit</i> down on the ground. We <i>set</i> a hen, and a hen
+<i>sits</i> on eggs. We should say, therefore, "as cross as a <i>sitting</i>
+[not, as a <i>setting</i>] hen."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Settle" id="Settle"></a>Settle.</b> This word is often inelegantly, if not incorrectly,
+used for <i>pay</i>. We <i>pay</i> our way, <i>pay</i> our fare, <i>pay</i>
+our hotel-bills, and the like. See, also, <span class="smcap"><a href="#Locate">Locate</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Shall and Will.</b> The nice distinctions that should be
+made between these two auxiliaries are, in some parts of
+the English-speaking world, often disregarded, and that,
+too, by persons of high culture. The proper use of <i>shall</i>
+and <i>will</i> can much better be learned from example than
+from precept. Many persons who use them, and also <i>should</i>
+and <i>would</i>, with well-nigh unerring correctness, do so unconsciously;
+it is simply habit with them, and they, though
+their culture may be limited, will receive a sort of verbal
+shock from Biddy's inquiry, "<i>Will</i> I put the kettle on,
+ma'am?" when your Irish or Scotch countess would not be
+in the least disturbed by it.</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p><span class="smcap">Shall</span>, <i>in an affirmative sentence, in the first person,
+and</i> <span class="smcap">WILL</span> <i>in the second and third persons, merely announce
+future action</i>. Thus, "I <i>shall</i> go to town to-morrow."
+"I <i>shall</i> not; I <i>shall</i> wait for better weather." "We <i>shall</i>
+be glad to see you." "I <i>shall</i> soon be twenty." "We <i>shall</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[Pg 174]</a></span>
+set out early, and <i>shall</i> try to arrive by noon." "You <i>will</i>
+be pleased." "You <i>will</i> soon be twenty." "You <i>will</i> find
+him honest." "He <i>will</i> go with us."</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Shall</span>, <i>in an affirmative sentence, in the second and third
+persons, announces the speaker's intention to control</i>. Thus,
+"You <i>shall</i> hear me out." "You <i>shall</i> go, sick or well."
+"He <i>shall</i> be my heir." "They <i>shall</i> go, whether they
+want to go or not."</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Will</span>, <i>in the first person, expresses a promise, announces
+the speaker's intention to control, proclaims a determination</i>.
+Thus, "I <i>will</i> [I promise to] assist you." "I <i>will</i> [I am
+determined to] have my right." "We <i>will</i> [we promise to]
+come to you in the morning."</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Shall</span>, <i>in an interrogative sentence, in the first and third
+persons, consults the will or judgment of another; in the
+second person, it inquires concerning the intention or future
+action of another</i>. Thus, "<i>Shall</i> I go with you?" "When
+<i>shall</i> we see you again?" "When <i>shall</i> I receive it?"
+"When <i>shall</i> I get well?" "When <i>shall</i> we get there?"
+"<i>Shall</i> he come with us?" "<i>Shall</i> you demand indemnity?"
+"<i>Shall</i> you go to town to-morrow?" "What
+<i>shall</i> you do about it?"</p>
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Will</span>, <i>in an interrogative sentence, in the second person,
+asks concerning the wish, and, in the third person, concerning
+the purpose or future action of others</i>. Thus, "<i>Will</i> you
+have an apple?" "<i>Will</i> you go with me to my uncle's?"
+"<i>Will</i> he be of the party?" "<i>Will</i> they be willing to receive
+us?" "When <i>will</i> he be here?"</p>
+
+<p><i>Will</i> can not be used interrogatively in the first person
+singular or plural. We can not say, "<i>Will</i> I go?" "<i>Will</i>
+I help you?" "<i>Will</i> I be late?" "<i>Will</i> we get there in
+time?" "<i>Will</i> we see you again soon?"</p>
+
+<p>Official courtesy, in order to avoid the semblance of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[Pg 175]</a></span>
+compulsion, conveys its commands in the <i>you-will</i> form instead
+of the strictly grammatical <i>you-shall</i> form. It says,
+for example, "You <i>will</i> proceed to Key West, where you
+will find further instructions awaiting you."</p>
+
+<p>A clever writer on the use of <i>shall</i> and <i>will</i> says that
+whatever concerns one's beliefs, hopes, fears, likes, or dislikes,
+can not be expressed in conjunction with <i>I will</i>. Are
+there no exceptions to this rule? If I say, "I think I <i>shall</i>
+go to Philadelphia to-morrow," I convey the impression that
+my going depends upon circumstances beyond my control;
+but if I say, "I think I <i>will</i> go to Philadelphia to-morrow,"
+I convey the impression that my going depends upon circumstances
+within my control&mdash;that my going or not depends on
+mere inclination. We certainly must say, "I fear that I <i>shall</i>
+lose it"; "I hope that I <i>shall</i> be well"; "I believe that I
+<i>shall</i> have the ague"; "I hope that I <i>shall</i> not be left
+alone"; "I fear that we <i>shall</i> have bad weather"; "I
+<i>shall</i> dislike the country"; "I <i>shall</i> like the performance."
+The writer referred to asks, "How can one say, 'I <i>will</i>
+have the headache'?" I answer, Very easily, as every
+young woman knows. Let us see: "Mary, you know you
+promised John to drive out with him to-morrow; how <i>shall</i>
+you get out of it?" "Oh, I <i>will</i> have the headache!"
+We request that people <i>will</i> do thus or so, and not that
+they <i>shall</i>. Thus, "It is requested that no one <i>will</i> leave
+the room."</p>
+
+<p><i>Shall</i> is rarely, if ever, used for <i>will</i>; it is <i>will</i> that is
+used for <i>shall</i>. Expressions like the following are common:
+"Where <i>will</i> you be next week?" "I <i>will</i> be at home."
+"We <i>will</i> have dinner at six o'clock." "How <i>will</i> you go
+about it?" "When <i>will</i> you begin?" "When <i>will</i> you
+set out?" "What <i>will</i> you do with it?" In all such expressions,
+when it is a question of mere future action on<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[Pg 176]</a></span>
+the part of the person speaking or spoken to, the auxiliary
+must be <i>shall</i>, and not <i>will</i>.</p>
+
+<p><i>Should</i> and <i>would</i> follow the regimen of <i>shall</i> and <i>will</i>.
+<i>Would</i> is often used for <i>should</i>; <i>should</i> rarely for <i>would</i>.
+Correct speakers say, "I <i>should</i> go to town to-morrow if
+I had a horse." "I <i>should</i> not; I <i>should</i> wait for better
+weather." "We <i>should</i> be glad to see you." "We <i>should</i>
+have started earlier, if the weather had been clear." "I
+<i>should</i> like to go to town, and <i>would</i> go if I could." "I
+<i>would</i> assist you if I could." "I <i>should</i> have been ill if I
+had gone." "I <i>would</i> I were home again!" "I <i>should</i>
+go fishing to-day if I were home." "I <i>should</i> so like to go
+to Europe!" "I <i>should</i> prefer to see it first." "I <i>should</i>
+be delighted." "I <i>should</i> be glad to have you sup with
+me." "I knew that I <i>should</i> be ill." "I feared that I
+<i>should</i> lose it." "I hoped that I <i>should</i> see him." "I
+thought I <i>should</i> have the ague." "I hoped that I <i>should</i>
+not be left alone." "I was afraid that we <i>should</i> have bad
+weather." "I knew I <i>should</i> dislike the country." "I
+<i>should</i> not like to do it, and <i>will</i> not [determination] unless
+compelled to."</p></div>
+
+<p><b>Shimmy.</b> "We derive from the French language our
+word <i>chemise</i>&mdash;pronounced <i>shemmeeze</i>. In French, the
+word denotes a man's shirt, as well as the under garment
+worn by women. In this country, it is often pronounced
+by people who should know better&mdash;<i>shimmy</i>. Rather than
+call it <i>shimmy</i>, resume the use of the old English words
+<i>shift</i> and <i>smock</i>. Good usage unqualifiedly condemns
+<i>gents</i>, <i>pants</i>, <i>kids</i>, <i>gums</i>, and <i>shimmy</i>."&mdash;"Vulgarisms and
+Other Errors of Speech."</p>
+
+<p><b>Should.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Ought">Ought</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Sick" id="Sick"></a>Sick&mdash;Ill.</b> These words are often used indiscriminately.
+<i>Sick</i>, however, is the stronger word, and generally the better<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[Pg 177]</a></span>
+word to use. <i>Ill</i> is used in England more than with us:
+there <i>sick</i> is generally limited to the expressing of nausea;
+as, "sick at the stomach."</p>
+
+<p><b>Signature, over or under?</b> A man writes <i>under</i>, not
+<i>over</i>, a signature. Charles Dickens wrote <i>under</i> the signature
+of "Boz"; Mr. Samuel L. Clemens writes <i>under</i> the
+signature of "Mark Twain." The reason given in Webster's
+Dictionary for preferring the use of <i>under</i> is absurd;
+viz., that the paper is <i>under</i> the hand in writing. The
+expression is elliptical, and has no reference to the position
+either of the signature or of the paper. "Given under my
+hand and seal" means "under the guarantee of my signature
+and my seal." "Under his own signature" or "name"
+means "under his own character, without disguise." "Under
+the signature of Boz" means "under the disguise of the
+assumed name Boz." We always write <i>under</i> a certain
+date, though the date be placed, as it often is, at the bottom
+of the page.</p>
+
+<p><b>Signs.</b> In one of the principal business streets of New
+York there is a sign which reads, "German Lace Store."
+Now, whether this is a store that makes a specialty of German
+laces, or whether it is a store where all kinds of lace
+are sold, kept by a German or after the German fashion, is
+something that the sign doubtless means to tell us, but,
+owing to the absence of a hyphen ("German-Lace Store,"
+or "German Lace-Store"), does not tell us. Nothing is more
+common than erroneous punctuation in signs, and gross
+mistakes by the unlettered in the wording of the simplest
+printed matter.</p>
+
+<p>The bad taste, incorrect punctuation, false grammar,
+and ridiculous nonsense met with on signs and placards,
+and in advertisements, are really surprising. An advertisement
+tells us that "a pillow which assists in procuring<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[Pg 178]</a></span>
+sleep is a <i>benediction</i>"; a placard, that they have "Charlotte
+<i>de</i> Russe" for sale within, which means, if it means
+anything, that they have for sale somebody or something
+called Charlotte of Russian; and, then, on how many signs
+do we see the possessive case when the plural number is
+intended!</p>
+
+<p><b>Simile.</b> In rhetoric, a direct and formal comparison is
+called a <i>simile</i>. It is generally denoted by <i>like</i>, <i>as</i>, or
+<i>so</i>; as,</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i9">"I have ventured,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Like</i> little wanton boys that swim on bladders,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">These many summers in a sea of glory."<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Thy smile is <i>as</i> the dawn of vernal day."&mdash;Shakespeare.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"<i>As</i>, down in the sunless retreats of the ocean,<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Sweet flow'rets are springing no mortal can see;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>So</i>, deep in my bosom, the prayer of devotion,<br /></span>
+<span class="i2">Unheard by the world, rises silent to thee."&mdash;Moore.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Tis with our judgments <i>as</i> with our watches; none<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Go just alike, yet each believes his own."&mdash;Pope.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Grace abused brings forth the foulest deeds,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>As</i> richest soil the most luxuriant weeds."&mdash;Cowper.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"<i>As</i> no roads are so rough as those that have just been
+mended, <i>so</i> no sinners are so intolerant as those who have
+just turned saints."&mdash;"Lacon."</p>
+
+<p><b>Sin.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Crime">Crime</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Since&mdash;Ago.</b> Dr. Johnson says of these two adverbs:
+"Reckoning time toward the present, we use <i>since</i>; as,
+'It is a year <i>since</i> it happened': reckoning from the present,
+we use <i>ago</i>; as, 'It is a year <i>ago</i>.' This is not, perhaps,
+always observed."</p>
+
+<p>Dr. Johnson's rule will hardly suffice as a sure guide.
+<i>Since</i> is often used for <i>ago</i>, but <i>ago</i> never for <i>since</i>. <i>Ago</i> is
+derived from the participle <i>agone</i>, while <i>since</i> comes from a<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[Pg 179]</a></span>
+preposition. We say properly, "not long" or "some time
+<i>ago</i> [agone]." <i>Since</i> requires a verbal clause after it; as,
+"<i>Since</i> I saw you"; "<i>Since</i> he was here."</p>
+
+<p><b>Sing.</b> Of the two forms&mdash;<i>sang</i> and <i>sung</i>&mdash;for the imperfect
+tense of the verb to <i>sing</i>, the former&mdash;<i>sang</i>&mdash;is to be
+preferred.</p>
+
+<p><b>Sit.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Set">Set</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Slang.</b> The slang that is heard among respectable
+people is made up of genuine words, to which an arbitrary
+meaning is given. It is always low, generally coarse, and
+not unfrequently foolish. With the exception of <i>cant</i>, there
+is nothing that is more to be shunned. We sometimes meet
+with persons of considerable culture who interlard their
+talk with slang expressions, but it is safe to assert that they
+are always persons of coarse natures.</p>
+
+<p><b>Smart.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Clever">Clever</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Smell of.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Taste_of">Taste of</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>So.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#As">As</a></span>; <span class="smcap"><a href="#Such">Such</a></span>; <span class="smcap"><a href="#That">That</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>So much so.</b> "The shipments by the coast steamers
+are very large, <i>so much so</i> [large?] as to tax the capacity of
+the different lines."&mdash;"Telegram," September 19, 1881.
+The sentence should be, "The shipments by the coast
+steamers are very large, <i>so large</i> as to tax," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Solecism" id="Solecism"></a>Solecism.</b> In rhetoric, a solecism is defined as an offense
+against the rules of grammar by the use of words in a
+wrong construction; false syntax.</p>
+
+<p>"Modern grammarians designate by <i>solecism</i> any word
+or expression which does not agree with the established
+usage of writing or speaking. But, as customs change, that
+which at one time is considered a <i>solecism</i> may at another
+be regarded as correct language. A <i>solecism</i>, therefore,
+differs from a <i>barbarism</i>, inasmuch as the latter consists in
+the use of a word or expression which is altogether contrary<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[Pg 180]</a></span>
+to the spirit of the language, and can, properly
+speaking, never become established as correct language."&mdash;"Penny
+Cyclop&aelig;dia." See, also, <span class="smcap"><a href="#Barbarism">Barbarism</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Some.</b> This word is not unfrequently misused for <i>somewhat</i>;
+thus, "She is <i>some</i> better to-day." It is likewise
+often misused for <i>about</i>; thus, "I think it is <i>some</i> ten miles
+from here": read, "<i>about</i> ten miles from here."</p>
+
+<p><b>Specialty.</b> This form has within a recent period been
+generally substituted for <i>speciality</i>. There is no apparent
+reason, however, why the <i>i</i> should be dropped, since it is
+required by the etymology of the word, and is retained in
+nearly all other words of the same formation.</p>
+
+<p><b>Specious Fallacy.</b> A <i>fallacy</i> is a sophism, a logical
+artifice, a deceitful or false appearance; while <i>specious</i>
+means having the appearance of truth, plausible. Hence
+we see that the very essence of a <i>fallacy</i> is its <i>speciousness</i>.
+We may very properly say that a <i>fallacy</i> is more or less
+<i>specious</i>, but we can not properly say that a fallacy <i>is</i> specious,
+since without speciousness we can have no fallacies.</p>
+
+<p><b>Splendid.</b> This poor word is used by the gentler sex
+to qualify well-nigh everything that has their approval, from
+a sugar-plum to the national capitol. In fact, <i>splendid</i> and
+<i>awful</i> seem to be about the only adjectives some of our
+superlative young women have in their vocabularies.</p>
+
+<p><b>Standpoint.</b> This is a word to which many students
+of English seriously object, and among them are the editors
+of some of our daily papers, who do not allow it to appear
+in their columns. The phrase to which no one objects
+is, <i>point of view</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>State.</b> This word, which properly means to make
+known specifically, to explain particularly, is often misused
+for <i>say</i>. When <i>say</i> says all one <i>wants</i> to say, why use a
+more pretentious word?<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[Pg 181]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Stop.</b> "Where are you <i>stopping</i>?" "At the Metropolitan."
+The proper word to use here is <i>staying</i>. <i>To stop</i>
+means to cease to go forward, to leave off; and <i>to stay</i>
+means to abide, to tarry, to dwell, to sojourn. We <i>stay</i>,
+not <i>stop</i>, at home, at a hotel, or with a friend, as the case
+may be.</p>
+
+<p><b>Storm.</b> Many persons indulge in a careless use of this
+word, using it when they mean to say simply that it rains
+or snows. To a <i>storm</i> a violent commotion of the atmosphere
+is indispensable. A very high wind constitutes a
+storm, though it be dry.</p>
+
+<p><b>Straightway.</b> Here is a good Anglo-Saxon word of
+<i>two</i> syllables whose place, without any good reason, is
+being usurped by the Latin word <i>immediately</i>, of <i>five</i> syllables.</p>
+
+<p><b>Street.</b> We live <i>in</i>, not <i>on</i>&mdash;meet our acquaintances <i>in</i>,
+not <i>on</i>&mdash;things occur <i>in</i>, not <i>on</i>&mdash;houses are built <i>in</i>, not
+<i>on</i>, the street, and so forth.</p>
+
+<p><b>Style.</b> This is a term that is used to characterize the
+peculiarities that distinguish a writer or a composition.
+Correctness and clearness properly belong to the domain of
+<i>diction</i>; simplicity, conciseness, gravity, elegance, diffuseness,
+floridity, force, feebleness, coarseness, etc., belong to
+the domain of <i>style</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Subjunctive_Mood" id="Subjunctive_Mood"></a>Subjunctive Mood.</b> This mood is unpopular with not
+a few now-a-day grammarians. One says that it is rapidly
+falling into disuse; that, in fact, there is good reason to
+suppose it will soon become obsolete. Another says that
+it would, perhaps, be better to abolish it entirely, as its use
+is a continual source of dispute among grammarians and of
+perplexity to schools. Another says that it is a universal
+stumbling-block; that nobody seems to understand it, although
+almost everybody attempts to use it.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[Pg 182]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>That the subjunctive mood is much less used now than
+it was a hundred years ago is certain, but that it is obsolescent
+is very far from certain. It would not be easy, I
+think, to find a single contemporary writer who does not
+use it. That it is not always easy to determine what form
+of it we should employ is very true; but if we are justified in
+abolishing it altogether, as Mr. Chandler suggests, because
+its correct use is not always easy, then we are also justified
+in abolishing the use of <i>shall</i> and <i>will</i>, and of the prepositions,
+for surely their right use is likewise at times most
+puzzling. Meanwhile, most persons will think it well to
+learn to use the subjunctive mood properly. With that
+object in view, one can not, perhaps, do better than to attend
+to what Dr. Alexander Bain, Professor of Logic in
+the University of Aberdeen, says upon the subject. In
+Professor Bain's "Higher English Grammar" we find:</p>
+
+<p>"In subordinate clauses.&mdash;In a clause expressing a condition,
+and introduced by a conjunction of condition, the
+verb is sometimes, but not always, in the subjunctive mood:
+'If I <i>be</i> able,' 'if I <i>were</i> strong enough,' 'if thou <i>should</i>
+come.'</p>
+
+<p>"The subjunctive inflexions have been wholly lost.
+The sense that something is wanting appears to have led
+many writers to use indicative forms where the subjunctive
+might be expected. The tendency appears strongest in the
+case of 'wert,' which is now used as indicative (for 'wast')
+only in poetical or elevated language.</p>
+
+<p>"The following is the rule given for the use of the subjunctive
+mood:</p>
+
+<p>"When in a conditional clause it is intended to express
+doubt or denial, use the subjunctive mood.<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> 'If I <i>were</i>
+sure of what you tell me, I would go.'</p>
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[Pg 183]</a></span></p>
+<p>"When the conditional clause is <i>affirmative</i> and <i>certain</i>,
+the verb is <i>indicative</i>: 'If that <i>is</i> the case' (as you now tell
+me, and as I believe), 'I can understand you.' This is
+equivalent to a clause of assumption, or supposition: 'That
+being the case,' 'inasmuch as that is the case,' etc.</p>
+
+<p>"As <i>futurity</i> is by its nature uncertain, the subjunctive
+is extensively used for future conditionality: 'If it <i>rain</i>, we
+shall not be able to go'; 'if I <i>be</i> well'; 'if he <i>come</i> shortly';
+'if thou <i>return</i> at all in peace'; 'though he <i>slay</i> me,
+yet will I trust in him.' These events are all in the uncertain
+future, and are put in the subjunctive.<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></p>
+
+<p>"A future result or consequence is expressed by the
+subjunctive in such instances as these: 'I will wait till he
+<i>return</i>'; 'no fear lest dinner <i>cool</i>'; 'thou shalt stone him
+with stones, that he <i>die</i>'; 'take heed lest at any time your
+hearts <i>be</i> overcharged with surfeiting.'</p>
+
+<p>"Uncertainty as to a past event may arise from our
+own ignorance, in which case the subjunctive is properly
+employed, and serves the useful purpose of distinguishing<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[Pg 184]</a></span>
+our ignorance from our knowledge. 'If any of my readers
+<i>has</i> looked with so little attention upon the world around
+him'; this would mean&mdash;'as I know that they have.' The
+meaning intended is probably&mdash;'as I do not know whether
+they have or not,' and therefore the subjunctive 'have' is
+preferable. 'If ignorance <i>is</i> bliss,' which I (ironically)
+admit. Had Gray been speaking seriously, he would have
+said, 'if ignorance <i>be</i> bliss,' he himself dissenting from the
+proposition.</p>
+
+<p>"A wish contrary to the fact takes the subjunctive: 'I
+wish he <i>were</i> here' (which he is not).</p>
+
+<p>"An intention not yet carried out is also subjunctive:
+'The sentence is that you <i>be</i> imprisoned.'</p>
+
+<p>"The only correct form of the future subjunctive is&mdash;'if
+I should.' We may say, 'I do not know whether or not
+I <i>shall</i> come'; but 'if I shall come,' expressing a condition,
+is not an English construction. 'If he will' has a real
+meaning, as being the present subjunctive of the verb
+'will': 'if he be willing,' 'if he have the will.' It is in
+accordance with good usage to express a future subjunctive
+meaning by a present tense; but in that case the form must
+be strictly subjunctive, and not indicative. 'If any member
+<i>absents</i> himself, he shall forfeit a penny for the use of
+the club'; this ought to be either 'absent,' or 'should
+absent.' 'If thou <i>neglectest</i> or <i>doest</i> unwillingly what I command
+thee, I will rack thee with old cramps'; better, 'if
+thou <i>neglect</i> or <i>do</i> unwillingly,' or 'if thou should neglect.'
+The indicative would be justified by the speaker's belief
+that the supposition is sure to turn out to be the fact.</p>
+
+<p>"The past subjunctive may imply denial; as, 'if the
+book <i>were</i> in the library (as it is not), it should be at your
+service.'</p>
+
+<p>"'If the book <i>be</i> in the library,' means, 'I do not know<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[Pg 185]</a></span>
+whether it be or not.' We have thus the power of discriminating
+<i>three</i> different suppositions. 'If the book <i>is</i> in the
+library' (as I know it is); 'if it <i>be</i>' (I am uncertain); 'if it
+<i>were</i>' (as I know it is not). So, 'if it rains,' 'if it rain,' 'if
+it rained.' 'Nay, and the villains march wide between the
+legs, as if they <i>had</i> gyves on,' implying that they had not.</p>
+
+<p>"The same power of the past tense is exemplified in
+'if I <i>could</i>, I would,' which means, 'I can not'; whereas,
+'if I can, I will,' means 'I do not know.'</p>
+
+<p>"The past subjunctive may be expressed by an inversion:
+'<i>Had</i> I the power,' '<i>were</i> I as I have been.'</p>
+
+<p>"In Principal Clauses.&mdash;The principal clause in a conditional
+statement also takes the subjunctive form when it
+refers to what is future and contingent, and when it refers
+to what is past and uncertain, or denied. 'If he should
+try, he <i>would</i> succeed'; 'if I had seen him, I <i>should</i> have
+asked him.'</p>
+
+<p>"The usual forms of the subjunctive in the principal
+clause are 'would,' 'should,' 'would have,' 'should have';
+and it is to be noted that in this application the second persons
+take the inflexional ending of the indicative: 'shouldst,'
+'wouldst.'</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'If 'twere done when 'tis done, then 't<i>were</i> (would be) well<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">It <i>were</i> (should be) done quickly.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"The English idiom appears sometimes to permit the
+use of an indicative where we should expect a subjunctive
+form. 'Many acts, that <i>had</i> been otherwise blamable,
+were employed'; 'I <i>had</i> fainted, unless I had believed,' etc.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Which else <i>lie</i> furled and shrouded in the soul.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"In 'else' there is implied a conditional clause that
+would suit 'lie'; or the present may be regarded as a
+more vivid form of expression. 'Had' may be indicative;
+just as we sometimes find pluperfect indicative for pluperfect<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[Pg 186]</a></span>
+subjunctive in the same circumstances in Latin. We
+may refer it to the general tendency, as already seen in the
+uses of 'could,' 'would,' 'should,' etc., to express conditionality
+by a past tense; or the indicative may be used
+as a more direct and vivid mode. 'Had' may be subjunctive;
+'I <i>had</i> fainted' is, in construction, analogous to 'I
+<i>should</i> have fainted'; the word for futurity, 'shall,' not
+being necessary to the sense, is withdrawn, and its past
+inflexion transferred to 'have.' Compare Germ. <i>w&uuml;rde
+haben</i> and <i>h&auml;tte</i>."</p>
+
+<p>In addition to the foregoing, we find in Professor Bain's
+"Composition Grammar" the following:</p>
+
+<p>"The case most suited to the subjunctive is <i>contingent
+futurity</i>, or the expression of an event unknown absolutely,
+as being still in the future: 'If to-morrow <i>be</i> fine, I will
+walk with you.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Unless I <i>were</i> prepared,' insinuates pretty strongly
+that I am or am not prepared, according to the manner of
+the principal clause.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'What's a tall man unless he <i>fight</i>?'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'The sword hath ended him: so shall it thee,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Unless thou <i>yield</i> thee as my prisoner.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Who but must laugh, if such a man there <i>be</i>?<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Who would not weep, if Atticus <i>were</i> he?'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"'I am to second Ion if he <i>fail</i>'; the failing is left
+quite doubtful. 'I should very imperfectly execute the
+task which I have undertaken if I <i>were</i> merely to treat
+of battles and sieges.' Macaulay thus implies that the
+scope of his work is to be wider than mere battles and
+sieges.</p>
+
+<p>"The subjunctive appears in some other constructions.
+'I hope to see the exhibition before <i>it close</i>'; 'wait till he
+<i>return</i>'; 'thou shall stand by the river's brink against he<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[Pg 187]</a></span>
+<i>come</i>'; 'take heed lest passion <i>sway</i> thy judgment'; 'speak
+to me, though it <i>be</i> in wrath'; 'if he <i>smite</i> him with an instrument
+of iron so that he <i>die</i>, he is a murderer'; 'beware
+this night that thou <i>cross</i> not my footsteps' (Shelley).</p>
+
+<p>"Again. 'Whatever this <i>be</i>'; 'whoever he <i>be</i>'; 'howe'er
+it <i>be</i>' (Tennyson); and such like.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'And <i>as long</i>, O God, <i>as</i> she<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Have</i> a grain of love for me,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">So long, no doubt, no doubt,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Shall I nurse in my dark heart,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">However weary, a spark of will<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Not to be trampled out.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"The Future Subjunctive is given in our scheme of the
+verb as 'should' in all persons: 'If I should, if thou
+should, if he should.' In old English, we have 'thou
+<i>shouldst</i>': 'if thou, Lord, <i>shouldst</i> mark iniquities.'</p>
+
+<p>"An inverted conditional form has taken deep root in
+our language, and may be regarded as an elegant and forcible
+variety. While dispensing with the conjunction, it
+does not cause ambiguity; nevertheless, conditionality is
+well marked.</p>
+
+<p>"'<i>If</i> you <i>should</i> abandon your Penelope and your home
+for Calypso, &mdash;&mdash;': '<i>should</i> you abandon &mdash;&mdash;.'</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i4">"'<i>Go</i> not my horse the better,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">I must become a borrower of the night<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">For a dark hour or twain.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Here had we now our country's honor roof'd<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Were</i> the graced person of our Banquo present.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'<i>Be</i> thou a spirit of health or goblin damn'd,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Bring</i> with thee airs from heaven or blasts from hell,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Be</i> thy intents wicked or charitable,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Thou com'st in such a questionable shape<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That I will speak to thee.'<br /></span><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[Pg 188]</a></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'<i>Come</i> one, <i>come</i> all, this rock shall fly<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">From its firm base as soon as I.'&mdash;Scott.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"The following examples are given by M&auml;tzner:</p>
+
+<p>"'Varney's communications, <i>be</i> they what they might,
+were operating in his favor.'&mdash;Scott.</p>
+
+<p>"'Governing persons, <i>were</i> they never so insignificant
+intrinsically, have for most part plenty of Memoir-writers.'&mdash;Carlyle.</p>
+
+<p>"'Even <i>were</i> I disposed, I could not gratify the reader.'&mdash;Warren.</p>
+
+<p>"'Bring them back to me, <i>cost</i> what it may.'&mdash;Coleridge,
+'Wallenstein.'</p>
+
+<p>"'And <i>will</i> you, <i>nill</i> you, I will marry you.'&mdash;'Taming
+of the Shrew.'</p>
+
+<p>"<i>Were</i> is used in the principal clause for 'should be'
+or 'would be.'<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'I <i>were</i> (=should be) a fool, not less than if a panther<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Were panic-stricken by the antelope's eye,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">If she escape me.'&mdash;Shelley.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Were you but riding forth to air yourself,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Such parting <i>were</i> too petty.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"'He <i>were</i> (=would be) no lion, were not Romans
+hinds.'</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Should he be roused out of his sleep to-night, ...<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">It <i>were</i> not well; indeed it <i>were</i> not well.'&mdash;Shelley.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"<i>Had</i> is sometimes used in the principal clause for
+'should have' or 'would have.'<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[Pg 189]</a></span></p><p>"'Had I known this before we set out, I think I <i>had</i>
+(= would have) remained at home.'&mdash;Scott.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Hadst thou been kill'd when first thou didst presume,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Thou <i>hadst</i> not lived to kill a son of mine.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i12">"'If he<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Had killed me, he <i>had</i> done a kinder deed.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'For once he <i>had</i> been ta'en or slain,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">An it had not been his ministry.'&mdash;Scott.<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'If thou hadst said him nay, it <i>had</i> been sin.'<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a><br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"'<i>Had</i> better, rather, best, as lief, as well, etc.,' is a
+form that is explained under this heading. 'Had' stands
+for 'would have.' The exploded notion that 'had' is a
+corrupted 'would' must be guarded against.</p>
+
+<p>"'I <i>had</i> as lief not be.' That is&mdash;'I <i>would</i> as lief <i>have</i>
+not (<i>to</i>) be' = 'I would as willingly (or as soon) have non-existence.'</p>
+
+<p>"'<i>Had</i> you rather C&aelig;sar were living&mdash;&mdash;?' '<i>Would</i>
+you rather <i>have</i> (<i>would</i> you <i>prefer</i> that) C&aelig;sar were living?'</p>
+
+<p>"'He <i>had</i> better reconsider the matter' is 'he <i>would</i>
+better <i>have</i> (<i>to</i>) reconsider the matter.'</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'I <i>had</i> rather be a kitten and cry mew<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Than one of these same metre ballad-mongers;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">I <i>had</i> rather hear a brazen canstick turned.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"Let us compare this form with another that appears
+side by side with it in early writers. (Cp. Lat. 'habeo'
+and 'mihi est.')</p>
+
+<p>"The construction of 'had' is thus illustrated in Chaucer,
+as in&mdash;Nonne Prestes Tale, 300:<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[Pg 190]</a></span></p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'By God, I <i>hadde</i> levere than my scherte,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">That ye hadde rad his legend, as I have.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"Compare now:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Ah <i>me were levere</i> with lawe <i>loose</i> my lyf<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Then so to fote hem <i>falle</i>.'&mdash;Wright, 'Polit. S.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"Here 'were' is unquestionably for 'would be'; and
+the whole expression might be given by 'had,' thus: 'Ah,
+<i>I hadde</i> levere &mdash;&mdash;,' '(to) <i>loose</i>' and '(to) <i>falle</i>,' changing
+from subjects of 'were' to objects of 'hadde.'</p>
+
+<p>"So, in the Chaucer example above, if we substitute
+'be' for 'have,' we shall get the same meaning, thus: 'By
+God, <i>me were</i> levere &mdash;&mdash;.' The interchange helps us to
+see more clearly that 'hadde' is to be explained as subjunctive
+for 'would have.'" See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Indicative_and_Subjunctive">Indicative and Subjunctive</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Such" id="Such"></a>Such.</b> "I have never before seen <i>such</i> a large ox."
+By a little transposing of the words of this sentence, we
+have, "I have never before seen an ox <i>such</i> large," which
+makes it quite clear that we should say <i>so large an ox</i> and
+not <i>such a large ox</i>. As proof that this error in the use of
+<i>such</i> is common, we find in Mr. George Washington Moon's
+"Dean's English and Bad English," the sentence, "With
+all due deference to <i>such</i> a high authority on <i>such</i> a very
+important matter." With a little transposing, this sentence
+is made to read, "With all due deference to an authority
+<i>such</i> high on a matter <i>such</i> very important." It is clear that
+the sentence should read, "With all due deference to <i>so</i> high
+an authority on <i>so</i> very important a matter." The phrases,
+<i>such</i> a handsome, <i>such</i> a lovely, <i>such</i> a long, <i>such</i> narrow,
+etc., are incorrect, and should be <i>so</i> handsome, <i>so</i> lovely, <i>so</i>
+long, and so on.</p>
+
+<p><b>Summon.</b> This verb comes in for its full share of mauling.
+We often hear such expressions as "I will <i>summons</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[Pg 191]</a></span>
+him," instead of <i>summon</i> him; and "He was <i>summonsed</i>,"
+instead of <i>summoned</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Superfluous Words.</b> "Whenever I try to write well, I
+<i>always</i> find I can do it." "I shall have finished by the <i>latter</i>
+end of the week." "Iron sinks <i>down</i> in water." "He combined
+<i>together</i> all the facts." "My brother called on me,
+and we <i>both</i> took a walk." "I can do it <i>equally</i> as well as
+he." "We could not forbear <i>from</i> doing it." "Before I
+go, I must <i>first</i> be paid." "We were compelled to return
+<i>back</i>." "We forced them to retreat <i>back</i> fully a mile."
+"His conduct was approved <i>of</i> by everybody." "They
+conversed <i>together</i> for a long time." "The balloon rose <i>up</i>
+very rapidly." "Give me another <i>one</i>." "Come home as
+soon as <i>ever</i> you can." "Who finds him <i>in</i> money?" "He
+came in last <i>of all</i>." "He has <i>got</i> all he can carry." "What
+have you <i>got</i>?" "No matter what I have <i>got</i>." "I have
+<i>got</i> the headache." "Have you <i>got</i> any brothers?" "No,
+but I have <i>got</i> a sister." All the words in <i>italics</i> are superfluous.</p>
+
+<p><b>Superior.</b> This word is not unfrequently used for able,
+excellent, gifted; as, "She is a <i>superior</i> woman," meaning
+an <i>excellent</i> woman; "He is a <i>superior</i> man," meaning an
+<i>able</i> man. The expression <i>an inferior man</i> is not less objectionable.</p>
+
+<p><b>Supposititious.</b> This word is <i>properly</i> used in the sense
+of put by a trick into the place or character belonging to
+another, spurious, counterfeit, not genuine; and <i>improperly</i>
+in the sense of conjectural, hypothetical, imaginary,
+presumptive; as, "This is a <i>supposititious</i> case," meaning
+an <i>imaginary</i> or <i>presumptive</i> case. "The English critic derived
+his materials from a stray copy of some <i>supposititious</i>
+indexes devised by one of the 'Post' reporters."&mdash;"Nation."
+Here is a correct use of the word.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[Pg 192]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Swosh.</b> There is a kind of ill-balanced brain in which
+the reflective and the imaginative very much outweight the
+perceptive. Men to whom this kind of an organization has
+been given generally have active minds, but their minds
+never present anything clearly. To their mental vision all
+is ill-defined, chaotic. They see everything in a haze.
+Whether such men talk or write, they are verbose, illogical,
+intangible, will-o'-the-wispish. Their thoughts are phantomlike;
+like shadows, they continually escape their grasp.
+In their talk they will, after long dissertations, tell you that
+they have not said just what they would like to say; there is
+always a subtle, lurking something still unexpressed, which
+something is the real essence of the matter, and which your
+penetration is expected to divine. In their writings they
+are eccentric, vague, labyrinthine, pretentious, transcendental,<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a>
+and frequently ungrammatical. These men, if write
+they must, should confine themselves to the descriptive;
+for when they enter the essayist's domain, which they are
+very prone to do, they write what I will venture to call
+<i>swosh</i>.</p>
+
+<p>We find examples in plenty of this kind of writing in
+the essays of Mr. Ralph Waldo Emerson. Indeed, the impartial
+critic who will take the trouble to examine any of
+Mr. Emerson's essays at all carefully, is quite sure to come
+to the conclusion that Mr. Emerson has seen everything he
+has ever made the subject of his essays very much as London
+is seen from the top of Saint Paul's in a fog.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[Pg 193]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>Mr. Emerson's definition of Nature runs thus: "Philosophically
+considered, the universe is composed of Nature
+and the Soul. Strictly speaking, therefore, all that is separate
+from us, all which philosophy distinguishes from the
+<i>Not Me</i>&mdash;that is, both Nature and Art, and all other men,
+and my own body&mdash;must be ranked under this name '<span class="smcap">Nature</span>.'
+In enumerating the values of Nature and casting
+up their sum, I shall use the word in both senses&mdash;in its
+common and in its philosophical import. In inquiries so
+general as our present one, the inaccuracy is not material;
+no confusion of thought will occur. <i>Nature</i>, in the common
+sense, refers to essences unchanged by man: space,
+the air, the river, the leaf. <i>Art</i> is applied to the mixture
+of his will with the same things, as in a house, a canal, a
+picture, a statue. But his operations, taken together, are
+so insignificant&mdash;a little chipping, baking, patching, and
+washing&mdash;that in an impression so grand as that of the
+world on the human mind they do not vary the result."</p>
+
+<p>In "Letters and Social Aims" Mr. Emerson writes:
+"Eloquence is the power to translate a truth into language
+perfectly intelligible to the person to whom you speak. He
+who would convince the worthy Mr. Dunderhead of any
+truth which Dunderhead does not see, must be a master of
+his art. Declamation is common; but such possession of
+thought as is here required, such practical chemistry as the
+conversion of a truth written in God's language into a truth
+in Dunderhead's language, is one of the most beautiful and
+cogent weapons that is forged in the shop of the Divine
+Artificer."</p>
+
+<p>The first paragraph of Mr. Emerson's "Essay on Art"
+reads: "All departments of life at the present day&mdash;Trade,
+Politics, Letters, Science, or Religion&mdash;seem to feel,
+and to labor to express, the identity of their law. They are<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[Pg 194]</a></span>
+rays of one sun; they translate each into a new language
+the sense of the other. They are sublime when seen as
+emanations of a Necessity contradistinguished from the
+vulgar Fate by being instant and alive, and dissolving man,
+as well as his works, in its flowing beneficence. This influence
+is conspicuously visible in the principles and history
+of Art."</p>
+
+<p>Another paragraph from Mr. Emerson's "Essay on
+Eloquence": "The orator, as we have seen, must be a
+substantial personality. Then, first, he must have power
+of statement&mdash;must have the fact, and know how to tell
+it. In a knot of men conversing on any subject, the person
+who knows most about it will have the ear of the
+company, if he wishes it, and lead the conversation, no
+matter what genius or distinction other men there present
+may have; and, in any public assembly, him who has the
+facts, and can and will state them, people will listen to,
+though he is otherwise ignorant, though he is hoarse and
+ungrateful, though he stutters and screams."</p>
+
+<p>Mr. Emerson, in his "Essay on Prudence," writes:
+"There are all degrees of proficiency in knowledge of the
+world. It is sufficient to our present purpose to indicate
+three. One class live to the utility of the symbol, esteeming
+health and wealth a final good. Another class
+live above this mark to the beauty of the symbol, as the
+poet and artist, and the naturalist and man of science. A
+third class live above the beauty of the symbol to the
+beauty of the thing signified; these are wise men. The
+first class have common sense; the second, taste; and the
+third, spiritual perception. Once in a long time a man
+traverses the whole scale, and sees and enjoys the symbol
+solidly; then, also, has a clear eye for its beauty; and,
+lastly, whilst he pitches his tent on this sacred volcanic isle<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[Pg 195]</a></span>
+of nature, does not offer to build houses and barns thereon,
+reverencing the splendor of God which he sees bursting
+through each chink and cranny."</p>
+
+<p>Those who are wont to accept others at their self-assessment
+and to see things through other people's eyes&mdash;and
+there are many such&mdash;are in danger of thinking
+this kind of writing very fine, when in fact it is not only the
+veriest <i>swosh</i>, but that kind of swosh that excites at least
+an occasional doubt with regard to the writer's sanity.
+We can make no greater mistake than to suppose that the
+reason we do not understand these rhetorical contortionists
+is because they are so subtle and profound. We understand
+them quite as well as they understand themselves.
+At their very best, they are but incoherent diluters of other
+men's ideas. They have but one thing to recommend them&mdash;honesty.
+They believe in themselves.</p>
+
+<p>"Whatever is dark is deep. Stir a puddle, and it is
+deeper than a well."&mdash;Swift.</p>
+
+<p><b>Synecdoche.</b> The using of the name of a part for
+that of the whole, the name of the whole for that of a part,
+or the using of a definite number for an indefinite, is called,
+in rhetoric, <i>synecdoche</i>. "The bay was covered with <i>sails</i>";
+i. e., with <i>ships</i>. "The man was old, careworn, and gray";
+i. e., literally, <i>his hair</i>, not the man, was gray. "<i>Nine
+tenths</i> of every man's happiness depends on the reception
+he meets with in the world." "He had seen seventy <i>winters</i>."
+"Thus spoke the <i>tempter</i>": here the part of the
+character is named that suits the occasion.</p>
+
+<p>"His roof was at the service of the outcast; the unfortunate
+ever found a welcome at his threshold."</p>
+
+<p><b>Take.</b> I copy from the "London Queen": "The
+verb <i>to take</i> is open to being considered a vulgar verb when
+used in reference to dinner, tea, or to refreshments of any<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[Pg 196]</a></span>
+kind. 'Will you <i>take</i>' is not considered <i>comme il faut</i>;
+the verb in favor for the offering of civilities being <i>to have</i>."
+According to "The Queen," then, we must say, "Will you
+<i>have</i> some dinner, tea, coffee, wine, fish, beef, salad," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Taste_of" id="Taste_of"></a>Taste of.</b> The redundant <i>of</i>, often used, in this country,
+in connection with the transitive verbs <i>to taste</i> and <i>to
+smell</i>, is a Yankeeism. We <i>taste</i> or <i>smell</i> a thing, not taste
+<i>of</i> nor smell <i>of</i> a thing. The neuter verbs <i>to taste</i> and <i>to
+smell</i> are often followed by <i>of</i>. "If butter <i>tastes of</i> brass."
+"For age but <i>tastes of</i> pleasures."</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"You shall stifle in your own report,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">and <i>smell of</i> calumny."&mdash;Shakespeare.<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p><b>Tautology.</b> Among the things to be avoided in writing
+is <i>tautology</i>, which is <i>the repeating of the same thought</i>,
+whether in the same or in different words.</p>
+
+<p><b>Tautophony.</b> "A regard for harmony requires us, in
+the progress of a sentence, to avoid repeating a sound by
+employing the same word more than once, or using, in
+contiguous words, similar combinations of letters. This
+fault is known as <i>tautology</i>."&mdash;Dr. G. P. Quackenbos, "Advanced
+Course of Composition and Rhetoric," p. 300. Dr.
+Quackenbos is in error. The repetition of the same <i>sense</i>
+is tautology, and the repetition of the same <i>sound</i>, or, as
+Dr. Quackenbos has it, "the repeating of a sound by employing
+the same word more than once, or by using in
+contiguous words similar combinations of letters," is <i>tautophony</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Teach" id="Teach"></a>Teach.</b> To impart knowledge, to inform, to instruct;
+as, "<i>Teach</i> me how to do it"; "<i>Teach</i> me to swim"; "He
+<i>taught</i> me to write." The uncultured often misuse <i>learn</i>
+for <i>teach</i>. See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Learn">Learn</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Tense.</b> The errors made in the use of the tenses are
+manifold. The one most frequently made by persons of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[Pg 197]</a></span>
+culture&mdash;the one that everybody makes would, perhaps, be
+nearer the fact&mdash;is that of using the <i>imperfect</i> instead of
+the <i>perfect</i> tense; thus, "I never <i>saw</i> it played but once":
+say, <i>have seen</i>. "He was the largest man I ever <i>saw</i>": say,
+<i>have seen</i>. "I never in my life <i>had</i> such trouble": say,
+<i>have had</i>. Another frequent error, the making of which
+is not confined to the unschooled, is that of using two
+verbs in a past tense when only one should be in that time;
+thus, "I intended to <i>have gone</i>": say, <i>to go</i>. "It was my
+intention to <i>have</i> come": say, <i>to come</i>. "I expected to
+<i>have found</i> you here": say, <i>to find</i>. "I was very desirous
+to <i>have gone</i>": say, <i>to go</i>. "He was better than I expected
+to <i>have found</i> him": say, <i>to find</i>.</p>
+
+<p>Among other common errors are the following: "I <i>seen</i>
+him when he <i>done</i> it": say, "I <i>saw</i> him when he <i>did</i> it."
+"I should have <i>went</i> home": say, <i>gone</i>. "If he had <i>went</i>":
+say, <i>gone</i>. "I wish you had <i>went</i>": say, <i>gone</i>. "He has
+<i>went</i> out": say, <i>gone</i>. "I <i>come</i> to town this morning":
+say, <i>came</i>. "He <i>come</i> to me for advice": say, <i>came</i>. "It
+<i>begun</i> very late": say, <i>began</i>. "It had already <i>began</i>":
+say, <i>begun</i>. "The following toasts were <i>drank</i>": say, <i>drunk</i>.
+"His text was that God <i>was</i> love": say, <i>is</i> love. Another
+error is made in such sentences as these: "If I had <i>have</i>
+known": say, <i>had known</i>. "If he had <i>have</i> come as he
+promised": say, <i>had come</i>. "If you had <i>have</i> told me":
+say, <i>had told</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Testimony.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Evidence">Evidence</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Than.</b> <i>Than</i> and <i>as</i> implying comparison have the
+same case after as before them. "He owes more than
+<i>me</i>": read, than <i>I</i>&mdash;i. e., more than <i>I owe</i>. "John is not
+so old as <i>her</i>": read, as <i>she</i>&mdash;i. e., as <i>she is</i>. We should
+say, then, "He is stronger than <i>she</i>," "She is older than
+<i>he</i>," "You are richer than <i>I</i>," etc. But it does not always<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[Pg 198]</a></span>
+happen that the nominative case comes after <i>than</i> or <i>as</i>.
+"I love you more than <i>him</i>," "I give you more than
+<i>him</i>," "I love you as well as <i>him</i>"; that is to say, "I love
+you more than <i>I love him</i>," "I give you more than <i>I give
+him</i>," "I love you as well as <i>I love him</i>." Take away <i>him</i>
+and put <i>he</i> in all these cases, and the grammar is just as
+good, but the meaning is quite different. "I love you as
+well as <i>him</i>," means that I love you as well <i>as I love him</i>;
+but, "I love you as well as <i>he</i>," means that I love you as
+well <i>as he loves you</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Than whom.</b> Cobbett, in his "Grammar of the English
+Language," says: "There is an erroneous way of employing
+<i>whom</i>, which I must point out to your particular
+attention, because it is so often seen in very good writers,
+and because it is very deceiving. 'The Duke of Argyll,
+<i>than whom</i> no man was more hearty in the cause.' 'Cromwell,
+<i>than whom</i> no man was better skilled in artifice.' A
+hundred such phrases might be collected from Hume,
+Blackstone, and even from Drs. Blair and Johnson. Yet
+they are bad grammar. In all such cases, <i>who</i> should be
+made use of: for it is <i>nominative</i> and not objective. 'No
+man was more hearty in the cause <i>than he was</i>'; 'No man
+was better skilled in artifice <i>than he was</i>.'<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> It is a very
+common Parliament-house phrase, and therefore presumably
+<i>corrupt</i>; but it is a Dr. Johnson phrase, too: 'Pope, <i>than
+whom</i> few men had more vanity.' The Doctor did not say,
+'Myself, <i>than whom</i> few men have been found more base,
+having, in my dictionary, described a pensioner as a slave
+of state, and having afterward myself become a pensioner.'</p>
+
+<p>"I differ in this matter from Bishop Lowth, who says<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[Pg 199]</a></span>
+that 'The relative <i>who</i>, having reference to no verb or
+preposition understood, but only to its antecedent, when it
+follows <i>than</i>, is <i>always in the objective case</i>; even though
+the pronoun, if substituted in its place, would be in the
+nominative.' And then he gives an instance from Milton.
+'Beelzebub, <i>than whom</i>, Satan except, none higher sat.' It
+is curious enough that this sentence of the Bishop is, itself,
+ungrammatical! Our poor unfortunate <i>it</i> is so placed as
+to make it a matter of doubt whether the Bishop meant it
+to relate to <i>who</i> or to <i>its antecedent</i>. However, we know
+its meaning; but, though he says that <i>who</i>, when it follows
+<i>than</i>, is always in the objective case, he gives us no reason
+for this departure from a clear general principle; unless
+we are to regard as a reason the example of Milton, who
+has committed many hundreds, if not thousands, of grammatical
+errors, many of which the Bishop himself has
+pointed out. There is a sort of side-wind attempt at
+reason in the words, 'having reference to no <i>verb</i> or <i>preposition</i>
+understood.' I do not see the <i>reason</i>, even if this
+could be; but it appears to me impossible that a noun or
+pronoun can exist in a grammatical state without having
+reference to some <i>verb</i> or <i>preposition</i>, either expressed or
+understood. What is meant by Milton? 'Than Beelzebub,
+none <i>sat</i> higher, except Satan.' And when, in order
+to avoid the repetition of the word Beelzebub, the relative
+becomes necessary, the full construction must be, 'no devil
+sat higher <i>than who</i> sat, except Satan'; and not, 'no devil
+sat higher <i>than whom</i> sat.'<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> The supposition that there
+can be a noun or pronoun which has reference to <i>no verb</i>
+and <i>no preposition</i>, is certainly a mistake."</p>
+
+<p>Of this, Dr. Fitzedward Hall remarks, in his "Recent
+Exemplifications of False Philology": "That any one<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[Pg 200]</a></span>
+but Cobbett would abide this as English is highly improbable;
+and how the expression&mdash;a quite classical one&mdash;which
+he discards can be justified grammatically, except by
+calling its <i>than</i> a preposition, others may resolve at their
+leisure and pleasure."</p>
+
+<p><b>Thanks.</b> There are many persons who think it in
+questionable taste to use <i>thanks</i> for <i>thank you</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="That" id="That"></a>That.</b> The best writers often appear to grope after a
+separate employment for the several relatives.</p>
+
+<p>"'<span class="smcap">That</span>' <i>is the proper restrictive, explicative, limiting,
+or defining relative</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"'<i>That</i>,' the neuter of the definite article, was early in
+use as a neuter relative. All the other oldest relatives
+gradually dropt away, and 'that' came to be applied also
+to plural antecedents, and to masculines and feminines.
+When 'as,' 'which,' and 'who' came forward to share the
+work of 'that,' there seems to have arisen not a little uncertainty
+about the relatives, and we find curious double forms:
+'whom that,' 'which that,' 'which as,' etc. Gower has,
+'Venus <i>whose</i> priest <i>that</i> I am'; Chaucer writes&mdash;'This
+Abbot <i>which that</i> was an holy man,' 'his love <i>the which that</i>
+he oweth.' By the Elizabethan period, these double forms
+have disappeared, and all the relatives are used singly without
+hesitation. From then till now, 'that' has been struggling
+with 'who' and 'which' to regain superior favor,
+with varying success. 'Who' is used for persons, 'which'
+for things, in both numbers; so is 'that'; and the only
+opportunity of a special application of 'that' lies in the
+important distinction between co&ouml;rdination and restriction.
+Now, as 'who' and 'which' are most commonly preferred
+for co&ouml;rdination, it would be a clear gain to confine them
+to this sense, and to reserve 'that' for the restrictive application
+alone. This arrangement, then, would <i>fall in with</i><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[Pg 201]</a></span>
+<i>the most general use of 'that,' especially beyond the limits of
+formal composition</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"The use of 'that' solely as restrictive, with 'who' and
+'which' solely as co&ouml;rdinating, <i>also avoids ambiguities</i> that
+often attend the indiscriminate use of 'who' and 'which'
+for co&ouml;rdinate and for restrictive clauses. Thus, when we
+say, 'his conduct surprised his English friends, <i>who</i> had not
+known him long,' we may mean either that his English
+friends generally were surprised (the relative being, in that
+case, <i>co&ouml;rdinating</i>), or that only a portion of them&mdash;namely,
+the particular portion that had not known him long&mdash;were
+surprised. In this last case the relative is meant to define
+or explain the antecedent, and the doubt would be removed
+by writing thus: 'his English friends <i>that</i> had not known
+him long.' So in the following sentence there is a similar
+ambiguity in the use of 'which': 'the next winter <i>which</i>
+you will spend in town will give you opportunities of making
+a more prudent choice.' This may mean, either 'you
+will spend next winter in town' ('which' being co&ouml;rdinating),
+or 'the next of the winters when you are to live in
+town,' let that come when it may. In the former case,
+'which' is the proper relative; in the latter case, the meaning
+is restrictive or defining, and would be best brought out
+by 'that': 'the next winter <i>that</i> you will spend in town.'</p>
+
+<p>"A further consideration in favor of employing 'that'
+for explicative clauses is the unpleasant effect arising from
+the <i>too frequent repetition of 'who' and 'which.'</i> Grammarians
+often recommend 'that' as a means of varying the
+style; but this end ought to be sought in subservience to
+the still greater end of perspicuity.</p>
+
+<p>"The following examples will serve further to illustrate
+the distinction between <i>that</i>, on the one hand, and <i>who</i> and
+<i>which</i>, on the other:<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[Pg 202]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>"'In general, Mr. Burchell was fondest of the company
+of children, <i>whom</i> he used to call harmless little men.'
+'Whom' is here idiomatically used, being the equivalent of
+'<i>and them</i> he used to call,' etc.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'Bacon at last, a mighty man, arose,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Whom</i> a wise king and nation chose<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Lord Chancellor of both their laws.'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>Here, also, 'whom' is equal to 'and him.'</p>
+
+<p>"In the following instance the relative is restrictive or
+defining, and 'that' would be preferable: 'the conclusion
+of the "Iliad" is like the exit of a great man out of company
+<i>whom</i> he has entertained magnificently.' Compare
+another of Addison's sentences: 'a man of polite imagination
+is let into a great many pleasures <i>that</i> the vulgar are
+not capable of receiving.'</p>
+
+<p>"Both relatives are introduced discriminatingly in this
+passage:&mdash;'She had learned that from Mrs. Wood, <i>who</i> had
+heard it from her husband, <i>who</i> had heard it at the public-house
+from the landlord, <i>who</i> had been let into the secret
+by the boy <i>that</i> carried the beer to some of the prisoners.'</p>
+
+<p>"The following sentences are ambiguous under the
+modern system of using 'who' for both purposes:&mdash;'I met
+the boatman <i>who</i> took me across the ferry.' If 'who' is
+the proper relative here, the meaning is, 'I met the boatman,
+<i>and he</i> took me across,' it being supposed that the boatman
+is known and definite. But if there be several boatmen,
+and I wish to indicate one in particular by the circumstance
+that he had taken me across the ferry, I should use 'that.'
+'The youngest boy <i>who</i> has learned to dance is James.'
+This means either 'the youngest boy is James, <i>and he</i> has
+learned to dance,' or, 'of the boys, the youngest that has
+learned to dance is James.' This last sense is restrictive,
+and 'that' should be used.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[Pg 203]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>"Turning now to 'which,' we may have a series of
+parallel examples. 'The court, <i>which</i> gives currency to
+manners, should be exemplary': here the meaning is 'the
+court should be exemplary, <i>for the court</i> gives currency to
+manners.' 'Which' is the idiomatic relative in this case.
+'The cat, <i>which</i> you despise so much, is a very useful animal.'
+The relative here also is co&ouml;rdinating, and not restrictive.
+If it were intended to point out one individual
+cat specially despised by the person addressed, 'that' would
+convey the sense. 'A theory <i>which</i> does not tend to the
+improvement of practice is utterly unworthy of regard.'
+The meaning is restrictive; 'a theory <i>that</i> does not tend.'
+The following sentence is one of many from Goldsmith that
+give 'that' instead of 'which':&mdash;'Age, <i>that</i> lessens the enjoyment
+of life, increases our desire of living.' Thackeray
+also was fond of this usage. But it is not very common.</p>
+
+<p>"'Their faith tended to make them improvident; but a
+wise instinct taught them that if there was one thing <i>which</i>
+ought not to be left to fate, or to the precepts of a deceased
+prophet, it was the artillery'; a case where 'that' is the
+proper relative.</p>
+
+<p>"'All words, <i>which</i> are signs of complex ideas, furnish
+matter of mistake.' This gives an erroneous impression,
+and should be 'all words <i>that</i> are signs of complex ideas.'</p>
+
+<p>"'In all cases of prescription, the universal practice of
+judges is to direct juries by analogy to the Statute of Limitations,
+to decide against incorporeal rights <i>which</i> have for
+many years been relinquished': say instead, 'incorporeal
+rights <i>that</i> have for many years,' and the sense is clear.</p>
+
+<p>"It is necessary for the proper understanding of 'which'
+to advert to its peculiar function of referring to a whole
+clause as the antecedent: 'William ran along the top of the
+wall, <i>which</i> alarmed his mother very much.' The antecedent<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[Pg 204]</a></span>
+is obviously not the noun 'wall,' but the fact expressed
+by the entire clause&mdash;'William ran,' etc. 'He by no means
+wants sense, <i>which</i> only serves to aggravate his former folly';
+namely, (not 'sense,' but) the circumstance 'that he does
+not want sense.' 'He is neither over-exalted by prosperity,
+nor too much depressed by misfortune; <i>which</i> you must
+allow marks a great mind.' 'We have done many things
+<i>which</i> we ought not to have done,' might mean 'we ought
+not <i>to have done many things</i>'; that is, 'we ought to have
+done few things.' 'That' would give the exact sense intended:
+'we have done many things <i>that</i> we ought not to
+have done.' 'He began to look after his affairs himself,
+<i>which</i> was the way to make them prosper.'</p>
+
+<p>"We must next allude to the cases where the relative is
+governed by a preposition. We can use a preposition before
+'who' and 'which,' but when the relative is 'that,' the
+preposition must be thrown to the end of the clause. Owing
+to an imperfect appreciation of the genius of our language,
+offense was taken at this usage by some of our leading
+writers at the beginning of last century, and to this circumstance
+we must refer the disuse of 'that' as the relative of
+restriction.<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a></p>
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[Pg 205]</a></span></p>
+<p>"'It is curious that the only circumstance connected
+with Scott, and related by Lockhart, <i>of which</i> I was a witness,
+is incorrectly stated in the "Life of Sir Walter."'&mdash;Leslie's
+'Memoirs.' The relative should be restrictive:
+'<i>that</i> I was a witness <i>of</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"'There are many words <i>which</i> are adjectives <i>which</i>
+have nothing to do with the qualities of the nouns <i>to which</i>
+they are put.'&mdash;Cobbett. Better: 'there are many words
+<i>that</i> are adjectives <i>that</i> have nothing to do with the qualities
+of the nouns (<i>that</i>) they are put <i>to</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Other objects, <i>of which</i> we have not occasion to speak
+so frequently, we do not designate by a name of their own.'
+This, if amended, would be: 'other objects <i>that</i> we have
+not occasion to speak <i>of</i> so frequently, we do not,' etc.</p>
+
+<p>"'Sorrow for the dead is the only sorrow <i>from which</i>
+we refuse to be divorced': 'the only sorrow (<i>that</i>) we refuse
+to be divorced <i>from</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Why, there is not a single sentence in this play <i>that</i>
+I do not know the meaning <i>of</i>.'&mdash;Addison.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[Pg 206]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>"'Originality is a thing we constantly clamor <i>for</i>, and
+constantly quarrel <i>with</i>.'&mdash;Carlyle.</p>
+
+<p>"'A spirit more amiable, but less vigorous, than Luther's
+would have shrunk back from the dangers <i>which</i> he braved
+and surmounted': '<i>that</i> he braved'; 'the dangers <i>braved</i>
+and <i>surmounted</i> by him.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Nor is it at all improbable that the emigrants had
+been guilty of those faults <i>from which</i> civilized men <i>who</i>
+settle among an uncivilized people are rarely free.'&mdash;Macaulay.
+'Nor is it at all improbable that the emigrants
+had been guilty of <i>the</i> faults <i>that</i> (<i>such</i> faults <i>as</i>) civilized
+men <i>that settle</i> (<i>settling</i>, or <i>settled</i>) among an uncivilized
+people are rarely free <i>from</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"'Prejudices are notions or opinions <i>which</i> the mind
+entertains without knowing the grounds and reasons of
+them, and <i>which</i> are assented to without examination.'&mdash;Berkeley.
+The 'which' in both cases should be 'that,'
+but the relative may be entirely dispensed with by participial
+conversion: 'prejudices are notions or opinions <i>entertained</i>
+by the mind without knowing the grounds and
+reasons of them, and <i>assented</i> to without examination.'</p>
+
+<p>"The too frequent repetition of 'who' and 'which'
+may be avoided by resolving them into the conjunction and
+personal or other pronoun: 'In such circumstances, the
+utmost that Bosquet could be expected to do was to hold
+his ground, (<i>which</i>) <i>and this</i> he did.'"&mdash;Bain's "Higher
+English Grammar."</p>
+
+<p>This word is sometimes vulgarly used for <i>so</i>; thus,
+"I was <i>that</i> nervous I forgot everything"; "I was <i>that</i>
+frightened I could hardly stand."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="The" id="The"></a>The.</b> Bungling writers sometimes write sheer nonsense,
+or say something very different from what they have
+in their minds, by the simple omission of the definite article;<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[Pg 207]</a></span>
+thus, "The indebtedness of the English tongue to the
+French, Latin and Greek is disclosed in almost every sentence
+framed." According to this, there is such a thing as
+a French, Latin and Greek tongue. Professor Townsend
+meant to say: "The indebtedness of the English tongue to
+the French, <i>the</i> Latin, and <i>the</i> Greek," etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Then.</b> The use of this word as an adjective is condemned
+in very emphatic terms by some of our grammarians,
+and yet this use of it has the sanction of such
+eminent writers as Addison, Johnson, Whately, and Sir J.
+Hawkins. Johnson says, "In his <i>then</i> situation," which,
+if brevity be really the soul of wit, certainly has much
+more soul in it than "In the situation he then occupied."
+However, it is doubtful whether <i>then</i>, as an adjective, will
+ever again find favor with careful writers.</p>
+
+<p><b>Thence.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Whence">Whence</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Think for.</b> We not unfrequently hear a superfluous
+<i>for</i> tacked to a sentence; thus, "You will find that he
+knows more about the affair than you think <i>for</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Those kind.</b> "<i>Those</i> kind of apples <i>are</i> best": read,
+"<i>That</i> kind of apples <i>is</i> best." It is truly remarkable that
+many persons who can justly lay claim to the possession
+of considerable culture use this barbarous combination. It
+would be just as correct to say, "Those flock of geese," or
+"Those drove of cattle," as to say, "Those <i>sort</i> or <i>kind</i> of
+people."</p>
+
+<p><b>Those who.</b> This phrase, applied in a restrictive sense,
+is the modern substitute for the ancient idiom <i>they that</i>, an
+idiom in accordance with the true meaning of <i>that</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"'<i>They that</i> told me the story said'; 'Blessed are
+<i>they that</i> mourn'; 'and Simon and <i>they that</i> were with
+him'; 'I love <i>them that</i> love me, and <i>they that</i> seek me
+early shall find me'; '<i>they that</i> are whole have no need of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[Pg 208]</a></span>
+a physician'; 'how sweet is the rest of <i>them that</i> labor!'
+'I can not tell who to compare them to so fitly as to <i>them
+that</i> pick pockets in the presence of the judge'; '<i>they that</i>
+enter into the state of marriage cast a die of the greatest
+contingency' (J. Taylor).</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'<i>That</i> man hath perfect blessedness<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Who</i> walketh not astray,'<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>if expressed according to the old idiom would be, '<i>the</i> man
+hath&mdash;<i>that</i> walketh.'</p>
+
+<p>"'That' and 'those,' as demonstrative adjectives, refer
+backward, and are not therefore well suited for the forward
+reference implied in making use of 'that which' and 'those
+who' as restrictive relatives. It is also very cumbrous to
+say '<i>that</i> case <i>to which</i> you allude' for 'the case (<i>that</i>) you
+allude <i>to</i>.'</p>
+
+<p>"Take now the following: 'The Duke of Wellington
+is not one of <i>those who</i> interfere with matters <i>over which</i>
+he has no control': 'the Duke is not one of <i>them that</i> interfere
+in matters <i>that</i> they have no control <i>over</i> (matters
+<i>that</i> they can not control, <i>beyond their control</i>, <i>out of their
+province</i>).' If 'them that' sounds too antiquated, we may
+adopt as a convenient compromise, 'the Duke is not one
+of <i>those that</i>'; or, 'the Duke is not one to <i>interfere</i> in matters
+out of his province'; 'the duke is not one <i>that interferes</i>
+with <i>what</i> he has no control <i>over</i>.'"&mdash;Bain.</p>
+
+<p><b>Threadbare Quotations.</b> Among the things that are
+in bad taste in speaking and writing, the use of threadbare
+quotations and expressions is in the front rank. Some of
+these <i>us&eacute;s et cass&eacute;s</i> old-timers are the following: "Their
+name is legion"; "hosts of friends"; "the upper ten";
+"Variety is the spice of life"; "Distance lends enchantment
+to the view"; "A thing of beauty is a joy for ever";
+"the light fantastic toe"; "own the soft impeachment";<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[Pg 209]</a></span>
+"fair women and brave men"; "revelry by night"; "A
+rose by any other name would smell as sweet."</p>
+
+<p><b>To.</b> It is a well-established rule of grammar that <i>to</i>,
+the sign of the infinitive mood, should not be used for the
+infinitive itself: thus, "He has not done it, nor is he likely
+<i>to</i>." It should be, "nor is he likely <i>to do it</i>."</p>
+
+<p>We often find <i>to</i>, when the sign of the infinitive, separated
+by an adverb from the verb to which it belongs.
+Professor A. P. Peabody says that no standard English
+writer makes this mistake, and that, so far as he knows, it
+occurs frequently with but one respectable American writer.</p>
+
+<p>Very often <i>to</i> is used instead of <i>at</i>; thus, "I have been
+<i>to</i> the theatre, <i>to</i> church, <i>to</i> my uncle's, <i>to</i> a concert," and so
+on. In all these cases, the preposition to use is clearly <i>at</i>,
+and not <i>to</i>. See, also, <span class="smcap"><a href="#And">And</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>To the Fore.</b> An old idiomatic phrase, now freely
+used again.</p>
+
+<p><b>Tongue.</b> "Much <i>tongue</i> and much judgment seldom
+go together."&mdash;L'Estrange. See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Language">Language</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Toward.</b> Those who profess to know about such
+things say that etymology furnishes no pretext for the adding
+of <i>s</i> to <i>ward</i> in such words as <i>backward</i>, <i>forward</i>, <i>toward</i>,
+<i>upward</i>, <i>onward</i>, <i>downward</i>, <i>afterward</i>, <i>heavenward</i>,
+<i>earthward</i>, and the like.</p>
+
+<p><b>Transferred Epithet.</b> This is the shifting of a qualifying
+word from its proper subject to some allied subject.
+Examples:</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"The little fields made green<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">By husbandry of many <i>thrifty years</i>."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"He plods his <i>weary way</i>." "Hence to your <i>idle bed</i>!"
+By this figure the diction is rendered more terse and vigorous;
+it is much used in verse. For the sake of conciseness,
+it is used in prose in such phrases as the <i>lunatic asylum</i>,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[Pg 210]</a></span>
+the <i>criminal court</i>, the <i>condemned cell</i>, the <i>blind asylum</i>,
+the <i>cholera hospital</i>, the <i>foundling asylum</i>, and the like.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"Still in harmonious intercourse they lived<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">The rural day, and talked the flowing heart."<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>"There be some who, with everything to make them
+happy, plod their discontented and melancholy way through
+life, less grateful than the dog that licks the hand that
+feeds it."</p>
+
+<p><b>Transpire.</b> This is one of the most frequently misused
+words in the language. Its primary meaning is to
+evaporate insensibly through the pores, but in this sense it
+is not used; in this sense we use its twin sister <i>per</i>spire.
+<i>Transpire</i> is now properly used in the sense of to escape
+from secrecy, to become known, to leak out; and improperly
+used in the sense of to occur, to happen, to come to
+pass, and to elapse. The word is correctly used thus:
+"You will not let a word concerning the matter <i>transpire</i>";
+"It <i>transpires</i> [leaks out] that S. &amp; B. control the enterprise";
+"Soon after the funeral it <i>transpired</i> [became
+known] that the dead woman was alive"; "It has <i>transpired</i>
+[leaked out] that the movement originated with John
+Blank"; "No report of the proceedings was allowed to
+<i>transpire</i>"; "It has not yet <i>transpired</i> who the candidate
+is to be." The word is incorrectly used thus: "The Mexican
+war <i>transpired</i> in 1847"; "The drill will <i>transpire</i>
+under shelter"; "The accident <i>transpired</i> one day last
+week"; "Years will <i>transpire</i> before it will be finished";
+"More than a century <i>transpired</i> before it was revisited by
+civilized man."</p>
+
+<p><b>Trifling Minuti&aelig;.</b> The meaning of <i>trifles</i> and of <i>minuti&aelig;</i>
+is so nearly the same that no one probably ever uses
+the phrase <i>trifling minuti&aelig;</i> except from thoughtlessness.</p>
+
+<p><b>Trustworthy.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Reliable">Reliable</a></span>.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[Pg 211]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Try.</b> This word is often improperly used for <i>make</i>.
+We <i>make</i> experiments, not <i>try</i> them, which is as incorrect
+as it would be to say, <i>try</i> the <i>attempt</i>, or the <i>trial</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Ugly.</b> In England, this word is restricted to meaning
+ill-favored; with us it is often used&mdash;and not without authority&mdash;in
+the sense of ill-tempered, vicious, unmanageable.</p>
+
+<p><b>Unbeknown.</b> This word is no longer used except by
+the unschooled.</p>
+
+<p><b>Underhanded.</b> This word, though found in the dictionaries,
+is a vulgarism, and as such is to be avoided.
+The proper word is <i>underhand</i>. An <i>underhand</i>, not an
+<i>underhanded</i>, proceeding.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Universal" id="Universal"></a>Universal&mdash;All.</b> "He is <i>universally</i> esteemed by <i>all</i>
+who know him." If he is <i>universally</i> esteemed, he must
+be esteemed by <i>all</i> who know him; and, if he is esteemed
+by <i>all</i> who know him, he must be <i>universally</i> esteemed.</p>
+
+<p><b>Upward of.</b> This phrase is often used, if not improperly,
+at least inelegantly, for <i>more than</i>; thus, "I have
+been here for <i>upward of</i> a year"; "For <i>upward of</i> three
+quarters of a century she has," etc., meaning, for <i>more than</i>
+three quarters of a century.</p>
+
+<p><b>Utter.</b> This verb is often misused for <i>say</i>, <i>express</i>.
+To <i>utter</i> means to <i>speak</i>, to <i>pronounce</i>; and its derivative
+<i>utterance</i> means the act, manner, or power of uttering,
+vocal expression; as, "the utterance of articulate
+sounds." We <i>utter</i> a cry; <i>express</i> a thought or sentiment;
+<i>speak</i> our mind; and, though prayers are <i>said</i>, they may be
+<i>uttered</i> in a certain tone or manner. "Mr. Blank is right
+in all he <i>utters</i>": read, <i>says</i>. "The court <i>uttered</i> a sentiment
+that all will applaud": read, <i>expressed</i> a sentiment.</p>
+
+<p>The primary meaning of the adjective <i>utter</i> is outer,
+on the outside; but it is no longer used in this sense. It is
+now used in the sense of complete, total, perfect, mere,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[Pg 212]</a></span>
+entire; but he who uses it indiscriminately as a synonym
+of these words will frequently utter <i>utter</i> nonsense&mdash;i. e., he
+will utter that which is without the pale of sense. For
+example, we can not say <i>utter</i> concord, but we can say <i>utter</i>
+discord&mdash;i. e., without the pale of concord.</p>
+
+<p><b>Valuable.</b> The following sentence, which recently appeared
+in one of the more fastidious of our morning papers,
+is offered as an example of extreme slipshodness in the use
+of language: "Sea captains are among the most <i>valuable</i>
+contributors to the Park aviary." What the writer probably
+meant to say is, "Sea captains are among those whose
+contributions to the Park aviary are the most valuable."</p>
+
+<p><b>Vast.</b> This word is often met with in forcible-feeble
+diction, where it is used instead of <i>great</i> or <i>large</i> to qualify
+such words as number, majority, multitude, and the like.
+Big words and expletives should be used only where they
+are really needed; where they are not really needed, they
+go wide of the object aimed at. The sportsman that hunts
+small game with buck-shot comes home empty-handed.</p>
+
+<p><b>Veracity.</b> The loss would be a small one if we were
+to lose this word and its derivatives. Truth and its derivatives
+would supply all our needs. In the phrase so often
+heard, "A man of truth and veracity," <i>veracity</i> is entirely
+superfluous, it having precisely the same meaning as truth.
+The phrase, "A big, large man," is equally good diction.</p>
+
+<p><b>Verbiage.</b> An unnecessary profusion of words is called
+<i>verbiage</i>: verbosity, wordiness.</p>
+
+<p>"I thought what I read of it <i>verbiage</i>."&mdash;Johnson.</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes a better name than verbiage for wordiness
+would be <i>emptiness</i>. Witness: "Clearness may be developed
+and cultivated in three ways, (<i>a</i>) By constantly practicing
+in heart and life the thoughts and ways of honesty and
+frankness." The first sentence evidently means, "Clearness<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[Pg 213]</a></span>
+may be <i>attained</i> in three ways"; but what the second
+sentence means&mdash;if it means anything&mdash;is more than I can
+tell. Professor L. T. Townsend, "Art of Speech," vol. i,
+p. 130, adds: "This may be regarded as the surest path to
+greater transparency of style." The transparency of Dr.
+Townsend's style is peculiar. Also, p. 144, we find: "The
+laws and rules<span class="fnanchor">1</span> thus far laid down<span class="fnanchor">2</span> furnish ample foundation
+for<span class="fnanchor">3</span> the general statement that an easy and natural<span class="fnanchor">4</span>
+expression, an exact verbal incarnation of one's thinking,<span class="fnanchor">5</span>
+together with the power of using appropriate figures, and
+of making nice discriminations between approximate synonyms,<span class="fnanchor">6</span>
+each being an important factor in correct style, are
+attained in two ways.<span class="fnanchor">7</span> (1) Through moral<span class="fnanchor">8</span> and mental
+discipline. (2) Through continuous and intimate<span class="fnanchor">9</span> acquaintance
+with such authors as best exemplify those attainments."<span class="fnanchor">10</span></p>
+
+<p>1. Would not <i>laws</i> cover the whole ground? 2. <i>En
+passant</i> I would remark that Dr. Townsend did not make
+these laws, though he so intimates. 3. I suggest the word
+<i>justify</i> in place of these four. 4. What is natural is easy;
+<i>easy</i>, therefore, is superfluous. 5. If this means anything,
+it does not mean more than the adjective <i>clear</i> would express,
+if properly used in the sentence. 6. <i>Approximate</i>
+synonyms!! Who ever heard of any antagonistic or even
+of dissimilar synonyms? 7. The transparency of this sentence
+is not unlike the transparency of corrugated glass.
+8. What has morality to do with correctness? 9. An intimate
+acquaintance would suffice for most people. 10.
+Those attainments! What are they? Dr. Townsend's
+corrugated style makes it hard to tell.</p>
+
+<p>This paragraph is so badly conceived throughout that
+it is well-nigh impossible to make head, middle, or tail of
+it; still, if I am at all successful in guessing what Professor<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[Pg 214]</a></span>
+Townsend wanted to say in it, then&mdash;when shorn of its
+redundancy and high-flown emptiness&mdash;it will read somewhat
+like this: "The laws thus far presented justify the
+general statement that a clear and natural mode of expression&mdash;together
+with that art of using appropriate figures
+and that ability properly to discriminate between synonyms
+which are necessary to correctness&mdash;is attained in
+two ways. (1) By mental discipline. (2) By the study of
+our best authors."</p>
+
+<p>The following sentence is from a leading magazine: "If
+we begin a system of interference, <i>regulating men's gains</i>,
+bolstering here, <i>in order to strengthen this interest</i>, [and] repressing
+<i>elsewhere</i> [there], in order to equalize wealth, we
+shall do <i>an</i> [a] <i>immense</i> deal of mischief, and without bringing
+about a more agreeable condition of things <i>than now</i>
+[we] shall <i>simply</i> discourage enterprise, repress industry,
+and check material growth <i>in all directions</i>." Read without
+the eighteen words in italics and with the four inclosed.</p>
+
+<p>"Nothing disgusts sooner than the empty pomp of language."</p>
+
+<p><b>Vice.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Crime">Crime</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Vicinity" id="Vicinity"></a>Vicinity.</b> This word is sometimes incorrectly used
+without the possessive pronoun; thus, "Washington and
+vicinity," instead of "Washington and <i>its</i> vicinity." The
+primary meaning of <i>vicinity</i> is nearness, proximity. In
+many of the cases in which vicinity is used, <i>neighborhood</i>
+would be the better word, though <i>vicinity</i> is perhaps preferable
+where it is a question of mere locality.</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Vocation" id="Vocation"></a>Vocation&mdash;Avocation.</b> These words are frequently
+confounded. A man's <i>vocation</i> is his profession, his calling,
+his business; and his <i>avocations</i> are the things that
+occupy him incidentally. Mademoiselle Bernhardt's <i>vocation</i>
+is acting; her <i>avocations</i> are painting and sculpture.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[Pg 215]</a></span>
+"The tracing of resemblances among the objects and events
+of the world is a constant <i>avocation</i> of the human mind."</p>
+
+<p><b>Vulgar.</b> By the many, this word is probably more
+frequently used improperly than properly. As a noun, it
+means the common people, the lower orders, the multitude,
+the many; as an adjective, it means coarse, low,
+unrefined, as "the <i>vulgar</i> people." The sense in which
+it is misused is that of immodest, indecent. The wearing,
+for example, of a gown too short at the top may be <i>indecent</i>,
+but is not <i>vulgar</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Was.</b> "He said he had come to the conclusion that
+there <i>was</i> no God." "The greatest of Byron's works <i>was</i>
+his whole work taken together."&mdash;Matthew Arnold. What
+is true at all times should be expressed by using the verb
+in the present tense. The sentences above should read <i>is</i>,
+not <i>was</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Wharf.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Dock">Dock</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>What.</b> "He would not believe but <i>what</i> I did it":
+read, but <i>that</i>. "I do not doubt <i>but what</i> I shall go to
+Boston to-morrow": read, doubt <i>that</i>. We say properly,
+"I have nothing <i>but what</i> you see"; "You have brought
+everything <i>but what</i> I wanted."</p>
+
+<p><b><a name="Whence" id="Whence"></a>Whence.</b> As this adverb means&mdash;unaided&mdash;<i>from</i> what
+place, source, or cause, it is, as Dr. Johnson styled it, "a
+vicious mode of speech" to say <i>from whence</i>, Milton to the
+contrary notwithstanding. Nor is there any more propriety
+in the phrase <i>from thence</i>, as <i>thence</i> means&mdash;unaided&mdash;from
+that place. "<i>Whence</i> do you come?" not "<i>From
+whence</i> do you come?" Likewise, "He went <i>hence</i>," not
+"<i>from hence</i>."</p>
+
+<p><b>Whether.</b> This conjunction is often improperly repeated
+in a sentence; thus, "I have not decided whether
+I shall go to Boston or <i>whether I shall go</i> to Philadelphia."<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[Pg 216]</a></span></p>
+
+<p><b>Which.</b> This pronoun as an <i>interrogative</i> applies to
+<i>persons</i> as well as to <i>things</i>; as a <i>relative</i>, it is now made
+to refer to <i>things only</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"<i>Which</i> is employed in co&ouml;rdinate sentences, where <i>it</i>,
+or <i>they</i>, and a conjunction might answer the purpose; thus,
+'At school I studied geometry, <i>which</i> (and it) I found
+useful afterward.' Here the new clause is something independent
+added to the previous clause, and not limiting
+that clause in any way. So in the adjectival clause; as,
+'He struck the poor dog, <i>which</i> (and it, or although it) had
+never done him harm.' Such instances represent the most
+accurate meaning of <i>which</i>. <i>Who</i> and <i>which</i> might be
+termed the <span class="smcap">co&ouml;rdinating relatives</span>.</p>
+
+<p>"<i>Which</i> is likewise used in <i>restrictive</i> clauses that limit
+or explain the antecedent; as, 'The house <i>which</i> he built
+still remains.' Here the clause introduced by <i>which</i> specifies,
+or points out, the house that is the subject of the
+statement, namely, by the circumstance that a certain person
+built it. As remarked with regard to <i>who</i>, our most
+idiomatic writers prefer <i>that</i> in this particular application,
+and would say, 'The house <i>that</i> he built still remains.'"</p>
+
+<p>"<i>Which</i> sometimes has a special reference attaching to
+it, as the neuter relative: 'C&aelig;sar crossed the Rubicon,
+<i>which</i> was in effect a declaration of war.' The antecedent
+in this instance is not <i>Rubicon</i>, but the entire clause.</p>
+
+<p>"There is a peculiar usage where <i>which</i> may <i>seem</i> to
+be still regularly used in reference to persons, as in 'John
+is a soldier, <i>which</i> I should like to be,' that is, 'And I
+should like <i>to be a soldier</i>.'" See <span class="smcap"><a href="#That">That</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Who.</b> There are few persons, even among the most
+cultivated, who do not make frequent mistakes in the use
+of this pronoun. They say, "<i>Who</i> did you see?" "<i>Who</i>
+did you meet?" "<i>Who</i> did he marry?" "<i>Who</i> did you<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[Pg 217]</a></span>
+hear?" "<i>Who</i> did he know?" "<i>Who</i> are you writing
+to?" "<i>Who</i> are you looking at?" In all these sentences
+the interrogative pronoun is in the objective case, and
+should be used in the objective form, which is <i>whom</i>, and
+not <i>who</i>. To show that these sentences are not correct,
+and are not defensible by supposing any ellipsis whatsoever,
+we have only to put the questions in another form.
+Take the first one, and, instead of "Who did you see?"
+say, "Who saw you?" which, if correct, justifies us in saying,
+"Who knew he," which is the equivalent of "Who did he
+know?" But "Who saw you?" in this instance, is clearly
+not correct, since it says directly the opposite of what is
+intended.</p>
+
+<p><i>Who</i> was little used as a relative till about the sixteenth
+century. Bain says: "In modern use, more especially
+in books, <i>who</i> is frequently employed to introduce a
+clause intended to restrict, define, limit, or explain a noun
+(or its equivalent); as, 'That is the man <i>who</i> spoke to us
+yesterday.'"</p>
+
+<p>"Here the clause introduced by <i>who</i> is necessary to
+define or explain the antecedent <i>the man</i>; without it, we
+do not know who <i>the man</i> is. Such relative clauses are
+typical <i>adjective</i> clauses&mdash;i. e., they have the same effect as
+adjectives in limiting nouns. This may be called the
+<span class="smcap">restrictive</span> use of the relative.</p>
+
+<p>"Now it will be found that the practice of our most
+idiomatic writers and speakers is to prefer <i>that</i> to <i>who</i> in
+this application.</p>
+
+<p>"<i>Who</i> is properly used in such co&ouml;rdinate sentences
+as, 'I met the watchman, <i>who</i> told me there had been a
+fire.' Here the two clauses are distinct and independent;
+in such a case, <i>and he</i> might be substituted for <i>who</i>.</p>
+
+<p>"Another form of the same use is when the second<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[Pg 218]</a></span>
+clause is of the kind termed adverbial, where we may resolve
+<i>who</i> into a personal or demonstrative pronoun and
+conjunction. 'Why should we consult Charles, <i>who</i> (<i>for
+he</i>, <i>seeing that he</i>) knows nothing of the matter?'</p>
+
+<p>"<i>Who</i> may be regarded as a modern objective form,
+side by side with <i>whom</i>. For many good writers and
+speakers say '<i>who</i> are you talking of?' '<i>who</i> does the garden
+belong to?' '<i>who</i> is this for?' '<i>who</i> from?'" etc.</p>
+
+<p>If this be true&mdash;if <i>who may</i> be regarded as a modern
+objective form, side by side with <i>whom</i>&mdash;then, of course,
+such expressions as "<i>Who</i> did you see?" "<i>Who</i> did you
+meet?" "<i>Who</i> did he marry?" "<i>Who</i> were you with?"
+"<i>Who</i> will you give it to?" and the like, are correct. That
+they are used colloquially by well-nigh everybody, no one
+will dispute; but that they are <i>correct</i>, few grammarians will
+concede. See <span class="smcap"><a href="#That">That</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Whole.</b> This word is sometimes most improperly used
+for <i>all</i>; thus, "The <i>whole</i> Germans seem to be saturated
+with the belief that they are really the greatest people on
+earth, and that they would be universally recognized as
+being the greatest, if they were not so exceeding modest."
+"The whole Russians are inspired with the belief that their
+mission is to conquer the world."&mdash;Alison.</p>
+
+<p><b>Wholesome.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Healthy">Healthy</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Whose.</b> Mr. George Washington Moon discountenances
+the use of <i>whose</i> as the possessive of <i>which</i>. He
+says, "The best writers, when speaking of inanimate objects,
+use <i>of which</i> instead of <i>whose</i>." The correctness of
+this statement is doubtful. The truth is, I think, that good
+writers use that form for the possessive case of <i>which</i> that
+in their judgment is, in each particular case, the more
+euphonious, giving the preference, perhaps, to <i>of which</i>.
+On this subject Dr. Campbell says: "The possessive of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[Pg 219]</a></span>
+<i>who</i> is properly <i>whose</i>. The pronoun <i>which</i>, originally indeclinable,
+had no possessive. This was supplied, in the
+common periphrastic manner, by the help of the preposition
+and the article. But, as this could not fail to enfeeble
+the expression, when so much time was given to mere conjunctives,
+all our best authors, both in prose and verse,
+have now come regularly to adopt, in such cases, the possessive
+of <i>who</i>, and thus have substituted one syllable in
+the room of three, as in the example following: 'Philosophy,
+<i>whose</i> end is to instruct us in the knowledge of nature,' for
+'Philosophy, <i>the</i> end <i>of which</i> is to instruct us.' Some
+grammarians remonstrate; but it ought to be remembered
+that use, well established, must give law to grammar, and
+not grammar to use."</p>
+
+<p>Professor Bain says: "<i>Whose</i>, although the possessive
+of <i>who</i>, and practically of <i>which</i>, is yet frequently employed
+for the purpose of restriction: 'We are the more
+likely to guard watchfully against those faults <i>whose</i> deformity
+we have seen fully displayed in others.' This is
+better than 'the deformity <i>of which</i> we have seen.' 'Propositions
+of <i>whose</i> truth we have no certain knowledge.'&mdash;Locke."
+Dr. Fitzedward Hall says that the use of <i>whose</i>
+for <i>of which</i>, where the antecedent is not only irrational
+but inanimate, has had the support of high authority for
+several hundred years.</p>
+
+<p><b>Widow Woman.</b> Since widows are always women,
+why say a widow <i>woman</i>? It would be perfectly correct
+to say a <i>widowed</i> woman.</p>
+
+<p><b>Widowhood.</b> There is good authority for using this
+word in speaking of men as well as of women.</p>
+
+<p><b>Without.</b> This word is often improperly used instead
+of <i>unless</i>; as, "You will never live to my age <i>without</i> you
+keep yourself in breath and exercise"; "I shall not go<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220">[Pg 220]</a></span>
+<i>without</i> my father consents": properly, <i>unless</i> my father
+consents, or, <i>without</i> my father's consent.</p>
+
+<p><b>Worst.</b> We should say <i>at the worst</i>, not <i>at worst</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Wove.</b> The past participle of the verb <i>to weave</i> is
+<i>woven</i>. "Where was this cloth <i>woven</i>?" not <i>wove</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>You are mistaken.</b> See <span class="smcap"><a href="#Mistaken">Mistaken</a></span>.</p>
+
+<p><b>You was.</b> Good usage does, and it is to be hoped
+always will, consider <i>you was</i> a gross vulgarism, certain
+grammarians to the contrary notwithstanding. <i>You</i> is the
+form of the pronoun in the second person plural, and must,
+if we would speak correctly, be used with the corresponding
+form of the verb. The argument that we use <i>you</i> in the
+singular number is so nonsensical that it does not merit a
+moment's consideration. It is a custom we have&mdash;and
+have in common with other peoples&mdash;to speak to one another
+in the second person plural, and that is all there is
+of it. The Germans speak to one another in the <i>third</i> person
+plural. The exact equivalent in German of our <i>How
+are you?</i> is, <i>How are they?</i> Those who would say <i>you was</i>
+should be consistent, and in like manner say <i>you has</i> and
+<i>you does</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Yours, &amp;c.</b> The ignorant and obtuse not unfrequently
+profess themselves at the bottom of their letters "Yours,
+&amp;c." And so forth! forth what? Few vulgarisms are equally
+offensive, and none could be more so. In printing correspondence,
+the newspapers often content themselves with
+this short-hand way of intimating that the writer's name
+was preceded by some one of the familiar forms of ending
+letters; this an occasional dunderhead seems to think is
+sufficient authority for writing himself, <i>Yours, &amp;c.</i></p>
+
+
+<p class="czerop3">THE END.</p>
+
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> If this is true in England, it is not true in America. Nowhere in
+the United States is such "questionable grammar" as this frequently
+heard in cultivated circles.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a> "It may be confidently affirmed that with good speakers, in the
+case of negation, <i>not me</i> is the usual practice."&mdash;Bain. This, I confidently
+affirm, is not true in America.&mdash;A. A.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> Should be, <i>a text-book for his course</i>, and not, <i>for his course a
+text-book</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> Mr. Gould criticises the Dean's <i>diction</i>, not his <i>style</i>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> Better, "to revise it."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> "Is <i>to put them</i> in tabular form."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> Bullions' "Grammar" was published in 1867.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> "L. W. K., CLK., LL. D., EX. SCH., T. C., D. Of this reverend
+gentleman's personality I know nothing. He does not say exactly
+what he means; but what he means is, yet, unmistakable. The extract
+given above is from 'Public Opinion,' January 20, 1866."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> "The analysis, taken for granted in this quotation, of 'are being
+thrown up' into 'are being' and 'thrown up' will be dealt with in
+the sequel, and shown to be untenable."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> "Vol. xlv, p. 504 (1837)."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> "'The Life and Correspondence of the late Robert Southey,'
+vol. i, p. 249."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> "Vol. i, p. 338. 'A student who <i>is being crammed</i>'; 'that verb
+is eternally <i>being declined</i>.'&mdash;'The Doctor,' pp. 38 and 40 (mono-tome
+ed.)."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> "In 'Put Yourself in his Place,' chapter x, he writes: 'She
+basked in the present delight, and looked as if she <i>was being taken</i> to
+heaven by an angel.'"</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> "'Words,' etc., p. 340."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> "Thomas Fuller writes: 'At his arrival, the last stake of the
+Christians was <i>on losing</i>.'&mdash;'The Historie of the Holy Warre,' p. 218
+(ed. 1647)."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> "I express myself in this manner because I distinguish between <i>be</i>
+and <i>exist</i>."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> "Samuel Richardson writes: 'Jenny, who attends me here, has
+more than once hinted to me that Miss Jervis loves to sit up late,
+either reading or <i>being read to</i> by Anne, who, though she reads well,
+is not fond of the task.'&mdash;'Sir Charles Grandison,' vol. iii, p. 46 (ed.
+1754).
+</p><p>
+"The transition is very slight by which we pass from 'sits being
+read to' to 'is being read to.'"</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> "I am here indebted to the last edition of Dr. Worcester's 'Dictionary,'
+preface, p. xxxix."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> "'Words and their Uses,' p. 353."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> "'<i>It is being</i> is simply equal to <i>it is</i>. And, in the supposed corresponding
+Latin phrases, <i>ens factus est</i>, <i>ens &aelig;dificatus est</i> (the obsoleteness
+of <i>ens</i> as a participle being granted), the monstrosity is not in
+the use of <i>ens</i> with <i>factus</i>, but in that of <i>ens</i> with <i>est</i>. The absurdity
+is, in Latin, just what it is in English, the use of <i>is</i> with <i>being</i>, the
+making of the verb <i>to be</i> a complement to itself.'&mdash;<i>Ibid.</i>, pp. 354, 355.
+</p><p>
+"Apparently, Mr. White recognizes no more difference between <i>supplement</i>
+and <i>complement</i> than he recognizes between <i>be</i> and <i>exist</i>.
+See the extract I have made above, from p. 353."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> "'But those things which, <i>being not now doing</i>, or having not yet
+been done, have a natural aptitude to exist hereafter, may be properly
+said to appertain to the future.'&mdash;Harris's 'Hermes,' book I, chap.
+viii (p. 155, foot-note, ed. 1771). For Harris's <i>being not now doing</i>,
+which is to translate <span title="m&ecirc; ginomena">&#956;&#8052; &#947;&#953;&#957;&#8057;&#956;&#949;&#957;&#945;</span>, the modern school, if they pursued
+uniformity with more of fidelity than of taste, would have to put <i>being
+not now being done</i>. There is not much to choose between the two."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a> "'Words and their Uses,' p. 343."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> The possessive construction here is, in my judgment, not imperatively
+demanded. There is certainly no lack of authority for putting
+the three substantives in the accusative. The possessive construction
+seems to me, however, to be preferable.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> "The use of the plural for the singular was established as early
+the beginning of the fourteenth century."&mdash;Morris, p. 118, &sect; 153.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> "Some writers omit the comma in cases where the conjunction is
+used. But, as the conjunction is generally employed in such cases for
+emphasis, commas ought to be used; although, where the words are
+very closely connected, or where they constitute a clause in the midst
+of a long sentence, they may be omitted."&mdash;Bigelow's "Handbook of
+Punctuation."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> "This usage violates one of the fundamental principles of punctuation;
+it indicates, very improperly, that the noun <i>man</i> is more
+closely connected with <i>learned</i> than with the other adjectives. Analogy
+and perspicuity require a comma after <i>learned</i>."&mdash;Quackenbos.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a> Many writers would omit the last two commas in this sentence.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> The commas before and after <i>particularly</i> are hardly necessary.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> The only exception to this rule is the occasional use of the colon
+to separate two short sentences that are closely connected.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> "Dr. Angus on the 'English Tongue,' art. 527."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> "In the following passages, the indicative mood would be more suitable
+than the subjunctive: 'If thou <i>be</i> the Son of God, command
+that these stones be made bread'; 'if thou <i>be</i> the Son of God, come
+down from the cross.' For, although the address was not sincere on the
+part of the speakers, they really meant to make the supposition or to
+grant that he was the Son of God; 'seeing that thou <i>art</i> the Son of
+God.' Likewise in the following: 'Now if Christ <i>be</i> preached, that
+He rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection
+from the dead?' The meaning is, 'Seeing now that Christ
+<i>is</i> preached.' In the continuation, the conditional clauses are of a different
+character, and 'be' is appropriate: 'But if there <i>be</i> no resurrection
+from the dead, then is Christ not risen. And if Christ <i>be</i> not
+risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.' Again,
+'If thou <i>bring</i> thy gift to the altar, and there remember<i>est</i>,' etc. Consistency
+and correctness require 'remember.'"&mdash;Harrison on the "English
+Language," p. 287.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> "So, in German, <i>w&auml;re</i> for <i>w&uuml;rde sein</i>. 'H&auml;tt' ich Schwingen,
+h&auml;tt' ich Fl&uuml;gel, nach den H&uuml;geln <i>z&ouml;g</i>' ich hin,' for '<i>w&uuml;rde</i> ich
+<i>ziehen</i>.'"</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> "So, in German, <i>h&auml;tte</i> occurs for <i>w&uuml;rde haben</i>. 'W&auml;re er da
+gewesen, so <i>h&auml;tten</i> wir ihn gesehen,' for 'so <i>w&uuml;rden</i> wir ihn gesehen
+<i>haben</i>.' <i>H&auml;tten</i> is still conditional, not indicative. In Latin, the
+pluperfect <i>indicative</i> is occasionally used; which is explained as a
+more vivid form."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a> "In <i>principal</i> clauses the inflection of the second person is always
+retained: 'thou had<i>st</i>,' 'thou would<i>st</i>, should<i>st</i>,' etc. In the example,
+the subordinate clause, although subjunctive, shows, 'had<i>st</i>.'
+And this usage is exceedingly common."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> To those who are not quite clear as to what transcendentalism is,
+the following lucid definition will be welcome: "It is the spiritual cognoscence
+of psychological irrefragability connected with concutient
+ademption of incolumnient spirituality and etherealized contention of
+subsultory concretion." Translated by a New York lawyer, it stands
+thus: "Transcendentalism is two holes in a sand-bank: a storm
+washes away the sand-bank without disturbing the holes."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> "Cromwell&mdash;<i>than he</i> no man was more skilled in artifice; or,
+Cromwell&mdash;no man was more skilled in artifice <i>than he</i> (was)."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> "No devil sat higher than <i>he</i> sat, except Satan."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> "Speaking of Dryden, Hallam says, 'His "Essay on Dramatic
+Poesy," published in 1668, was reprinted sixteen years afterward, and
+it is curious to observe the changes which Dryden made in the expression.
+Malone has carefully noted all these; they show both the care
+the author took with his own style, and the change which was gradually
+working in the English language. The Anglicism of terminating the
+sentence with a preposition is rejected. Thus, "I can not think so
+contemptibly of the age I live in," is exchanged for "the age in which
+I live." "A deeper expression of belief than all the actor can persuade
+us to," is altered, "can insinuate into us." And, though the old form
+continued in use long after the time of Dryden, it has of late years been
+reckoned inelegant, and proscribed in all cases, perhaps with an unnecessary
+fastidiousness, to which I have not uniformly deferred, since
+our language is of Teutonic structure, and the rules of Latin and French
+grammar are not always to bind us.'
+</p><p>
+"The following examples, taken from Massinger's 'Grand Duke of
+Florence,' will show what was the usage of the Elizabethan writers:&mdash;
+</p>
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'For I must use the freedom I <i>was born with</i>.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'In that dumb rhetoric <i>which</i> you <i>make use of</i>.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i8">"'&mdash;&mdash; if I had been heir<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of all the globes and sceptres mankind <i>bows to</i>.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i7">"'&mdash;&mdash; the name of friend<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>Which</i> you are pleased to <i>grace me with</i>.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i4">"'&mdash;&mdash; wilfully ignorant in my opinion<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Of what it did <i>invite him to</i>.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"'I look to her as on a princess<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>I dare not be ambitious of</i>.'<br /></span>
+</div><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i7">"'&mdash;&mdash; a duty<br /></span>
+<span class="i0"><i>That I was born with</i>.'"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+</div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+<h2><a name="THE_ORTHOEPIST" id="THE_ORTHOEPIST"></a><big>THE ORTHO&Euml;PIST:</big></h2>
+
+
+<p class="center"><i>A PRONOUNCING MANUAL</i>,<br /><br />
+
+<b>Containing about Three Thousand Five Hundred<br />
+Words, including a Considerable Number of<br />
+the Names of Foreign Authors, Artists, etc.,<br />
+that are often mispronounced.</b></p>
+
+<h2>By ALFRED AYRES.</h2>
+
+<hr class="thin" />
+
+
+<h3>SELECTIONS FROM THE WORK.</h3>
+
+
+
+<ul><li>&#7841;b-d&#333;&acute;m&#7865;n, <i>not</i> &#259;b&acute;d&#7885;-m&#277;n.</li>
+
+<li>&#7841;c-cr&#7795;e&acute;, <i>not</i> -cr&#363;&acute;.<ul>
+<li><small><small>The ortho&euml;pists agree that <i>u</i>, preceded by <i>r</i> in the same syllable,
+generally becomes simply <i>oo</i>, as in <i>rude</i>, <i>rumor</i>, <i>rural</i>, <i>rule</i>,
+<i>ruby</i>.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+
+<li>&#7841;l-l&#335;p&acute;&#7841;-thy; &#7841;l-l&#335;p&acute;&#7841;-th&#301;st.</li>
+
+
+<li>&#258;r&acute;&#7841;-b&#301;c, <i>not</i> &#7840;-r&#257;&acute;b&#301;c.</li>
+
+<li>Asia&mdash;&#257;&acute;sh&#7865;-&#551;, <i>not</i> &#257;&acute;zh&#551;.</li>
+
+<li>ay, <i>or</i> aye (meaning <i>yes</i>)&mdash;&#299;.</li>
+
+<li>aye (meaning <i>always</i>)&mdash;&#257;.</li>
+
+<li>B&#301;s&acute;m&auml;rck, <i>not</i> b&#301;z&acute;-.
+<ul><li><small><small>At the end of a syllable, <i>s</i>, in German, has invariably its sharp,
+hissing sound.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>Cairo&mdash;in Egypt, k&#299;&acute;r&#333;; in the United States, k&#257;&acute;r&#333;.</li>
+
+<li>Courbet&mdash;ko&#804;r&acute;b&#257;&acute;.</li>
+
+<li>d&#277;c&acute;&#7841;de, <i>not</i> d&#7865;-k&#257;d&acute;.</li>
+
+<li>d&#7865;-c&#333;&acute;ro&#365;s.
+<ul><li><small><small>The authority is small, and is becoming less, for saying
+<i>d&#277;c&acute;o-ro&#365;s</i>, which is really as incorrect as it would be to say
+<i>s&#335;n&acute;o-ro&#365;s</i>.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>d&#277;f&acute;&#7883;-c&#301;t, <i>not</i> d&#7865;-f&#301;&ccedil;&acute;it.</li>
+
+<li>d&#7883;s&#817;-d&#257;in&acute;, <i>not</i> dis-.</li>
+
+<li>d&#7883;s&#817;-h&#335;n&acute;or, <i>not</i> dis-.</li>
+
+<li>&#277;c-&#7885;-n&#335;m&acute;&#7883;-c&#7841;l, <i>or</i> &#275;-c&#7885;-n&#335;m&acute;&#7883;-c&#7841;l.
+<ul><li><small><small>The first is the marking of a large majority of the ortho&euml;pists.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>&#7865;-n&#275;r&acute;v&#257;te.
+<ul><li><small><small>The only authority for saying <i>&#277;n&acute;er-v&#257;te</i> is popular usage; all
+the ortho&euml;pists say <i>e-n&#7869;r&acute;v&#257;te</i>.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>&#277;p&acute;&#7885;c&#821;h, <i>not</i> &#275;&acute;p&#335;c&#821;h.
+<ul><li><small><small>The latter is a Websterian pronunciation, which is not even permitted
+in the late editions.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>f&#301;n-&#7841;n-ci&#275;r&acute;.
+<ul><li><small><small>This much-used word is rarely pronounced correctly.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>He&#299;&acute;n&#7865;, <i>not</i> hine.
+<ul><li><small><small>Final <i>e</i> in German is never silent.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>honest&mdash;&#335;n&acute;est, <i>not</i> -&#301;st, <i>nor</i> -&#365;st.
+<ul><li><small><small>&quot;Hon<i>est</i>, hon<i>est</i> Iago,&quot; is preferable to &quot;hon<i>ust</i>, hon<i>ust</i> Iago,&quot;
+some of our accidental Othellos to the contrary notwithstanding.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+<li>&#301;s&#817;&acute;&#7885;-l&#257;te, <i>or</i> &#301;s&acute;&#7885;-late, <i>not</i> &#299;&acute;s&#7885;-l&#257;t.
+<ul><li><small><small>The first marking is Walker's, Worcester's, and Smart's; the second,
+Webster's.</small></small></li></ul></li>
+
+</ul>
+
+
+
+<hr class="thin" />
+
+<p class="center"><b>One vol., 18mo, cloth. Price, $1.00.</b></p>
+
+<hr class="thin" />
+
+<p class="center">New York: D. APPLETON &amp; CO., 1, 3, &amp; 5 Bond Street.</p>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Verbalist, by 
+Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+***** This file should be named 22457-h.htm or 22457-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/2/2/4/5/22457/
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+</pre>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/22457-h/images/001.png b/22457-h/images/001.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c93aeab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-h/images/001.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/f001.png b/22457-page-images/f001.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..321853d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/f001.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/f002.png b/22457-page-images/f002.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d39fecb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/f002.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/f003.png b/22457-page-images/f003.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..50aa6bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/f003.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/f004.png b/22457-page-images/f004.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..95c0ee4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/f004.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/f005.png b/22457-page-images/f005.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..07896c6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/f005.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p007.png b/22457-page-images/p007.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..11ded3e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p007.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p008.png b/22457-page-images/p008.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6770cb8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p008.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p009.png b/22457-page-images/p009.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..910c24d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p009.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p010.png b/22457-page-images/p010.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..663039f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p010.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p011.png b/22457-page-images/p011.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8c3d827
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p011.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p012.png b/22457-page-images/p012.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..aa0cf5e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p012.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p013.png b/22457-page-images/p013.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ff8367b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p013.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p014.png b/22457-page-images/p014.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c95baf1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p014.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p015.png b/22457-page-images/p015.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9495322
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p015.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p016.png b/22457-page-images/p016.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..20b0730
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p016.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p017.png b/22457-page-images/p017.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..204be53
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p017.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p018.png b/22457-page-images/p018.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7ff0ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p018.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p019.png b/22457-page-images/p019.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..85c3728
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p019.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p020.png b/22457-page-images/p020.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f2b5c5c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p020.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p021.png b/22457-page-images/p021.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e3de026
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p021.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p022.png b/22457-page-images/p022.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..98b290d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p022.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p023.png b/22457-page-images/p023.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..823c829
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p023.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p024.png b/22457-page-images/p024.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ee7ffb1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p024.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p025.png b/22457-page-images/p025.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e213f26
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p025.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p026.png b/22457-page-images/p026.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2eede17
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p026.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p027.png b/22457-page-images/p027.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d22e08e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p027.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p028.png b/22457-page-images/p028.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fa63e17
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p028.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p029.png b/22457-page-images/p029.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3fbc531
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p029.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p030.png b/22457-page-images/p030.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..622644e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p030.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p031.png b/22457-page-images/p031.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbb4dea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p031.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p032.png b/22457-page-images/p032.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5169e27
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p032.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p033.png b/22457-page-images/p033.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6a0094e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p033.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p034.png b/22457-page-images/p034.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7d82d23
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p034.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p035.png b/22457-page-images/p035.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e1e2eb1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p035.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p036.png b/22457-page-images/p036.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6234791
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p036.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p037.png b/22457-page-images/p037.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..faaf88c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p037.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p038.png b/22457-page-images/p038.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9e80bed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p038.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p039.png b/22457-page-images/p039.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ec771f3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p039.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p040.png b/22457-page-images/p040.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ba734b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p040.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p041.png b/22457-page-images/p041.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..afd39a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p041.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p042.png b/22457-page-images/p042.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b86ad8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p042.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p043.png b/22457-page-images/p043.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..15269df
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p043.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p044.png b/22457-page-images/p044.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..54d2784
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p044.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p045.png b/22457-page-images/p045.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b0ac2ca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p045.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p046.png b/22457-page-images/p046.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1248de7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p046.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p047.png b/22457-page-images/p047.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..01204bf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p047.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p048.png b/22457-page-images/p048.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7a4cc4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p048.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p049.png b/22457-page-images/p049.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..de1bf77
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p049.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p050.png b/22457-page-images/p050.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf39e45
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p050.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p051.png b/22457-page-images/p051.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..78f1c20
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p051.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p052.png b/22457-page-images/p052.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c6167ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p052.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p053.png b/22457-page-images/p053.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9d39c11
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p053.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p054.png b/22457-page-images/p054.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ef6b9bd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p054.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p055.png b/22457-page-images/p055.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ce5bf05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p055.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p056.png b/22457-page-images/p056.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2b48a91
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p056.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p057.png b/22457-page-images/p057.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5c417be
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p057.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p058.png b/22457-page-images/p058.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..193ac7d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p058.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p059.png b/22457-page-images/p059.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..01b58ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p059.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p060.png b/22457-page-images/p060.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ec26ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p060.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p061.png b/22457-page-images/p061.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..96ae5d9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p061.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p062.png b/22457-page-images/p062.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..087338b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p062.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p063.png b/22457-page-images/p063.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..350d116
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p063.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p064.png b/22457-page-images/p064.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..518fce6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p064.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p065.png b/22457-page-images/p065.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b04fee9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p065.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p066.png b/22457-page-images/p066.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0141fa7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p066.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p067.png b/22457-page-images/p067.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5e1a1f5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p067.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p068.png b/22457-page-images/p068.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..50a9316
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p068.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p069.png b/22457-page-images/p069.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..147e672
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p069.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p070.png b/22457-page-images/p070.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..76b9007
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p070.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p071.png b/22457-page-images/p071.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fc1c327
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p071.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p072.png b/22457-page-images/p072.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ab01715
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p072.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p073.png b/22457-page-images/p073.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..67637ae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p073.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p074.png b/22457-page-images/p074.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..950d685
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p074.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p075.png b/22457-page-images/p075.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1b50634
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p075.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p076.png b/22457-page-images/p076.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e5612a1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p076.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p077.png b/22457-page-images/p077.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4fc5e78
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p077.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p078.png b/22457-page-images/p078.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4143bbf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p078.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p079.png b/22457-page-images/p079.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fe90730
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p079.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p080.png b/22457-page-images/p080.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..31308dd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p080.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p081.png b/22457-page-images/p081.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..518dc9a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p081.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p082.png b/22457-page-images/p082.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..80b3f9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p082.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p083.png b/22457-page-images/p083.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f36414a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p083.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p084.png b/22457-page-images/p084.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..884bf81
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p084.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p085.png b/22457-page-images/p085.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..942d24c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p085.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p086.png b/22457-page-images/p086.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7524f8b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p086.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p087.png b/22457-page-images/p087.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1849d2e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p087.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p088.png b/22457-page-images/p088.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cb12b4d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p088.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p089.png b/22457-page-images/p089.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e3a1863
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p089.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p090.png b/22457-page-images/p090.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a66d921
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p090.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p091.png b/22457-page-images/p091.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..832d990
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p091.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p092.png b/22457-page-images/p092.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d77acf6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p092.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p093.png b/22457-page-images/p093.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7aba853
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p093.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p094.png b/22457-page-images/p094.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..67cad20
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p094.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p095.png b/22457-page-images/p095.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..500604b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p095.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p096.png b/22457-page-images/p096.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..beb8381
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p096.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p097.png b/22457-page-images/p097.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..41b5d96
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p097.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p098.png b/22457-page-images/p098.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4deafe1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p098.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p099.png b/22457-page-images/p099.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2af0713
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p099.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p100.png b/22457-page-images/p100.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7d9980b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p100.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p101.png b/22457-page-images/p101.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..77e94ae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p101.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p102.png b/22457-page-images/p102.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3350268
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p102.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p103.png b/22457-page-images/p103.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4672a41
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p103.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p104.png b/22457-page-images/p104.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f8230ab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p104.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p105.png b/22457-page-images/p105.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e50a4c2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p105.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p106.png b/22457-page-images/p106.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4496b39
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p106.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p107.png b/22457-page-images/p107.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a83b51f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p107.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p108.png b/22457-page-images/p108.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1869111
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p108.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p109.png b/22457-page-images/p109.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5cd14c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p109.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p110.png b/22457-page-images/p110.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3baf02a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p110.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p111.png b/22457-page-images/p111.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bff6b74
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p111.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p112.png b/22457-page-images/p112.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..be7002a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p112.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p113.png b/22457-page-images/p113.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6c40347
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p113.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p114.png b/22457-page-images/p114.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..209bc5f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p114.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p115.png b/22457-page-images/p115.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..69995fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p115.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p116.png b/22457-page-images/p116.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cb4ec77
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p116.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p117.png b/22457-page-images/p117.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4cd960c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p117.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p118.png b/22457-page-images/p118.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..79a8fde
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p118.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p119.png b/22457-page-images/p119.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..17ad59a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p119.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p120.png b/22457-page-images/p120.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..29e2b0a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p120.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p121.png b/22457-page-images/p121.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2ca3baf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p121.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p122.png b/22457-page-images/p122.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e0a6e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p122.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p123.png b/22457-page-images/p123.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e5bc9d9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p123.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p124.png b/22457-page-images/p124.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5a8b75c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p124.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p125.png b/22457-page-images/p125.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ce22c61
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p125.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p126.png b/22457-page-images/p126.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c5f3d1d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p126.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p127.png b/22457-page-images/p127.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f4b38ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p127.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p128.png b/22457-page-images/p128.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ebc7de
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p128.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p129.png b/22457-page-images/p129.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6948be4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p129.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p130.png b/22457-page-images/p130.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..615e366
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p130.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p131.png b/22457-page-images/p131.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..28a41be
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p131.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p132.png b/22457-page-images/p132.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4ee8043
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p132.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p133.png b/22457-page-images/p133.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f53fecf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p133.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p134.png b/22457-page-images/p134.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e21a1d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p134.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p135.png b/22457-page-images/p135.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1595b3c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p135.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p136.png b/22457-page-images/p136.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7dba857
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p136.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p137.png b/22457-page-images/p137.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1cd7fed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p137.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p138.png b/22457-page-images/p138.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9d811ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p138.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p139.png b/22457-page-images/p139.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..99a8ee4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p139.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p140.png b/22457-page-images/p140.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..543267e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p140.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p141.png b/22457-page-images/p141.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e91e1b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p141.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p142.png b/22457-page-images/p142.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbc1a72
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p142.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p143.png b/22457-page-images/p143.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dcdea93
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p143.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p144.png b/22457-page-images/p144.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ea52922
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p144.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p145.png b/22457-page-images/p145.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..af83e6e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p145.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p146.png b/22457-page-images/p146.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..63c8a0f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p146.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p147.png b/22457-page-images/p147.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..494c21c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p147.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p148.png b/22457-page-images/p148.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b27c9ab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p148.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p149.png b/22457-page-images/p149.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fb6b726
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p149.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p150.png b/22457-page-images/p150.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a022a7c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p150.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p151.png b/22457-page-images/p151.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..be1e2bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p151.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p152.png b/22457-page-images/p152.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bda1036
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p152.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p153.png b/22457-page-images/p153.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..775f612
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p153.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p154.png b/22457-page-images/p154.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..28b1d0d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p154.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p155.png b/22457-page-images/p155.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2fd7334
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p155.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p156.png b/22457-page-images/p156.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8e1e61c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p156.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p157.png b/22457-page-images/p157.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf0466d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p157.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p158.png b/22457-page-images/p158.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fddbe08
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p158.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p159.png b/22457-page-images/p159.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7f2720
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p159.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p160.png b/22457-page-images/p160.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b2d7aac
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p160.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p161.png b/22457-page-images/p161.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8ceb39e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p161.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p162.png b/22457-page-images/p162.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1db32d3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p162.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p163.png b/22457-page-images/p163.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..caf7102
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p163.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p164.png b/22457-page-images/p164.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1570dba
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p164.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p165.png b/22457-page-images/p165.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..59b4421
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p165.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p166.png b/22457-page-images/p166.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..07fbda7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p166.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p167.png b/22457-page-images/p167.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a6dad8b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p167.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p168.png b/22457-page-images/p168.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a5c0893
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p168.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p169.png b/22457-page-images/p169.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fd447c3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p169.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p170.png b/22457-page-images/p170.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b817638
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p170.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p171.png b/22457-page-images/p171.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6ec8256
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p171.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p172.png b/22457-page-images/p172.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ec3ef25
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p172.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p173.png b/22457-page-images/p173.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7a578cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p173.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p174.png b/22457-page-images/p174.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6360f24
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p174.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p175.png b/22457-page-images/p175.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6346dbe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p175.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p176.png b/22457-page-images/p176.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..251ba9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p176.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p177.png b/22457-page-images/p177.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9a3c722
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p177.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p178.png b/22457-page-images/p178.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a1f1f60
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p178.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p179.png b/22457-page-images/p179.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..39304b3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p179.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p180.png b/22457-page-images/p180.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b1891ec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p180.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p181.png b/22457-page-images/p181.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4c37dcf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p181.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p182.png b/22457-page-images/p182.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..26ce4c5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p182.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p183.png b/22457-page-images/p183.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..04807cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p183.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p184.png b/22457-page-images/p184.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3f14a0a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p184.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p185.png b/22457-page-images/p185.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..88355d5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p185.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p186.png b/22457-page-images/p186.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f6fa6aa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p186.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p187.png b/22457-page-images/p187.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4298d32
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p187.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p188.png b/22457-page-images/p188.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b06c8b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p188.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p189.png b/22457-page-images/p189.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f913036
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p189.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p190.png b/22457-page-images/p190.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f1c2985
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p190.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p191.png b/22457-page-images/p191.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dbe468b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p191.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p192.png b/22457-page-images/p192.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d90d3dd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p192.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p193.png b/22457-page-images/p193.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b4a1a9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p193.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p194.png b/22457-page-images/p194.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..65144a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p194.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p195.png b/22457-page-images/p195.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d8ef882
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p195.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p196.png b/22457-page-images/p196.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8758a87
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p196.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p197.png b/22457-page-images/p197.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..660a8fd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p197.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p198.png b/22457-page-images/p198.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8c249cb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p198.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p199.png b/22457-page-images/p199.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bb4224c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p199.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p200.png b/22457-page-images/p200.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..83c24b8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p200.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p201.png b/22457-page-images/p201.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a36d269
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p201.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p202.png b/22457-page-images/p202.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..46ee47f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p202.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p203.png b/22457-page-images/p203.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8e3fe4a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p203.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p204.png b/22457-page-images/p204.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7a2614
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p204.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p205.png b/22457-page-images/p205.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e440190
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p205.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p206.png b/22457-page-images/p206.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..61e5d8a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p206.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p207.png b/22457-page-images/p207.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..88e90a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p207.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p208.png b/22457-page-images/p208.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e9eb3ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p208.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p209.png b/22457-page-images/p209.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..450d915
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p209.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p210.png b/22457-page-images/p210.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..77ec420
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p210.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p211.png b/22457-page-images/p211.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c182e90
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p211.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p212.png b/22457-page-images/p212.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2c687f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p212.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p213.png b/22457-page-images/p213.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..52f9c9b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p213.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p214.png b/22457-page-images/p214.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1520c72
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p214.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p215.png b/22457-page-images/p215.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9ebed15
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p215.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p216.png b/22457-page-images/p216.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..10daab1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p216.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p217.png b/22457-page-images/p217.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e222e70
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p217.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p218.png b/22457-page-images/p218.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..02e407e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p218.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p219.png b/22457-page-images/p219.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8b9df4b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p219.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p220.png b/22457-page-images/p220.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dfd2ad3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p220.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p221.png b/22457-page-images/p221.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b1212af
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p221.png
diff --git a/22457-page-images/p222.png b/22457-page-images/p222.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d298165
--- /dev/null
+++ b/22457-page-images/p222.png
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d07ecfe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #22457 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/22457)
diff --git a/old/22457-0.txt b/old/22457-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3b181bd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,7635 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Verbalist, by Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: 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.
+
+Author: Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+Release Date: August 30, 2007 [EBook #22457]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                                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.
+
+                          [Illustration]
+
+                             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_.
+
+CHEAP. The dictionaries define this adjective as meaning, bearing a low
+price, or to be had at a low price; but nowadays good usage makes it
+mean that a thing may be had, or has been sold, at a bargain. Hence, in
+order to make sure of being understood, it is better to say
+_low-priced_, when one means low-priced, than to use the word _cheap_.
+What is low-priced, as everybody knows, is often _dear_, and what is
+high-priced is often _cheap_. A diamond necklace might be _cheap_ at
+ten thousand dollars, and a pinchbeck necklace dear at ten dollars.
+
+CHERUBIM. The Hebrew plural of _cherub_. "We are authorized," says Dr.
+Campbell, "both by use and analogy, to say either _cherubs_ and
+_seraphs_, according to the English idiom, or _cherubim_ and _seraphim_,
+according to the Oriental. The former suits better the familiar, the
+latter the solemn, style. As the words _cherubim_ and _seraphim_ are
+plural, the terms _cherubims_ and _seraphims_, as expressing the plural,
+are quite improper."--"Philosophy of Rhetoric."
+
+CITIZEN. This word properly means one who has certain political rights;
+when, therefore, it is used, as it often is, to designate persons who
+may be aliens, it, to say the least, betrays a want of care in the
+selection of words. "Several _citizens_ were injured by the explosion."
+Here some other word--_persons_, for example--should be used.
+
+CLEVER. In this country the word _clever_ is most improperly used in the
+sense of good-natured, well-disposed, good-hearted. It is properly used
+in the sense in which we are wont most inelegantly to use the word
+_smart_, though it is a less colloquial term, and is of wider
+application. In England the phrase "a _clever_ man" is the equivalent of
+the French phrase, "_un homme d'esprit_." The word is properly used in
+the following sentences: "Every work of Archbishop Whately must be an
+object of interest to the admirers of _clever_ reasoning"; "Cobbett's
+letter ... very _clever_, but very mischievous"; "Bonaparte was
+certainly as _clever_ a man as ever lived."
+
+CLIMAX. A clause, a sentence, a paragraph, or any literary composition
+whatsoever, is said to end with a _climax_ when, by an artistic
+arrangement, the more effective is made to follow the less effective in
+regular gradation. Any great departure from the order of ascending
+strength is called an _anti-climax_. Here are some examples of climax:
+
+"Give all diligence; add to your faith, virtue; and to virtue,
+knowledge; and to knowledge, temperance; and to temperance, patience;
+and to patience, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to
+brotherly kindness, charity."
+
+"What is every year of a wise man's life but a criticism on the past!
+Those whose life is the shortest live long enough to laugh at one half
+of it; the boy despises the infant, the man the boy, the sage both, and
+the Christian all."
+
+"What a piece of work is man! how noble in reason! how infinite in
+faculties! in form and moving, how express and admirable! in action, how
+like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god!"
+
+CO. The prefix _co_ should be used only when the word to which it is
+joined begins with a vowel, as in _co-eval_, _co-incident_,
+_co-operate_, etc. _Con_ is used when the word begins with a consonant,
+as in _con-temporary_, _con-junction_, etc. _Co-partner_ is an exception
+to the rule.
+
+COMMENCE. The Britons use or misuse this word in a manner peculiar to
+themselves. They say, for example, "commenced merchant," "commenced
+actor," "commenced politician," and so on. Dr. Hall tells us that
+_commence_ has been employed in the sense of "begin to be," "become,"
+"set up as," by first-class writers, for more than two centuries.
+Careful speakers make small use of _commence_ in any sense; they prefer
+to use its Saxon equivalent, _begin_. See, also, BEGIN.
+
+COMPARISON. When only two objects are compared, the comparative and not
+the superlative degree should be used; thus, "Mary is the _older_ of the
+two"; "John is the _stronger_ of the two"; "Brown is the _richer_ of
+the two, and the _richest_ man in the city"; "Which is the _more_
+desirable, health or wealth?" "Which is the _most_ desirable, health,
+wealth, or genius?"
+
+    "Of two such lessons, why forget
+    The _nobler_ and the _manlier_ one?"
+
+COMPLETED. This word is often incorrectly used for _finished_. That is
+_complete_ which lacks nothing; that is _finished_ which has had all
+done to it that was intended. The builder of a house may _finish_ it and
+yet leave it very _incomplete_.
+
+CONDIGN. It is safe to say that most of those who use this word do not
+know its meaning, which is, suitable, deserved, merited, proper. "His
+endeavors shall not lack _condign_ praise"; i. e., his endeavors shall
+not lack _proper_ or their _merited_ praise. "A villain _condignly_
+punished" is a villain punished _according to his deserts_. To use
+_condign_ in the sense of _severe_ is just as incorrect as it would be
+to use _deserved_ or _merited_ in the sense of _severe_.
+
+CONFIRMED INVALID. This phrase is a convenient mode of expressing the
+idea it conveys, but it is difficult to defend, inasmuch as _confirmed_
+means strengthened, established.
+
+CONSEQUENCE. This word is sometimes used instead of _importance_ or
+_moment_; as, "They were all persons of more or less _consequence_":
+read, "of more or less _importance_." "It is a matter of no
+_consequence_": read, "of no _moment_."
+
+CONSIDER. "This word," says Mr. Richard Grant White, in his "Words and
+Their Uses," "is perverted from its true meaning by most of those who
+use it." _Consider_ means, to meditate, to deliberate, to reflect, to
+revolve in the mind; and yet it is made to do service for _think_,
+_suppose_, and _regard_. Thus: "I _consider_ his course very
+unjustifiable"; "I have always _considered_ it my duty," etc.; "I
+_consider_ him as being the cleverest man of my acquaintance."
+
+CONTEMPTIBLE. This word is sometimes used for _contemptuous_. An old
+story says that a man once said to Dr. Parr, "Sir, I have a
+_contemptible_ opinion of you." "That does not surprise me," returned
+the Doctor; "all your opinions are _contemptible_." What is worthless or
+weak is _contemptible_. Despicable is a word that expresses a still more
+intense degree of the contemptible. A traitor is a _despicable_
+character, while a poltroon is only _contemptible_.
+
+CONTINUALLY. See PERPETUALLY.
+
+CONTINUE ON. The _on_ in this phrase is generally superfluous. "We
+continued on our way" is idiomatic English, and is more euphonious than
+the sentence would be without the particle. The meaning is, "We
+continued to travel _on_ our way." In such sentences, however, as
+"Continue _on_," "He continued to read _on_," "The fever continued _on_
+for some hours," and the like, the _on_ generally serves no purpose.
+
+CONVERSATIONIST. This word is to be preferred to _conversationalist_.
+Mr. Richard Grant White says that _conversationalist_ and
+_agriculturalist_ are inadmissible. On the other hand, Dr. Fitzedward
+Hall says: "As for _conversationist_ and _conversationalist_,
+_agriculturist_ and _agriculturalist_, as all are alike legitimate
+formations, it is for convention to decide which we are to prefer."
+
+CONVOKE--CONVENE. At one time and another there has been some discussion
+with regard to the correct use of these two words. According to Crabb,
+"There is nothing imperative on the part of those that _assemble_, or
+_convene_, and nothing binding on those _assembled_, or _convened_: one
+_assembles_, or _convenes_, by invitation or request; one attends to the
+notice or not, at pleasure. _Convoke_, on the other hand, is _an act of
+authority_; it is the call of one who has the authority to give the
+call; it is heeded by those who feel themselves bound to attend."
+Properly, then, President Arthur _convokes_, not _convenes_, the Senate.
+
+CORPOREAL--CORPORAL. These adjectives, though regarded as synonyms, are
+not used indiscriminately. _Corporal_ is used in reference to the body,
+or animal frame, in its proper sense; _corporeal_, to the animal
+substance in an extended sense--opposed to spiritual. _Corporal_
+punishment; _corporeal_ or _material_ form or substance.
+
+    "That to _corporeal_ substances could add
+    Speed most spiritual."--Milton.
+
+    "What seemed _corporal_
+    Melted as breath into the wind."--Shakespeare.
+
+COUPLE. In its primitive signification, this word does not mean simply
+two, but two that are united by some bond; such as, for example, the tie
+that unites the sexes. It has, however, been so long used to mean two of
+a kind considered together, that in this sense it may be deemed
+permissible, though the substitution of the word _two_ for it would
+often materially improve the diction.
+
+COURAGE. See BRAVERY.
+
+CRIME--VICE--SIN. The confusion that exists in the use of these words is
+due largely to an imperfect understanding of their respective meanings.
+_Crime_ is the violation of the law of a state; hence, as the laws of
+states differ, what is crime in one state may not be crime in another.
+_Vice_ is a course of wrong-doing, and is not modified either by
+country, religion, or condition. As for _sin_, it is very difficult to
+define what it is, as what is sinful in the eyes of one man may not be
+sinful in the eyes of another; what is sinful in the eyes of a Jew may
+not be sinful in the eyes of a Christian; and what is sinful in the eyes
+of a Christian of one country may not be sinful in the eyes of a
+Christian of another country. In the days of slavery, to harbor a
+runaway slave was a _crime_, but it was, in the eyes of most people,
+neither a _vice_ nor a _sin_.
+
+CRUSHED OUT. "The rebellion was finally _crushed out_." Out of what? We
+may _crush_ the life out of a man, or _crush_ a man to death, and
+_crush_, not _crush out_, a rebellion.
+
+CULTURED. This word is said to be a product of Boston--an excellent
+place for anybody or anything to come from. Many persons object to its
+use on the ground that there can be no such participial adjective,
+because there is no verb in use from which to form it. We have in use
+the substantive _culture_, but, though the dictionaries recognize the
+verb _to culture_, we do not use it. Be this objection valid or be it
+not, _cultured_ having but two syllables, while its synonym _cultivated_
+has four, it is likely to find favor with those who employ short words
+when they convey their meaning as well as long ones. Other adjectives of
+this kind are, moneyed, whiskered, slippered, lettered, talented,
+cottaged, lilied, anguished, gifted, and so forth.
+
+CURIOUS. This word is often used instead of _strange_ or _remarkable_.
+"A _curious_ fact": better, "a _remarkable_ fact." "A _curious_
+proceeding": better, "a _strange_ proceeding."
+
+DANGEROUS. "He is pretty sick, but not _dangerous_." Dangerous people
+are generally most dangerous when they are most vigorous. Say, rather,
+"He is sick, but not _in danger_."
+
+DEAREST. "A gentleman once began a letter to his bride thus: 'My
+_dearest_ Maria.' The lady replied: 'My dear John, I beg that you will
+mend either your morals or your grammar. You call me your "_dearest_
+Maria"; am I to understand that you have other Marias'?"--Moon's "Bad
+English."
+
+DECEIVING. "You are _deceiving_ me." Not unfrequently _deceiving_ is
+used when the speaker means _trying to deceive_. It is when we do not
+suspect deception that we are deceived.
+
+DECIMATE. This word, meaning as it properly does to tithe, to take the
+tenth part, is hardly permissible in the sense in which it is used in
+such sentences as, "The regiment held its position, though terribly
+_decimated_ by the enemy's artillery." "Though terribly _tithed_" would
+be equally correct.
+
+DEMEAN. This word is sometimes erroneously used in the sense of _to
+debase_, _to disgrace_, _to humble_. It is a reflexive verb, and its
+true meaning is _to behave_, _to carry_, _to conduct_; as, "He _demeans
+himself_ in a gentlemanly manner," i. e., He _behaves_, or _carries_, or
+_conducts_, himself in a gentlemanly manner.
+
+DENUDE. "The vulture," says Brande, "has some part of the head and
+sometimes of the neck _denuded_ of feathers." Most birds might be
+_denuded_ of the feathers on their heads; not so, however, the vulture,
+for his head is always featherless. A thing can not be _denuded_ of what
+it does not have. Denuding a vulture's head and neck of the feathers is
+like _denuding_ an eel of its scales.
+
+DEPRECATE. Strangely enough, this word is often used in the sense of
+disapprove, censure, condemn; as, "He _deprecates_ the whole
+proceeding"; "Your course, from first to last, is universally
+_deprecated_." But, according to the authorities, the word really means,
+to endeavor to avert by prayer; to pray exemption or deliverance from;
+to beg off; to entreat; to urge against.
+
+"Daniel kneeled upon his knees to _deprecate_ the captivity of his
+people."--Hewyt.
+
+DESPITE. This word is often incorrectly preceded by _in_ and followed by
+_of_; thus, "_In_ despite _of_ all our efforts to detain him, he set
+out"; which should be, "Despite all our efforts," etc., or "_In spite
+of_ all our efforts," etc.
+
+DETERMINED. See BOUND.
+
+DICTION. This is a general term, and is applicable to a single sentence
+or to a connected composition. _Bad diction_ may be due to errors in
+grammar, to a confused disposition of words, or to an improper use of
+words. _Diction_, to be good, requires to be only correct and clear. Of
+excellent examples of bad diction there are very many in a little work
+by Dr. L. T. Townsend, Professor of Sacred Rhetoric in Boston
+University, the first volume of which has lately come under my notice.
+The first ten lines of Dr. Townsend's preface are:
+
+"The leading genius[1] of the People's College at Chautauqua Lake, with
+a [the?] view of providing for his course[2] a text-book, asked for the
+publication of the following laws and principles of speech.[3]
+
+"The author, not seeing sufficient reason[4] for withholding what had
+been of much practical benefit[5] to himself, consented.[6]
+
+"The subject-matter herein contained is an outgrowth from[7] occasional
+instructions[8] given[9] while occupying the chair[10] of Sacred
+Rhetoric."
+
+1. The phrase _leading genius_ is badly chosen. Founder, projector,
+head, organizer, principal, or president--some one of these terms would
+probably have been appropriate. 2. What course? Race-course, course of
+ethics, æsthetics, rhetoric, or what?[3] 3. "The following laws and
+principles of speech." And how came these laws and principles in
+existence? Who made them? We are to infer, it would seem, that Professor
+Townsend made them, and that the world would have had to go without the
+laws that govern language and the principles on which language is formed
+had it pleased Professor Townsend to withhold them. 4. "_Sufficient_
+reason"! Then there were reasons why Professor Townsend ought to have
+kept these good things all to himself; only, they were not _sufficient_.
+5. "Practical benefit"! Is there _any_ such thing as impractical
+benefit? Are not all benefits practical? and, if they are, what purpose
+does the epithet _practical_ serve? 6. Consented to what? It is easy to
+see that the Doctor means _acceded to the request_, but he is a long way
+from saying so. The object writers usually have in view is to convey
+thought, not to set their readers to guessing. 7. _The outgrowth of_
+would be English. 8. "Occasional instructions"! Very vague, and well
+calculated to set the reader to guessing again. 9. Given to whom? 10.
+"_The_ chair." The definite article made it necessary for the writer to
+specify what particular chair of Sacred Rhetoric he meant.
+
+These ten lines are a fair specimen of the diction of the entire volume.
+
+Page 131. "To render a _given ambiguous or_ unintelligible sentence
+transparent, the following suggestions are recommended." The words in
+italics are unnecessary, since what is ambiguous is unintelligible. Then
+who has ever heard of _recommending suggestions_?
+
+Dr. Townsend speaks of _mastering a subject before publishing it_.
+Publishing a subject?
+
+Page 133. "Violations of simplicity, whatever the type, show either that
+_the mind of_ the writer is tainted with affectation, or _else_ that _an
+effort is making_ to conceal _conscious_ poverty of _sentiment_ under
+loftiness of expression." Here is an example of a kind of sentence that
+can be mended in only one way--by rewriting, which might be done thus:
+Violations of simplicity, whatever the type, show either that the writer
+is tainted with affectation, or that he is making an effort to conceal
+poverty of thought under loftiness of expression.
+
+Page 143. "This _quality_ is fully _stated_ and recommended," etc. Who
+has ever heard of _stating a quality_?
+
+On page 145 Dr. Townsend says: "A person can not read a single book of
+poor style without having his own style vitiated." _A book of poor
+style_ is an awkward expression, to say the least. _A single
+badly-written book_ would have been unobjectionable.
+
+Page 160. "The presented picture produces instantly a definite effect."
+Why this unusual disposition of words? Why not say, in accordance with
+the idiom of the language, "The picture presented instantly produces,"
+etc.?
+
+Page 161. "The boy studies ... geography and hates everything connected
+with the sea and land." Why _the_ boy? As there are few things besides
+seals and turtles that are connected with the sea _and_ land, the boy in
+question has few things to hate.
+
+On page 175, Dr. Townsend heads a chapter thus: "_Art_ of acquiring
+_Skill_ in the use of Poetic Speech." This reminds one of the man who
+tried to lift himself over a fence by taking hold of the seat of his
+breeches. "_How_ to acquire skill" is probably what is meant.
+
+On page 232, "Jeremy Taylor is among the best models of long sentences
+which are both clear and logical." Jeremy Taylor is a clear and logical
+long sentence?! True, our learned rhetorician says so, but he doesn't
+mean it. He means, "In Jeremy Taylor we find some of the best examples
+of long sentences which are at once clear and logical."
+
+Since the foregoing was written, the second volume of Professor
+Townsend's "Art of Speech" has been published. In the brief preface to
+this volume we find this characteristic sentence: "The author has felt
+that _clergymen_ more than _those_ of other professions will study this
+treatise." The antecedent of the relative _those_ being _clergymen_, the
+sentence, it will be perceived, says: "The author has felt that
+_clergymen_ more than _clergymen of other professions_ will study this
+treatise." Comment on such "art" as Professor Townsend's is not
+necessary.
+
+I find several noteworthy examples of bad diction in an article in a
+recent number of an Australian magazine. The following are some of them:
+"_Large capital_ always manages to make _itself_ master of the
+situation; it is the small capitalist and the small landholder that
+would suffer," etc. Should be, "_The large capitalist ... himself_,"
+etc. Again: "The small farmer would ... be despoiled ... of the meager
+profit which _strenuous_ labor had conquered from the _reluctant_ soil."
+Not only are the epithets in italics superfluous, and consequently
+weakening in their effect, but idiom does not permit _strenuous_ to be
+used to qualify _labor_: _hard_ labor and _strenuous_ effort. Again:
+"Capital has always the choice _of_ a large field." Should be, "the
+choice _offered by_ a large field." Again: "Should capital be withdrawn,
+tenements would soon prove insufficient." Should be, "_the number of_
+tenements would," etc. Again: "Men of wealth, therefore, would find
+their Fifth Avenue mansions and their summer villas a little more
+burdened with taxes, but with this increase happily balanced by the
+exemption of their bonds and mortgages, their plate and furniture." The
+thought here is so simple that we easily divine it; but, if we look at
+the sentence at all carefully, we find that, though we supply the
+ellipses in the most charitable manner possible, the sentence really
+says: "Men would find their mansions more burdened, but would find them
+with this increased burden happily balanced by the exemption," etc. The
+sentence should have been framed somewhat in this wise: "Men ... would
+find their ... mansions ... more burdened with taxes, but this increase
+in the taxes on their real estate would be happily balanced by the
+exemption from taxation of their bonds, mortgages, plate, and
+furniture." Again: "Men generally ... would be inclined to laugh at the
+idea of intrusting the modern politician with such gigantic
+opportunities for enriching his favorites." We do not _intrust_ one
+another with _opportunities_. _To enrich_ would better the diction.
+Again: "The value of land that has accrued from labor is not ... a just
+object for confiscation." Correctly: "The value of land that has
+_resulted_ from labor is not _justly_ ... an object _of_ confiscation."
+_Accrue_ is properly used more in the sense of _spontaneous growth_.
+Again: "If the state attempts to confiscate this increase by means of
+taxes, either rentals will increase correspondingly, or such a check
+will be put upon _the_ growth _of each place_ and _all the_ enterprises
+_connected with it_ that greater injury would be done than if things had
+been left untouched." We have here, it will be observed, a confusion of
+moods; the sentence begins in the indicative and ends in the
+conditional. The words in italics are worse than superfluous. Rewritten:
+"If the state _should_ attempt to confiscate this increase by means of
+taxes, either rentals _would_ increase correspondingly, or such a check
+_would_ be put upon growth and enterprise that greater injury would,"
+etc. Again: "The _theory_ that land ... is a _boon_ of Nature, to which
+every person has an inalienable right equal to every other person, is
+not new." The words _theory_ and _boon_ are here misused. A _theory_ is
+a system of suppositions. The things man receives from Nature are
+_gifts_, not _boons_: the gift of reason, the gift of speech, etc. The
+sentence should be: "The _declaration_ (or _assertion_) that land ... is
+a _gift_ of Nature, to which every person has an inalienable right equal
+to _that of any_ other person, is not new." Or, more simply and quite as
+forcibly: "... to which one person has an inalienable right equal to
+that of another, is not new." Or, more simply still, and more forcibly:
+"... to which one _man_ has as good a right as another, is not new." By
+substituting the word _man_ for _person_, we have a word of one syllable
+that expresses, in this connection, all that the longer word expresses.
+The fewer the syllables, if the thought be fully expressed, the more
+vigorous the diction. Inalienability being foreign to the discussion,
+the long word _inalienable_ only encumbers the sentence.
+
+"We have thus[1] passed in review[2] the changes and improvements[3]
+which the revision contains[4] in the First Epistle to the Corinthians.
+It has[5] not, indeed,[6] been possible to refer to[7] them all; but so
+many illustrations[8] have been given in[9] the several classes
+described that the reader will have[10] a satisfactory[11] survey of the
+whole subject. Whatever may be said of other portions[12] of the New
+Testament, we think it will be generally admitted that in this Epistle
+the changes have improved the old[13] translation. They are such as[14]
+make the English version[15] conform more completely[16] to the Greek
+original. If this be[17] true, the revisers have done a good work for
+the Church.[18] If it be true[19] with regard to all the New Testament
+books, the work which they have done will remain[20] a blessing to the
+readers of those books for[21] generations to come. But the blessing
+will be only in the clearer presentation of the Divine truth, and,
+therefore, it will be only to the glory of God."
+
+This astonishingly slipshod bit of composition is from the pen of the
+Rev. Dr. Timothy Dwight. If the learned Professor of Divinity in Yale
+College deemed it worth while to give a little thought to manner as well
+as to matter, it is probable that his diction would be very different
+from what it is; and, if he were to give a few minutes to the making of
+verbal corrections in the foregoing paragraph, he would, perhaps, do
+something like this: 1, change _thus_ to _now_; 2, write _some of_ the
+changes; 3, strike out _and improvements_; 4, for _contains changes_
+substitute some other form of expression; 5, instead of _has been_,
+write _was_; 6, strike out _indeed_; 7, instead of _refer to_, write
+_cite_; 8, change _illustrations_ to _examples_; 9, instead of _in_,
+write _of_; 10, instead of _the reader will have_, write _the reader
+will be able to get_; 11, change _satisfactory_ to _tolerable_; 12,
+change _portions_ to _parts_; 13, not talk of the _old_ translation, as
+we have no new one; 14, strike out as superfluous the words _are such
+as_; 15, change _version_ to _text_; 16, substitute _nearly_ for
+_completely_, which does not admit of comparison; 17, substitute the
+indicative for the conditional; 18, end sentence with the word _work_;
+19, introduce _also_ after _be_; 20, instead of _remain_, in the sense
+of _be_, use _be_; 21, introduce _the_ after _for_. As for the last
+sentence, it reminds one of Mendelssohn's "Songs without Words," though
+here we have, instead of a song and no words, words and no song, or
+rather no meaning. As is often true of cant, we have here simply a
+syntactical arrangement of words signifying--nothing.
+
+If Professor Dwight were of those who, in common with the Addisons and
+Macaulays and Newmans, think it worth while to give some attention to
+diction, the thought conveyed in the paragraph under consideration
+would, perhaps, have been expressed somewhat in this wise:
+
+"We have now passed in review some of the changes that, in the revision,
+have been made in the First Epistle to the Corinthians. It was not
+possible to cite them all, but a sufficient number of examples of the
+several classes described have been given to enable the reader to get a
+tolerable survey of the whole subject. Whatever may be said of the other
+parts of the New Testament, we think it will be generally admitted that
+in this Epistle the changes have improved the translation. They make the
+English text conform more nearly to the Greek. This being true, the
+revisers have done a good work; and, if it be also true with regard to
+all the New Testament books, the work which they have done will be a
+blessing to the readers of these books for the generations to come."
+
+DIE WITH. Man and brute die _of_, and not _with_, fevers, consumption,
+the plague, pneumonia, old age, and so on.
+
+DIFFER. Writers differ _from_ one another in opinion with regard to the
+particle we should use with this verb. Some say they differ _with_,
+others that they differ _from_, their neighbors in opinion. The weight
+of authority is on the side of always using _from_, though A may differ
+_with_ C from D in opinion with regard, say, to the size of the fixed
+stars. "I differ, as to this matter, _from_ Bishop Lowth."--Cobbett.
+_Different to_ is heard sometimes instead of _different from_.
+
+DIRECTLY. The Britons have a way of using this word in the sense of
+_when_, _as soon as_. This is quite foreign to its true meaning, which
+is immediately, at once, straightway. They say, for example,
+"_Directly_ he reached the city, he went to his brother's." "Directly he
+[the saint] was dead, the Arabs sent his woolen shirt to the
+sovereign."--"London News." Dr. Hall says of its use in the sense of _as
+soon as_: "But, after all, it may simply anticipate on the English of
+the future."
+
+DIRT. This word means filth or anything that renders foul and unclean,
+and means nothing else. It is often improperly used for earth or loam,
+and sometimes even for sand or gravel. We not unfrequently hear of a
+_dirt_ road when an unpaved road is meant.
+
+DISCOMMODE. This word is rarely used; _incommode_ is accounted the
+better form.
+
+DISREMEMBER. This is a word vulgarly used in the sense of _forget_. It
+is said to be more frequently heard in the South than in the North.
+
+DISTINGUISH. This verb is sometimes improperly used for _discriminate_.
+We _distinguish_ by means of the senses as well as of the understanding;
+we _discriminate_ by means of the understanding only. "It is difficult,
+in some cases, to _distinguish between_," etc.: should be, "It is
+difficult, in some cases, to _discriminate between_," etc. We
+_distinguish_ one thing _from another_, and _discriminate between_ two
+or more things.
+
+DOCK--WHARF. The first of these words is often improperly used for the
+second. Of docks there are several kinds: a _naval dock_ is a place for
+the keeping of naval stores, timber, and materials for ship-building; a
+_dry dock_ is a place where vessels are drawn out of the water for
+repairs; a _wet dock_ is a place where vessels are kept afloat at a
+certain level while they are loaded and unloaded; a _sectional dock_ is
+a contrivance for raising vessels out of the water on a series of
+air-tight boxes. A _dock_, then, is a place into which things are
+received; hence, a man might fall _into_ a dock, but could no more fall
+_off_ a dock than he could fall off a hole. A _wharf_ is a sort of quay
+built by the side of the water. A similar structure built at a right
+angle with the shore is generally called a _pier_. Vessels lie at
+_wharves_ and _piers_, not at _docks_.
+
+DONATE. This word, which is defined as meaning to give, to contribute,
+is looked upon by most champions of good English as being an
+abomination. _Donation_ is also little used by careful writers.
+"_Donate_," says Mr. Gould, "may be dismissed with this remark: so long
+as its place is occupied by _give_, _bestow_, _grant_, _present_, etc.,
+it is not needed; and it should be unceremoniously bowed out, or thrust
+out, of the seat into which it has, temporarily, intruded."
+
+DONE. This past participle is often very inelegantly, if not improperly,
+used thus: "He did not cry out as some have _done_ against it," which
+should read, "He did not cry out as some have against it"; i. e., "as
+some _have cried out_ against it."
+
+"Done is frequently a very great offender against grammar," says
+Cobbett. "_To do_ is the _act of doing_. We see people write, 'I _did_
+not speak yesterday so well as I wished to have _done_.' Now, what is
+meant by the writer? He means to say that he _did_ not speak so well as
+he then _wished_, or was wishing, _to speak_. Therefore, the sentence
+should be, 'I did not speak yesterday so well as I wished _to do_.' That
+is to say, 'so well as I wished to do it'; that is to say, to do or to
+perform _the act of speaking_.
+
+"Take great care not to be too free in your use of the verb _to do_ in
+any of its times or modes. It is a nice little handy word, and, like our
+oppressed _it_, it is made use of very often when the writer is at a
+_loss_ for what to put down. _To do_ is to _act_, and therefore it never
+can, in any of its parts, supply the place of a _neuter_ verb. 'How do
+you do?' Here _do_ refers to the _state_, and is essentially passive or
+neuter. Yet, to employ it for this purpose is very common. Dr. Blair, in
+his 23d Lecture, says: 'It is somewhat unfortunate that this Number of
+the "Spectator" did not _end_, as it might have _done_, with the former
+beautiful period.' That is to say, _done it_. And then we ask, Done
+what? Not the _act of ending_, because in this case there is _no action_
+at all. The verb means _to come to an end_, _to cease_, _not to go any
+further_. This same verb _to end_ is sometimes an active verb: 'I _end_
+my sentence'; _then_ the verb _to do_ may supply its place; as, 'I have
+not ended my sentence so well as I might have _done_'; that is, done
+_it_; that is, done, or performed, the _act of ending_. But the Number
+of the 'Spectator' was no _actor_; it was expected to _perform_ nothing;
+it was, by the Doctor, wished to have _ceased_ to proceed. 'Did not
+_end_ as it very well might have ended....' This would have been
+correct; but the Doctor wished to avoid the _repetition_, and thus he
+fell into bad grammar. 'Mr. Speaker, I do not _feel_ so well satisfied
+as I should have _done_ if the Right Honorable Gentleman had explained
+the matter more fully.' To _feel_ satisfied is--when the satisfaction is
+to arise from conviction produced by fact or reasoning--a senseless
+expression; and to supply its place, when it is, as in this case, a
+neuter verb, by _to do_, is as senseless. Done _what_? Done _the act of
+feeling_! 'I do not _feel_ so well satisfied as I should have _done_, or
+_executed_, or _performed_ the _act of feeling_'! What incomprehensible
+words!"
+
+DON'T. Everybody knows that _don't_ is a contraction of _do not_, and
+that _doesn't_ is a contraction of _does not_; and yet _nearly_
+everybody is guilty of using _don't_ when he should use _doesn't_. "So
+you _don't_ go; John _doesn't_ either, I hear."
+
+DOUBLE GENITIVE. An anecdote of Mr. Lincoln--an anecdote of Mr.
+Lincoln's. We see at a glance that these two phrases are very different
+in meaning. So, also, a portrait of Brown--a portrait of Brown's. No
+precise rule has ever been given to guide us in our choice between these
+two forms of the possessive case. Sometimes it is not material which
+form is employed; where, however, it is material--and it generally
+is--we must consider the thought we wish to express, and rely on our
+discrimination.
+
+DRAMATIZE. See ADAPT.
+
+DRAWING-ROOM. See PARLOR.
+
+DRESS--GOWN. Within the memory of many persons the outer garment worn by
+women was properly called a _gown_ by everybody, instead of being
+improperly called a _dress_, as it now is by nearly everybody.
+
+DRIVE. See RIDE.
+
+DUE--OWING. These two words, though close synonyms, should not be used
+indiscriminately. The mistake usually made is in using _due_ instead of
+_owing_. That is _due_ which ought to be paid as a debt; that is _owing_
+which is to be referred to as a source. "It was _owing_ to his exertions
+that the scheme succeeded." "It was _owing_ to your negligence that the
+accident happened." "A certain respect is _due_ to men's prejudices."
+"This was _owing_ to an indifference to the pleasures of life." "It is
+_due_ to the public that I should tell all I know of the matter."
+
+EACH OTHER. "Their great authors address themselves, not to their
+country, but to _each other_."--Buckle. _Each other_ is properly applied
+to two only; _one another_ must be used when the number considered
+exceeds two. Buckle should have written _one another_ and not _each
+other_, unless he meant to intimate that the Germans had only two great
+authors, which is not probable.
+
+EAT. Grammarians differ very widely with regard to the conjugation of
+this verb; there is no doubt, however, that from every point of view the
+preferable forms for the preterite and past participle are respectively
+_ate_ and _eaten_. To refined ears the other forms smack of vulgarity,
+although supported by good authority. "I _ate_ an apple." "I have
+_eaten_ dinner." "John _ate_ supper with me." "As soon as you have
+_eaten_ breakfast we will set out."
+
+EDITORIAL. The use of this adjective as a substantive is said to be an
+Americanism.
+
+EDUCATION. This is one of the most misused of words. A man may be well
+acquainted with the contents of text-books, and yet be a person of
+little _education_; on the other hand, a man may be a person of good
+education, and yet know little of the contents of text-books. Abraham
+Lincoln and Edwin Forrest knew comparatively little of what is generally
+learned in schools; still they were men of culture, men of _education_.
+A man may have ever so much book-knowledge and still be a boor; but a
+man can not be a person of good education and not be--so far as manner
+is concerned--a gentleman. _Education_, then, is a whole of which
+Instruction and Breeding are the parts. The man or the woman--even in
+this democratic country of ours--who _deserves_ the title of gentleman
+or lady is always a person of education; i. e., he or she has a
+sufficient acquaintance with books and with the usages of social
+intercourse to acquit himself or herself creditably in the society of
+cultivated people. Not moral worth, nor learning, nor wealth, nor all
+three combined, can unaided make a gentleman, for with all three a man
+might be _uneducated_--i. e., coarse, unbred, unschooled in those things
+which alone make men welcome in the society of the refined.
+
+EFFECTUATE. This word, together with _ratiocinate_ and _eventuate_, is
+said to be a great favorite with the rural members of the Arkansas
+legislature.
+
+EFFLUVIUM. The plural of this word is _effluvia_. It is a common error
+with those who have no knowledge of Latin to speak of "a disagreeable
+effluvia," which is as incorrect as it would be to talk about "a
+disagreeable vapors."
+
+EFFORT WITHOUT EFFECT. "Some writers deal in expletives to a degree that
+tires the ear and offends the understanding. With them everything is
+_excessively_, or _immensely_, or _extremely_, or _vastly_, or
+_surprisingly_, or _wonderfully_, or _abundantly_, or the like. The
+notion of such writers is that these words give _strength_ to what they
+are saying. This is a great error. Strength must be found in the
+_thought_, or it will never be found in the _words_. Big-sounding words,
+without thoughts corresponding, are effort without effect."--William
+Cobbett. See FORCIBLE-FEEBLE.
+
+EGOIST. "One of a class of philosophers who professed to be sure of
+nothing but their own existence."--Reid.
+
+EGOTIST. "One who talks much of himself."
+
+"A tribe of _egotists_ for whom I have always had a mortal
+aversion."--"Spectator."
+
+EITHER. This word means, strictly, the _one_ or the _other_ of two.
+Unlike _both_, which means two taken collectively, _either_, like
+_each_, may mean _two considered separately_; but in this sense _each_
+is the better word to use. "Give me _either_ of them" means, Give me the
+one or the other of two. "He has a farm on _either_ side of the river"
+would mean that he has two farms, one on each (or either) side of the
+river. "He has a farm on _both_ sides of the river" would mean that his
+farm lies partly on the one side of the river and partly on the other.
+The use of _either_ in the sense of _each_, though biblical and
+defensible, may be accounted little if any better than an affectation.
+_Neither_ is the negative of _either_. _Either_ is responded to by
+_or_, _neither_ by _nor_; as, "_either_ this _or_ that," "_neither_ this
+_nor_ that." _Either_ and _neither_ should not--strictly--be used in
+relation to more than two objects. But, though both _either_ and
+_neither_ are strictly applicable to two only, they have been for a very
+long time used in relation to more than two by many good writers; and,
+as it is often convenient so to use them, it seems probable that the
+custom will prevail. When more than two things are referred to, _any_
+and _none_ should be used instead of _either_ and _neither_; as, "_any_
+of the three," not, "_either_ of the three"; "_none_ of the four," not,
+"_neither_ of the four."
+
+EITHER ALTERNATIVE. The word _alternative_ means a choice offered
+between two things. An _alternative writ_, for example, offers the
+_alternative_ of choosing between the doing of a specified act or of
+showing cause why it is not done. Such propositions, therefore, as, "You
+are at liberty to choose _either_ alternative," "_Two_ alternatives are
+presented to me," "_Several_ alternatives presented themselves," and the
+like, are not correct English. The word is correctly used thus: "I am
+confronted with a hard _alternative_: I must either denounce a friend or
+betray my trust." We rarely hear the word _alternate_ or any of its
+derivatives correctly pronounced.
+
+ELDER. See OLDER.
+
+ELEGANT. Professor Proctor says: "If you say to an American, 'This is a
+fine morning,' he is likely to reply, 'It is an _elegant_ morning,' or
+perhaps oftener by using simply the word _elegant_. This is not a
+pleasing use of the word." This is not American English, Professor, but
+popinjay English.
+
+ELLIPSIS. The omission of a word or of words necessary to complete the
+grammatical construction, but not necessary to make the meaning clear,
+is called an _ellipsis_. We almost always, whether in speaking or in
+writing, leave out some of the words necessary to the _full_ expression
+of our meaning. For example, in dating a letter to-day, we should write,
+"New York, August 25, 1881," which would be, if fully written out, "I am
+now writing in the city of New York; this is the twenty-fifth day of
+August, and this month is in the one thousand eight hundred and
+eighty-first year of the Christian era." "I am going to Wallack's"
+means, "I am going to Wallack's _theatre_." "I shall spend the summer at
+my aunt's"; i. e., at my aunt's _house_.
+
+By supplying the _ellipses_ we can often discover the errors in a
+sentence, if there are any.
+
+ENJOY BAD HEALTH. As no one has ever been known to _enjoy_ bad health,
+it is better to employ some other form of expression than this. Say, for
+example, he is in _feeble_, or _delicate_, health.
+
+ENTHUSE. This is a word that is occasionally heard in conversation, and
+is sometimes met with in print; but it has not as yet made its
+appearance in the dictionaries. What its ultimate fate will be, of
+course, no one can tell; for the present, however, it is studiously
+shunned by those who are at all careful in the selection of their
+language. It is said to be most used in the South. The writer has never
+seen it anywhere in the North but in the columns of the "Boston
+Congregationalist."
+
+EPIGRAM. "The word _epigram_ signified originally an inscription on a
+monument. It next came to mean a short poem containing some single
+thought pointedly expressed, the subjects being very various--amatory,
+convivial, moral, eulogistic, satirical, humorous, etc. Of the various
+devices for brevity and point employed in such compositions, especially
+in modern times, the most frequent is a play upon words.... In the
+_epigram_ the mind is roused by a conflict or contradiction between the
+form of the language and the meaning really conveyed."--Bain.
+
+Some examples are:
+
+"When you have nothing to say, say it."
+
+"We can not see the wood for the trees"; that is, we can not get a
+general view because we are so engrossed with the details.
+
+"Verbosity is cured by a large vocabulary"; that is, he who commands a
+large vocabulary is able to select words that will give his meaning
+tersely.
+
+"By indignities men come to dignities."
+
+"Some people are too foolish to commit follies."
+
+"He went to his imagination for his facts, and to his memory for his
+tropes."
+
+EPITHET. Many persons use this word who are in error with regard to its
+meaning; they think that to "apply epithets" to a person is to vilify
+and insult him. Not at all. An _epithet_ is a word that expresses a
+quality, good or bad; a term that expresses an attribute. "All
+_adjectives_ are _epithets_, but all _epithets_ are not _adjectives_,"
+says Crabb; "thus, in Virgil's Pater Æneas, the _pater_ is an _epithet_,
+but not an _adjective_." _Epithet_ is the technical term of the
+rhetorician; _adjective_, that of the grammarian.
+
+EQUALLY AS WELL. A redundant form of expression, as any one will see who
+for a moment considers it. _As well_, or _equally well_, expresses quite
+as much as _equally as well_.
+
+EQUANIMITY OF MIND. This phrase is tautological, and expresses no more
+than does _equanimity_ (literally, "equalmindedness") alone; hence, _of
+mind_ is superfluous, and consequently inelegant. _Anxiety of mind_ is a
+scarcely less redundant form of expression. _A capricious mind_ is in
+the same category.
+
+ERRATUM. Plural, _errata_.
+
+ESQUIRE. An esquire was originally the shield-bearer of a knight. It is
+much, and, in the opinion of some, rather absurdly, used in this
+country. Mr. Richard Grant White says on the subject of its use: "I have
+yet to discover what a man means when he addresses a letter to John
+Dash, _Esqr._" He means no more nor less than when he writes _Mr._
+(master). The use of _Esq._ is quite as prevalent in England as in
+America, and has little more meaning there than here. It simply belongs
+to our stock of courteous epithets.
+
+EUPHEMISM. A description which describes in inoffensive language that
+which is of itself offensive, or a figure which uses agreeable
+phraseology when the literal would be offensive, is called a
+_euphemism_.
+
+EVENTUATE. See EFFECTUATE.
+
+EVERLASTINGLY. This adverb is misused in the South in a manner that is
+very apt to excite the risibility of one to whom the peculiar misuse is
+new. The writer recently visited the upper part of New York with a
+distinguished Southern poet and journalist. It was the gentleman's first
+ride over an elevated road. When we were fairly under way, in admiration
+of the rate of speed at which the cars were moving, he exclaimed, "Well,
+they do just _everlastingly_ shoot along, don't they!"
+
+EVERY. This word, which means simply each or all taken separately, is of
+late years frequently made, by slipshod speakers, to do duty for
+perfect, entire, great, or all possible. Thus we have such expressions
+as _every_ pains, _every_ confidence, _every_ praise, _every_ charity,
+and so on. We also have such diction as, "_Every one_ has this in
+common"; meaning, "_All of us_ have this in common."
+
+EVERY-DAY LATIN. _A fortiori_: with stronger reason. _A posteriori_:
+from the effect to the cause. _A priori_: from the cause to the effect.
+_Bona fide_: in good faith; in reality. _Certiorari_: to be made more
+certain. _Ceteris paribus_: other circumstances being equal. _De facto_:
+in fact; in reality. _De jure_: in right; in law. _Ecce homo_: behold
+the man. _Ergo_: therefore. _Et cetera_: and the rest; and so on.
+_Excerpta_: extracts. _Exempli gratia_: by way of example; abbreviated,
+_e. g._, and _ex. gr._ _Ex officio_: by virtue of his office. _Ex
+parte_: on one side; an _ex parte_ statement is a statement on one side
+only. _Ibidem_: in the same place; abbreviated, _ibid._ _Idem_: the
+same. _Id est_: that is; abbreviated, _i. e._ _Imprimis_: in the first
+place. _In statu quo_: in the former state; just as it was. _In statu
+quo ante bellum_: in the same state as before the war. _In transitu_: in
+passing. _Index expurgatorius_: a purifying index. _In extremis_: at the
+point of death. _In memoriam_: in memory. _Ipse dixit_: on his sole
+assertion. _Item_: also. _Labor omnia vincit_: labor overcomes every
+difficulty. _Locus sigilli_: the place of the seal. _Multum in parvo_:
+much in little. _Mutatis mutandis_: after making the necessary changes.
+_Ne plus ultra_: nothing beyond; the utmost point. _Nolens volens_:
+willing or unwilling. _Nota bene_: mark well; take particular notice.
+_Omnes_: all. _O tempora, O mores!_ O the times and the manners! _Otium
+cum dignitate_: ease with dignity. _Otium sine dignitate_: ease without
+dignity. _Particeps criminis_: an accomplice. _Peccavi_: I have sinned.
+_Per se_: by itself. _Prima facie_: on the first view or appearance; at
+first sight. _Pro bono publico_: for the public good. _Quid nunc_: what
+now? _Quid pro quo_: one thing for another; an equivalent. _Quondam_:
+formerly. _Rara avis_: a rare bird; a prodigy. _Resurgam_: I shall rise
+again. _Seriatim_: in order. _Sine die_: without specifying any
+particular day; to an indefinite time. _Sine qua non_: an indispensable
+condition. _Sui generis_: of its own kind. _Vade mecum_: go with me.
+_Verbatim_: word by word. _Versus_: against. _Vale_: fare-well. _Via_:
+by the way of. _Vice_: in the place of. _Vide_: see. _Vi et armis_: by
+main force. _Viva voce_: orally; by word of mouth. _Vox populi, vox
+Dei_: the voice of the people is the voice of God.
+
+EVIDENCE--TESTIMONY. These words, though differing widely in meaning,
+are often used indiscriminately by careless speakers. _Evidence_ is that
+which _tends_ to convince; _testimony_ is that which is _intended_ to
+convince. In a judicial investigation, for example, there might be a
+great deal of _testimony_--a great deal of _testifying_--and very little
+_evidence_; and the _evidence_ might be quite the reverse of the
+_testimony_. See PROOF.
+
+EXAGGERATION. "Weak minds, feeble writers and speakers delight in
+_superlatives_." See EFFORT WITHOUT EFFECT.
+
+EXCEPT. "No one need apply _except_ he is thoroughly familiar with the
+business," should be, "No one need apply _unless_," etc.
+
+EXCESSIVELY. That class of persons who are never content with any form
+of expression that falls short of the superlative, frequently use
+_excessively_ when _exceedingly_ or even the little word _very_ would
+serve their turn better. They say, for example, that the weather is
+_excessively hot_, when they should content themselves with saying
+simply that the weather is _very warm_, or, if the word suits them
+better, _hot_. Intemperance in the use of language is as much to be
+censured as intemperance in anything else; like intemperance in other
+things, its effect is vulgarizing.
+
+EXECUTE. This word means to follow out to the end, to carry into effect,
+to accomplish, to fulfill, to perform; as, to execute an order, to
+execute a purpose. And the dictionaries and almost universal usage say
+that it also means to put to death in conformity with a judicial
+sentence; as, to execute a criminal. Some of our careful speakers,
+however, maintain that the use of the word in this sense is
+indefensible. They say that _laws_ and _sentences_ are executed, but not
+_criminals_, and that their execution only rarely results in the death
+of the persons upon whom they are executed. In the hanging of a
+criminal, it is, then, not the criminal who is executed, but the law and
+the sentence. The criminal is _hanged_.
+
+EXPECT. This verb always has reference to what is to come, never to what
+is past. We can not _expect_ backward. Instead, therefore, of saying, "I
+_expect_, you thought I would come to see you yesterday," we should say,
+"I _suppose_," etc.
+
+EXPERIENCE. "We _experience_ great difficulty in getting him to take his
+medicine." The word _have_ ought to be big enough, in a sentence like
+this, for anybody. "We _experienced_ great hardships." Better, "We
+_suffered_."
+
+EXTEND. This verb, the primary meaning of which is to stretch out, is
+used, especially by lovers of big words, in connections where to give,
+to show, or to offer would be preferable. For example, it is certainly
+better to say, "They _showed_ me every courtesy," than "They _extended_
+every courtesy to me." See EVERY.
+
+FALSE GRAMMAR. Some examples of false grammar will show what every one
+is the better for knowing: that in literature nothing should be taken on
+trust; that errors of grammar even are found where we should least
+expect them. "I do not know whether the imputation _were_ just or
+not."--Emerson. "I proceeded to inquire if the 'extract' ... _were_ a
+veritable quotation."--Emerson. Should be _was_ in both cases. "How
+_sweet_ the moonlight sleeps!"--Townsend, "Art of Speech," vol. i, p.
+114. Should be _sweetly_. "There is no question _but_ these arts ...
+will greatly aid him," etc.--Ibid., p. 130. Should be _that_. "Nearly
+all who have been distinguished in literature or oratory have made ...
+the generous confession that their attainments _have been_ reached
+through patient and laborious industry. They have declared that speaking
+and writing, though once difficult for them, _have become_ well-nigh
+recreations."--Ibid., p. 143. The _have been_ should be _were_, and the
+_have become_ should be _became_. "Many pronominal adverbs are
+correlatives of _each other_."--Harkness's "New Latin Grammar," p. 147.
+Should be _one another_. "Hot and cold springs, boiling springs, and
+quiet springs lie within a few feet of _each other_, but _none of them
+are properly geysers_."--Appletons' "Condensed Cyclopædia," vol. ii, p.
+414. Should be _one another_, and _not one of them is properly a
+geyser_. "How much better for you as seller and the nation as buyer ...
+than to sink ... in cutting _one another's_ throats." Should be _each
+other's_. "A minister, noted for prolixity of style, was once preaching
+before the inmates of a lunatic asylum. In one of his illustrations he
+painted a scene of a man condemned to be hung, but reprieved under the
+gallows." These two sentences are so faulty that the only way to mend
+them is to rewrite them. They are from a work that professes to teach
+the "art of speech." Mended: "A minister, noted for his prolixity, once
+_preached_ before the inmates of a lunatic asylum. By way of
+illustration he painted a scene in which a man, _who had been_ condemned
+to be _hanged_, _was_ reprieved under the gallows."
+
+FEMALE. The terms _male_ and _female_ are not unfrequently used where
+good taste would suggest some other word. For example, we see over the
+doors of school-houses, "Entrance for males," "Entrance for females."
+Now bucks and bulls are males as well as boys and men, and cows and sows
+are females as well as girls and women.
+
+FETCH. See BRING.
+
+FEWER. See LESS.
+
+FINAL COMPLETION. If there were such a thing as a plurality or a series
+of completions, there would, of course, be such a thing as the _final_
+completion; but, as every completion is final, to talk about a _final
+completion_ is as absurd as it would be to talk about a _final
+finality_.
+
+FIRST RATE. There are people who object to this phrase, and yet it is
+well enough when properly placed, as it is, for example, in such a
+sentence as this: "He's a 'first class' fellow, and I like him _first
+rate_; if I didn't, 'you bet' I'd just give him 'hail Columbia' for
+'blowing' the thing all round town like the big fool that he is."
+
+FIRSTLY. George Washington Moon says in defense of _firstly_: "I do not
+object to the occasional use of _first_ as an adverb; but, in sentences
+where it would be followed by _secondly_, _thirdly_, etc., I think that
+the adverbial form is preferable." To this, one of Mr. Moon's critics
+replies: "However desirable it may be to employ the word _firstly_ on
+certain occasions, the fact remains that the employment of it on any
+occasion is not the best usage." Webster inserts _firstly_, but remarks,
+"Improperly used for _first_."
+
+FLEE--FLY. These verbs, though near of kin, are not interchangeable. For
+example, we can not say, "He _flew_ the city," "He _flew_ from his
+enemies," "He _flew_ at the approach of danger," _flew_ being the
+imperfect tense of _to fly_, which is properly used to express the
+action of birds on the wing, of kites, arrows, etc. The imperfect tense
+of _to flee_ is _fled_; hence, "He _fled_ the city," etc.
+
+FORCIBLE-FEEBLE. This is a "novicy" kind of diction in which the
+would-be forcible writer defeats his object by the overuse of
+expletives. Examples: "And yet the _great_ centralization of wealth is
+one of the [great] evils of the day. All that Mr. ---- _utters_ [says]
+upon this point is _forcible and_ just. This centralization is due to
+the _enormous_ reproductive power of capital, to the _immense_ advantage
+that _costly and complicated_ machinery gives to _great_ [large]
+establishments, and to _the marked_ difference of personal force among
+men." The first _great_ is misplaced; the word _utters_ is misused; the
+second _great_ is ill-chosen. The other words in italics only enfeeble
+the sentence. Again: "In countries where _immense_ [large] estates
+exist, a breaking up of these _vast_ demesnes into _many_ minor
+freeholds would no doubt be a [of] _very_ great advantage." Substitute
+_large_ for _immense_, and take out _vast_, _many_, and _very_, and the
+language becomes much more forcible. Again: "The _very_ first effect of
+the ---- taxation plan would be destructive to the interests of this
+_great multitude_ [class]; it would impoverish our _innumerable_
+farmers, _it would_ confiscate the earnings of [our] _industrious_
+tradesmen and artisans, _it would_ [and] paralyze the hopes of
+_struggling_ millions." What a waste of portly expletives is here! With
+them the sentence is high-flown and weak; take them out, and introduce
+the words inclosed in brackets, and it becomes simple and forcible.
+
+FRIEND--ACQUAINTANCE. Some philosopher has said that he who has half a
+dozen friends in the course of his life may esteem himself fortunate;
+and yet, to judge from many people's talk, one would suppose they had
+friends by the score. No man knows whether he has any friends or not
+until he has "their adoption tried"; hence, he who is desirous to call
+things by their right names will, as a rule, use the word _acquaintance_
+instead of _friend_. "Your friend" is a favorite and very objectionable
+way many people, especially young people, have of writing themselves at
+the bottom of their letters. In this way the obscure stripling protests
+himself the FRIEND of the first man in the land, and that, too, when he
+is, perhaps, a comparative stranger and asking a favor.
+
+GALSOME. Here is a good, sonorous Anglo-Saxon word--meaning malignant,
+venomous, churlish--that has fallen into disuse.
+
+GENTLEMAN. Few things are in worse taste than to use the term
+_gentleman_, whether in the singular or plural, to designate the sex.
+"If I was a _gentleman_," says Miss Snooks. "_Gentlemen_ have just as
+much curiosity as _ladies_," says Mrs. Jenkins. "_Gentlemen_ have so
+much more liberty than we _ladies_ have," says Mrs. Parvenue. Now, if
+these ladies were ladies, they would in each of these cases use the word
+_man_ instead of _gentleman_, and _woman_ instead of _lady_; further,
+Miss Snooks would say, "If I _were_." Well-bred men, men of culture and
+refinement--gentlemen, in short--use the terms _lady_ and _gentleman_
+comparatively little, and they are especially careful not to call
+themselves _gentlemen_ when they can avoid it. A gentleman, for example,
+does not say, "I, with some _other_ gentlemen, went," etc.; he is
+careful to leave out the word _other_. The men who use these terms most,
+and especially those who lose no opportunity to proclaim themselves
+_gentlemen_, belong to that class of men who cock their hats on one side
+of their heads, and often wear them when and where gentlemen would
+remove them; who pride themselves on their familiarity with the latest
+slang; who proclaim their independence by showing the least possible
+consideration for others; who laugh long and loud at their own wit; who
+wear a profusion of cheap finery, such as outlandish watch-chains hooked
+in the lowest button-hole of their vests, Brazilian diamonds in their
+shirt-bosoms, and big seal-rings on their little fingers; who use bad
+grammar and interlard their conversation with big oaths. In business
+correspondence Smith is addressed as _Sir_, while Smith & Brown are
+often addressed as _Gentlemen_--or, vulgarly, as _Gents_. Better, much,
+is it to address them as _Sirs_.
+
+Since writing the foregoing, I have met with the following paragraph in
+the London publication, "All the Year Round": "Socially, the term
+'gentleman' has become almost vulgar. It is certainly less employed by
+gentlemen than by inferior persons. The one speaks of 'a man I know,'
+the other of 'a gentleman I know.' In the one case the gentleman is
+taken for granted, in the other it seems to need specification. Again,
+as regards the term 'lady.' It is quite in accordance with the usages of
+society to speak of your acquaintance the duchess as 'a very nice
+person.' People who would say 'very nice lady' are not generally of a
+social class which has much to do with duchesses; and if you speak of
+one of these as a 'person,' you will soon be made to feel your mistake."
+
+GENTS. Of all vulgarisms, this is, perhaps, the most offensive. If we
+say _gents_, why not say _lades_?
+
+GERUND. "'I have work _to do_,' 'there is no more _to say_,' are phrases
+where the verb is not in the common infinitive, but in the form of the
+_gerund_. 'He is the man _to do_ it, or _for doing_ it.' 'A house _to
+let_,' 'the course _to steer_ by,' 'a place _to lie_ in,' 'a thing _to
+be_ done,' 'a city _to take_ refuge in,' 'the means _to do_ ill deeds,'
+are adjective gerunds; they may be expanded into clauses: 'a house that
+the owner lets or will let'; 'the course that we should steer by'; 'a
+thing that should be done'; 'a city wherein one may take refuge'; 'the
+means whereby ill deeds may be done.' When the _to_ ceased in the
+twelfth century to be a distinctive mark of the dative infinitive or
+gerund, _for_ was introduced to make the writer's intention clear. Hence
+the familiar form in 'what went ye out _for to see_?' 'they came _for to
+show_ him the temple.'"--Bain.
+
+GET. In sentences expressing simple possession--as, "I have _got_ a
+book," "What has he _got_ there?" "Have you _got_ any news?" "They have
+_got_ a new house," etc.--_got_ is entirely superfluous, if not, as some
+writers contend, absolutely incorrect. Possession is completely
+expressed by _have_. "Foxes have holes; the birds of the air have
+nests"; not, "Foxes have _got_ holes; the birds of the air have _got_
+nests." Formerly the imperfect tense of this verb was _gat_, which is
+now obsolete, and the perfect participle was _gotten_, which, some
+grammarians say, is growing obsolete. If this be true, there is no good
+reason for it. If we say _eaten_, _written_, _striven_, _forgotten_, why
+not say _gotten_, where this form of the participle is more
+euphonious--as it often is--than _got_?
+
+GOODS. This term, like other terms used in trade, should be restricted
+to the vocabulary of commerce. Messrs. Arnold & Constable, in common
+with the Washington Market huckster, very properly speak of their wares
+as their _goods_; but Mrs. Arnold and Mrs. Constable should, and I doubt
+not do, speak of their gowns as being made of fine or coarse _silk_,
+_cashmere_, _muslin_, or whatever the material may be.
+
+GOULD AGAINST ALFORD. Mr. Edward S. Gould, in his review of Dean
+Alford's "Queen's English," remarks, on page 131 of his "Good English":
+"And now, as to the style[4] of the Dean's book, taken as a whole. He
+must be held responsible for every error in it; because, as has been
+shown, he has had full leisure for its revision.[5] The errors are,
+nevertheless, numerous; and the shortest way to exhibit them is[6] in
+tabular form." In several instances Mr. Gould would not have taken the
+Dean to task had he known English better. The following are a few of Mr.
+Gould's corrections in which he is clearly in the right:
+
+Paragraph
+
+4. "Into _another_ land _than_"; should be, "into a land _other than_."
+
+16. "We do not follow rule in spelling other words, but custom"; should
+be, "we do not follow _rule, but custom_, in spelling," etc.
+
+18. "The distinction is observed in French, but _never appears_ to have
+been made," etc.; read, "_appears never_ to have been made."
+
+61. "_Rather_ to aspirate more _than_ less"; should be, "to aspirate
+more _rather than_ less."
+
+9. "It is said also _only_ to occur three times," etc.; read, "_occur
+only_ three times."
+
+44. "This doubling _only takes place_ in a syllable," etc.; read,
+"_takes place only_."
+
+142. "Which can _only_ be decided when those circumstances are known";
+read, "_can be decided only_ when," etc.
+
+166. "I will _only_ say that it produces," etc.; read, "I will _say
+only_," etc.
+
+170. "It is said that this can _only_ be filled in thus"; read, "can be
+_filled in only_ thus."
+
+368. "I can _only_ deal with the complaint in a general way"; read,
+"_deal with the complaint only_," etc.
+
+86. "_In_ so far as they are idiomatic," etc. What is the use of _in_?
+
+171. "Try the experiment"; "_tried_ the experiment." Read, _make_ and
+_made_.
+
+345. "It is _most_ generally used of that very sect," etc. Why _most_?
+
+362. "The joining together two clauses with a third," etc.; read, "_of
+two_ clauses," etc.
+
+GOWN. See DRESS.
+
+GRADUATED. Students do not _graduate_; they _are_ graduated. Hence most
+writers nowadays say, "I _was_, he _was_, or they _were_ graduated"; and
+ask, "When _were_ you, or _was_ he, graduated?"
+
+GRAMMATICAL ERRORS. "The correctness of the expression _grammatical
+errors_ has been disputed. 'How,' it has been asked, 'can an error be
+grammatical?' How, it may be replied, can we with propriety say,
+_grammatically incorrect_? Yet we can do so.
+
+"No one will question the propriety of saying _grammatically correct_.
+Yet the expression is the acknowledgment of things _grammatically
+INcorrect_. Likewise the phrase _grammatical correctness_ implies the
+existence of _grammatical INcorrectness_. If, then, a sentence is
+_grammatically incorrect_, or, what is the same thing, has _grammatical
+incorrectness_, it includes a GRAMMATICAL ERROR. _Grammatically
+incorrect_ signifies INCORRECT WITH RELATION TO THE RULES OF GRAMMAR.
+_Grammatical errors_ signifies ERRORS WITH RELATION TO THE RULES OF
+GRAMMAR.
+
+"They who ridicule the phrase _grammatical errors_, and substitute the
+phrase _errors in grammar_, make an egregious mistake. Can there, it may
+be asked with some show of reason, be an error in grammar? Why, grammar
+is a science founded in our nature, referable to our ideas of time,
+relation, method; imperfect, doubtless, as to the system by which it is
+represented; but surely we can speak of error in that which is error's
+criterion! All this is hypercritical, but hypercriticism must be met
+with its own weapons.
+
+"Of the two expressions--_a grammatical error_, and _an error in
+grammar_--the former is preferable. If one's judgment can accept
+neither, one must relinquish the belief in the possibility of tersely
+expressing the idea of an offense against grammatical rules. Indeed, it
+would be difficult to express the idea even by circumlocution. Should
+some one say, 'This sentence is, according to the rules of grammar,
+incorrect.' 'What!' the hypercritic may exclaim, 'incorrect! and
+according to the rules of grammar!' 'This sentence, then,' the corrected
+person would reply, 'contains an error in grammar.' 'Nonsense!' the
+hypercritic may shout, 'grammar is a science; you may be wrong in its
+interpretation, but principles are immutable!'
+
+"After this, it need scarcely be added that, grammatically, no one can
+make a mistake, that there can be no grammatical mistake, that there can
+be no bad grammar, and, consequently, no bad English; a very pleasant
+conclusion, which would save us a great amount of trouble if it did not
+lack the insignificant quality of being true."--"Vulgarisms and Other
+Errors of Speech."
+
+GRATUITOUS. There are those who object to the use of this word in the
+sense of unfounded, unwarranted, unreasonable, untrue. Its use in this
+sense, however, has the sanction of abundant authority. "Weak and
+_gratuitous_ conjectures."--Porson. "A _gratuitous_ assumption."--Godwin.
+"The _gratuitous_ theory."--Southey. "A _gratuitous_ invention."--De
+Quincey. "But it is needless to dwell on the improbability of a
+hypothesis which has been shown to be altogether _gratuitous_."--Dr.
+Newman.
+
+GROW. This verb originally meant to increase in size, but has normally
+come to be also used to express a change from one state or condition to
+another; as, to _grow_ dark, to _grow_ weak or strong, to _grow_ faint,
+etc. But it is doubtful whether what is large can properly be said to
+_grow_ small. In this sense, _become_ would seem to be the better word.
+
+GUMS. See RUBBERS.
+
+HAD HAVE. Nothing could be more incorrect than the bringing together of
+these two auxiliary verbs in this manner; and yet we occasionally find
+it in writers of repute. Instead of "Had I known it," "Had you seen it,"
+"Had we been there," we hear, "Had I _have_ known it," "Had you _have_
+seen it," "Had we _have_ been there."
+
+HAD OUGHT. This is a vulgarism of the worst description, yet we hear
+people, who would be highly indignant if any one should intimate that
+they were not ladies and gentlemen, say, "He _had_ ought to go." A
+fitting reply would be, "Yes, I think he better had." _Ought_ says all
+that _had ought_ says.
+
+HAD RATHER. This expression and _had better_ are much used, but, in the
+opinion of many, are indefensible. We hear them in such sentences as, "I
+_had_ rather not do it," "You _had_ better go home." "Now, what tense,"
+it is asked, "is _had do_ and _had go_?" If we transpose the words thus,
+"You _had do_ better (to) go home," it becomes at once apparent, it is
+asserted, that the proper word to use in connection with _rather_ and
+_better_ is not _had_, but _would_; thus, "I _would_ rather not do it,"
+"You _would_ better go home." Examples of this use of _had_ can be found
+in the writings of our best authors. For what Professor Bain has to say
+on this subject in his "Composition Grammar," see SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
+
+HALF. "It might have been expressed in _one_ half the space." We see at
+a glance that _one_ here is superfluous.
+
+HANGED--HUNG. The irregular form, _hung_, of the past participle of the
+verb _to hang_ is most used; but, when the word denotes suspension by
+the neck for the purpose of destroying life, the regular form,
+_hanged_, is always used by careful writers and speakers.
+
+HASTE. See HURRY.
+
+HEADING. See CAPTION.
+
+HEALTHY--WHOLESOME. The first of these two words is often improperly
+used for the second; as, "Onions are a _healthy_ vegetable." A man, if
+he is in good health, is _healthy_; the food he eats, if it is not
+deleterious, is _wholesome_. A _healthy_ ox makes _wholesome_ food. We
+speak of _healthy_ surroundings, a _healthy_ climate, situation,
+employment, and of _wholesome_ food, advice, examples. _Healthful_ is
+generally used in the sense of conducive to health, virtue, morality;
+as, _healthful_ exercise, the _healthful_ spirit of the
+community--meaning that the spirit that prevails in the community is
+conducive to virtue and good morals.
+
+HELPMATE. The dictionaries suggest that this word is a corruption of
+_help_ and _meet_, as we find these words used in Gen. ii, 18, "I will
+make him a help meet for him," and that the proper word is _helpmeet_.
+If, as is possible, the words in Genesis mean, "I will make him a help,
+meet [suitable] for him," then neither _helpmate_ nor _helpmeet_ has any
+_raison d'être_.
+
+HIGHFALUTIN. This is a style of writing often called the freshman style.
+It is much indulged in by very young men, and by a class of older men
+who instinctively try to make up in clatter for what they lack in
+matter. Examples of this kind of writing are abundant in Professor L. T.
+Townsend's "Art of Speech," which, as examples, are all the better for
+not being of that exaggerated description sometimes met within the
+newspapers. Vol. i, p. 131: "Very often adverbs, prepositions, and
+relatives drift so far from their moorings as to lose themselves, or
+make attachments where they do not belong." Again, p. 135: "Every law of
+speech enforces the statement that there is no excuse for such inflated
+and defective style. [Such style!] To speak thus is treason in the
+realms and under the laws of language." Again, p. 175: "Cultivate
+figure-making habitudes. This is done by asking the spiritual import of
+every physical object seen; also by forming the habit of constantly
+metaphorizing. Knock at the door of anything met which interests, and
+ask, 'Who lives here?' The process is to look, then close the eyes, then
+look within." The blundering inanity of this kind of writing is equaled
+only by its bumptious grandiloquence. On p. 137 Dr. Townsend quotes this
+wholesome admonition from Coleridge: "If men would only say what they
+have to say in plain terms, how much more eloquent they would be!" As an
+example of reportorial highfalutin, I submit the following: "The spirit
+of departed day had joined communion with the myriad ghosts of
+centuries, and four full hours fled into eternity before the citizens of
+many parts of the town found out there was a freshet here at all."
+
+HINTS. "Never write about any matter that you do not well understand. If
+you clearly understand all about your matter, you will never want
+thoughts, and thoughts instantly become words.
+
+"One of the greatest of all faults in writing and in speaking is this:
+the using of many words to _say little_. In order to guard yourself
+against this fault, inquire what is the _substance_, or _amount_, of
+what you have said. Take a long speech of some talking Lord and put down
+upon paper what the amount of it is. You will most likely find that the
+_amount_ is very small; but at any rate, when you get it, you will then
+be able to examine it and to tell what it is worth. A very few
+examinations of the sort will so frighten you that you will be for ever
+after upon your guard against _talking a great deal_ and _saying
+little_."--Cobbett.
+
+"Be simple, be unaffected, be honest in your speaking and writing. Never
+use a long word where a short one will do. Call a spade _a spade_, not a
+_well-known oblong instrument of manual husbandry_; let home be _home_,
+not a _residence_; a place a _place_, not a _locality_; and so of the
+rest. Where a short word will do, you always lose by using a long one.
+You lose in clearness; you lose in honest expression of your meaning;
+and, in the estimation of all men who are qualified to judge, you lose
+in reputation for ability. The only true way to shine, even in this
+false world, is to be modest and unassuming. Falsehood may be a very
+thick crust, but, in the course of time, truth will find a place to
+break through. Elegance of language may not be in the power of all of
+us; but simplicity and straightforwardness are. Write much as you would
+speak; speak as you think. If with your inferiors, speak no coarser than
+usual; if with your superiors, no finer. Be what you say; and, within
+the rules of prudence, say what you are."--Dean Alford.
+
+"Go critically over what you have written, and strike out every word,
+phrase, and clause which it is found will leave the sentence neither
+less clear nor less forcible than it is without them."--Swinton.
+
+"With all watchfulness, it is astonishing what slips are made, even by
+good writers, in the employment of an inappropriate word. In Gibbon's
+'Rise and Fall,' the following instance occurs: 'Of nineteen tyrants who
+started up after the reign of Gallienus, there was not one who _enjoyed_
+a life of peace or a natural _death_.' Alison, in his 'History of
+Europe,' writes: 'Two great sins--one of _omission_ and one of
+commission--have been _committed_ by the states of Europe in modern
+times.' And not long since a worthy Scotch minister, at the close of
+the services, intimated his intention of visiting some of his people as
+follows: 'I intend, during this week, to visit in Mr. M----'s district,
+and will on this occasion take the opportunity of _embracing_ all the
+servants in the district.' When worthies such as these offend, who shall
+call the bellman in question as he cries, 'Lost, a silver-handled silk
+lady's parasol'?
+
+"The proper arrangement of words into sentences and paragraphs gives
+clearness and strength. To attain a clear and pithy style, it may be
+necessary to cut down, to rearrange, and to rewrite whole passages of an
+essay. Gibbon wrote his 'Memoirs' six times, and the first chapter of
+his 'History' three times. Beginners are always slow to prune or cast
+away any thought or expression which may have cost labor. They forget
+that brevity is no sign of thoughtlessness. Much consideration is needed
+to compress the details of any subject into small compass. Essences are
+more difficult to prepare, and therefore more valuable, than weak
+solutions. Pliny wrote to one of his friends, 'I have not time to write
+you a short letter, therefore I have written you a long one.' Apparent
+elaborateness is always distasteful and weak. Vividness and strength are
+the product of an easy command of those small trenchant Saxon
+monosyllables which abound in the English language."--"Leisure Hour."
+
+"As a rule, the student will do well to banish for the present all
+thought of ornament or elegance, and to aim only at expressing himself
+plainly and clearly. The best ornament is always that which comes
+unsought. Let him not beat about the bush, but go straight to the point.
+Let him remember that what is written is meant to be read; that time is
+short; and that--other things being equal--the fewer words the
+better.... Repetition is a far less serious fault than obscurity. Young
+writers are often unduly afraid of repeating the same word, and require
+to be reminded that it is always better to use the right word over again
+than to replace it by a wrong one--and a word which is liable to be
+misunderstood is a wrong one. A frank repetition of a word has even
+sometimes a kind of charm--as bearing the stamp of _truth_, the
+foundation of all excellence of style."--Hall.
+
+"A young writer is afraid to be simple; he has no faith in beauty
+unadorned, hence he crowds his sentences with superlatives. In his
+estimation, turgidity passes for eloquence, and simplicity is but
+another name for that which is weak and unmeaning."--George Washington
+Moon.
+
+HONORABLE. See REVEREND.
+
+HOW. "I have heard _how_ in Italy one is beset on all sides by beggars":
+read, "heard _that_." "I have heard _how_ some critics have been
+pacified with claret and a supper, and others laid asleep with soft
+notes of flattery."--Dr. Johnson. The _how_ in this sentence also should
+be _that_. _How_ means the _manner in which_. We may, therefore, say, "I
+have heard _how_ he went about it to circumvent you."
+
+"And it is good judgment alone can dictate _how far_ to proceed in it
+and _when_ to stop." Cobbett comments on this sentence in this wise:
+"Dr. Watts is speaking here of writing. In such a case, an adverb, like
+_how far_, expressive of longitudinal space, introduces a _rhetorical
+figure_; for the plain meaning is, that judgment will dictate _how much
+to write on it_ and not _how far to proceed in it_. The figure, however,
+is very proper and much better than the literal words. But when a figure
+is _begun_ it should be carried on throughout, which is not the case
+here; for the Doctor begins with a figure of longitudinal space and
+ends with a figure of _time_. It should have been, _where_ to stop. Or,
+how _long_ to proceed in it and _when_ to stop. To tell a man _how far_
+he is to go into the Western countries of America, and _when_ he is to
+stop, is a very different thing from telling him _how far_ he is to go
+and _where_ he is to stop. I have dwelt thus on this distinction for the
+purpose of putting you on the watch and guarding you against confounding
+figures. The less you use them the better, till you understand more
+about them."
+
+HUMANITARIANISM. This word, in its original, theological sense, means
+the doctrine that denies the godhead of Jesus Christ, and avers that he
+was possessed of a human nature only; a _humanitarian_, therefore, in
+the theological sense, is one who believes this doctrine. The word and
+its derivatives are, however, nowadays, both in this country and in
+England, most used in a humane, philanthropic sense; thus, "The audience
+enthusiastically endorsed the _humanitarianism_ of his eloquent
+discourse."--Hatton.
+
+HUNG. See HANGED.
+
+HURRY. Though widely different in meaning, both the verb and the noun
+_hurry_ are continually used for _haste_ and _hasten_. _Hurry_ implies
+not only _haste_, but haste with confusion, flurry; while _haste_
+implies only rapidity of action, an eager desire to make progress, and,
+unlike _hurry_, is not incompatible with deliberation and dignity. It is
+often wise to _hasten_ in the affairs of life; but, as it is never wise
+to proceed without forethought and method, it is never wise to _hurry_.
+Sensible people, then, may be often in _haste_, but are never in a
+_hurry_; and we tell others to _make haste_, and not to _hurry up_.
+
+HYPERBOLE. The magnifying of things beyond their natural limits is
+called _hyperbole_. Language that signifies, literally, more than the
+exact truth, more than is really intended to be represented, by which a
+thing is represented greater or less, better or worse than it really is,
+is said to be _hyperbolical_. Hyperbole is exaggeration.
+
+"Our common forms of compliment are almost all of them extravagant
+_hyperboles_."--Blair.
+
+Some examples are the following:
+
+"Rivers of blood and hills of slain."
+
+"They were swifter than eagles; they were stronger than lions."
+
+    "The sky shrunk upward with unusual dread,
+    And trembling Tiber div'd beneath his bed."
+
+    "So frowned the mighty combatants, that hell
+    Grew darker at their frown."
+
+"I saw their chief tall as a rock of ice; his spear the blasted fir; his
+shield the rising moon; he sat on the shore like a cloud of mist on a
+hill."
+
+ICE-CREAM--ICE-WATER. As for ice-cream, there is no such thing, as
+ice-cream would be the product of frozen cream, i. e., cream made from
+ice by melting. What is called ice-cream is cream _iced_; hence,
+properly, _iced_ cream and not _ice_-cream. The product of melted ice is
+_ice_-water, whether it be cold or warm; but water made cold with ice is
+_iced_ water, and not _ice_-water.
+
+IF. "I doubt _if_ this will ever reach you": say, "I doubt _whether_
+this will ever reach you."
+
+ILL. See SICK.
+
+ILLY. It will astonish not a few to learn that there is no such word as
+_illy_. The form of the adverb, as well as of the adjective and the
+noun, is _ill_. A thing is _ill_ formed, or _ill_ done, or _ill_ made,
+or _ill_ constructed, or _ill_ put together.
+
+    "_Ill_ fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
+    Where wealth accumulates and men decay."--Goldsmith.
+
+IMMODEST. This adjective and its synonyms, _indecent_ and _indelicate_,
+are often used without proper discrimination being made in their
+respective meanings. _Indecency_ and _immodesty_ are opposed to
+morality: the former in externals, as dress, words, and looks; the
+latter in conduct and disposition. "_Indecency_," says Crabb, "may be a
+partial, _immodesty_ is a positive and entire breach of the moral law.
+_Indecency_ is less than _immodesty_, but more than _indelicacy_." It is
+_indecent_ for a man to marry again very soon after the death of his
+wife. It is _indelicate_ for any one to obtrude himself upon another's
+retirement. It is _indecent_ for women to expose their persons as do
+some whom we can not call _immodest_.
+
+    "Immodest words admit of no defense,
+    For want of decency is want of sense."
+                          --Earl of Roscommon.
+
+IMPROPRIETY. As a rhetorical term, defined as an error in using words in
+a sense different from their recognized signification.
+
+IMPUTE. Non-painstaking writers not unfrequently use _impute_ instead of
+_ascribe_. "The numbers [of blunders] that have been _imputed_ to him
+are endless."--"Appletons' Journal." The use of _impute_ in this
+connection is by no means indefensible; still it would have been better
+to use _ascribe_.
+
+IN OUR MIDST. The phrases _in our midst_ and _in their midst_ are
+generally supposed to be of recent introduction; and, though they have
+been used by some respectable writers, they nevertheless find no favor
+with those who study propriety in the use of language. To the phrase _in
+the midst_ no one objects. "Jesus came and stood in the midst." "There
+was a hut _in the midst_ of the forest."
+
+IN RESPECT OF. "The deliberate introduction of incorrect forms, whether
+by the coinage of new or the revival of obsolete and inexpressive
+syntactical combinations, ought to be resisted even in trifles,
+especially where it leads to the confusion of distinct ideas. An example
+of this is the recent use of the adverbial phrases _in respect of_, _in
+regard of_, for _in_ or _with_ respect _to_, or regard _to_. This
+innovation is without any syntactical ground, and ought to be condemned
+and avoided as a mere grammatical crotchet."--George P. Marsh, "Lectures
+on the English Language," p. 660.
+
+IN SO FAR AS. A phrase often met with, and in which the _in_ is
+superfluous. "A want of proper opportunity would suffice, _in_ so far as
+the want could be shown." "We are to act up to the extent of our
+knowledge; but, _in_ so far as our knowledge falls short," etc.
+
+INAUGURATE. This word, which means to install in office with certain
+ceremonies, is made, by many lovers of big words, to do service for
+_begin_; but the sooner these rhetorical high-fliers stop _inaugurating_
+and content themselves with simply _beginning_ the things they are
+called upon to do in the ordinary routine of daily life, the sooner they
+will cease to set a very bad example.
+
+INDECENT. See IMMODEST.
+
+INDEX EXPURGATORIUS. William Cullen Bryant, who was a careful student of
+English, while he was editor of the "New York Evening Post," sought to
+prevent the writers for that paper from using "over and above (for 'more
+than'); artiste (for 'artist'); aspirant; authoress; beat (for
+'defeat'); bagging (for 'capturing'); balance (for 'remainder'); banquet
+(for 'dinner' or 'supper'); bogus; casket (for 'coffin'); claimed (for
+'asserted'); collided; commence (for 'begin'); compete; cortége (for
+'procession'); cotemporary (for 'contemporary'); couple (for 'two');
+darky (for 'negro'); day before yesterday (for 'the day before
+yesterday'); début; decrease (as a verb); democracy (applied to a
+political party); develop (for 'expose'); devouring element (for
+'fire'); donate; employé; enacted (for 'acted'); indorse (for
+'approve'); en route; esq.; graduate (for 'is graduated'); gents (for
+'gentlemen'); 'Hon.'; House (for 'House of Representatives'); humbug;
+inaugurate (for 'begin'); in our midst; item (for 'particle, extract, or
+paragraph'); is being done, and all passives of this form; jeopardize;
+jubilant (for 'rejoicing'); juvenile (for 'boy'); lady (for 'wife');
+last (for 'latest'); lengthy (for 'long'); leniency (for 'lenity');
+loafer; loan or loaned (for 'lend' or 'lent'); located; majority
+(relating to places or circumstances, for 'most'); Mrs. President, Mrs.
+Governor, Mrs. General, and all similar titles; mutual (for 'common');
+official (for 'officer'); ovation; on yesterday; over his signature;
+pants (for 'pantaloons'); parties (for 'persons'); partially (for
+'partly'); past two weeks (for 'last two weeks,' and all similar
+expressions relating to a definite time); poetess; portion (for 'part');
+posted (for 'informed'); progress (for 'advance'); reliable (for
+'trustworthy'); rendition (for 'performance'); repudiate (for 'reject'
+or 'disown'); retire (as an active verb); Rev. (for 'the Rev.'); rôle
+(for 'part'); roughs; rowdies; secesh; sensation (for 'noteworthy
+event'); standpoint (for 'point of view'); start, in the sense of
+setting out; state (for 'say'); taboo; talent (for 'talents' or
+'ability'); talented; tapis; the deceased; war (for 'dispute' or
+'disagreement')."
+
+This index is offered here as a curiosity rather than as a guide, though
+in the main it might safely be used as such. No valid reason, however,
+can be urged for discouraging the use of several words in the list; the
+words aspirant, banquet, casket, compete, decrease, progress, start,
+talented, and deceased, for example.
+
+INDICATIVE AND SUBJUNCTIVE. "'I _see_ the signal,' is unconditional;
+'_if_ I _see_ the signal,' is the same fact expressed in the form of a
+condition. The one form is said to be in the _indicative_ mood, the mood
+that simply _states or indicates_ the action; the other form is in the
+_subjunctive_, conditional, or conjunctive mood. There is sometimes a
+slight variation made in English, to show that an affirmation is made as
+a condition. The mood is called 'subjunctive,' because the affirmation
+_is subjoined to_ another affirmation: '_If I see the signal_, I will
+call out.'
+
+"Such forms as 'I may see,' 'I can see,' have sometimes been considered
+as a variety of mood, to which the name 'Potential' is given. But this
+can not properly be maintained. There is no trace of any inflection
+corresponding to this meaning, as we find with the subjunctive.
+Moreover, such a mood would have itself to be subdivided into indicative
+and subjunctive forms: 'I may go,' 'if I may go.' And further, we might
+proceed to constitute other moods on the same analogy, as, for example,
+an obligatory mood--'I must go,' or 'I ought to go'; a mood of
+resolution--'I will go, you shall go'; a mood of gratification--'I am
+delighted to go'; of deprecation--'I am grieved to go.' The only
+difference in the two last instances is the use of the sign of the
+infinitive 'to,' which does not occur after 'may,' 'can,' 'must,'
+'ought,' etc.; but that is not an essential difference. Some grammarians
+consider the form 'I do go' a separate mood, and term it the emphatic
+mood. But all the above objections apply to it likewise, as well as many
+others."--Bain. See SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
+
+INDIVIDUAL. This word is often most improperly used for _person_; as,
+"The _individual_ I saw was not over forty"; "There were several
+_individuals_ on board that I had never seen before." _Individual_
+means, etymologically, that which can not be divided, and is used, in
+speaking of things as well as of persons, to express unity. It is
+opposed to the whole, or that which is divisible into parts.
+
+INDORSE. Careful writers generally discountenance the use of _indorse_
+in the sense of _sanction_, _approve_, _applaud_. In this signification
+it is on the list of prohibited words in some of our newspaper offices.
+"The following rules are _indorsed_ by nearly all writers upon this
+subject."--Dr. Townsend. It is plain that the right word to use here is
+_approved_. "The public will heartily _indorse_ the sentiments uttered
+by the court."--New York "Evening Telegram." "The public will heartily
+_approve_ the sentiments _expressed_ by the court," is what the sentence
+should be.
+
+INFINITIVE MOOD. When we can choose, it is generally better to use the
+verb in the infinitive than in the participial form. "Ability being in
+general the power _of doing_," etc. Say, _to do_. "I desire to reply ...
+to the proposal _of substituting_ a tax upon land values ... and
+_making_ this tax, as near [nearly] as may be, equal to rent," etc. Say,
+_to substitute_ and _to make_. "This quality is of prime importance when
+the chief object is _the imparting of_ knowledge." Say, _to impart_.
+
+INITIATE. This is a pretentious word, which, with its derivatives, many
+persons--especially those who like to be grandiloquent--use, when homely
+English would serve their turn much better.
+
+INNUMERABLE NUMBER. A repetitional expression to be avoided. We may say
+_innumerable_ times, or _numberless_ times, but we should not say an
+_innumerable number_ of times.
+
+INTERROGATION. The rhetorical figure that asks a question in order to
+emphasize the reverse of what is asked is called _interrogation_; as,
+"Do we mean to submit to this measure? Do we mean to submit, and consent
+that we ourselves, our country and its rights, shall be trampled on?"
+
+"Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice?"
+
+INTRODUCE. See PRESENT.
+
+IRONY. That mode of speech in which what is meant is contrary to the
+literal meaning of the words--in which praise is bestowed when censure
+is intended--is called _irony_. Irony is a kind of delicate sarcasm or
+satire--raillery, mockery.
+
+"In writings of humor, figures are sometimes used of so delicate a
+nature that it shall often happen that some people will see things in a
+direct contrary sense to what the author and the majority of the readers
+understand them: to such the most innocent _irony_ may appear
+irreligion."--Cambridge.
+
+IRRITATE. See AGGRAVATE.
+
+IS BEING BUILT. A tolerable idea of the state of the discussion
+regarding the propriety of using the locution _is being built_, and all
+like expressions, will, it is hoped, be obtained from the following
+extracts. The Rev. Peter Bullions, in his "Grammar of the English
+Language," says:
+
+"There is properly _no passive_ form, in English, _corresponding to the
+progressive_ form in the _active_ voice, except where it is made by the
+participle _ing_, in a passive sense; thus, 'The house is building';
+'The garments are making'; 'Wheat is selling,' etc. An attempt has been
+made by some grammarians, of late, to banish such expressions from the
+language, though they have been used in all time past by the best
+writers, and to justify and defend a clumsy solecism, which has been
+recently introduced chiefly through the newspaper press, but which has
+gained such currency, and is becoming so familiar to the ear, that it
+seems likely to prevail, with all its uncouthness and deformity. I refer
+to such expressions as 'The house is being built'; 'The letter is being
+written'; 'The mine is being worked'; 'The news is being telegraphed,'
+etc., etc.
+
+"This mode of expression _had no existence_ in the language till _within
+the last fifty years_.[7] This, indeed, would not make the expression
+wrong, were it otherwise unexceptionable; but its recent origin shows
+that it is not, as is pretended, a _necessary_ form.
+
+"This form of expression, when analyzed, is found not to express what it
+is intended to express, and would be used only by such as are either
+ignorant of its import or are careless and loose in their use of
+language. To make this manifest, let it be considered, first, that there
+is _no progressive form_ of the verb _to be_, and no need of it; hence,
+there is no such expression in English as _is being_. Of course the
+expression '_is being_ built,' for example, is not a compound of _is
+being_ and _built_, but of _is_ and _being built_; that is, of the verb
+_to be_ and the _present participle passive_. Now, let it be observed
+that the only verbs in which the present participle passive expresses a
+continued action are those mentioned above as the first class, in which
+the regular passive form expresses a _continuance_ of the action; as,
+_is loved_, _is desired_, etc., and in which, of course, the form in
+question (_is being built_) is not required. Nobody would think of
+saying, 'He is being loved'; 'This result is being desired.'
+
+"The use of this form is justified only by _condemning an established
+usage_ of the language; namely, the passive sense in some verbs of the
+participle in _ing_. In reference to this it is flippantly asked, 'What
+does the house build?' 'What does the letter write?' etc.--taking for
+granted, without attempting to prove, that the participle in _ing_ can
+not have a passive sense in any verb. The following are a few examples
+from writers of the best reputation, which this novelty would condemn:
+'While the ceremony was performing.'--Tom. Brown. 'The court was then
+holding.'--Sir G. McKenzie. 'And still be doing, never done.'--Butler.
+'The books are selling.'--Allen's 'Grammar.' 'To know nothing of what is
+transacting in the regions above us.'--Dr. Blair. 'The spot where this
+new and strange tragedy was acting.'--E. Everett. 'The fortress was
+building.'--Irving. 'An attempt is making in the English
+parliament.'--D. Webster. 'The church now erecting in the city of New
+York.'--'N. A. Review.' 'These things were transacting in
+England.'--Bancroft.
+
+"This new doctrine is in _opposition_ to the almost _unanimous judgment_
+of the _most distinguished grammarians_ and critics, who have considered
+the subject, and expressed their views concerning it. The following are
+a specimen: 'Expressions of this kind are condemned by some critics; but
+the usage is unquestionably of far better authority, and (according to
+my apprehension) in far better taste, than the more complex phraseology
+which some late writers adopt in its stead; as, "The books are now being
+sold."'--Goold Brown. 'As to the notion of introducing a new and more
+complex passive form of conjugation, as, "The bridge _is being built_,"
+"The bridge _was being built_," and so forth, it is one of the most
+absurd and monstrous innovations ever thought of. "The work _is now
+being published_," is certainly no better English than, "The work _was
+being published_, _has been being published_, _had been being
+published_, _shall or will be being published_, _shall or will have
+been being published_," and so on through all the moods and tenses. What
+a language shall we have when our verbs are thus conjugated!'--Brown's
+'Gr. of Eng. Gr.,' p. 361. De War observes: 'The participle in _ing_ is
+also passive in many instances; as, "The house is building," "I heard of
+a plan forming,"' etc.--Quoted in 'Frazee's Grammar,' p. 49. 'It would
+be an absurdity, indeed, to give up the only way we have of denoting the
+incomplete state of action by a passive form (viz., by the participle in
+_ing_ in the passive sense).'--Arnold's 'English Grammar,' p. 46. 'The
+present participle is often used passively; as, "The ship is building."
+The form of expression, _is being built_, _is being committed_, etc., is
+almost universally condemned by grammarians, but it is sometimes met
+with in respectable writers; it occurs most frequently in newspaper
+paragraphs and in hasty compositions. See Worcester's "Universal and
+Critical Dictionary."'--Weld's 'Grammar,' pp. 118 and 180. 'When we say,
+"The house is building," the advocates of the new theory ask, "Building
+what?" We might ask, in turn, when you say, "The field ploughs
+well,"--"Ploughs what?" "Wheat sells well,"--"Sells what?" If usage
+allows us to say, "Wheat sells at a dollar," in a sense that is not
+active, why may we not say, "Wheat is selling at a dollar," in a sense
+that is not active?'--Hart's 'Grammar,' p. 76. 'The prevailing practice
+of the best authors is in favor of the simple form; as, "The house is
+building."'--Wells' 'School Grammar,' p. 148. 'Several other expressions
+of this sort now and then occur, such as the newfangled and most uncouth
+solecism "_is being done_," for the good old English idiom "_is
+doing_"--an absurd periphrasis driving out a pointed and pithy turn of
+the English language.'--'N. A. Review,' quoted by Mr. Wells, p. 148.
+'The phrase, "is being built," and others of a similar kind, have been
+for a few years insinuating themselves into our language; still they are
+not English.'--Harrison's 'Rise, Progress, and Present Structure of the
+English Language.' 'This mode of expression [the house is being built]
+is becoming quite common. It is liable, however, to several important
+objections. It appears formal and pedantic. It has not, as far as I
+know, the support of any respectable grammarian. The easy and natural
+expression is, "The house is building."'--Prof. J. W. Gibbs."
+
+Mr. Richard Grant White, in his "Words and Their Uses," expresses his
+opinion of the locution _is being_ in this wise: "In bad eminence, at
+the head of those intruders in language which to many persons seem to be
+of established respectability, but the right of which to be at all is
+not fully admitted, stands out the form of speech _is being done_, or
+rather, _is being_, which, about seventy or eighty years ago, began to
+affront the eye, torment the ear, and assault the common sense of the
+speaker of plain and idiomatic English." Mr. White devotes thirty pages
+of his book to the discussion of the subject, and adduces evidence that
+is more than sufficient to convince those who are content with an _ex
+parte_ examination that "it can hardly be that such an incongruous and
+ridiculous form of speech as _is being done_ was contrived by a man who,
+by any stretch of the name, should be included among grammarians."
+
+Mr. George P. Marsh, in his "Lectures on the English Language," says
+that the deviser of the locution in question was "some grammatical
+pretender," and that it is "an awkward neologism, which neither
+convenience, intelligibility, nor syntactical congruity demands."
+
+To these gentlemen, and to those who are of their way of thinking with
+regard to _is being_, Dr. Fitzedward Hall replies at some length, in an
+article published in "Scribner's Monthly" for April, 1872. Dr. Hall
+writes:
+
+"'All really well educated in the English tongue lament the many
+innovations introduced into our language from America; and I doubt if
+more than one of these novelties deserve acceptation. That one is,
+substituting a compound participle for an active verb used in a neuter
+signification: for instance, "The house is _being built_," instead of,
+"The house is _building_."' Such is the assertion and such is the
+opinion of some anonymous luminary,[8] who, for his liberality in
+welcoming a supposed Americanism, is somewhat in advance of the herd of
+his countrymen. Almost any popular expression which is considered as a
+novelty, a Briton is pretty certain to assume, off-hand, to have
+originated on our side of the Atlantic. Of the assertion I have quoted,
+no proof is offered; and there is little probability that its author had
+any to offer. 'Are being,' in the phrase 'are being thrown up,'[9] is
+spoken of in 'The North American Review'[10] as 'an outrage upon English
+idiom, "to be detested, abhorred, execrated, and given over to six
+thousand" penny-paper editors'; and the fact is, that phrases of the
+form here pointed at have hitherto enjoyed very much less favor with us
+than with the English.
+
+"As lately as 1860, Dr. Worcester, referring to _is being built_, etc.,
+while acknowledging that 'this new form has been used by some
+respectable writers,' speaks of it as having 'been introduced' 'within a
+few years.' Mr. Richard Grant White, by a most peculiar process of
+ratiocination, endeavors to prove that what Dr. Worcester calls 'this
+new form' came into existence just fifty-six years ago. He premises that
+in Jarvis's translation of 'Don Quixote,' published in 1742, there
+occurs 'were carrying,' and that this, in the edition of 1818, is
+sophisticated into 'were being carried.' 'This change,' continues our
+logician, 'and the appearance of _is being_ with a perfect participle in
+a very few books published between A. D. 1815 and 1820, indicate the
+former period as that of the origin of this phraseology, which, although
+more than half a century old, is still pronounced a novelty as well as a
+nuisance.'
+
+"Who, in the next place, devised our modern imperfects passive? The
+question is not, originally, of my asking; but, as the learned are at
+open feud on the subject, it should not be passed by in silence. Its
+deviser is, more than likely, as undiscoverable as the name of the
+valiant antediluvian who first tasted an oyster. But the deductive
+character of the miscreant is another thing; and hereon there is a war
+between the philosophers. Mr. G. P. Marsh, as if he had actually spotted
+the wretched creature, passionately and categorically denounces him as
+'some grammatical pretender.' 'But,' replies Mr. White, 'that it is the
+work of any grammarian is more than doubtful. Grammarians, with all
+their faults, do not deform language with fantastic solecisms, or even
+seek to enrich it with new and startling verbal combinations. They
+rather resist novelty, and devote themselves to formulating that which
+use has already established.' In the same page with this, Mr. White
+compliments the great unknown as 'some precise and feeble-minded soul,'
+and elsewhere calls him 'some pedantic writer of the last generation.'
+To add even one word toward a solution of the knotty point here
+indicated transcends, I confess, my utmost competence. It is painful to
+picture to one's self the agonizing emotions with which certain
+philologists would contemplate an authentic effigy of the Attila of
+speech who, by his _is being built_ or _is being done_, first offered
+violence to the whole circle of the proprieties. So far as I have
+observed, the first grammar that exhibits them is that of Mr. R. S.
+Skillern, M. A., the first edition of which was published at Gloucester
+in 1802. Robert Southey had not, on the 9th of October, 1795, been out
+of his minority quite two months when, evidently delivering himself in a
+way that had already become familiar enough, he wrote of 'a fellow whose
+uttermost upper grinder _is being torn out_ by the roots by a
+mutton-fisted barber.'[11] This is in a letter. But repeated instances
+of the same kind of expression are seen in Southey's graver writings.
+Thus, in his 'Colloquies,' etc.,[12] we read of 'such [nunneries] as at
+this time _are being reëstablished_.'
+
+"'While my hand _was being drest_ by Mr. Young, I spoke for the first
+time,' wrote Coleridge, in March, 1797.
+
+"Charles Lamb speaks of realities which '_are being acted_ before us,'
+and of 'a man who _is being strangled_.'
+
+"Walter Savage Landor, in an imaginary conversation, represents Pitt as
+saying: 'The man who possesses them may read Swedenborg and Kant while
+he _is being tossed_ in a blanket.' Again: 'I have seen nobles, men and
+women, kneeling in the street before these bishops, when no ceremony of
+the Catholic Church _was being performed_.' Also, in a translation from
+Catullus: 'Some criminal _is being tried_ for murder.'
+
+"Nor does Mr. De Quincey scruple at such English as 'made and _being
+made_,' 'the bride that _was being married_ to him,' and 'the shafts of
+Heaven _were_ even now _being forged_.' On one occasion he writes, 'Not
+done, not even (according to modern purism) _being done_'; as if
+'purism' meant exactness, rather than the avoidance of neoterism.
+
+"I need, surely, name no more, among the dead, who found _is being
+built_, or the like, acceptable. 'Simple-minded common people and those
+of culture were alike protected against it by their attachment to the
+idiom of their mother tongue, with which they felt it to be directly at
+variance.' So Mr. White informs us. But the writers whom I have quoted
+are formidable exceptions. Even Mr. White will scarcely deny to them the
+title of 'people of culture.'
+
+"So much for offenders past repentance; and we all know that the sort of
+phraseology under consideration is daily becoming more and more common.
+The best written of the English reviews, magazines, and journals are
+perpetually marked by it; and some of the choicest of living English
+writers employ it freely. Among these, it is enough if I specify Bishop
+Wilberforce and Mr. Charles Reade.[13]
+
+"Extracts from Bishop Jewel downward being also given, Lord Macaulay,
+Mr. Dickens, 'The Atlantic Monthly,' and 'The Brooklyn Eagle' are
+alleged by Mr. White in proof that people still use such phrases as
+'Chelsea Hospital _was building_,' and 'the train _was preparing_.'
+'Hence we see,' he adds,[14] 'that the form _is being done_, _is being
+made_, _is being built_, lacks the support of authoritative usage from
+the period of the earliest classical English to the present day.' I
+fully concur with Mr. White in regarding 'neither "The Brooklyn Eagle"
+nor Mr. Dickens as a very high authority in the use of language'; yet,
+when he has renounced the aid of these contemned straws, what has he to
+rest his inference on, as to the present day, but the practice of Lord
+Macaulay and 'The Atlantic Monthly'? Those who think fit will bow to the
+dictatorship here prescribed to them; but there may be those with whom
+the classic sanction of Southey, Coleridge, and Landor will not be
+wholly void of weight. All scholars are aware that, to convey the sense
+of the imperfects passive, our ancestors, centuries ago, prefixed, with
+_is_, etc., _in_, afterward corrupted into _a_, to a verbal substantive.
+'The house _is in building_' could be taken to mean nothing but _ædes
+ædificantur_; and, when the _in_ gave place to _a_,[15] it was still
+manifest enough, from the context, that _building_ was governed by a
+preposition. The second stage of change, however, namely, when the _a_
+was omitted, entailed, in many cases, great danger of confusion. In the
+early part of the last century, when English was undergoing what was
+then thought to be purification, the polite world substantially resigned
+_is a-building_ to the vulgar. Toward the close of the same century,
+when, under the influence of free thought, it began to be felt that even
+ideas had a right to faithful and unequivocal representation, a just
+resentment of ambiguity was evidenced in the creation of _is being
+built_. The lament is too late that the instinct of reformation did not
+restore the old form. It has gone forever; and we are now to make the
+best of its successors. '"The brass _is forging_,"' in the opinion of
+Dr. Johnson, is 'a vicious expression, probably corrupted from a phrase
+more pure, but now somewhat obsolete, ... "the brass _is a-forging_."'
+Yet, with a true Tory's timidity and aversion to change, it is not
+surprising that he went on preferring what he found established, vicious
+as it confessedly was, to the end. But was the expression 'vicious'
+solely because it was a corruption? In 1787 William Beckford wrote as
+follows of the fortune-tellers of Lisbon: '_I saw one dragging into
+light_, as I passed by the ruins of a palace thrown down by the
+earthquake. Whether a familiar of the Inquisition was griping her in his
+clutches, or _whether she was taking to account by some disappointed
+votary_, I will not pretend to answer.' Are the expressions here
+italicized either perspicuous or graceful? Whatever we are to have in
+their place, we should be thankful to get quit of them.
+
+"Inasmuch as, concurrently with _building_ for the active participle,
+and _being built_ for the corresponding passive participle, we possessed
+the former, with _is_ prefixed, as the active present imperfect, it is
+in rigid accordance with the symmetry of our verb that, to construct the
+passive present-imperfect, we prefix _is_ to the latter, producing the
+form _is being built_. Such, in its greatest simplicity, is the
+procedure which, as will be seen, has provoked a very levanter of ire
+and vilification. But anything that is new will be excepted to by minds
+of a certain order. Their tremulous and impatient dread of removing
+ancient landmarks even disqualifies them for thoroughly investigating
+its character and pretensions. In _has built_ and _will build_, we find
+the active participle perfect and the active infinitive subjoined to
+auxiliaries; and so, in _has been built_ and _will be built_, the
+passive participle perfect and the passive infinitive are subjoined to
+auxiliaries. In _is building_ and _is being built_, we have, in strict
+harmony with the constitution of the perfect and future tenses, an
+auxiliary followed by the active participle present and the passive
+participle present. _Built_ is determined as active or passive by the
+verbs which qualify it, _have_ and _be_; and the grammarians are right
+in considering it, when embodied in _has built_, as active, since its
+analogue, embodied in _has been built_, is the exclusively passive _been
+built_. Besides this, _has been_ + _built_ would signify something like
+_has existed, built_,[16] which is plainly neuter. We are debarred,
+therefore, from such an analysis; and, by parity of reasoning, we may
+not resolve _is being built_ into _is being_ + _built_. It must have
+been an inspiration of analogy, felt or unfelt, that suggested the form
+I am discussing. _Is being_ + _built_, as it can mean, pretty nearly,
+only _exists, built_, would never have been proposed as adequate to
+convey any but a neuter sense; whereas it was perfectly natural for a
+person aiming to express a passive sense to prefix _is_ to the passive
+concretion _being built_.[17]
+
+"The analogical justification of _is being built_ which I have brought
+forward is so obvious that, as it occurred to myself more than twenty
+years ago, so it must have occurred spontaneously to hundreds besides.
+It is very singular that those who, like Mr. Marsh and Mr. White, have
+pondered long and painfully over locutions typified by _is being built_,
+should have missed the real ground of their grammatical defensibleness,
+and should have warmed themselves, in their opposition to them, into
+uttering opinions which no calm judgment can accept.
+
+"'One who _is being beaten_' is, to Archbishop Whately, 'uncouth
+English.' '"The bridge _is being built_," and other phrases of the like
+kind, have pained the eye' of Mr. David Booth. Such phrases, according
+to Mr. M. Harrison, 'are not English.' To Professor J. W. Gibbs 'this
+mode of expression ... appears formal and pedantic'; and 'the easy and
+natural expression is, "The house _is building_."'[18] In all this,
+little or nothing is discernible beyond sheer prejudice, the prejudice
+of those who resolve to take their stand against an innovation,
+regardless of its utility, and who are ready to find an argument against
+it in any random epithet of disparagement provoked by unreasoning
+aversion. And the more recent denouncers in the same line have no more
+reason on their side than their elder brethren.
+
+"In Mr. Marsh's estimation, _is being built_ illustrates 'corruption of
+language'; it is 'clumsy and unidiomatic'; it is 'at best but a
+philological coxcombry'; it 'is an awkward neologism, which neither
+convenience, intelligibility, nor syntactical congruity demands, and the
+use of which ought, therefore, to be discountenanced, as an attempt at
+the artificial improvement of the language in a point which needed no
+amendment.' Again, 'To reject' _is building_ in favor of the modern
+phrase 'is to violate the laws of language by an arbitrary change; and,
+in this particular case, the proposed substitute is at war with the
+genius of the English tongue.' Mr. Marsh seems to have fancied that,
+wherever he points out a beauty in _is building_, he points out,
+inclusively, a blemish in _is being built_.
+
+"The fervor and feeling with which Mr. White advances to the charge are
+altogether tropical. 'The full absurdity of this phrase, the essence of
+its nonsense, seems not to have been hitherto pointed out.' It is not
+'consistent with reason'; and it is not 'conformed to the normal
+development of the language.' It is 'a monstrosity, the illogical,
+confusing, inaccurate, unidiomatic character of which I have at some
+length, but yet imperfectly, set forth.' Finally, 'In fact, it means
+nothing, and is the most incongruous combination of words and ideas that
+ever attained respectable usage in any civilized language.' These be
+'prave 'ords'; and it seems a pity that so much sterling vituperative
+ammunition should be expended in vain. And that it is so expended thinks
+Mr. White himself; for, though passing sentence in the spirit of a
+Jeffreys, he is not really on the judgment-seat, but on the lowest
+hassock of despair. As concerns the mode of expression exemplified by
+_is being built_, he owns that 'to check its diffusion would be a
+hopeless undertaking.' If so, why not reserve himself for service
+against some evil not avowedly beyond remedy?
+
+"Again we read, 'Some precise and feeble-minded soul, having been taught
+that there is a passive voice in English, and that, for instance,
+_building_ is an active participle, and _builded_ or _built_ a passive,
+felt conscientious scruples at saying "the house _is building_." For
+what could the house build?' As children say at play, Mr. White burns
+here. If it had occurred to him that the 'conscientious scruples' of his
+hypothetical, 'precise, and feeble-minded soul' were roused by _been
+built_, not by _built_, I suspect his chapter on _is being built_ would
+have been much shorter than it is at present, and very different. 'The
+fatal absurdity in this phrase consists,' he tells us, 'in the
+combination of _is_ with _being_; in the making of the verb _to be_ a
+supplement, or, in grammarians' phrase, an auxiliary to itself--an
+absurdity so palpable, so monstrous, so ridiculous, that it should need
+only to be pointed out to be scouted.'[19] Lastly, 'The question is thus
+narrowed simply to this, Does _to be being_ (_esse ens_) mean anything
+more or other than _to be_?'
+
+"Having convicted Mr. White of a mistaken analysis, I am not concerned
+with the observations which he founds on his mistake. However, even if
+his analysis had been correct, some of his arguments would avail him
+nothing. For instance, _is being built_, on his understanding of it,
+that is to say, _is being_ + _built_, he represents by _ens ædificatus
+est_, as 'the supposed corresponding Latin phrase.'[20] The Latin is
+illegitimate; and he infers that, therefore, the English is the same.
+But _ædificans est_, a translation, on the model which he offers, of the
+active _is building_, is quite as illegitimate as _ens æedificatus est_.
+By parity of _non-sequitur_, we are, therefore, to surrender the active
+_is building_. Assume that a phrase in a given language is indefensible
+unless it has its counterpart in some other language; from the very
+conception and definition of an idiom every idiom is illegitimate.
+
+"I now pass to another point. '_To be_ and _to exist_ are,' to Mr.
+White's apprehension, 'perfect synonyms, or more nearly perfect,
+perhaps, than any two verbs in the language. In some of their meanings
+there is a shade of difference, but in others there is none whatever;
+and the latter are those which serve our present purpose. When we say,
+"He, _being_ forewarned of danger, fled," we say, "He, _existing_
+forewarned of danger, fled." When we say that a thing _is_ done, we say
+that it _exists_ done.... _Is being done_ is simply _exists existing
+done_.' But, since _is_ and _exists_ are equipollent, and so _being_ and
+_existing, is being_ is the same as the unimpeachable _is existing_. Q.
+_non_ E. D. _Is existing_ ought, of course, to be no less objectionable
+to Mr. White than _is being_. Just as absurd, too, should he reckon the
+Italian _sono stato_, _era stato_, _sia stato_, _fossi stato_, _saro
+stato_, _sarei stato_, _essere stato_, and _essendo stato_. For in
+Italian both _essere_ and _stare_ are required to make up the verb
+substantive, as in Latin both _esse_ and the offspring of _fuere_ are
+required; and _stare_, primarily 'to stand,' is modified into a true
+auxiliary. The alleged 'full absurdity of this phrase,' to wit, _is
+being built_, 'the essence of its nonsense,' vanishes thus into thin
+air. So I was about to comment bluntly, not forgetting to regret that
+any gentleman's cultivation of logic should fructify in the shape of
+irrepressible tendencies to suicide. But this would be precipitate.
+Agreeably to one of Mr. White's judicial placita, which I make no
+apology for citing twice, 'no man who has preserved all his senses will
+doubt for a moment that "to exist a mastiff or a mule" is absolutely the
+same as "to be a mastiff or a mule."' Declining to admit their identity,
+I have not preserved all my senses; and, accordingly--though it may be
+in me the very superfetation of lunacy--I would caution the reader to
+keep a sharp eye on my arguments, hereabouts particularly. The Cretan,
+who, in declaring all Cretans to be liars, left the question of his
+veracity doubtful to all eternity, fell into a pit of his own digging.
+Not unlike the unfortunate Cretan, Mr. White has tumbled headlong into
+his own snare. It was, for the rest, entirely unavailing that he
+insisted on the insanity of those who should gainsay his fundamental
+postulate. Sanity, of a crude sort, may accept it; and sanity may put it
+to a use other than its propounder's.
+
+"Mr. Marsh, after setting forth the all-sufficiency of _is building_, in
+the passive sense, goes on to say: 'The reformers who object to the
+phrase I am defending must, in consistency, employ the proposed
+substitute with all passive participles, and in other tenses as well as
+the present. They must say, therefore, "The subscription-paper _is being
+missed_, but I know that a considerable sum _is being wanted_ to make up
+the amount"; "the great Victoria Bridge _has been being built_ more than
+two years"; "when I reach London, the ship Leviathan _will be being
+built_"; "if my orders had been followed, the coat _would have been
+being made yesterday_"; "if the house _had_ then _been being built_, the
+mortar _would have been being mixed_."' We may reply that, while awkward
+instances of the old form are most abundant in our literature, there is
+no fear that the repulsive elaborations which have been worked out in
+ridicule of the new forms will prove to have been anticipations of
+future usage. There was a time when, as to their adverbs, people
+compared them, to a large extent, with _-er_ and _-est_, or with _more_
+and _most_, just as their ear or pleasure dictated. They wrote
+_plainlier_ and _plainliest_, or _more plainly_ and _most plainly_; and
+some adverbs, as _early_, _late_, _often_, _seldom_, and _soon_, we
+still compare in a way now become anomalous. And as our forefathers
+treated their adverbs we still treat many adjectives. _Furthermore_,
+_obligingness_, _preparedness_, and _designedly_ seem quite natural; yet
+we do not feel that they authorize us to talk of 'the _seeingness_ of
+the eye,' 'the _understoodness_ of a sentence,' or of 'a statement
+_acknowledgedly_ correct.' 'The now too notorious fact' is tolerable;
+but 'the never to be sufficiently execrated monster Bonaparte' is
+intolerable. The sun may be _shorn_ of his splendor; but we do not allow
+cloudy weather to _shear_ him of it. How, then, can any one claim that a
+man who prefers to say _is being built_ should say _has been being
+built_? Are not awkward instances of the old form, typified by _is
+building_, as easily to be picked out of extant literature as such
+instances of the new form, likely ever to be used, are to be invented?
+And 'the reformers' have not forsworn their ears. Mr. Marsh, at p. 135
+of his admirable 'Lectures,' lays down that 'the adjective _reliable_,
+in the sense of _worthy of confidence_, is altogether unidiomatic'; and
+yet, at p. 112, he writes '_reliable_ evidence.' Again, at p. 396 of the
+same work, he rules that _whose_, in 'I passed a house _whose_ windows
+were open,' is 'by no means yet fully established'; and at p. 145 of his
+very learned 'Man and Nature' he writes 'a quadrangular pyramid, the
+perpendicular of _whose_ sides,' etc. Really, if his own judgments sit
+so very loose on his practical conscience, we may, without being
+chargeable with exaction, ask of him to relax a little the rigor of his
+requirements at the hands of his neighbors.
+
+"Beckford's Lisbon fortune-teller, before had into court, was
+'_dragging_ into light,' and, perchance, '_was taking_ to account.' Many
+moderns would say and write '_being dragged_ into light,' and '_was
+being taken_ to account.' But, if we are to trust the conservative
+critics, in comparison with expressions of the former pattern, those of
+the latter are 'uncouth,' 'clumsy,' 'awkward neologisms,' 'philological
+coxcombries,' 'formal and pedantic,' 'incongruous and ridiculous forms
+of speech,' 'illogical, confusing, inaccurate monstrosities.' Moreover,
+they are neither 'consistent with reason' nor 'conformed to the normal
+development of the language'; they are 'at war with the genius of the
+English tongue'; they are 'unidiomatic'; they are 'not English.' In
+passing, if Mr. Marsh will so define the term _unidiomatic_ as to evince
+that it has any applicability to the case in hand, or if he will arrest
+and photograph 'the genius of the English tongue,' so that we may know
+the original when we meet with it, he will confer a public favor. And
+now I submit for consideration whether the sole strength of those who
+decry _is being built_ and its congeners does not consist in their
+talent for calling hard names. If they have not an uneasy
+subconsciousness that their cause is weak, they would, at least, do well
+in eschewing the violence to which, for want of something better, the
+advocates of weak causes proverbially resort.
+
+"I once had a friend who, for some microscopic penumbra of heresy, was
+charged, in the words of his accuser, with 'as near an approach to the
+sin against the Holy Ghost as is practicable to human infirmity.'
+Similarly, on one view, the feeble potencies of philological turpitude
+seem to have exhibited their most consummate realization in engendering
+_is being built_. The supposed enormity perpetrated in its production,
+provided it had fallen within the sphere of ethics, would, at the least,
+have ranked, with its denunciators, as a brand-new exemplification of
+total depravity. But, after all, what incontestable defect in it has any
+one succeeded in demonstrating? Mr. White, in opposing to the
+expression objections based on an erroneous analysis, simply lays a
+phantom of his own evoking; and, so far as I am informed, other
+impugners of _is being built_ have, absolutely, no argument whatever
+against it over and beyond their repugnance to novelty. Subjected to a
+little untroubled contemplation, it would, I am confident, have ceased
+long ago to be matter of controversy; but the dust of prejudice and
+passion, which so distempers the intellectual vision of theologians and
+politicians, is seen to make, with ruthless impartiality, no exception
+of the perspicacity of philologists.
+
+"Prior to the evolution of _is being built_ and _was being built_, we
+possessed no discriminate equivalents to _ædificatur_ and
+_ædificabatur_; _is built_ and _was built_, by which they were rendered,
+corresponding exactly to _ædificatus est_ and _ædificatus erat_. _Cum
+ædificaretur_ was to us the same as _ædificabatur_. On the wealth of the
+Greek in expressions of imperfect passive I need not dwell. With rare
+exceptions, the Romans were satisfied with the present-imperfect and the
+past-imperfect; and we, on the comparatively few occasions which present
+themselves for expressing other imperfects, shall be sure to have
+recourse to the old forms rather than to the new, or else to use
+periphrases.[21] The purists may, accordingly, dismiss their
+apprehensions, especially as the neoterists have, clearly, a keener
+horror of phraseological ungainliness than themselves. One may have no
+hesitation about saying 'the house _is being built_,' and may yet recoil
+from saying that 'it _should have been being built_ last Christmas'; and
+the same person--just as, provided he did not feel a harshness,
+inadequacy, and ambiguity in the passive 'the house _is building_,' he
+would use the expression--will, more likely than not, elect _is in
+preparation_ preferentially to _is being prepared_. If there are any
+who, in their zealotry for the congruous, choose to adhere to the new
+form in its entire range of exchangeability for the old, let it be hoped
+that they will find, in Mr. Marsh's speculative approbation of
+consistency, full amends for the discomfort of encountering smiles or
+frowns. At the same time, let them be mindful of the career of Mr.
+White, with his black flag and no quarter. The dead Polonius was, in
+Hamlet's phrase, at supper, 'not where he eats, but where he _is
+eaten_.' Shakespeare, to Mr. White's thinking, in this wise expressed
+himself at the best, and deserves not only admiration therefor, but to
+be imitated. 'While the ark _was built_,' 'while the ark _was
+prepared_,' writes Mr. White himself.[22] Shakespeare is commended for
+his ambiguous _is eaten_, though _in eating_ or _an eating_ would have
+been not only correct in his day, but, where they would have come in his
+sentence, univocal. With equal reason a man would be entitled to
+commendation for tearing his mutton-chops with his fingers, when he
+might cut them up with a knife and fork. '_Is eaten_,' says Mr. White,
+'does not mean _has been eaten_.' Very true; but a continuous unfinished
+passion--Polonius's still undergoing manducation, to speak
+Johnsonese--was in Shakespeare's mind; and his words describe a passion
+no longer in generation. The King of Denmark's lord chamberlain had no
+precedent in Herod, when 'he _was eaten_ of worms'; the original,
+γενόμενος σκωληκόβρωτος, yielding, but for its participle, 'he became
+worm-eaten.'
+
+"Having now done with Mr. White, I am anxious, before taking leave of
+him, to record, with all emphasis, that it would be the grossest
+injustice to write of his elegant 'Life and Genius of Shakespeare,' a
+book which does credit to American literature, in the tone which I have
+found unavoidable in dealing with his 'Words and their Uses.'"
+
+The student of English who has honestly weighed the arguments on both
+sides of the question, must, I believe, be of opinion that our language
+is the richer for having two forms for expressing the Progressive
+Passive. Further, he must, I believe, be of opinion that in very many
+cases he conforms to the most approved usage of our time by employing
+the old form; that, however, if he were to employ the old form in all
+cases, his meaning would sometimes be uncertain.
+
+IT. Cobbett discourses of this little neuter pronoun in this wise: "The
+word _it_ is the greatest troubler that I know of in language. It is so
+small and so convenient that few are careful enough in using it. Writers
+seldom spare this word. Whenever they are at a loss for either a
+nominative or an objective to their sentence, they, without any kind of
+ceremony, clap in an _it_. A very remarkable instance of this pressing
+of poor _it_ into actual service, contrary to the laws of grammar and of
+sense, occurs in a piece of composition, where we might, with justice,
+insist on correctness. This piece is on the subject of grammar; it is a
+piece written by a _Doctor of Divinity_ and read by him to students in
+grammar and language in an academy; and the very sentence that I am now
+about to quote is selected by the author of a grammar as testimony of
+high authority in favor of the excellence of his work. Surely, if
+correctness be ever to be expected, it must be in a case like this. I
+allude to two sentences in the 'Charge of the Reverend Doctor
+Abercrombie to the Senior Class of the Philadelphia Academy,' published
+in 1806; which sentences have been selected and published by Mr. Lindley
+Murray as a testimonial of the _merits_ of his grammar; and which
+sentences are by Mr. Murray given to us in the following words: 'The
+unwearied exertions of this gentleman _have_ done more toward
+elucidating the obscurities and embellishing the structure of our
+language than any _other writer_ on the subject. _Such a work_ has long
+been wanted, and from the success with which _it_ is executed, can not
+be too highly appreciated.'
+
+"As in the learned Doctor's opinion obscurities can be elucidated, and
+as in the same opinion Mr. Murray is an able hand at this kind of work,
+it would not be amiss were the grammarian to try his skill upon this
+article from the hand of his dignified eulogist; for here is, if one may
+use the expression, a constellation of obscurities. Our poor oppressed
+_it_, which we find forced into the Doctor's service in the second
+sentence, relates to '_such a work_,' though this work is nothing that
+has an existence, notwithstanding it is said to be '_executed_.' In the
+first sentence, the 'exertions' become, all of a sudden, a '_writer_':
+the _exertions_ have done more than 'any _other_ writer'; for, mind you,
+it is not the _gentleman_ that has done anything; it is 'the
+_exertions_' that _have_ done what is said to be done. The word
+_gentleman_ is in the possessive case, and has nothing to do with the
+action of the sentence. Let us give the sentence a turn, and the Doctor
+and the grammarian will hear how it will sound. 'This gentleman's
+_exertions_ have done more than any _other writer_.' This is on a level
+with 'This gentleman's _dog_ has killed more hares than any _other
+sportsman_.' No doubt Doctor Abercrombie _meant_ to say, 'The exertions
+of this gentleman have done more _than those_ of any other writer. Such
+a work as this gentleman's has long been wanted; his work, seeing the
+successful manner of its execution, can not be too highly commended.'
+_Meant!_ No doubt at all of that! And when we hear a Hampshire ploughboy
+say, 'Poll Cherrycheek have giv'd a thick handkecher,' we know very well
+that he _means_ to say, 'Poll Cherrycheek has given me this
+handkerchief'; and yet we are too apt to _laugh at him_ and to call him
+_ignorant_; which is wrong, because he has no pretensions to a knowledge
+of grammar, and he may be very skillful as a ploughboy. However, we will
+not laugh at Doctor Abercrombie, whom I knew, many years ago, for a very
+kind and worthy man. But, if we may, in any case, be allowed to laugh at
+the ignorance of our fellow-creatures, that case certainly does arise
+when we see a professed grammarian, the author of voluminous precepts
+and examples on the subject of grammar, producing, in imitation of the
+possessors of valuable medical secrets, testimonials vouching for the
+efficacy of his literary panacea, and when, in those testimonials, we
+find most flagrant instances of bad grammar.
+
+"However, my dear James, let this strong and striking instance of the
+misuse of the word _it_ serve you in the way of caution. Never put an
+_it_ upon paper without thinking well of what you are about. When I see
+many _its_ in a page, I always tremble for the writer."
+
+JEOPARDIZE. This is a modern word which we could easily do without, as
+it means neither more nor less than its venerable progenitor _to
+jeopard_, which is greatly preferred by all careful writers.
+
+JUST GOING TO. Instead of "I am _just going to_ go," it is better to
+say, "I am just _about_ to go."
+
+KIDS. "This is another vile contraction. Habit blinds people to the
+unseemliness of a term like this. How would it sound if one should speak
+of silk gloves as _silks_?"
+
+KIND. See POLITE.
+
+KNIGHTS TEMPLARS. The name of this ancient body has been adopted by a
+branch of the Masonic fraternity, but in a perverted form--_Knights
+Templar_; and this form is commonly seen in print, whether referring to
+the old knights or to their modern imitators. This doubtless is due to
+the erroneous impression that _Templar_ is an adjective, and so can not
+take the plural form; while in fact it is a case of two nouns in
+apposition--a double designation--meaning Knights of the order of
+Templars. Hence the plural should be _Knights Templars_, and not
+_Knights Templar_. Members of the contemporaneous order of St. John of
+Jerusalem were commonly called Knights Hospitallers.
+
+LADY. To use the term _lady_, whether in the singular or in the plural,
+simply to designate the sex, is in the worst possible taste. There is a
+kind of pin-feather gentility which seems to have a settled aversion to
+using the terms _man_ and _woman_. Gentlemen and ladies establish their
+claims to being called such by their bearing, and not by arrogating to
+themselves, _even indirectly_, the titles. In England, the title _lady_
+is properly correlative to _lord_; but there, as in this country, it is
+used as a term of complaisance, and is appropriately applied to women
+whose lives are exemplary, and who have received that school and home
+education which enables them to appear to advantage in the better
+circles of society. Such expressions as "She is a fine _lady_, a clever
+_lady_, a well-dressed _lady_, a good _lady_, a modest _lady_, a
+charitable _lady_, an amiable _lady_, a handsome _lady_, a fascinating
+_lady_," and the like, are studiously avoided by persons of refinement.
+_Ladies_ say, "we _women_, the _women_ of America, _women's_ apparel,"
+and so on; _vulgar_ women talk about "us _ladies_, the _ladies_ of
+America, _ladies'_ apparel," and so on. If a woman of culture and
+refinement--in short, a lady--is compelled from any cause soever to work
+in a store, she is quite content to be called a sales-_woman_; not so,
+however, with your young woman who, being in a store, is in a better
+position than ever before. She, Heaven bless her! boils with indignation
+if she is not denominated a sales-_lady_. Lady is often the proper term
+to use, and then it would be very improper to use any other; but it is
+very certain that the terms _lady_ and _gentleman_ are least used by
+those persons who are most worthy of being designated by them. With a
+nice discrimination worthy of special notice, one of our daily papers
+recently said: "Miss Jennie Halstead, daughter of the proprietor of the
+'Cincinnati Commercial,' is one of the most brilliant young _women_ in
+Ohio."
+
+In a late number of the "London Queen" was the following: "The terms
+_ladies_ and _gentlemen_ become in themselves vulgarisms when
+misapplied, and the improper application of the wrong term at the wrong
+time makes all the difference in the world to ears polite. Thus, calling
+a man a _gentleman_ when he should be called a _man_, or speaking of a
+man as a _man_ when he should be spoken of as a _gentleman_; or alluding
+to a lady as a _woman_ when she should be alluded to as a _lady_, or
+speaking of a woman as a _lady_ when she should properly be termed a
+_woman_. Tact and a sense of the fitness of things decide these points,
+there being no fixed rule to go upon to determine when a man is a _man_
+or when he is a _gentleman_; and, although he is far oftener termed the
+one than the other, he does not thereby lose his attributes of a
+gentleman. In common parlance, a man is always a _man_ to a man, and
+never a _gentleman_; to a woman, he is occasionally a _man_ and
+occasionally a _gentleman_; but a man would far oftener term a woman a
+_woman_ than he would term her a _lady_. When a man makes use of an
+adjective in speaking of a lady, he almost invariably calls her a
+_woman_. Thus, he would say, 'I met a rather agreeable _woman_ at dinner
+last night'; but he would _not_ say, 'I met an agreeable _lady_'; but he
+might say, 'A _lady_, a friend of mine, told me,' etc., when he would
+_not_ say, 'A _woman_, a friend of mine, told me,' etc. Again, a man
+would say, 'Which of the _ladies_ did you take in to dinner?' He would
+certainly not say, 'Which of the _women_,' etc.
+
+"Speaking of people _en masse_, it would be to belong to a very advanced
+school to refer to them in conversation as 'men and women,' while it
+would be all but vulgar to style them 'ladies and gentlemen,' the
+compromise between the two being to speak of them as 'ladies and men.'
+Thus a lady would say, 'I have asked two or three ladies and several
+men'; she would not say, 'I have asked several men and women'; neither
+would she say, 'I have asked several ladies and gentlemen.' And,
+speaking of numbers, it would be very usual to say, 'There were a great
+many ladies, and but very few men present,' or, 'The ladies were in the
+majority, so few men being present.' Again, a lady would not say, 'I
+expect two or three men,' but she would say, 'I expect two or three
+gentlemen.' When people are on ceremony with each other [_one another_],
+they might, perhaps, in speaking of a man, call him a _gentleman_; but,
+otherwise, it would be more usual to speak of him as a _man_. Ladies,
+when speaking of each other [_one another_], usually employ the term
+_woman_ in preference to that of _lady_. Thus they would say, 'She is a
+very good-natured _woman_,' 'What sort of a _woman_ is she?' the term
+_lady_ being entirely out of place under such circumstances. Again, the
+term young _lady_ gives place as far as possible to the term _girl_,
+although it greatly depends upon the amount of intimacy existing as to
+which term is employed."
+
+LANGUAGE. A note in Worcester's Dictionary says: "_Language_ is a very
+general term, and is not strictly confined to utterance by words, as it
+is also expressed by the countenance, by the eyes, and by signs.
+_Tongue_ refers especially to an original language; as, 'the Hebrew
+_tongue_.' The modern languages are derived from the original
+_tongues_." If this be correct, then he who speaks French, German,
+English, Spanish, and Italian, may properly say that he speaks five
+_languages_, but only one _tongue_.
+
+LAY--LIE. Errors are frequent in the use of these two irregular verbs.
+_Lay_ is often used for _lie_, and _lie_ is sometimes used for _lay_.
+This confusion in their use is due in some measure, doubtless, to the
+circumstance that _lay_ appears in both verbs, it being the imperfect
+tense of _to lie_. We say, "A mason _lays_ bricks," "A ship _lies_ at
+anchor," etc. "I must _lie_ down"; "I must _lay_ myself down"; "I must
+_lay_ this book on the table"; "He _lies_ on the grass"; "He _lays_ his
+plans well"; "He _lay_ on the grass"; "He _laid_ it away"; "He has
+_lain_ in bed long enough"; "He has _laid up_ some money," "_in_ a
+stock," "_down_ the law"; "He is _laying_ out the grounds"; "Ships _lie_
+at the wharf"; "Hens _lay_ eggs"; "The ship _lay_ at anchor"; "The hen
+_laid_ an egg." It will be seen that _lay_ always expresses transitive
+action, and that _lie_ expresses rest.
+
+    "Here _lies_ our sovereign lord, the king,
+      Whose word no man relies on;
+    He never says a foolish thing,
+      Nor ever does a wise one."
+
+--Written on the bedchamber door of Charles II, by the Earl of
+Rochester.
+
+LEARN. This verb was long ago used as a synonym of _teach_, but in this
+sense it is now obsolete. To _teach_ is to give instruction; to _learn_
+is to take instruction. "I will _learn_, if you will _teach_ me." See
+TEACH.
+
+LEAVE. There are grammarians who insist that this verb should not be
+used without an object, as, for example, it is used in such sentences
+as, "When do you leave?" "I leave to-morrow." The object of the
+verb--home, town, or whatever it may be--is, of course, understood; but
+this, say these gentlemen, is not permissible. On this point opinions
+will, I think, differ; they will, however, not differ with regard to the
+vulgarity of using _leave_ in the sense of _let_; thus, "_Leave_ me be";
+"_Leave_ it alone"; "_Leave_ her be--don't bother her"; "_Leave_ me see
+it."
+
+LEND. See LOAN.
+
+LENGTHY. This word is of comparatively recent origin, and, though it is
+said to be an Americanism, it is a good deal used in England. The most
+careful writers, however, both here and elsewhere, much prefer the word
+_long_: "a _long_ discussion," "a _long_ discourse," etc.
+
+LENIENCY. Mr. Gould calls this word and _lenience_ "two philological
+abortions." _Lenity_ is undoubtedly the proper word to use, though both
+Webster and Worcester do recognize _leniency_ and _lenience_.
+
+LESS. This word is much used instead of _fewer_. _Less_ relates to
+quantity; _fewer_ to number. Instead of, "There were not _less_ than
+twenty persons present," we should say, "There were not _fewer_ than
+twenty persons present."
+
+LESSER. This form of the comparative of _little_ is accounted a
+corruption of _less_. It may, however, be used instead of _less_ with
+propriety in verse, and also, in some cases, in prose. We may say, for
+example, "Of two evils choose the _less_," or "the _lesser_." The latter
+form, in sentences like this, is the more euphonious.
+
+LIABLE. Richard Grant White, in inveighing against the misuse of this
+word, cites the example of a member from a rural district, who called
+out to a man whom he met in the village, where he was in the habit of
+making little purchases: "I say, mister, kin yer tell me whar I'd be
+_li'ble_ to find some beans?" See, also, APT.
+
+LIE. See LAY.
+
+LIKE--AS. Both these words express similarity; _like_ (adjective)
+comparing things, _as_ (adverb) comparing action, existence, or quality.
+Like is followed by an object only, and does not admit of a verb in the
+same construction. _As_ must be followed by a verb expressed or
+understood. We say, "He looks _like_ his brother," or "He looks _as_ his
+brother _looks_." "Do _as_ I do," not "_like_ I do." "You must speak
+_as_ James does," not "_like_ James does." "He died _as_ he had lived,
+_like_ a dog." "It is _as_ blue _as_ indigo"; i. e., "as indigo is."
+
+LIKE, TO. See LOVE.
+
+LIKELY. See APT.
+
+LIT. This form of the past participle of the verb _to light_ is now
+obsolete. "Have you _lighted_ the fire?" "The gas is _lighted_." _Het_
+for _heated_ is a similar, but much greater, vulgarism.
+
+LOAN--LEND. There are those who contend that there is no such verb as
+_to loan_, although it has been found in our literature for more than
+three hundred years. Whether there is properly such a verb or not, it is
+quite certain that it is only those having a vulgar _penchant_ for big
+words who will prefer it to its synonym _lend_. Better far to say
+"_Lend_ me your umbrella" than "_Loan_ me your umbrella."
+
+LOCATE--SETTLE. The use of the verb _to locate_ in the sense of _to
+settle_ is said to be an Americanism. Although the dictionaries
+recognize _to locate_ as a neuter verb, as such it is marked "rarely
+used," and, in the sense of _to settle_, it is among the vulgarisms that
+careful speakers and writers are studious to avoid. A man _settles_, not
+_locates_, in Nebraska. "Where do you intend to _settle_?" not _locate_.
+See, also, SETTLE.
+
+LOGGERHEADS. "In the mean time France is at _loggerheads
+internally_."--"New York Herald," April 29, 1881. Loggerheads
+_internally_?!
+
+LOOKS BEAUTIFULLY. It is sometimes interesting to note the difference
+between _vulgar_ bad grammar and _genteel_ bad grammar, or, more
+properly, between non-painstaking and painstaking bad grammar. The
+former uses, for example, adjectives instead of adverbs; the latter uses
+adverbs instead of adjectives. The former says, "This bonnet is trimmed
+_shocking_"; the latter says, "This bonnet looks _shockingly_." In the
+first sentence the epithet qualifies the verb _is trimmed_, and
+consequently should have its adverbial form--_shockingly_; in the second
+sentence the epithet qualifies the _appearance_--a noun--of the bonnet,
+and consequently should have its adjectival form--_shocking_. The second
+sentence means to say, "This bonnet presents a shocking appearance." The
+bonnet certainly does not really _look_; it is _looked at_, and to the
+_looker_ its appearance is _shocking_. So we say, in like manner, of a
+person, that he or she looks _sweet_, or _charming_, or _beautiful_, or
+_handsome_, or _horrid_, or _graceful_, or _timid_, and so on, always
+using an adjective. "Miss Coghlan, as Lady Teazle, looked _charmingly_."
+The grammar of the "New York Herald" would not have been any more
+incorrect if it had said that Miss Coghlan looked _gladly_, or _sadly_,
+or _madly_, or _delightedly_, or _pleasedly_. A person may look _sick_
+or _sickly_, but in both cases the qualifying word is an adjective. The
+verbs to _smell_, to _feel_, to _sound_, and to _appear_ are also found
+in sentences in which the qualifying word must be an adjective and not
+an adverb. We say, for example, "The rose smells _sweet_"; "The butter
+smells _good_, or _bad_, or _fresh_"; "I feel _glad_, or _sad_, or
+_bad_, or _despondent_, or _annoyed_, or _nervous_"; "This construction
+sounds _harsh_"; "How _delightful_ the country appears!"
+
+On the other hand, to _look_, to _feel_, to _smell_, to _sound_, and to
+_appear_ are found in sentences where the qualifying word must be an
+adverb; thus, "He feels his loss _keenly_"; "The king looked
+_graciously_ on her"; "I smell it _faintly_." We might also say, "He
+feels _sad_ [adjective], because he feels his loss _keenly_" (adverb);
+"He appears _well_" (adverb).
+
+The expression, "_She seemed confusedly_, or _timidly_," is not a whit
+more incorrect than "_She looked beautifully_, or _charmingly_." See
+ADJECTIVES.
+
+LOVE--LIKE. Men who are at all careful in the selection of language to
+express their thoughts, and have not an undue leaning toward the
+superlative, _love_ few things: their wives, their sweethearts, their
+kinsmen, truth, justice, and their country. Women, on the contrary, as a
+rule, _love_ a multitude of things, and, among their loves, the thing
+they perhaps love most is--taffy.
+
+LUGGAGE--BAGGAGE. The former of these words is generally used in
+England, the latter in America.
+
+LUNCH. This word, when used as a substantive, may at the best be
+accounted an inelegant abbreviation of _luncheon_. The dictionaries
+barely recognize it. The proper phraseology to use is, "Have you
+_lunched_?" or, "Have you had your _luncheon_?" or, better, "Have you
+had _luncheon_?" as we may in most cases presuppose that the person
+addressed would hardly take anybody's else luncheon.
+
+LUXURIOUS--LUXURIANT. The line is drawn much more sharply between these
+two words now than it was formerly. Luxurious was once used, to some
+extent at least, in the sense of _rank growth_, but now all careful
+writers and speakers use it in the sense of _indulging_ or _delighting
+in luxury_. We talk of a _luxurious_ table, a _luxurious_ liver,
+_luxurious_ ease, _luxurious_ freedom. Luxuriant, on the other hand, is
+restricted to the sense of _rank_, or _excessive_, growth or production;
+thus, _luxuriant_ weeds, _luxuriant_ foliage or branches, _luxuriant_
+growth.
+
+    "Prune the _luxuriant_, the uncouth refine,
+    But show no mercy to an empty line."--Pope.
+
+MAD. Professor Richard A. Proctor, in a recent number of "The
+Gentleman's Magazine," says: "The word _mad_ in America seems nearly
+always to mean _angry_. For _mad_, as we use the word, Americans say
+_crazy_. Herein they have manifestly impaired the language." Have they?
+
+                "Now, in faith, Gratiano,
+    You give your wife too unkind a cause of grief;
+    An 'twere, to me, I would be _mad at_ it."
+                              --"Merchant of Venice."
+
+"And being exceedingly _mad_ against them, I persecuted them even unto
+strange cities."--Acts xxvi, II.
+
+MAKE A VISIT. The phrase "_make_ a visit," according to Dr. Hall,
+whatever it once was, is no longer English.
+
+MALE. See FEMALE.
+
+MARRY. There has been some discussion, at one time and another, with
+regard to the use of this word. Is John Jones married _to_ Sally Brown
+or _with_ Sally Brown, or are they married to each other? Inasmuch as
+the woman loses her name in that of the man to whom she is wedded, and
+becomes a member of his family, not he of hers--inasmuch as, with few
+exceptions, it is her life that is merged in his--it would seem that,
+_properly_, Sally Brown is married _to_ John Jones, and that this would
+be the proper way to make the announcement of their having been wedded,
+and not John Jones _to_ Sally Brown.
+
+There is also a difference of opinion as to whether the active or the
+passive form is preferable in referring to a person's wedded state. In
+speaking definitely of the _act_ of marriage, the passive form is
+necessarily used with reference to either spouse. "John Jones was
+married to Sally Brown on Dec. 1, 1881"; not, "John Jones _married_
+Sally Brown" on such a date, for (unless they were Quakers) some third
+person married him to her and her to him. But, in speaking indefinitely
+of the _fact_ of marriage, the active form is a matter of course. "Whom
+did John Jones marry?" "He married Sally Brown." "John Jones, when he
+had sown his wild oats, married [married himself, as the French say] and
+settled down." _Got married_ is a vulgarism.
+
+MAY. In the sense of _can_, _may_, in a negative clause, has become
+obsolete. "Though we _may_ say a horse, we _may_ not say a ox." The
+first _may_ here is permissible; not so, however, the second, which
+should be _can_.
+
+MEAT. At table, we ask for and offer beef, mutton, veal, steak, turkey,
+duck, etc., and do not ask for nor offer _meat_, which, to say the
+least, is inelegant. "Will you have [not, take] another piece of _beef_
+[not, of _the_ beef]?" not, "Will you have another piece of _meat_?"
+
+MEMORANDUM. The plural is _memoranda_, except when the singular means a
+book; then the plural is _memorandums_.
+
+MERE. This word is not unfrequently misplaced, and sometimes, as in the
+following sentence, in consequence of being misplaced, it is changed to
+an adverb: "It is true of men as of God, that words _merely_ meet with
+no response." What the writer evidently intended to say is, that _mere_
+words meet with no response.
+
+METAPHOR. An _implied_ comparison is called a metaphor; it is a more
+terse form of expression than the simile. Take, for example, this
+sentence from Spenser's "Philosophy of Style": "As, in passing through
+the crystal, beams of white light are decomposed into the colors of the
+rainbow; so, in traversing the soul of the poet, the colorless rays of
+truth are transformed into brightly-tinted poetry." Expressed in
+metaphors, this becomes: "The white light of truth, in traversing the
+many-sided, transparent soul of the poet, is refracted into iris-hued
+poetry."
+
+Worcester's definition of a _metaphor_ is: "A figure of speech founded
+on the resemblance which one object is supposed to bear, in some
+respect, to another, or a figure by which a word is transferred from a
+subject to which it properly belongs to another, in such a manner that a
+_comparison is implied, though not formally expressed_; a comparison or
+simile comprised in a word; as, 'Thy word is a _lamp_ to my feet.'" A
+_metaphor_ differs from a _simile_ in being expressed without any sign
+of comparison; thus, "the _silver_ moon" is a _metaphor_; "the moon is
+bright as silver" is a simile. Examples:
+
+    "But look, the morn, in russet mantle clad,
+    Walks o'er the dew of yon high eastern hill."
+
+    "Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased--
+    Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow?"
+
+                      "At length Erasmus
+    Stemmed the wild torrent of a barbarous age,
+    And drove those holy Vandals off the stage."
+
+"Censure is the tax a man pays to the public for being eminent."
+
+METONYMY. The rhetorical figure that puts the effect for the cause, the
+cause for the effect, the container for the thing contained, the sign,
+or symbol, for the thing signified, or the instrument for the agent, is
+called _metonymy_.
+
+"One very common species of _metonymy_ is, when the badge is put for the
+office. Thus we say the _miter_ for the priesthood; the _crown_ for
+royalty; for military occupation we say the _sword_; and for the
+literary professions, those especially of theology, law, and physic, the
+common expression is the _gown_."--Campbell.
+
+Dr. Quackenbos, in his "Course of Composition and Rhetoric," says:
+"_Metonymy_ is the exchange of names between things related. It is
+founded, not on resemblance, but on the relation of, 1. Cause and
+effect; as,'They have _Moses_ and _the prophets_,' i. e., their
+writings; '_Gray hairs_ should be respected,' i. e., _old age_. 2.
+Progenitor and posterity; as, 'Hear, O Israel!' i. e., _descendants of
+Israel_. 3. Subject and attribute; as, '_Youth_ and _beauty_ shall be
+laid in dust,' i. e., _the young_ and _beautiful_. 4. Place and
+inhabitant; as, 'What _land_ is so barbarous as to allow this
+injustice?' i. e., what _people_. 5. Container and thing contained; as,
+'Our _ships_ next opened fire,' i. e., our _sailors_. 6. Sign and thing
+signified; as, 'The _scepter_ shall not depart from Judah,' i. e.,
+_kingly_ power. 7. Material and thing made of it; as, 'His _steel_
+gleamed on high,' i. e., his _sword_."
+
+"Petitions having proved unsuccessful, it was determined to approach the
+throne more boldly."
+
+MIDST, THE. See IN OUR MIDST.
+
+MIND--CAPRICIOUS. "Lord Salisbury's _mind_ is _capricious_."--"Tribune,"
+April 3, 1881. See EQUANIMITY OF MIND.
+
+MISPLACED CLAUSES. In writing and speaking, it is as important to give
+each clause its proper place as it is to place the words properly. The
+following are a few instances of misplaced clauses and adjuncts: "All
+these circumstances brought close to us a state of things which we never
+thought to have witnessed [_to witness_] in peaceful England. _In the
+sister island, indeed, we had read of such horrors_, but now they were
+brought home to our very household hearth."--Swift. Better: "We had
+read, indeed, of such horrors occurring in the sister island," etc.
+
+"The savage people in many places in America, except the government of
+families, have no government at all, and live at this day in that savage
+manner as I have said before."--Hobbes. Better: "The savage people ...
+in America have no government at all, except the government of
+families," etc.
+
+"I shall have a comedy for you, in a season or two at farthest, that I
+believe will be worth your acceptance."--Goldsmith. Bettered: "In a
+season or two at farthest, I shall have a comedy for you that I believe
+will be worth your acceptance."
+
+Among the following examples of the wrong placing of words and clauses,
+there are some that are as amusing as they are instructive: "This
+orthography is regarded as normal _in England_." What the writer
+intended was, "in England _as normal_"--a very different thought. "The
+Normal School is a commodious building capable of accommodating three
+hundred students four stories high." "HOUSEKEEPER.--A highly respectable
+middle-aged Person who has been filling the above Situation with a
+gentleman for upwards of eleven years and who is now deceased is anxious
+to meet a similar one." "TO PIANO-FORTE MAKERS.--A lady keeping a
+first-class school requiring a good piano, is desirous of receiving a
+daughter of the above in exchange for the same." "The Moor, seizing a
+bolster boiling over with rage and jealousy, smothers her." "The Dying
+Zouave the most wonderful mechanical representation ever seen of the
+last breath of life being shot in the breast and life's blood leaving
+the wound." "Mr. T---- presents his compliments to Mr. H----, and I have
+got a hat that is not his, and, if he have a hat that is not yours, no
+doubt they are the expectant ones." See ONLY.
+
+MISPLACED WORDS. "Of all the faults to be found in writing," says
+Cobbett, "this is one of the most common, and perhaps it leads to the
+greatest number of misconceptions. All the words may be the proper words
+to be used upon the occasion, and yet, by a _misplacing_ of a part of
+them, the meaning may be wholly destroyed; and even made to be the
+contrary of what it ought to be."
+
+"I asked the question with no other intention than to set the gentleman
+free from the necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of
+mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly from which, _however
+uneasy_, he could not then _escape_, _by a kind introduction_ of the
+only subject on which I believed him to be able to speak with
+propriety."--Dr. Johnson.
+
+"This," says Cobbett, "is a very bad sentence altogether. '_However
+uneasy_' applies to _assembly_ and not to _gentleman_. Only observe how
+easily this might have been avoided. 'From which _he_, _however uneasy_,
+could not then escape.' After this we have, '_he_ could not then
+_escape_, _by a kind introduction_.' We know what is _meant_; but the
+Doctor, with all his _commas_, leaves the sentence confused. Let us see
+whether we can not make it clear. 'I asked the question with no other
+intention than, by a kind introduction of the only subject on which I
+believed him to be able to speak with propriety, to set the gentleman
+free from the necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of
+mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly from which he, however
+uneasy, could not then escape.'"
+
+"Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the chief eminences
+whereby we are raised above our fellow-creatures, the brutes, _in this
+lower world_."--Doctor Watts' "Logic."
+
+"I have before showed an error," Cobbett remarks, "in the _first_
+sentence of Doctor Watts' work. This is the _second_ sentence. The words
+_in this lower world_ are not words _misplaced_ only; they are wholly
+_unnecessary_, and they do great harm; for they do these two things:
+first, they imply _that there are brutes in the higher world_; and,
+second, they excite a doubt _whether we are raised above those brutes_.
+
+"I might greatly extend the number of my extracts from these authors;
+but here, I trust, are enough. I had noted down about _two hundred
+errors_ in Dr. Johnson's 'Lives of the Poets'; but, afterward perceiving
+that he had revised and corrected 'The Rambler' with _extraordinary
+care_, I chose to make my extracts from that work rather than from the
+'Lives of the Poets.'"
+
+The position of the adverb should be as near as possible to the word it
+qualifies. Sometimes we place it before the auxiliary and sometimes
+after it, according to the thought we wish to express. The difference
+between "The fish should _properly_ be broiled" and "The fish should be
+_properly_ broiled" is apparent at a glance. "The colon may be
+_properly_ used in the following cases": should be, "may _properly_ be
+used." "This mode of expression _rather suits_ a familiar than a grave
+style": should be, "suits a familiar _rather than_ a grave style." "It
+is a frequent error _in the writings even_ of some good authors": should
+be, "in the writings of _even some good_ authors." "_Both_ the
+circumstances of contingency and futurity are necessary": should be,
+"The circumstances of contingency and futurity are _both_ necessary."
+"He has made charges ... which he has failed _utterly_ to
+sustain."--"New York Tribune." Here it is uncertain at first sight which
+verb the adverb is intended to qualify; but the nature of the case makes
+it probable that the writer meant "has utterly failed to sustain."
+
+MISTAKEN. "If I am not _mistaken_, you are in the wrong": say, "If I
+_mistake not_." "I tell you, you are _mistaken_." Here _mistaken_ means,
+"You are wrong; you do not understand"; but it might be taken to mean,
+"I _mistake you_." For "you are _mistaken_," say, "you _mistake_." If,
+as Horace and Professor Davidson aver, usage in language makes right,
+then the grammarians ought long ago to have invented some theory upon
+which the locution _you are mistaken_ could be defended. Until they do
+invent such a theory, it will be better to say _you mistake_, _he
+mistakes_, and so on; or _you are_, or _he is_--as the case may be--_in
+error_.
+
+MORE PERFECT. Such expressions as, "the _more_ perfect of the two," "the
+_most_ perfect thing of the kind I have ever seen," "the _most_ complete
+cooking-stove ever invented," and the like, can not be defended
+logically, as nothing can be more perfect than perfection, or more
+complete than completeness. Still such phrases are, and probably will
+continue to be, used by good writers.
+
+MOST. "Everybody abuses this word," says Mr. Gould in his "Good
+English"; and then, in another paragraph, he adds: "If a man would cross
+out _most_ wherever he can find it in any book in the English language,
+he would in _al_most every instance improve the style of the book." That
+this statement may appear within bounds, he gives many examples from
+good authors, some of which are the following: "a _most_ profound
+silence"; "a _most_ just idea"; "a _most_ complete orator"; "this was
+_most_ extraordinary"; "an object of _most_ perfect esteem"; "a _most_
+extensive erudition"; "he gave it _most_ liberally away"; "it is, _most_
+assuredly, not because I value his services least"; "would _most_
+seriously affect us"; "that such a system must _most_ widely and _most_
+powerfully," etc.; "it is _most_ effectually nailed to the counter"; "it
+is _most_ undeniable that," etc.
+
+This word is much, and very erroneously, used for _almost_. "He comes
+here _most_ every day." The user of such a sentence as this means to say
+that he comes _nearly_ every day, but he _really says_, if he says
+anything, that he comes more every day than he does every night. In such
+sentences _almost_, and not _most_, is the word to use.
+
+MUTUAL. This word is much misused in the phrase "our _mutual_ friend."
+Macaulay says: "_Mutual_ friend is a low vulgarism for _common_ friend."
+_Mutual_ properly relates to two persons, and implies reciprocity of
+sentiment--sentiment, be it what it may, received and returned. Thus, we
+say properly, "John and James have a _mutual_ affection, or a _mutual_
+aversion," i. e., they like or dislike each other; or, "John and James
+are _mutually_ dependent," i. e., they are dependent on each other. In
+using the word _mutual_, care should be taken not to add the words _for
+each other_ or _on each other_, the thought conveyed by these words
+being already expressed in the word _mutual_. "Dependent on each other"
+is the exact equivalent of "mutually dependent"; hence, saying that John
+and James are _mutually_ dependent _on each other_ is as redundant in
+form as it would be to say that the editors of "The Great Vilifier" are
+the biggest, greatest mud-slingers in America.
+
+MYSELF. This form of the personal pronoun is properly used in the
+nominative case only where _increased emphasis_ is aimed at.
+
+    "I had as lief not be as live to be
+    In awe of such a thing as I _myself_."
+
+"I will do it _myself_," "I saw it _myself_." It is, therefore,
+incorrect to say, "Mrs. Brown and myself were both very much pleased."
+
+NAME. This word is sometimes improperly used for _mention_; thus, "I
+never _named_ the matter to any one": should be, "I never _mentioned_
+the matter to any one."
+
+NEIGHBORHOOD. See VICINITY.
+
+NEITHER. See EITHER.
+
+NEITHER--NOR. "He would _neither_ give wine, _nor_ oil, _nor_
+money."--Thackeray. The conjunction should be placed before the excluded
+object; "neither _give_" implies neither some other _verb_, a meaning
+not intended. Rearrange thus, taking all the common parts of the
+contracted sentences together: "He would give _neither_ wine, _nor_ oil,
+_nor_ money." So, "She can _neither_ help her beauty, _nor_ her courage,
+_nor_ her cruelty" (Thackeray), should be, "She can help _neither_,"
+etc. "He had _neither_ time to intercept _nor_ to stop her" (Scott),
+should be, "He had time _neither_ to intercept," etc. "Some _neither_
+can for wits _nor_ critics pass" (Pope), should be, "Some can _neither_
+for wits _nor_ critics pass."
+
+NEVER. Grammarians differ with regard to the correctness of using
+_never_ in such sentences as, "He is in error, though _never_ so wise,"
+"Charm he _never_ so wisely." In sentences like these, to say the least,
+it is better, in common with the great majority of writers, to use
+_ever_.
+
+NEW. This adjective is often misplaced. "He has a _new_ suit of clothes
+and a _new_ pair of gloves." It is not the _suit_ and the _pair_ that
+are new, but the _clothes_ and the _gloves_.
+
+NICE. Archdeacon Hare remarks of the use, or rather misuse, of this
+word: "That stupid vulgarism by which we use the word _nice_ to denote
+almost every mode of approbation, for almost every variety of quality,
+and, from sheer poverty of thought, or fear of saying anything definite,
+wrap up everything indiscriminately in this characterless domino,
+speaking at the same breath of a _nice_ cheese-cake, a _nice_ tragedy, a
+_nice_ sermon, a _nice_ day, a _nice_ country, as if a universal deluge
+of _niaiserie_--for _nice_ seems originally to have been only
+_niais_--had whelmed the whole island." Nice is as good a word as any
+other in its place, but its place is not everywhere. We talk very
+properly about a _nice_ distinction, a _nice_ discrimination, a _nice_
+calculation, a _nice_ point, and about a person's being _nice_, and
+over-_nice_, and the like; but we certainly ought not to talk about
+"Othello's" being a _nice_ tragedy, about Salvini's being a _nice_
+actor, or New York bay's being a _nice_ harbor.[23]
+
+NICELY. The very quintessence of popinjay vulgarity is reached when
+_nicely_ is made to do service for _well_, in this wise: "How do you
+do?" "_Nicely_." "How are you?" "_Nicely_."
+
+NO. This word of negation is responded to by _nor_ in sentences like
+this: "Let your meaning be obscure, and _no_ grace of diction _nor_ any
+music of well-turned sentences will make amends."
+
+"Whether he is there or _no_." Supply the ellipsis, and we have,
+"Whether he is there or _no_ there." Clearly, the word to use in
+sentences like this is not _no_, but _not_. And yet our best writers
+sometimes inadvertently use _no_ with _whether_. Example: "But perhaps
+some people are quite indifferent _whether_ or _no_ it is said,"
+etc.--Richard Grant White, in "Words and Their Uses," p. 84. Supply the
+ellipsis, and we have, "said or _no_ said." In a little book entitled
+"Live and Learn," I find, "No _less_ than fifty persons were there; No
+_fewer_," etc. In correcting one mistake, the writer himself makes one.
+It should be, "_Not_ fewer," etc. If we ask, "There were fifty persons
+there, were there or were there _not_?" the reply clearly would be,
+"There were _not_ fewer than fifty." "There was _no_ one of them who
+would not have been proud," etc., should be, "There was _not_ one of
+them."
+
+NOT. The correlative of _not_, when it stands in the first member of a
+sentence, is _nor_ or _neither_. "_Not_ for thy ivory _nor_ thy gold
+will I unbind thy chain." "I will _not_ do it, _neither_ shall you."
+
+The wrong placing of _not_ often gives rise to an imperfect negation;
+thus, "John and James were _not_ there," means that John and James were
+not there _in company_. It does not exclude the presence of one of them.
+The negative should precede in this case: "Neither John _nor_ James was
+there." "Our company was _not_ present" (as a company, but some of us
+might have been), should be, "No member of our company was present."
+
+NOT--BUT ONLY. "Errors frequently arise in the use of _not_--but _only_,
+to understand which we must attend to the force of the whole
+expression. 'He did _not_ pretend to extirpate French music, _but only_
+to cultivate and civilize it.' Here the _not_ is obviously misplaced.
+'He pretended, or professed, _not_ to extirpate.'"--Bain.
+
+NOTORIOUS. Though this word can not be properly used in any but a bad
+sense, we sometimes see it used instead of _noted_, which may be used in
+either a good or a bad sense. _Notorious_ characters are always persons
+to be shunned, whereas _noted_ characters may or may not be persons to
+be shunned.
+
+"This is the tax a man must pay for his virtues--they hold up a torch to
+his vices and render those frailties _notorious_ in him which would pass
+without observation in another."--Lacon.
+
+NOVICE. See AMATEUR.
+
+NUMBER. It is not an uncommon thing for a pronoun in the plural number
+to be used in connection with an antecedent in the singular. At present,
+the following notice may be seen in some of our Broadway omnibuses:
+"Fifty dollars reward for the conviction of any person caught collecting
+or keeping fares given to _them_ to deposit in the box." Should be, to
+_him_. "A person may be very near-sighted if _they_ can not recognize an
+acquaintance ten feet off." Should be, if _he_.
+
+The verb _to be_ is often used in the singular instead of in the plural;
+thus, "There _is_ several reasons why it would be better": say, _are_.
+"How many _is_ there?" say, _are_. "There _is_ four": say, _are_. "_Was_
+there many?" say, _were_. "No matter how many there _was_": say, _were_.
+
+A verb should agree in number with its subject, and not with its
+predicate. We say, for example, "Death _is_ the wages of sin," and "The
+wages of sin _are_ death."
+
+"When singular nouns connected by _and_ are preceded by _each_,
+_every_, or _no_, the verb must be singular." We say, for example,
+"_Each_ boy and _each_ girl _studies_." "_Every_ leaf, and _every_ twig,
+and _every_ drop of water _teems_ with life." "_No_ book and _no_ paper
+_was_ arranged."
+
+_Each_ being singular, a pronoun or verb to agree with it must also be
+singular; thus, "Let them depend each on _his_ own exertions"; "Each
+city has _its_ peculiar privileges"; "Everybody has a right to look
+after _his_ own interest."
+
+Errors are often the result of not repeating the verb; thus, "Its
+significance is as varied as the passions": correctly, "as _are_ the
+passions." "The words are as incapable of analysis as the thing
+signified": correctly, "as _is_ the thing signified."
+
+OBSERVE. The dictionaries authorize the use of this word as a synonym of
+_say_ and _remark_; as, for example, "What did you _observe_?" for "What
+did you _say_, or _remark_?" In this sense, however, it is better to
+leave _observe_ to the exclusive use of those who delight in being fine.
+
+O'CLOCK. "It is a quarter _to_ ten o'clock." What does this statement
+mean, literally? We _understand_ by it that it lacks a quarter of ten,
+i. e., of being ten; but it does not really mean that. Inasmuch as _to_
+means toward, it _really_ means a quarter after nine. We should say,
+then, a quarter _of_, which means, literally, a quarter _out of_ ten.
+
+OF ALL OTHERS. "The vice of covetousness, _of all others_, enters
+deepest into the soul." This sentence says that covetousness is one of
+the _other_ vices. A thing can not be _another_ thing, nor can it be one
+of a number of _other_ things. The sentence should be, "Of all the
+vices, covetousness enters deepest into the soul"; or, "The vice of
+covetousness, of all the vices, enters," etc.; or, "The vice of
+covetousness, _above_ all others, enters," etc.
+
+OF ANY. This phrase is often used when _of all_ is meant; thus, "This is
+the largest _of any_ I have seen." Should be, "the largest _of all_,"
+etc.
+
+OFF OF. In such sentences as, "Give me a yard _off of_ this piece of
+calico," either the _off_ or the _of_ is vulgarly superfluous. The
+sentence would be correct with either one, but not with both of them.
+"The apples fell _off of_ the tree": read, "fell _off_ the tree."
+
+OFTEN. This adverb is properly compared by changing its termination:
+often, oftener, oftenest. Why some writers use _more_ and _most_ to
+compare it, it is not easy to see; this mode of comparing it is
+certainly not euphonious.
+
+OH--O. It is only the most careful writers who use these two
+interjections with proper discrimination. The distinction between them
+is said to be modern. _Oh_ is simply an exclamation, and should always
+be followed by some mark of punctuation, usually by an exclamation
+point. "Oh! you are come at last." "Oh, help him, you sweet heavens!"
+"Oh, woe is me!" "Oh! I die, Horatio." _O_, in addition to being an
+exclamation, denotes a calling to or adjuration; thus, "Hear, O heavens,
+and give ear, O earth!" "O grave, where is thy victory?" "O heavenly
+powers, restore him!" "O shame! where is thy blush?"
+
+OLDER--ELDER. "He is the _older_ man of the two, and the _oldest_ in the
+neighborhood." "He is the _elder_ of the two sons, and the _eldest_ of
+the family." "The _elder_ son is heir to the estate; he is _older_ than
+his brother by ten years."
+
+ON TO. We get _on_ a chair, _on_ an omnibus, _on_ a stump, and _on_ a
+spree, and not on _to_.
+
+ONE. Certain pronouns of demonstrative signification are called
+indefinite because they refer to no particular subject. This is one of
+them. If we were putting a supposition by way of argument or
+illustration, we might say, "Suppose _I_ were to lose my way in a
+wood"; or, "Suppose _you_ were to lose your way in a wood"; or, "Suppose
+_one_ were to lose _one's_ way in a wood." All these forms are used,
+but, as a rule, the last is to be preferred. The first verges on
+egotism, and the second makes free with another's person, whereas the
+third is indifferent. "If _one's_ honesty were impeached, what should
+_one_ do?" is more courtly than to take either one's self or the person
+addressed for the example.
+
+_One_ should be followed by _one_, and not by _he_. "The better
+acquainted _one_ is with any kind of rhetorical trick, the less liable
+_he_ is to be misled by it." Should be, "the less liable _one_ is to be
+misled by it."
+
+In the phrase, "any of the little _ones_," _one_ is the numeral employed
+in the manner of a pronoun, by indicating something that has gone
+before, or, perhaps, has to come after. "I like peaches, but I must have
+a ripe _one_, or ripe _ones_."
+
+Professor Bain says, in his "Composition Grammar":
+
+"This pronoun continually lands writers in difficulties. English idiom
+requires that, when the pronoun has to be again referred to, it should
+be used itself a second time. The correct usage is shown by Pope: '_One_
+may be ashamed to consume half _one's_ days in bringing sense and rhyme
+together.' It would be against idiom to say 'half _his_ days.'
+
+"Still, the repetition of the pronoun is often felt to be heavy, and
+writers have recourse to various substitutions. Even an ear accustomed
+to the idiom can scarcely accept with unmixed pleasure this instance
+from Browning:
+
+                        "'Alack! _one_ lies _oneself_
+    Even in the stating that _one's_ end was truth,
+    Truth only, if _one_ states so much in words.'
+
+"The representative 'I' or 'we' occasionally acts the part of 'one.' The
+following sentence presents a curious alternation of 'we' with
+'one'--possibly not accidental (George Eliot): 'It's a desperately
+vexatious thing that, after all _one's_ reflections and quiet
+determinations, _we_ should be ruled by moods that _one_ can't calculate
+on beforehand.' By the use of 'we' here, a more pointed reference is
+suggested, while the vagueness actually remains.
+
+"Fenimore Cooper, like Scott, is not very particular; an example may be
+quoted: 'Modesty is a poor man's wealth; but, as _we_ grow substantial
+in the world, patroon, _one_ can afford to begin to speak truth of
+_himself_ as well as of _his_ neighbor.' Were Cooper a careful writer,
+we might persuade ourselves that he chose 'we' and 'one' with a purpose:
+'we' might indicate that the speaker had himself and the patroon
+directly in his eye, although at the same time he wanted to put it
+generally; and 'one' might hint that modesty succeeded in getting the
+better of him. But 'himself' and 'his' would alone show that such
+speculations are too refined for the occasion.
+
+"The form 'a man,' which was at one time common, seems to be reviving.
+In 'Adam Bede' we have, '_A man_ can never do anything at variance with
+his own nature.' We might substitute 'one.'
+
+"'Men' was more frequent in good writing formerly than now. 'Neither do
+_men_ light a candle, and put it under a bushel.' 'Do _men_ gather
+grapes of thorns?' Hume is fond of expressing a general subject by
+'men.'
+
+"'Small birds are much more exposed to the cold than large _ones_.' This
+usage is hardly 'indefinite'; and it needs no further exemplification."
+
+ONLY. This word, when used as an adjective, is more frequently misplaced
+than any other word in the language. Indeed, I am confident that it is
+not correctly placed half the time, either in conversation or in
+writing. Thus, "In its pages, papers of sterling merit [only] will
+_only_ appear" (Miss Braddon); "Things are getting dull down in Texas;
+they _only_ shot [only] three men down there last week"; "I have _only_
+got [only] three." _Only_ is sometimes improperly used for _except_ or
+_unless_; thus, "The trains will not stop _only_ when the bell rings."
+The meaning here is clearly "_except_ when the bell rings."
+
+Dr. Bain, in his "Higher English Grammar," speaking of the order of
+words, says:
+
+"The word requiring most attention is _only_.
+
+"According to the position of _only_, the same words may be made to
+express very different meanings.
+
+"'He _only_ lived for their sakes.' Here _only_ must be held as
+qualifying '_lived_ for their sakes,' the emphasis being on _lived_, the
+word immediately adjoining. The meaning then is 'he _lived_,' but did
+not _work_, did not _die_, did not do any other thing for their sakes.
+
+"'He lived _only_ for their sakes.' _Only_ now qualifies 'for their
+sakes,' and the sentence means he lived for this one reason, namely, for
+their sakes, and not for any other reason.
+
+"'He lived for their sakes _only_.' The force of the word when placed at
+the end is peculiar. Then it often has a diminutive or disparaging
+signification. 'He lived for their sakes,' and not for any more worthy
+reason. 'He gave sixpence _only_,' is an insinuation that more was
+expected.
+
+"By the use of _alone_, instead of _only_, other meanings are expressed.
+'He _alone_ lived for their sakes'; that is, _he, and nobody else_, did
+so. 'He lived for their sakes _alone_,' or, 'for the sake of them
+_alone_'; that is, not for the sake of any other persons. 'It was
+_alone_ by the help of the Confederates that any such design could be
+carried out.' Better _only_.
+
+"'When men grow virtuous in their old age, they _only_ make a sacrifice
+to God of the devil's leavings.'--Pope. Here _only_ is rightly placed.
+'Think _only_ of the past as its remembrance gives you pleasure,' should
+be, 'think of the past, _only_ as its remembrance,' etc. 'As he did not
+leave his name, it was _only_ known that a gentleman had called on
+business': it was known _only_. 'I can _only_ refute the accusation by
+laying before you the whole': this would mean, 'the only thing I am able
+to do is to refute; I may not retaliate, or let it drop, I must _refute_
+it.' 'The negroes are to appear at church _only_ in boots'; that is,
+when the negroes go to church they are to have no clothing but boots.
+'The negroes are to appear _only_ at church in boots' might mean that
+they are not to appear anywhere but at church, whether in boots or out
+of them. The proper arrangement would be to connect the adverbial
+adjunct, _in boots_, with its verb, _appear_, and to make _only_ qualify
+_at church_ and no more: 'the negroes are to appear in boots _only_ at
+church.'"
+
+It thus appears very plain that we should look well to our _onlys_.
+
+OUGHT--SHOULD. These two words, though they both imply obligation,
+should not be used indiscriminately. _Ought_ is the stronger term; what
+we _ought_ to do, we are morally bound to do. We _ought_ to be truthful
+and honest, and _should_ be respectful to our elders and kind to our
+inferiors.
+
+OVERFLOWN. _Flown_ is the past participle of _to fly_, and _flowed_ of
+_to flow_. As, therefore, a river does not _fly_ over its banks, but
+_flows_ over them, we should say of it that it has over_flowed_, and not
+that it has over_flown_.
+
+OVERLY. This word is now used only by the unschooled.
+
+OWING. See DUE.
+
+PANTS. This abbreviation is not used by those who are careful in the
+choice of words. The purist does not use the word _pantaloons_ even, but
+_trousers_. _Pants_ are worn by _gents_ who eat _lunches_ and _open_
+wine, and _trousers_ are worn by _gentlemen_ who eat _luncheons_ and
+_order_ wine.
+
+PARAPHERNALIA. This is a law term. In Roman law, it meant the goods
+which a woman brought to her husband besides her dowry. In English law,
+it means the goods which a woman is allowed to have after the death of
+her husband, besides her dower, consisting of her apparel and ornaments
+suitable to her rank. When used in speaking of the affairs of every-day
+life, it is generally misused.
+
+PARLOR. This word, in the sense of _drawing-room_, according to Dr.
+Hall, except in the United States and some of the English colonies, is
+obsolete.
+
+PARTAKE. This is a very fine word to use for _eat_; just the word for
+young women who hobble on French heels.
+
+PARTIALLY--PARTLY. "It is only _partially_ done." This use of the adverb
+_partially_ is sanctioned by high authority, but that does not make it
+correct. A thing done in part is _partly_, not _partially_, done.
+
+PARTICIPLES. When the present participle is used substantively, in
+sentences like the following, it is preceded by the definite article and
+followed by the preposition _of_. The omitting of the preposition is a
+common error. Thus, "Or, it is _the drawing_ a conclusion which was
+before either unknown or dark," should be, "the drawing _of_ a
+conclusion." "Prompted by the most extreme vanity, he persisted in the
+writing bad verses," should be, "in writing bad verses," or "in the
+writing _of_ bad verses." "There is a misuse of the article _a_ which is
+very common. It is the using it before the word _most_."--Moon. Most
+writers would have said "the using _of_ it." Mr. Moon argues for his
+construction.
+
+PARTICLES. "Nothing but study of the best writers and practice in
+composition will enable us to decide what are the prepositions and
+conjunctions that ought to go with certain verbs. The following examples
+illustrate some common blunders:
+
+"'It was characterized _with_ eloquence': read, 'by.'
+
+"'A testimonial _of_ the merits of his grammar': read, 'to.'
+
+"'It was an example of the love _to form_ comparisons': read, 'of
+forming.'
+
+"'Repetition is always to be preferred _before_ obscurity': read, 'to.'
+
+"'He made an effort _for meeting_ them': read, 'to meet.'
+
+"'They have no _other_ object _but_ to come': read, 'other object than,'
+or omit 'other.'
+
+"Two verbs are not unfrequently followed by a single preposition, which
+accords with one only; e. g., 'This duty _is repeated_ and inculcated
+_upon_ the reader.' 'Repeat _upon_' is nonsense; we must read 'is
+repeated _to_ and inculcated upon.'"--Nichol's "English Composition," p.
+39. We often see _for_ used with the substantive _sympathy_; the best
+practice, however, uses _with_; thus, "Words can not express the deep
+sympathy I feel _with_ you."--Queen Victoria.
+
+PARTY. This is a very good word in its place, but it is very much out of
+its place when used--as it often is by the vulgar--where good taste
+would use the word _person_.
+
+PATRONIZE. This word and its derivatives would be much less used by the
+American tradesman than they are, if he were better acquainted with
+their true meaning. Then he would solicit his neighbors' _custom_, not
+their _patronage_. A man can have no _patrons_ without incurring
+obligations--without becoming a _protégé_; while a man may have
+customers innumerable, and, instead of placing himself under obligations
+to them, he may place them under obligations to him. Princes are the
+_patrons_ of those tradesmen whom they allow to call themselves their
+purveyors; as, "John Smith, Haberdasher to H. R. H. the Prince of
+Wales." Here the Prince _patronizes_ John Smith.
+
+PELL-MELL. This adverb means mixed or mingled together; as, "Men,
+horses, chariots, crowded _pell-mell_." It can not properly be applied
+to an individual. To say, for example, "He rushed pell-mell down the
+stairs," is as incorrect as it would be to say, "He rushed down the
+stairs _mixed together_."
+
+PER. This Latin preposition is a good deal used in English, as, for
+example, in such phrases as _per_ day, _per_ man, _per_ pound, _per_
+ton, and so on. In all such cases it is better to use plain English, and
+say, _a_ day, _a_ man, _a_ pound, _a_ ton, etc. _Per_ is correct before
+Latin nouns only; as, per annum, per diem, per cent., etc.
+
+PERFORM. "She _performs_ on the piano beautifully." In how much better
+taste it is to say simply, "She _plays_ the piano well," or, more
+superlatively, "exceedingly well," or "admirably"! If we talk about
+_performing_ on musical instruments, to be consistent, we should call
+those who _perform_, piano-performers, cornet-performers,
+violin-performers, and so on.
+
+PERPETUALLY. This word is sometimes misused for _continually_. Dr.
+William Mathews, in his "Words, their Use and Abuse," says: "The Irish
+are _perpetually_ using _shall_ for _will_." _Perpetual_ means never
+ceasing, continuing without intermission, uninterrupted; while
+_continual_ means that which is constantly renewed and recurring with
+perhaps frequent stops and interruptions. As the Irish do something
+_besides_ misuse _shall_, the Doctor should have said that they
+_continually_ use _shall_ for _will_. I might perhaps venture to
+intimate that _perpetually_ is likewise misused in the following
+sentence, which I copy from the "London Queen," if I were not conscious
+that the monster who can write and print such a sentence would not
+hesitate to cable a thunderbolt at an offender on the slightest
+provocation. Judge, if my fears are groundless: "But some few people
+contract the ugly habit of making use of these expressions unconsciously
+and continuously, _perpetually_ interlarding their conversation with
+them."
+
+PERSON. See PARTY; also, INDIVIDUAL.
+
+PERSONALTY. This word does not, as some persons think, mean the articles
+worn on one's person. It is properly a law term, and means _personal
+property_. "There is but one case on record of a peer of England leaving
+over $7,500,000 personalty."
+
+PERSONIFICATION. That rhetorical figure which attributes sex, life, or
+action to inanimate objects, or ascribes to objects and brutes the acts
+and qualities of rational beings, is called _personification_ or
+_prosopopœia_.
+
+"The mountains _sing together_, the hills rejoice and _clap their
+hands_." "The worm, _aware_ of his intent, _harangued_ him thus."
+
+    "See, _Winter_ comes to _rule_ the varied year,
+    _Sullen_ and _sad_ with all his rising train."--Thomson.
+
+    "So saying, her rash hand, in evil hour,
+    Forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she ate!
+    _Earth felt the wound; and Nature from her seat,
+    Sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe,
+    That all was lost._"--Milton.
+
+    "War and Love are strange compeers.
+    War sheds blood, and Love sheds tears;
+    War has swords, and Love has darts;
+    War breaks heads, and Love breaks hearts."
+
+"Levity is often less foolish and gravity less wise than each of them
+appears."
+
+"The English language, by reserving the distinction of gender for living
+beings that have sex, gives especial scope for personification. The
+highest form of personification should be used seldom, and only when
+justified by the presence of strong feeling."--Bain.
+
+    "Knowledge and wisdom, far from being one,
+    Have ofttimes no connection. Knowledge dwells
+    In heads replete with thoughts of other men;
+    Wisdom in minds attentive to their own.
+    Knowledge is proud that he has learned so much;
+    Wisdom is humble that he knows no more."--Cowper.
+
+PHENOMENON. Plural, _phenomena_.
+
+PLEAD. The imperfect tense and the perfect participle of the verb _to
+plead_ are both _pleaded_ and not _plead_. "He _pleaded_ not guilty."
+"You should have _pleaded_ your cause with more fervor."
+
+PLENTY. In Worcester's Dictionary we find the following note: "_Plenty_
+is much used colloquially as an adjective, in the sense of _plentiful_,
+both in this country and in England; and this use is supported by
+respectable authorities, though it is condemned by various critics.
+Johnson says: 'It is used barbarously, I think, for _plentiful_'; and
+Dr. Campbell, in his 'Philosophy of Rhetoric,' says: '_Plenty_ for
+_plentiful_ appears to me so gross a vulgarism that I should not have
+thought it worthy of a place here if I had not sometimes found it in
+works of considerable merit.'" We should say, then, that money is
+_plentiful_, and not that it is _plenty_.
+
+PLEONASM. Redundancy or pleonasm is the use of more words than are
+necessary to express the thought clearly. "They returned _back again_ to
+the _same_ city _from_ whence they came _forth_": the five words in
+italics are _redundant_ or _pleonastic_. "The different departments of
+science and of art _mutually_ reflect light _on each other_": either of
+the expressions in italics embodies the whole idea. "The _universal_
+opinion of _all_ men" is a pleonastic expression often heard. "I wrote
+you _a letter_ yesterday": here _a letter_ is redundant.
+
+Redundancy is _sometimes_ permissible for the surer conveyance of
+meaning, for emphasis, and in the language of poetic embellishment.
+
+POLITE. This word is much used by persons of doubtful culture, where
+those of the better sort use the word _kind_. We accept _kind_, not
+_polite_ invitations; and, when any one has been obliging, we tell him
+that he has been _kind_; and, when an interviewing reporter tells us of
+his having met with a _polite_ reception, we may be sure that the person
+by whom he has been received deserves well for his considerate kindness.
+"I thank you and Mrs. Pope for my _kind_ reception."--Atterbury.
+
+PORTION. This word is often incorrectly used for _part_. A _portion_ is
+properly a part assigned, allotted, set aside for a special purpose; a
+share, a division. The verb _to portion_ means to divide, to parcel, to
+endow. We ask, therefore, "In what _part_ [not, in what _portion_] of
+the country, state, county, town, or street do you live?"--or, if we
+prefer grandiloquence to correctness, _reside_. In the sentence, "A
+large _portion_ of the land is unfilled," the right word would be
+either _part_ or _proportion_, according to the intention of the writer.
+
+POSTED. A word very much and very inelegantly used for _informed_. Such
+expressions as, "I will _post_ you," "I must _post_ myself up," "If I
+had been better _posted_," and the like, are, at the best, but one
+remove from slang.
+
+PREDICATE. This word is often very incorrectly used in the sense of _to
+base_; as, "He _predicates_ his opinion on insufficient data." Then we
+sometimes hear people talk about predicating an action upon certain
+information or upon somebody's statement. To predicate means primarily
+_to speak before_, and has come to be properly used in the sense of
+_assumed_ or believed to be the consequence of. Examples: "Contentment
+is _predicated_ of virtue"; "Good health may be _predicated_ of a good
+constitution." He who is not very sure that he uses the word correctly
+would do better not to use it at all.
+
+PREJUDICE--PREPOSSESS. Both these words mean, to incline in one
+direction or the other for some reason not founded in justice; but by
+common consent _prejudice_ has come to be used in an unfavorable sense,
+and _prepossess_ in a favorable one. Thus, we say, "He is _prejudiced_
+against him," and "He is _prepossessed_ in his favor." We sometimes hear
+the expression, "He is _prejudiced_ in his favor," but this can not be
+accounted a good use of the word.
+
+PREPOSITIONS. The errors made in the use of the prepositions are very
+numerous. "The indolent child is one who [that?] has a strong aversion
+_from_ action of any sort."--Graham's "English Synonymes," p. 236. The
+prevailing and best modern usage is in favor of _to_ instead of _from_
+after _averse_ and _aversion_, and before the object. "Clearness ...
+enables the reader to see thoughts without noticing the language _with_
+which they are clothed."--Townsend's "Art of Speech." We clothe thoughts
+_in_ language. "Shakespeare ... and the Bible are ... models _for_ the
+English-speaking tongue."--Ibid. If this means models of English, then
+it should be _of_; but if it means models for English organs of speech
+to practice on, then it should be _for_; or if it means models to model
+English tongues after, then also it should be _for_. "If the resemblance
+is too faint, the mind is fatigued _while_ attempting to trace the
+analogies." "Aristotle is in error _while_ thus describing
+governments."--Ibid. Here we have two examples, not of the misuse of the
+preposition, but of the erroneous use of the adverb _while_ instead of
+the preposition _in_. "For my part I can not think that Shelley's
+poetry, except _by_ snatches and fragments, has the value of the good
+work of Wordsworth or Byron."--Matthew Arnold. Should be, "except _in_
+snatches." "Taxes with us are collected nearly [almost] solely _from_
+real and personal estate."--"Appletons' Journal." Taxes are levied _on_
+estates and collected _from_ the owners.
+
+"If I am not commended _for_ the beauty of my works, I may hope to be
+pardoned for their brevity." Cobbett comments on this sentence as
+follows: "We may commend him _for_ the beauty of his works, and we may
+_pardon_ him _for_ their brevity, if we deem the brevity _a fault_; but
+this is not what he means. He means that, at any rate, he shall have the
+_merit_ of brevity. 'If I am not commended for the beauty of my works, I
+may hope to be pardoned _on account of_ their brevity.' This is what the
+Doctor meant; but this would have marred a little the antithesis: it
+would have unsettled a little of the balance of that _seesaw_ in which
+Dr. Johnson so much delighted, and which, falling into the hands of
+novel-writers and of members of Parliament, has, by moving unencumbered
+with any of the Doctor's reason or sense, lulled so many thousands
+asleep! Dr. Johnson created a race of writers and speakers. 'Mr.
+Speaker, that the state of the nation is very critical, all men will
+allow; but that it is wholly desperate, few will believe.' When you hear
+or see a sentence like this, be sure that the person who speaks or
+writes it has been reading Dr. Johnson, or some of his imitators. But,
+observe, these imitators go no further than the frame of the sentences.
+They, in general, take care not to imitate the Doctor in knowledge and
+reasoning."
+
+The rhetoricians would have us avoid such forms of expression as, "The
+boy went _to_ and asked the advice _of_ his teacher"; "I called _on_ and
+had a conversation _with_ my brother."
+
+Very often the preposition is not repeated in a sentence, when it should
+be. We say properly, "He comes from Ohio or _from_ Indiana"; or, "He
+comes _either_ from Ohio or Indiana."
+
+PREPOSSESS. See PREJUDICE.
+
+PRESENT--INTRODUCE. Few errors are more common, especially among those
+who are always straining to be fine, than that of using _present_, in
+the social world, instead of _introduce_. _Present_ means to place in
+the presence of a superior; _introduce_, to bring to be acquainted. A
+person is presented at court, and on an official occasion to our
+President; but persons who are unknown to each other are _introduced_ by
+a common acquaintance. And in these introductions, it is the younger who
+is introduced to the older; the lower to the higher in place or social
+position; the gentleman to the lady. A lady should say, as a rule, that
+Mr. Blank was introduced to her, not that she was introduced to Mr.
+Blank.
+
+PRESUMPTIVE. This word is sometimes misused by the careless for
+_presumptuous_.
+
+PREVENTIVE. A useless and unwarranted syllable is sometimes added to
+this word--_preventative_.
+
+PREVIOUS. This adjective is much used in an adverbial sense; thus,
+"_Previous_ to my return," etc. Until _previous_ is recognized as an
+adverb, if we would speak grammatically, we must say, "_Previously_ to
+my return." "_Previously_ to my leaving England, I called on his
+lordship."
+
+PROCURE. This is a word much used by people who strive to be fine.
+"Where did you _get_ it?" with them is, "Where did you _procure_ it?"
+
+PROFANITY. The extent to which some men habitually interlard their talk
+with oaths is disgusting even to many who, on occasion, do not
+themselves hesitate to give expression to their feelings in oaths portly
+and unctuous. If these fellows could be made to know how offensive to
+decency they make themselves, they would, perhaps, be less profane.
+
+PROMISE. This word is sometimes very improperly used for _assure_; thus,
+"I _promise_ you I was very much astonished."
+
+PRONOUNS OF THE FIRST PERSON. "The ordinary uses of 'I' and 'we,' as the
+singular and plural pronouns of the first person, would appear to be
+above all ambiguity, uncertainty, or dispute. Yet when we consider the
+force of the plural 'we,' we are met with a contradiction; for, as a
+rule, only one person can speak at the same time to the same audience.
+It is only by some exceptional arrangement, or some latitude or license
+of expression, that several persons can be conjoint speakers. For
+example, a plurality may sing together in chorus, and may join in the
+responses at church, or in the simultaneous repetition of the Lord's
+Prayer or the Creed. Again, one person may be the authorized spokesman
+in delivering a judgment or opinion held by a number of persons in
+common. Finally, in written compositions, the 'we' is not unsuitable,
+because a plurality of persons may append their names to a document.
+
+"A speaker using 'we' may speak for himself and one or more others;
+commonly he stands forward as the representative of a class, more or
+less comprehensive. 'As soon as my companion and I had entered the
+field, _we_ saw a man coming toward _us_'; '_we_ like _our_ new curate';
+'you do _us_ poets the greatest injustice'; '_we_ must see to the
+efficiency of _our_ forces.' The widest use of the pronoun will be
+mentioned presently.
+
+"'We' is used for 'I' in the decrees of persons in authority; as when
+King Lear says:
+
+        'Know that _we_ have divided
+    In three _our_ kingdom.'
+
+By the fiction of plurality a veil of modesty is thrown over the
+assumption of vast superiority over human beings generally. Or, 'we' may
+be regarded as an official form whereby the speaker personally is
+magnified or enabled to rise to the dignity of the occasion.
+
+"The editorial 'we' is to be understood on the same principle. An author
+using 'we' appears as if he were not alone, but sharing with other
+persons the responsibility of his views.
+
+"This representative position is at its utmost stretch in the practice
+of using 'we' for human beings generally; as in discoursing on the laws
+of human nature. The preacher, the novelist, or the philosopher, in
+dwelling upon the peculiarity of our common constitution, being himself
+an example of what he is speaking of, associates the rest of mankind
+with him, and speaks collectively by means of 'we.' '_We_ are weak and
+fallible'; '_we_ are of yesterday'; '_we_ are doomed to dissolution.'
+'Here have _we_ no continuing city, but _we_ seek one to come.'
+
+"It is not unfrequent to have in one sentence, or in close proximity,
+both the editorial and the representative meaning, the effect being
+ambiguity and confusion. 'Let _us_ [the author] now consider why _we_
+[humanity generally] overrate distant good.' In such a case the author
+should fall back upon the singular for himself--'_I_ will now
+consider--.' '_We_ [speaker] think _we_ [himself and hearers together]
+should come to the conclusion.' Say, either '_I_ think,' or '_you_
+would.'
+
+"The following extract from Butler exemplifies a similar confusion:
+'Suppose _we_ [representative] are capable of happiness and of misery in
+degrees equally intense and extreme, yet _we_ [rep.] are capable of the
+latter for a much longer time, beyond all comparison. _We_ [change of
+subject to a limited class] see men in the tortures of pain--. Such is
+_our_ [back to representative] make that anything may become the
+instrument of pain and sorrow to _us_.' The 'we' at the commencement of
+the second sentence--'_We_ see men in the tortures'--could be
+advantageously changed to 'you,' or the passive construction could be
+substituted; the remaining _we_'s would then be consistently
+representative.
+
+"From the greater emphasis of singularity, energetic speakers and
+writers sometimes use 'I' as representative of mankind at large. Thus:
+'The current impressions received through the senses are not voluntary
+in origin. What _I_ see in walking is seen because _I_ have an organ of
+vision.' The question of general moral obligation is forcibly stated by
+Paley in the individual form, 'Why am _I_ obliged to keep my word?' It
+is sometimes well to confine the attention of the hearer or reader to
+his own relation to the matter under consideration, more especially in
+difficult or non-popular argument or exposition. The speaker, by using
+'I,' does the action himself, or makes himself the example, the hearer
+being expected to put himself in the same position."--Bain's
+"Composition Grammar."
+
+PRONOUNS OF THE SECOND PERSON. "Anomalous usages have sprung up in
+connection with these pronouns. The plural form has almost wholly
+superseded the singular; a usage more than five centuries old.[24]
+
+"The motive is courtesy. The singling out of one person for address is
+supposed to be a liberty or an excess of familiarity; and the effect is
+softened or diluted by the fiction of taking in others. If our address
+is uncomplimentary, the sting is lessened by the plural form; and if the
+reverse, the shock to modesty is not so great. This is a refinement that
+was unknown to the ancient languages. The orators of Greece delighted in
+the strong, pointed, personal appeal implied in the singular 'thou.' In
+modern German, 'thou' (_du_) is the address of familiarity and intimacy;
+while the ordinary pronoun is the curiously indirect 'they' (_Sie_). On
+solemn occasions, we may revert to 'thou.' Cato, in his meditative
+soliloquy on reading Plato's views on the immortality of the soul before
+killing himself, says: 'Plato, _thou_ reasonest well.' So in the
+Commandments, 'thou' addresses to each individual an unavoidable appeal:
+'_Thou_ shall not----.' But our ordinary means of making the personal
+appeal is, 'you, _sir_,' 'you, _madam_,' 'my _Lord_, you----,' etc.; we
+reserve 'thou' for the special case of addressing the Deity. The
+application of the motive of courtesy is here reversed; it would be
+irreverent to merge this vast personality in a promiscuous assemblage.
+
+"'You' is not unfrequently employed, like 'we,' as a representative
+pronoun. The action is represented with great vividness, when the person
+or persons addressed may be put forward as the performers: 'There is
+such an echo among the old ruins, and vaults, that if _you_ stamp a
+little louder than ordinary, _you_ hear the sound repeated'; 'Some
+practice is required to see these animals in the thick forest, even when
+_you_ hear them close by _you_.'
+
+"There should not be a mixture of 'thou' and 'you' in the same passage.
+Thus, Thackeray (Adventures of Philip): 'So, as _thy_ sun rises, friend,
+over the humble house-tops round about _your_ home, shall _you_ wake
+many and many a day to duty and labor.' So, Cooper (Water-Witch):
+'_Thou_ hast both master and mistress? _You_ have told us of the latter,
+but we would know something of the former. Who is _thy_ master?'
+Shakespeare, Scott, and others might also be quoted.
+
+"'Ye' and 'you' were at one time strictly distinguished as different
+cases; 'ye' was nominative, 'you' objective (dative or accusative). But
+the Elizabethan dramatists confounded the forms irredeemably; and 'you'
+has gradually ousted 'ye' from ordinary use. 'Ye' is restricted to the
+expression of strong feeling, and in this employment occurs chiefly in
+the poets."--Bain's "Composition Grammar."
+
+PROOF. This word is much and very improperly used for _evidence_, which
+is only the medium of _proof_, _proof_ being the effect of _evidence_.
+"What _evidence_ have you to offer in _proof_ of the truth of your
+statement?" See also EVIDENCE.
+
+PROPOSE--PURPOSE. Writers and speakers often fail to discriminate
+properly between the respective meanings of these two verbs. _Propose_,
+correctly used, means, to put forward or to offer for _the
+consideration of others_; hence, _a proposal_ is a scheme or design
+offered for acceptance or consideration, a proposition. _Purpose_ means,
+to intend, to design, to resolve; hence, _a purpose_ is an intention, an
+aim, that which one sets _before one's self_. Examples: "What do you
+_purpose_ doing in the matter?" "What do you _propose_ that we shall do
+in the matter?" "I will do" means "I _purpose_ doing, or to do." "I
+_purpose_ to write a history of England from the accession of King James
+the Second down to a time which is within the memory of men still
+living."--Macaulay. It will be observed that Macaulay says, "I purpose
+_to write_" and not, "I purpose _writing_," using the verb in the
+infinitive rather than in the participial form. "On which he _purposed_
+to mount one of his little guns." See INFINITIVE.
+
+PROPOSITION. This word is often used when _proposal_ would be better,
+for the reason that _proposal_ has but one meaning, and is shorter by
+one syllable. "He demonstrated the _proposition_ of Euclid, and rejected
+the _proposal_ of his friend."
+
+PROSAIST. Dr. Hall is of opinion that this is a word we shall do well to
+encourage. It is used by good writers.
+
+PROVEN. This form for the past participle of the verb _to prove_ is said
+to be a Scotticism. It is not used by careful writers and speakers. The
+correct form is _proved_.
+
+PROVIDING. The present participle of the verb _to provide_ is sometimes
+vulgarly used for the conjunction _provided_, as in this sentence from
+the "London Queen": "Society may be congratulated, ... _providing_
+that," etc.
+
+PROVOKE. See AGGRAVATE.
+
+PUNCTUATION. The importance of punctuation can not be overestimated; it
+not only helps to make plain the meaning of what one writes, but it may
+prevent one's being misconstrued. Though no two writers could be found
+who punctuate just alike, still in the main those who pay attention to
+the art put in their stops in essentially the same manner. The
+difference that punctuation may make in the meaning of language is well
+illustrated by the following anecdote:
+
+At Ramessa there lived a benevolent and hospitable prior, who caused
+these lines to be painted over his door:
+
+    "Be open evermore,
+    O thou my door!
+    To none be shut--to honest or to poor!"
+
+In time the good prior was succeeded by a man as selfish as his
+predecessor was generous. The lines over the door of the priory were
+allowed to remain; one stop, however, was altered, which made them read
+thus:
+
+    "Be open evermore,
+    O thou my door!
+    To none--be shut to honest or to poor!"
+
+He punctuates best who makes his punctuation contribute most to the
+clear expression of his thought; and that construction is best that has
+least need of being punctuated.
+
+  THE COMMA.--The chief difference in the punctuation of different
+  writers is usually in their use of the comma, in regard to which there
+  is a good deal of latitude; much is left to individual taste. Nowadays
+  the best practice uses it sparingly. An idea of the extent to which
+  opinions differ with regard to the use of the comma may be formed from
+  the following excerpt from a paper prepared for private use:
+
+  "In the following examples, gathered from various sources--chiefly
+  from standard books--the superfluous commas are inclosed in
+  parentheses:
+
+  "1. 'It remains(,) perhaps(,) to be said(,) that, if any lesson at
+  all(,) as to these delicate matters(,) is needed(,) in this period, it
+  is not so much a lesson,' etc. 2. 'The obedience is not due to the
+  power of a right authority, but to the spirit of fear, and(,)
+  therefore(,) is(,) in reality(,) no obedience at all.' 3. 'The patriot
+  disturbances in Canada ... awakened deep interest among the people of
+  the United States(,) who lived adjacent to the frontier.' 4.
+  'Observers(,) who have recently investigated this point(,) do not all
+  agree,' etc. 5. 'The wind did(,) in an instant(,) what man and steam
+  together had failed to do in hours.' 6. 'All the cabin passengers(,)
+  situated beyond the center of the boat(,) were saved.' 7. 'No other
+  writer has depicted(,) with so much art or so much accuracy(,) the
+  habits, the manners,' etc. 8. 'If it shall give satisfaction to those
+  who have(,) in any way(,) befriended it, the author will feel,' etc.
+  9. 'Formed(,) or consisting of(,) clay.' 10. 'The subject [witchcraft]
+  grew interesting; and(,) to examine Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth
+  Proctor, the deputy-governor(,) and five other magistrates(,) went to
+  Salem.' 11. 'The Lusitanians(,) who had not left their home(,) rose as
+  a man,' etc. 12. 'Vague reports ... had preceded him to Washington,
+  and his Mississippi friends(,) who chanced to be at the capital(,)
+  were not backward to make their boast of him.' 13. 'Our faith has
+  acquired a new vigor(,) and a clearer vision.' 14. 'In 1819(,) he
+  removed to Cambridge.' 15. 'Doré was born at Strasburg(,) in 1832, and
+  labors,' etc. 16. 'We should never apply dry compresses, charpie, or
+  wadding(,) to the wound.' 17. '--to stand idle, to look, act, or
+  think(,) in a leisurely way.' 18. '--portraits taken from the farmers,
+  schoolmasters, and peasantry(,) of the neighborhood.' 19. '--gladly
+  welcomed painters of Flanders, Holland, and Spain(,) to their
+  shores.'
+
+  "In all these cases, the clauses between or following the inclosed
+  commas are so closely connected grammatically with the immediately
+  preceding words or phrases, that they should be read without a
+  perceptible pause, or with only a slight one for breath, without
+  change of voice. Some of the commas would grossly pervert the meaning
+  if strictly construed. Thus, from No. 3 it would appear that the
+  people of the United States in general lived adjacent to the frontier;
+  from No. 4, that all observers have recently investigated the point in
+  question; from No. 6, that all the cabin passengers were so situated
+  that they were saved, whereas it is meant that only a certain small
+  proportion of them were saved; from No. 10 (Bancroft), that somebody
+  whose name is accidentally omitted went to Salem 'to examine Sarah
+  Cloyce and Elizabeth Proctor, the deputy-governor, and five other
+  magistrates'; from No. 11, that none of the Lusitanians had left their
+  home, whereas it was the slaughter by the Romans of a great number of
+  them who _had_ left their home that caused the rising.
+
+  "Commas are frequently omitted, and in certain positions very
+  generally, where the sense and correct reading require a pause. In the
+  following examples, such commas, omitted in the works from which they
+  were taken, are inclosed in brackets:
+
+  "1. 'The modes of thought[,] and the types of character which those
+  modes produce[,] are essentially and universally transformed.' 2.
+  'Taken by itself[,] this doctrine could have no effect whatever;
+  indeed[,] it would amount to nothing but a verbal proposition.' 3.
+  'Far below[,] the little stream of the Oder foamed over the rocks.' 4.
+  'When the day returned[,] the professor, the artist[,] and I rowed to
+  within a hundred yards of the shore.' 5. 'Proceeding into the interior
+  of India[,] they passed through Belgaum.' 6. 'If Loring is defeated
+  in the Sixth District[,] it can be borne.'
+
+  "In No. 3, the reader naturally enunciates 'the little stream of the
+  Oder' as in the objective case after 'below'; but there he comes to a
+  predicate which compels him to go back and read differently. In No. 4,
+  it appears that 'the day returned the professor,' and then 'the artist
+  and I rowed,' etc."
+
+  All clauses should generally be isolated by commas; where, however,
+  the connection is very close or the clause is very short, no point may
+  be necessary. "But his pride is greater than his ignorance, and what
+  he wants in knowledge he supplies by sufficiency." "A man of polite
+  imagination can converse with a picture, and find an agreeable
+  companion in a statue." "Though he slay me, yet will I trust him."
+  "The prince, his father being dead, succeeded." "To confess the truth,
+  I was much at fault." "As the heart panteth after the water-brooks, so
+  panteth my soul after thee." "Where the bee sucks, there suck I." "His
+  father dying, he succeeded to the estate." "The little that is known,
+  and the circumstance that little is known, must be considered as
+  honorable to him."
+
+  The comma is used before and after a phrase when coördinating and not
+  restrictive. "The jury, having retired for half an hour, brought in a
+  verdict." "The stranger, unwilling to obtrude himself on our notice,
+  left in the morning." "Rome, the city of the Emperors, became the city
+  of the Popes." "His stories, which made everybody laugh, were often
+  made to order." "He did not come, which I greatly regret." "The
+  younger, who was yet a boy, had nothing striking in his appearance."
+  "They passed the cup to the stranger, who drank heartily." "Peace at
+  any price, which these orators seem to advocate, means war at any
+  cost." "Sailors, who are generally superstitious, say it is unlucky to
+  embark on Friday."
+
+  Adverbs and short phrases, _when they break the connection_, should be
+  between commas. Some of the most common words and phrases so used are
+  the following: Also, too, there, indeed, perhaps, surely, moreover,
+  likewise, however, finally, namely, therefore, apparently, meanwhile,
+  consequently, unquestionably, accordingly, notwithstanding, in truth,
+  in fact, in short, in general, in reality, no doubt, of course, as it
+  were, at all events, to be brief, to be sure, now and then, on the
+  contrary, in a word, by chance, in that case, in the mean time, for
+  the most part. "History, in a word, is replete with moral lessons."
+  "As an orator, however, he was not great." "There is, remember, a
+  limit at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue." "Our civilization,
+  therefore, is not an unmixed good." "This, I grant you, is not of
+  great importance."
+
+  If, however, the adverb does not break the connection, but readily
+  coalesces with the rest of the sentence, the commas are omitted.
+  "Morning will come at last, however dark the night may be." "We then
+  proceeded on our way." "Our civilization is therefore not an unmixed
+  good." "Patience, I say; your mind perhaps may change."
+
+  Adverbial phrases and clauses beginning a sentence are set off by
+  commas. "In truth, I could not tell." "To sum up, the matter is this."
+  "Everything being ready, they set out." "By looking a little deeper,
+  the reason will be found." "Finally, let me sum up the argument." "If
+  the premises were admitted, I should deny the conclusion." "Where your
+  treasure is, there will your heart be also."
+
+  Words used in apposition should be isolated by commas. "Newton, the
+  great mathematician, was very modest." "And he, their prince, shall
+  rank among my peers." In such sentences, however, as, "The
+  mathematician Newton was very modest," and "The Emperor Napoleon was a
+  great soldier," commas are not used.
+
+  The name or designation of a person addressed is isolated by commas.
+  "It touches you, my lord, as well as me." "John, come here." "Mr.
+  President, my object is peace." "Tell me, boy, where do you live?"
+  "Yes, sir, I will do as you say." "Mr. Brown, what is your number?"
+
+  Pairs of words.--"Old and young, rich and poor, wise and foolish, were
+  involved." "Sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish, I give my
+  hand and heart to this vote." "Interest and ambition, honor and shame,
+  friendship and enmity, gratitude and revenge, are the prime movers in
+  public transactions."
+
+  A restrictive clause is not separated by a comma from the noun. "Every
+  one must love a boy who [that] is attentive and docile." "He preaches
+  sublimely who [that] lives a holy life." "The things which [that] are
+  seen are temporal." "A king depending on the support of his subjects
+  can not rashly go to war." "The sailor who [that] is not superstitious
+  will embark any day."
+
+  The comma is used after adjectives, nouns, and verbs in sentences like
+  the following:
+
+      "Are all thy conquests, glories, triumphs, spoils
+      Shrunk to this little measure?"
+
+      "He fills, he bounds, connects and equals all."
+
+      "Who to the enraptured heart, and ear, and eye
+      Teach beauty, virtue, truth, and love, and melody."[25]
+
+  "He rewarded his friends, chastised his foes, set Justice on her seat,
+  and made his conquest secure."
+
+  The comma is used to separate adjectives in opposition, but closely
+  connected. "Though deep, yet clear; though gentle, yet not dull."
+  "Liberal, not lavish, is kind Nature's hand." "Though black, yet
+  comely; and though rash, benign."
+
+  After a nominative, where the verb is understood. "To err is human; to
+  forgive, divine." "A wise man seeks to shine in himself; a fool, in
+  others." "Conversation makes a ready man; writing, an exact man;
+  reading, a full man."
+
+  A long subject is often separated from the predicate by a comma. "Any
+  one that refuses to earn an honest livelihood, is not an object of
+  charity." "The circumstance of his being unprepared to adopt immediate
+  and decisive measures, was represented to the Government." "That he
+  had persistently disregarded every warning and persevered in his
+  reckless course, had not yet undermined his credit with his dupes."
+  "That the work of forming and perfecting the character is difficult,
+  is generally allowed."
+
+  In a series of adjectives that precede their noun, a comma is placed
+  after each except the last; there usage omits the point. "A beautiful,
+  tall, willowy, sprightly girl." "A quick, brilliant, studious, learned
+  man."[26]
+
+  A comma is placed between short members of compound sentences,
+  connected by _and_, _but_, _for_, _nor_, _or_, _because_, _whereas_,
+  _that_ expressing purpose (so that, in order that), and other
+  conjunctions. "Be virtuous, that you may be respected." "Love not
+  sleep, lest you come to poverty." "Man proposes, but God disposes."
+
+  A comma must not be placed before _that_ except when it is equivalent
+  to _in order that_. "He says that he will be here."
+
+  A comma must not be placed before _and_ when it connects two words
+  only. "Time and tide wait for no man." "A rich and prosperous people."
+  "Plain and honest truth wants no artificial covering."
+
+  A comma is sometimes necessary to prevent ambiguity. "He who pursues
+  pleasure only defeats the object of his creation." Without a comma
+  before or after _only_, the meaning of this sentence is doubtful.
+
+  The following sentences present some miscellaneous examples of the use
+  of the comma by writers on punctuation: "Industry, as well as genius,
+  is essential to the production of great works." "Prosperity is secured
+  to a state, not by the acquisition of territory or riches, but by the
+  encouragement of industry." "Your manners are affable, and, for the
+  most part, pleasing."[27]
+
+  "However fairly a bad man may appear to act, we distrust him." "Why,
+  this is rank injustice." "Well, follow the dictates of your
+  inclination." "The comma may be omitted in the case of _too_, _also_,
+  _therefore_, and _perhaps_, when introduced so as not to interfere
+  with the harmonious flow of the period; and, particularly, when the
+  sentence is short."[28] "Robert Horton, M. D., F. R. S." "To those who
+  labor, sleep is doubly pleasant"; "Sleep is doubly pleasant to those
+  who labor." "Those who persevere, succeed." "To be overlooked,
+  slighted, and neglected; to be misunderstood, misrepresented, and
+  slandered; to be trampled under foot by the envious, the ignorant, and
+  the vile; to be crushed by foes, and to be distrusted and betrayed
+  even by friends--such is too often the fate of genius." "She is tall,
+  though not so handsome as her sister." "Verily, verily, I say unto
+  you." "Whatever is, is right." "What is foreordained to be, will be."
+  "The Emperor Augustus was a patron of the fine arts." "Augustus, the
+  Emperor, was a patron of the fine arts." "United, we stand; divided,
+  we fall." "God said, Let there be light." "July 21, 1881." "President
+  Garfield was shot, Saturday morning, July 2, 1881; he died, Monday
+  night, Sept. 19, 1881." "I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient
+  servant, John Jones." "New York, August, 1881." "Room 20, Equitable
+  Building, Broadway, New York."
+
+  "_When you are in doubt as to the propriety of inserting commas, omit
+  them_; IT IS BETTER TO HAVE TOO FEW THAN TOO MANY."--Quackenbos.
+
+  THE SEMICOLON.--Reasons are preceded by semicolons; "Economy is no
+  disgrace; for it is better to live on a little than to outlive a great
+  deal." Clauses in opposition are separated by a semicolon when the
+  second is introduced by an adversative: "Straws swim at the surface;
+  but pearls lie at the bottom"; "Lying lips are an abomination to the
+  Lord; but they that deal truly are his delight." Without the
+  adversative, the colon is to be preferred: "Prosperity showeth vice:
+  adversity, virtue." The great divisions of a sentence must be pointed
+  with a semicolon when the minor divisions are pointed with commas:
+  "Mirth should be the embroidery of conversation, not the web; and wit
+  the ornament of the mind, not the furniture." The things enumerated
+  must be separated by semicolons, when the enunciation of particulars
+  is preceded by a colon: "The value of a maxim depends on four things:
+  the correctness of the principle it embodies; the subject to which it
+  relates; the extent of its application; and the ease with which it may
+  be practically carried out." When _as_ introduces an example, it is
+  preceded by a semicolon. When several successive clauses have a common
+  connection with a preceding or following clause, they are separated by
+  semicolons; as, "Children, as they gamboled on the beach; reapers, as
+  they gathered the harvest; mowers, as they rested from using the
+  scythe; mothers, as they busied themselves about the household--were
+  victims to an enemy, who disappeared the moment a blow was struck."
+  "Reason as we may, it is impossible not to read in such a fate much
+  that we know not how to interpret; much of provocation to cruel deeds
+  and deep resentment; much of apology for wrong and perfidy; much of
+  doubt and misgiving as to the past; much of painful recollections;
+  much of dark foreboding." "Philosophers assert that Nature is
+  unlimited; that her treasures are endless; that the increase of
+  knowledge will never cease."
+
+  THE COLON.--This point is less used now than formerly: its place is
+  supplied by the period, the semicolon, or the dash; and sometimes,
+  even by the comma. The colon is used very differently by different
+  writers. "He was heard to say, 'I have done with this world.'" Some
+  writers would put a colon, some a comma, after _say_. "When the quoted
+  passage is brought in without any introductory word, if short," says
+  Quackenbos, "it is generally preceded by a comma; if long, by a colon;
+  as, 'A simpleton, meeting a philosopher, asked him, "What affords wise
+  men the greatest pleasure?" Turning on his heel, the sage replied,
+  "To get rid of fools."'"
+
+  Formal enumerations of particulars, and direct quotations, when
+  introduced by such phrases as _in these words_, _as follows_, _the
+  following_, _namely_, _this_, _these_, _thus_, etc., are properly
+  preceded by a colon. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
+  all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with
+  certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and
+  the pursuit of happiness." "Lord Bacon has summed up the whole matter
+  in the following words: 'A little philosophy inclineth men's minds to
+  atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds to religion.'"
+  "The human family is composed of five races: first, the Caucasian;
+  second, the Mongolian; third, the," etc.
+
+      "All were attentive to the godlike man
+      When from his lofty couch he thus began:
+      'Great queen,'" etc.--Dryden.
+
+  When the quotation, or other matter, begins a new paragraph, the colon
+  is, by many writers, followed with a dash; as, "The cloth being
+  removed, the President rose and said:--
+
+      "'Ladies and gentlemen, we are,'" etc.
+
+  The colon is used to mark the greater breaks in sentences, when the
+  lesser breaks are marked by semicolons. "You have called yourself an
+  atom in the universe; you have said that you are but an insect in the
+  solar blaze: is your present pride consistent with these professions?"
+  "A clause is either independent or dependent: independent, if it forms
+  an assertion by itself; dependent, if it enters into some other clause
+  with the value of a part of speech." A colon is sometimes used instead
+  of a period to separate two short sentences, which are closely
+  connected. "Never flatter people: leave that to such as mean to
+  betray them." "Some things we can, and others we can not do: we can
+  walk, but we can not fly."
+
+  THE PERIOD.--Complete sentences are always followed either by a
+  period, or by an exclamation or an interrogation point.[29]
+
+  The period is also used after abbreviations; as, R. D. Van Nostrand,
+  St. Louis, Mo.; Jno. B. Morris, M. D., F. R. S., London, Eng.; Jas. W.
+  Wallack, Jr., New York City, N. Y.; Jas. B. Roberts, Elocutionist,
+  Phila., Pa.
+
+  INTERROGATION-POINT.--This point is used after questions put by the
+  writer, and after questions reported directly. "What can I do for
+  you?" "Where are you going?" "What do you say?" cried the General.
+  "The child still lives?" It should not be used when the question is
+  reported indirectly. "He asked me where I was going." "The Judge asked
+  the witness if he believed the man to be guilty."
+
+  EXCLAMATION-POINT.--This mark is placed after interjections, after
+  sentences and clauses of sentences of passionate import, and after
+  solemn invocations and addresses. "Zounds! the man's in earnest."
+  "Pshaw! what can we do?" "Bah! what's that to me?" "Indeed! then I
+  must look to it." "Look, my lord, it comes!" "Rest, rest, perturbed
+  spirit!" "O heat, dry up my brains!" "Dear maid, kind sister, sweet
+  Ophelia!" "While in this part of the country, I once more
+  revisited--and, alas, with what melancholy presentiments!--the home of
+  my youth." "O rose of May!" "Oh, from this time forth, my thoughts be
+  bloody or be nothing worth!" "O heavens! die two months ago, and not
+  forgotten yet?"
+
+      "Night, sable goddess! from her ebon throne,
+      In rayless majesty now stretches forth
+      Her leaden scepter o'er a slumbering world.
+      Silence, how dead! and darkness, how profound!"--Young.
+
+      "Hail, holy light! offspring of heaven just born!"--Milton.
+
+      "But thou, O Hope! with eyes so fair,
+      What was thy delighted measure?"--Collins.
+
+  It will be observed that the interjection O is an exception to the
+  rule: it is often followed by a comma, but never by an
+  exclamation-point.
+
+  An exclamation-point sometimes gives the same words quite another
+  meaning. The difference between "What's that?" and "What's that!" is
+  obvious.
+
+  THE DASH.--Cobbett did not favor the use of this mark, as we see from
+  the following: "Let me caution you against the use of what, by some,
+  is called the _dash_. The dash is a stroke along the line; thus, 'I am
+  rich--I was poor--I shall be poor again.' This is wild work indeed!
+  Who is to know what is intended by these _dashes_? Those who have
+  thought proper, like Mr. Lindley Murray, to place the _dash_ amongst
+  the _grammatical points_, ought to give us some rule relative to its
+  different longitudinal dimensions in different cases. The _inch_, the
+  _three-quarter-inch_, the _half-inch_, the _quarter-inch_: these would
+  be something determinate; but '_the dash_,' without measure, must be a
+  perilous thing for the young grammarian to handle. In short, '_the
+  dash_' is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points, and it can
+  answer no other purpose."
+
+  This is one of the few instances in which Cobbett was wrong. The
+  _dash_ is the proper point with which to mark an unexpected or
+  emphatic pause, or a sudden break or transition. It is very often
+  preceded by another point. "And Huitzilopochtli--a sweet name to roll
+  under one's tongue--for how many years has this venerable war-god
+  blinked in the noonday sun!" "Crowds gathered about the newspaper
+  bulletins, recalling the feverish scenes that occurred when the
+  President's life was thought to be hanging by a thread. 'Wouldn't it
+  be too bad,' said one, 'if, after all--no, I won't allow myself to
+  think of it.'" "Was there ever--but I scorn to boast." "You are--no,
+  I'll not tell you what you are."
+
+      "He suffered--but his pangs are o'er;
+        Enjoyed--but his delights are fled;
+      Had friends--his friends are now no more;
+        And foes--his foes are dead."--Montgomery.
+
+  "Greece, Carthage, Rome,--where are they?" "He chastens;--but he
+  chastens to save."
+
+  Dashes are much used where parentheses were formerly employed. "In the
+  days of Tweed the expression to divide fair--forcible, if not
+  grammatical--acquired much currency." "In truth, the character of the
+  great chief was depicted two thousand five hundred years before his
+  birth, and depicted--such is the power of genius--in colors which will
+  be fresh as many years after his death." "To render the Constitution
+  perpetual--which God grant it may be!--it is necessary that its
+  benefits should be practically felt by all parts of the country."
+
+  PARENTHESIS.--This mark is comparatively little used nowadays. The
+  dash is preferred, probably because it disfigures the page less. The
+  office of the parenthesis is to isolate a phrase which is merely
+  incidental, and which might be omitted without detriment to the
+  grammatical construction.
+
+      "Know then this truth (enough for man to know),
+      Virtue alone is happiness below."--Pope.
+
+      "The bliss of man (could pride that blessing find)
+      Is not to act or think beyond mankind."
+
+  BRACKETS.--This mark is used principally to inclose words improperly
+  omitted by the writer, or words introduced for the purpose of
+  explanation or to correct an error. The bracket is often used in this
+  book.
+
+  THE APOSTROPHE.--This point is used to denote the omission of letters
+  and sometimes of figures; as, Jan'y, '81; _I've_ for _I have_;
+  _you'll_ for _you will_; _'tis_ for _it is_; _don't_ for _do not_;
+  _can't_ for _can not_; It was in the year '93; the spirit of '76; It
+  was in the years 1812, '13, and '14.
+
+  Also to denote the possessive case; as, Brown's house; the king's
+  command; Moses' staff; for conscience' sake; the boys' garden.
+
+  Also with _s_ to denote the plural of letters, figures, and signs; as,
+  Cross your _t_'s, dot your _i_'s, and mind your _p_'s and _q_'s; make
+  your 5's better, and take out the _x_'s.
+
+  CAPITALS.--A capital letter should begin every sentence, every line of
+  verse, and every direct quotation.
+
+  All names of the Deity, of Jesus Christ, of the Trinity, and of the
+  Virgin Mary must begin with a capital. Pronouns are usually
+  capitalized when they refer to the Deity.
+
+  Proper names, and nouns and adjectives formed from proper names, names
+  of streets, of the months, of the days of the week, and of the
+  holidays, are capitalized.
+
+  Titles of nobility and of high office, when used to designate
+  particular persons, are capitalized; as, the Earl of Dunraven, the
+  Mayor of Boston, the Baron replied, the Cardinal presided.
+
+  THE PARAGRAPH.--In writing for the press, the division of matter into
+  paragraphs is often quite arbitrary; in letter-writing, on the
+  contrary, the several topics treated of should, as a rule, be isolated
+  by paragraphic divisions. These divisions give one's letters a
+  shapely appearance that they otherwise never have.
+
+PURCHASE. This word is much preferred to its synonym _buy_, by that
+class of people who prefer the word _reside_ to _live_, _procure_ to
+_get_, _inaugurate_ to _begin_, and so on. They are generally of those
+who are great in pretense, and who would be greater still if they were
+to pretend to all they have to pretend to.
+
+PURPOSE. See PROPOSE.
+
+QUANTITY. This word is often improperly used for _number_. _Quantity_
+should be used in speaking of what is measured or weighed; _number_, of
+what is counted. Examples: "What _quantity_ of apples have you, and what
+_number_ of pineapples?" "Delaware produces a large _quantity_ of
+peaches and a large _number_ of melons."
+
+QUIT.--This word means, properly, to leave, to go away from, to forsake;
+as, "Avaunt! _quit_ my sight." This is the only sense in which the
+English use it. In America, it is generally used in the sense of to
+leave off, to stop; as, "_Quit_ your nonsense"; "_Quit_ laughing";
+"_Quit_ your noise"; "He has _quit_ smoking," and so on.
+
+QUITE. This word originally meant completely, perfectly, totally,
+entirely, fully; and this is the sense in which it was used by the early
+writers of English. It is now often used in the sense of _rather_; as,
+"It is _quite_ warm"; "She is _quite_ tall"; "He is _quite_ proficient."
+Sometimes it is incorrectly used in the sense of _considerable_; as,
+_quite_ an amount, _quite_ a number, _quite_ a fortune. _Quite_,
+according to good modern usage, may qualify an adjective, but not a
+noun. "She is quite the lady," is a vile phrase, meaning, "She is very
+or _quite_ ladylike."
+
+RAILROAD DEPOT. Few things are more offensive to fastidious ears than to
+hear a railway _station_ called a _depot_. A depot is properly a place
+where goods or stores of any kind are kept; and the places at which the
+trains of a railroad--or, better, rail_way_--stop for passengers, or the
+points from which they start and at which they arrive, are, properly,
+the _stations_.
+
+RAILWAY. The English prefer this word to rail_road_.
+
+RAISE THE RENT. An expression incorrectly used for _increase the rent_.
+
+RARELY. It is no uncommon thing to see this adverb improperly used in
+such sentences as, "It is very _rarely_ that the puppets of the romancer
+assume," etc.--"Appletons' Journal," February, 1881, p. 177. "But," says
+the defender of this phraseology, "_rarely_ qualifies a verb--the verb
+_to be_." Not at all. The sentence, if written out in full, would be,
+"It is a very rare thing that," etc., or "The circumstance is a very
+rare one that," etc., or "It is a very rare occurrence that," etc. To
+those who contend for "It is very _rarely_ that," etc., I would say, It
+is very _sadly_ that persons of culture will write and then defend--or
+rather try to defend--such grammar.
+
+RATIOCINATE. See EFFECTUATE.
+
+REAL.--This adjective is often vulgarly used in the sense of the adverb
+_very_; thus, _real_ nice, _real_ pretty, _real_ angry, _real_ cute, and
+so on.
+
+RECOMMEND. This word, which means to commend or praise to another, to
+declare worthy of esteem, trust, or favor, is sometimes put to strange
+uses. Example: "Resolved, that the tax-payers of the county be
+_recommended_ to meet," etc. What the resolving gentlemen meant was,
+that the tax-payers should be _counseled_ to meet.
+
+REDUNDANCY. See PLEONASM.
+
+RELIABLE. This is a modern word which is often met with; but it is not
+used by our careful writers. They prefer its synonym _trustworthy_, and
+argue that, in consequence of being ill-formed, _reliable_ can not
+possibly have the signification in which it is used.
+
+REMAINDER. See BALANCE.
+
+RENDITION. This word is much misused for _rendering_. Example: "The
+excellence of Mr. Gilbert's _rendition_ of certain characters, Sir Peter
+and Sir Antony, for instance, is not equaled," etc. _Rendition_ means
+the act of yielding possession, surrender, as the _rendition_ of a town
+or fortress. The sentence above should read, "The excellence of Mr.
+Gilbert's _rendering_," etc. _Rendition_ is also sometimes improperly
+used for _performance_.
+
+REPLY. See ANSWER.
+
+REPUTATION. See CHARACTER.
+
+RESIDE. A big word that Mr. Wouldbe uses where Mr. Is uses the little
+word _live_.
+
+RESIDENCE. In speaking of a man's domicile, it is not only in better
+taste but more correct to use the term _house_ than _residence_. A man
+has a _residence_ in New York, when he has lived here long enough to
+have the right to exercise the franchise here; and he may have a _house_
+in Fifth Avenue where he _lives_. People who _are_ live in houses;
+people who _would be_ reside in residences. The former _buy_ things; the
+latter _purchase_ them.
+
+REST. See BALANCE.
+
+RESTIVE. Some of the dictionaries, Richard Grant White, and some other
+writers, contend that this word, when properly used, means unwilling to
+go, standing still stubbornly, obstinate, stubborn, and nothing else. In
+combating this opinion, Fitzedward Hall says: "Very few instances, I
+apprehend, can be produced, from our literature, of this use of
+_restive_." Webster gives impatient, uneasy, as a second meaning; and
+this is the sense in which the word is nearly always used.
+
+RETIRE. It is only the over-nice who use _retire_ in the sense of _go to
+bed_.
+
+REVEREND--HONORABLE. Many persons are in doubt whether they should or
+should not put _the_ before these adjectives. Emphatically, yes, they
+should. See "Words and Their Uses," by Richard Grant White, for a full
+discussion of the question; also "Good English," by Edward S. Gould.
+
+RHETORIC. The art which has for its object the rendering of language
+effective is called _rhetoric_. Without some study of the art of
+composition, no one can expect to write well, or to judge the literary
+work of others.
+
+    "True ease in writing comes from art, not chance,
+    As those move easiest who have learned to dance."
+
+RIDE--DRIVE. Fashion, both in England and in this country, says that we
+must always use the second of these words when we speak of going out in
+a carriage, although _ride_ means, according to all the lexicographers,
+"to be carried on a horse or other animal, or in any kind of vehicle or
+carriage."
+
+RIGHT. Singularly enough, this word is made, by some people, to do
+service for _ought_, _in duty bound_, under _obligation_ to; thus, "You
+had a _right_ to tell me," meaning, "You should have told me." "The
+Colonists contended that they _had no right_ to pay taxes," meaning,
+"They were _under no obligation_ to pay taxes," i. e., that it was
+unjust to tax them.
+
+RIGHT HERE. The expressions "right here" and "right there" are
+Americanisms. Correctly, "just here" and "just there."
+
+ROLLING. The use of this participial adjective in the sense of
+undulating is said to be an Americanism. Whether an Americanism or not,
+it would seem to be quite unobjectionable.
+
+RUBBERS. This word, in common with _gums_ and _arctics_, is often, in
+defiance of good taste, used for _overshoes_.
+
+SABBATH. This term was first used in English for Sunday, or Lord's day,
+by the Puritans. Nowadays it is little used in this sense. The word to
+use is _Sunday_.
+
+SARCASM. Bain says that _sarcasm_ is vituperation softened in the
+outward expression by the arts and figures of disguise--epigram,
+innuendo, irony--and embellished with the figures of illustration. Crabb
+says that _sarcasm_ is the indulgence only of personal resentment, and
+is never justifiable.
+
+SATIRE. The holding up to ridicule of the follies and weaknesses of
+mankind, by way of rebuke, is called _satire_. Satire is general rather
+than individual, its object being the reformation of abuses. A
+_lampoon_, which has been defined as a _personal satire_, attacks the
+individual rather than his fault, and is intended to injure rather than
+to reform.
+
+Said Sheridan: "Satires and lampoons on particular people circulate more
+by giving copies in confidence to the friends of the parties than by
+printing them."
+
+SAW. The imperfect tense of the verb _to see_ is carelessly used by good
+writers and speakers when they should use the perfect; thus, "I never
+_saw_ anything like it before," when the meaning intended is, "I _have_
+never [in all my life] _seen_ anything like it before [until now]." We
+say properly, "I never _saw_ anything like it _when I was in Paris_";
+but, when the period of time referred to extends to the time when the
+statement is made, it must be _have seen_. Like mistakes are made in
+the use of other verbs, but they are hardly as common; yet we often hear
+such expressions as, "I _was_ never in Philadelphia," "I never _went_ to
+the theatre in my life," instead of _have been_ in Philadelphia, and
+_have gone_ to the theatre.
+
+SECTION. The use of this word for region, neighborhood, vicinity, part
+(of the town or country), is said to be a Westernism. A _section_ is a
+division of the public lands containing six hundred and forty acres.
+
+SEEM--APPEAR. Graham, in his "English Synonymes," says of these two
+words: "What _seems_ is in the mind; what _appears_ is external. Things
+_appear_ as they present themselves to the eye; they _seem_ as they are
+represented to the mind. Things _appear_ good or bad, as far as we can
+judge by our senses. Things _seem_ right or wrong as we determine by
+reflection. Perception and sensation have to do with appearing;
+reflection and comparison, with seeming. When things are not what they
+_appear_, our senses are deceived; when things are not what they _seem_,
+our judgment is at fault."
+
+"No man had ever a greater power over himself, or was less the man he
+_seemed_ to be, which shortly after _appeared_ to everybody, when he
+cared less to keep on the mask."--Clarendon.
+
+SELDOM OR EVER. This phrase should be "seldom _if_ ever," or "seldom or
+_never_."
+
+SERAPHIM. This is the plural of _seraph_. "One of the _seraphim_." "To
+Thee cherubim and seraphim continually do cry." See CHERUBIM.
+
+SET--SIT. The former of these two verbs is often incorrectly used for
+the latter. To _set_; imperfect tense, _set_; participles, _setting_,
+_set_. To _sit_; imperfect tense, _sat_; participles, _sitting_, _sat_.
+To _set_ means to put, to place, to plant; to put in any place,
+condition, state, or posture. We say, to _set_ about, to _set_ against,
+to _set_ out, to _set_ going, to _set_ apart, to _set_ aside, to _set_
+down (to put in writing). To _sit_ means to rest on the lower part of
+the body, to repose on a seat, to perch, as a bird, etc. We say, "_Sit_
+up," i. e., rise from lying to sitting; "We will _sit_ up," i. e., will
+not go to bed; "_Sit_ down," i. e., place yourself on a seat. We _sit_ a
+horse and we _sit_ for a portrait. Garments _sit_ well or otherwise.
+Congress _sits_, so does a court. "I have _sat_ up long enough." "I have
+_set_ it on the table." We _set_ down figures, but we _sit_ down on the
+ground. We _set_ a hen, and a hen _sits_ on eggs. We should say,
+therefore, "as cross as a _sitting_ [not, as a _setting_] hen."
+
+SETTLE. This word is often inelegantly, if not incorrectly, used for
+_pay_. We _pay_ our way, _pay_ our fare, _pay_ our hotel-bills, and the
+like. See, also, LOCATE.
+
+SHALL AND WILL. The nice distinctions that should be made between these
+two auxiliaries are, in some parts of the English-speaking world, often
+disregarded, and that, too, by persons of high culture. The proper use
+of _shall_ and _will_ can much better be learned from example than from
+precept. Many persons who use them, and also _should_ and _would_, with
+well-nigh unerring correctness, do so unconsciously; it is simply habit
+with them, and they, though their culture may be limited, will receive a
+sort of verbal shock from Biddy's inquiry, "_Will_ I put the kettle on,
+ma'am?" when your Irish or Scotch countess would not be in the least
+disturbed by it.
+
+  SHALL, _in an affirmative sentence, in the first person, and_ WILL _in
+  the second and third persons, merely announce future action_. Thus, "I
+  _shall_ go to town to-morrow." "I _shall_ not; I _shall_ wait for
+  better weather." "We _shall_ be glad to see you." "I _shall_ soon be
+  twenty." "We _shall_ set out early, and _shall_ try to arrive by
+  noon." "You _will_ be pleased." "You _will_ soon be twenty." "You
+  _will_ find him honest." "He _will_ go with us."
+
+  SHALL, _in an affirmative sentence, in the second and third persons,
+  announces the speaker's intention to control_. Thus, "You _shall_ hear
+  me out." "You _shall_ go, sick or well." "He _shall_ be my heir."
+  "They _shall_ go, whether they want to go or not."
+
+  WILL, _in the first person, expresses a promise, announces the
+  speaker's intention to control, proclaims a determination_. Thus, "I
+  _will_ [I promise to] assist you." "I _will_ [I am determined to] have
+  my right." "We _will_ [we promise to] come to you in the morning."
+
+  SHALL, _in an interrogative sentence, in the first and third persons,
+  consults the will or judgment of another; in the second person, it
+  inquires concerning the intention or future action of another_. Thus,
+  "_Shall_ I go with you?" "When _shall_ we see you again?" "When
+  _shall_ I receive it?" "When _shall_ I get well?" "When _shall_ we get
+  there?" "_Shall_ he come with us?" "_Shall_ you demand indemnity?"
+  "_Shall_ you go to town to-morrow?" "What _shall_ you do about it?"
+
+  WILL, _in an interrogative sentence, in the second person, asks
+  concerning the wish, and, in the third person, concerning the purpose
+  or future action of others_. Thus, "_Will_ you have an apple?" "_Will_
+  you go with me to my uncle's?" "_Will_ he be of the party?" "_Will_
+  they be willing to receive us?" "When _will_ he be here?"
+
+  _Will_ can not be used interrogatively in the first person singular or
+  plural. We can not say, "_Will_ I go?" "_Will_ I help you?" "_Will_ I
+  be late?" "_Will_ we get there in time?" "_Will_ we see you again
+  soon?"
+
+  Official courtesy, in order to avoid the semblance of compulsion,
+  conveys its commands in the _you-will_ form instead of the strictly
+  grammatical _you-shall_ form. It says, for example, "You _will_
+  proceed to Key West, where you will find further instructions awaiting
+  you."
+
+  A clever writer on the use of _shall_ and _will_ says that whatever
+  concerns one's beliefs, hopes, fears, likes, or dislikes, can not be
+  expressed in conjunction with _I will_. Are there no exceptions to
+  this rule? If I say, "I think I _shall_ go to Philadelphia to-morrow,"
+  I convey the impression that my going depends upon circumstances
+  beyond my control; but if I say, "I think I _will_ go to Philadelphia
+  to-morrow," I convey the impression that my going depends upon
+  circumstances within my control--that my going or not depends on mere
+  inclination. We certainly must say, "I fear that I _shall_ lose it";
+  "I hope that I _shall_ be well"; "I believe that I _shall_ have the
+  ague"; "I hope that I _shall_ not be left alone"; "I fear that we
+  _shall_ have bad weather"; "I _shall_ dislike the country"; "I _shall_
+  like the performance." The writer referred to asks, "How can one say,
+  'I _will_ have the headache'?" I answer, Very easily, as every young
+  woman knows. Let us see: "Mary, you know you promised John to drive
+  out with him to-morrow; how _shall_ you get out of it?" "Oh, I _will_
+  have the headache!" We request that people _will_ do thus or so, and
+  not that they _shall_. Thus, "It is requested that no one _will_ leave
+  the room."
+
+  _Shall_ is rarely, if ever, used for _will_; it is _will_ that is used
+  for _shall_. Expressions like the following are common: "Where _will_
+  you be next week?" "I _will_ be at home." "We _will_ have dinner at
+  six o'clock." "How _will_ you go about it?" "When _will_ you begin?"
+  "When _will_ you set out?" "What _will_ you do with it?" In all such
+  expressions, when it is a question of mere future action on the part
+  of the person speaking or spoken to, the auxiliary must be _shall_,
+  and not _will_.
+
+  _Should_ and _would_ follow the regimen of _shall_ and _will_. _Would_
+  is often used for _should_; _should_ rarely for _would_. Correct
+  speakers say, "I _should_ go to town to-morrow if I had a horse." "I
+  _should_ not; I _should_ wait for better weather." "We _should_ be
+  glad to see you." "We _should_ have started earlier, if the weather
+  had been clear." "I _should_ like to go to town, and _would_ go if I
+  could." "I _would_ assist you if I could." "I _should_ have been ill
+  if I had gone." "I _would_ I were home again!" "I _should_ go fishing
+  to-day if I were home." "I _should_ so like to go to Europe!" "I
+  _should_ prefer to see it first." "I _should_ be delighted." "I
+  _should_ be glad to have you sup with me." "I knew that I _should_ be
+  ill." "I feared that I _should_ lose it." "I hoped that I _should_ see
+  him." "I thought I _should_ have the ague." "I hoped that I _should_
+  not be left alone." "I was afraid that we _should_ have bad weather."
+  "I knew I _should_ dislike the country." "I _should_ not like to do
+  it, and _will_ not [determination] unless compelled to."
+
+SHIMMY. "We derive from the French language our word
+_chemise_--pronounced _shemmeeze_. In French, the word denotes a man's
+shirt, as well as the under garment worn by women. In this country, it
+is often pronounced by people who should know better--_shimmy_. Rather
+than call it _shimmy_, resume the use of the old English words _shift_
+and _smock_. Good usage unqualifiedly condemns _gents_, _pants_, _kids_,
+_gums_, and _shimmy_."--"Vulgarisms and Other Errors of Speech."
+
+SHOULD. See OUGHT.
+
+SICK--ILL. These words are often used indiscriminately. _Sick_, however,
+is the stronger word, and generally the better word to use. _Ill_ is
+used in England more than with us: there _sick_ is generally limited to
+the expressing of nausea; as, "sick at the stomach."
+
+SIGNATURE, OVER OR UNDER? A man writes _under_, not _over_, a signature.
+Charles Dickens wrote _under_ the signature of "Boz"; Mr. Samuel L.
+Clemens writes _under_ the signature of "Mark Twain." The reason given
+in Webster's Dictionary for preferring the use of _under_ is absurd;
+viz., that the paper is _under_ the hand in writing. The expression is
+elliptical, and has no reference to the position either of the signature
+or of the paper. "Given under my hand and seal" means "under the
+guarantee of my signature and my seal." "Under his own signature" or
+"name" means "under his own character, without disguise." "Under the
+signature of Boz" means "under the disguise of the assumed name Boz." We
+always write _under_ a certain date, though the date be placed, as it
+often is, at the bottom of the page.
+
+SIGNS. In one of the principal business streets of New York there is a
+sign which reads, "German Lace Store." Now, whether this is a store that
+makes a specialty of German laces, or whether it is a store where all
+kinds of lace are sold, kept by a German or after the German fashion, is
+something that the sign doubtless means to tell us, but, owing to the
+absence of a hyphen ("German-Lace Store," or "German Lace-Store"), does
+not tell us. Nothing is more common than erroneous punctuation in signs,
+and gross mistakes by the unlettered in the wording of the simplest
+printed matter.
+
+The bad taste, incorrect punctuation, false grammar, and ridiculous
+nonsense met with on signs and placards, and in advertisements, are
+really surprising. An advertisement tells us that "a pillow which
+assists in procuring sleep is a _benediction_"; a placard, that they
+have "Charlotte _de_ Russe" for sale within, which means, if it means
+anything, that they have for sale somebody or something called Charlotte
+of Russian; and, then, on how many signs do we see the possessive case
+when the plural number is intended!
+
+SIMILE. In rhetoric, a direct and formal comparison is called a
+_simile_. It is generally denoted by _like_, _as_, or _so_; as,
+
+                            "I have ventured,
+    _Like_ little wanton boys that swim on bladders,
+    These many summers in a sea of glory."
+
+    "Thy smile is _as_ the dawn of vernal day."--Shakespeare.
+
+    "_As_, down in the sunless retreats of the ocean,
+      Sweet flow'rets are springing no mortal can see;
+    _So_, deep in my bosom, the prayer of devotion,
+      Unheard by the world, rises silent to thee."--Moore.
+
+    "'Tis with our judgments _as_ with our watches; none
+    Go just alike, yet each believes his own."--Pope.
+
+    "Grace abused brings forth the foulest deeds,
+    _As_ richest soil the most luxuriant weeds."--Cowper.
+
+"_As_ no roads are so rough as those that have just been mended, _so_ no
+sinners are so intolerant as those who have just turned
+saints."--"Lacon."
+
+SIN. See CRIME.
+
+SINCE--AGO. Dr. Johnson says of these two adverbs: "Reckoning time
+toward the present, we use _since_; as, 'It is a year _since_ it
+happened': reckoning from the present, we use _ago_; as, 'It is a year
+_ago_.' This is not, perhaps, always observed."
+
+Dr. Johnson's rule will hardly suffice as a sure guide. _Since_ is often
+used for _ago_, but _ago_ never for _since_. _Ago_ is derived from the
+participle _agone_, while _since_ comes from a preposition. We say
+properly, "not long" or "some time _ago_ [agone]." _Since_ requires a
+verbal clause after it; as, "_Since_ I saw you"; "_Since_ he was here."
+
+SING. Of the two forms--_sang_ and _sung_--for the imperfect tense of
+the verb to _sing_, the former--_sang_--is to be preferred.
+
+SIT. See SET.
+
+SLANG. The slang that is heard among respectable people is made up of
+genuine words, to which an arbitrary meaning is given. It is always low,
+generally coarse, and not unfrequently foolish. With the exception of
+_cant_, there is nothing that is more to be shunned. We sometimes meet
+with persons of considerable culture who interlard their talk with slang
+expressions, but it is safe to assert that they are always persons of
+coarse natures.
+
+SMART. See CLEVER.
+
+SMELL OF. See TASTE OF.
+
+SO. See AS; SUCH; THAT.
+
+SO MUCH SO. "The shipments by the coast steamers are very large, _so
+much so_ [large?] as to tax the capacity of the different
+lines."--"Telegram," September 19, 1881. The sentence should be, "The
+shipments by the coast steamers are very large, _so large_ as to tax,"
+etc.
+
+SOLECISM. In rhetoric, a solecism is defined as an offense against the
+rules of grammar by the use of words in a wrong construction; false
+syntax.
+
+"Modern grammarians designate by _solecism_ any word or expression which
+does not agree with the established usage of writing or speaking. But,
+as customs change, that which at one time is considered a _solecism_ may
+at another be regarded as correct language. A _solecism_, therefore,
+differs from a _barbarism_, inasmuch as the latter consists in the use
+of a word or expression which is altogether contrary to the spirit of
+the language, and can, properly speaking, never become established as
+correct language."--"Penny Cyclopædia." See, also, BARBARISM.
+
+SOME. This word is not unfrequently misused for _somewhat_; thus, "She
+is _some_ better to-day." It is likewise often misused for _about_;
+thus, "I think it is _some_ ten miles from here": read, "_about_ ten
+miles from here."
+
+SPECIALTY. This form has within a recent period been generally
+substituted for _speciality_. There is no apparent reason, however, why
+the _i_ should be dropped, since it is required by the etymology of the
+word, and is retained in nearly all other words of the same formation.
+
+SPECIOUS FALLACY. A _fallacy_ is a sophism, a logical artifice, a
+deceitful or false appearance; while _specious_ means having the
+appearance of truth, plausible. Hence we see that the very essence of a
+_fallacy_ is its _speciousness_. We may very properly say that a
+_fallacy_ is more or less _specious_, but we can not properly say that a
+fallacy _is_ specious, since without speciousness we can have no
+fallacies.
+
+SPLENDID. This poor word is used by the gentler sex to qualify well-nigh
+everything that has their approval, from a sugar-plum to the national
+capitol. In fact, _splendid_ and _awful_ seem to be about the only
+adjectives some of our superlative young women have in their
+vocabularies.
+
+STANDPOINT. This is a word to which many students of English seriously
+object, and among them are the editors of some of our daily papers, who
+do not allow it to appear in their columns. The phrase to which no one
+objects is, _point of view_.
+
+STATE. This word, which properly means to make known specifically, to
+explain particularly, is often misused for _say_. When _say_ says all
+one _wants_ to say, why use a more pretentious word?
+
+STOP. "Where are you _stopping_?" "At the Metropolitan." The proper word
+to use here is _staying_. _To stop_ means to cease to go forward, to
+leave off; and _to stay_ means to abide, to tarry, to dwell, to sojourn.
+We _stay_, not _stop_, at home, at a hotel, or with a friend, as the
+case may be.
+
+STORM. Many persons indulge in a careless use of this word, using it
+when they mean to say simply that it rains or snows. To a _storm_ a
+violent commotion of the atmosphere is indispensable. A very high wind
+constitutes a storm, though it be dry.
+
+STRAIGHTWAY. Here is a good Anglo-Saxon word of _two_ syllables whose
+place, without any good reason, is being usurped by the Latin word
+_immediately_, of _five_ syllables.
+
+STREET. We live _in_, not _on_--meet our acquaintances _in_, not
+_on_--things occur _in_, not _on_--houses are built _in_, not _on_, the
+street, and so forth.
+
+STYLE. This is a term that is used to characterize the peculiarities
+that distinguish a writer or a composition. Correctness and clearness
+properly belong to the domain of _diction_; simplicity, conciseness,
+gravity, elegance, diffuseness, floridity, force, feebleness,
+coarseness, etc., belong to the domain of _style_.
+
+SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. This mood is unpopular with not a few now-a-day
+grammarians. One says that it is rapidly falling into disuse; that, in
+fact, there is good reason to suppose it will soon become obsolete.
+Another says that it would, perhaps, be better to abolish it entirely,
+as its use is a continual source of dispute among grammarians and of
+perplexity to schools. Another says that it is a universal
+stumbling-block; that nobody seems to understand it, although almost
+everybody attempts to use it.
+
+That the subjunctive mood is much less used now than it was a hundred
+years ago is certain, but that it is obsolescent is very far from
+certain. It would not be easy, I think, to find a single contemporary
+writer who does not use it. That it is not always easy to determine what
+form of it we should employ is very true; but if we are justified in
+abolishing it altogether, as Mr. Chandler suggests, because its correct
+use is not always easy, then we are also justified in abolishing the use
+of _shall_ and _will_, and of the prepositions, for surely their right
+use is likewise at times most puzzling. Meanwhile, most persons will
+think it well to learn to use the subjunctive mood properly. With that
+object in view, one can not, perhaps, do better than to attend to what
+Dr. Alexander Bain, Professor of Logic in the University of Aberdeen,
+says upon the subject. In Professor Bain's "Higher English Grammar" we
+find:
+
+"In subordinate clauses.--In a clause expressing a condition, and
+introduced by a conjunction of condition, the verb is sometimes, but not
+always, in the subjunctive mood: 'If I _be_ able,' 'if I _were_ strong
+enough,' 'if thou _should_ come.'
+
+"The subjunctive inflexions have been wholly lost. The sense that
+something is wanting appears to have led many writers to use indicative
+forms where the subjunctive might be expected. The tendency appears
+strongest in the case of 'wert,' which is now used as indicative (for
+'wast') only in poetical or elevated language.
+
+"The following is the rule given for the use of the subjunctive mood:
+
+"When in a conditional clause it is intended to express doubt or denial,
+use the subjunctive mood.[30] 'If I _were_ sure of what you tell me, I
+would go.'
+
+"When the conditional clause is _affirmative_ and _certain_, the verb is
+_indicative_: 'If that _is_ the case' (as you now tell me, and as I
+believe), 'I can understand you.' This is equivalent to a clause of
+assumption, or supposition: 'That being the case,' 'inasmuch as that is
+the case,' etc.
+
+"As _futurity_ is by its nature uncertain, the subjunctive is
+extensively used for future conditionality: 'If it _rain_, we shall not
+be able to go'; 'if I _be_ well'; 'if he _come_ shortly'; 'if thou
+_return_ at all in peace'; 'though he _slay_ me, yet will I trust in
+him.' These events are all in the uncertain future, and are put in the
+subjunctive.[31]
+
+"A future result or consequence is expressed by the subjunctive in such
+instances as these: 'I will wait till he _return_'; 'no fear lest dinner
+_cool_'; 'thou shalt stone him with stones, that he _die_'; 'take heed
+lest at any time your hearts _be_ overcharged with surfeiting.'
+
+"Uncertainty as to a past event may arise from our own ignorance, in
+which case the subjunctive is properly employed, and serves the useful
+purpose of distinguishing our ignorance from our knowledge. 'If any of
+my readers _has_ looked with so little attention upon the world around
+him'; this would mean--'as I know that they have.' The meaning intended
+is probably--'as I do not know whether they have or not,' and therefore
+the subjunctive 'have' is preferable. 'If ignorance _is_ bliss,' which I
+(ironically) admit. Had Gray been speaking seriously, he would have
+said, 'if ignorance _be_ bliss,' he himself dissenting from the
+proposition.
+
+"A wish contrary to the fact takes the subjunctive: 'I wish he _were_
+here' (which he is not).
+
+"An intention not yet carried out is also subjunctive: 'The sentence is
+that you _be_ imprisoned.'
+
+"The only correct form of the future subjunctive is--'if I should.' We
+may say, 'I do not know whether or not I _shall_ come'; but 'if I shall
+come,' expressing a condition, is not an English construction. 'If he
+will' has a real meaning, as being the present subjunctive of the verb
+'will': 'if he be willing,' 'if he have the will.' It is in accordance
+with good usage to express a future subjunctive meaning by a present
+tense; but in that case the form must be strictly subjunctive, and not
+indicative. 'If any member _absents_ himself, he shall forfeit a penny
+for the use of the club'; this ought to be either 'absent,' or 'should
+absent.' 'If thou _neglectest_ or _doest_ unwillingly what I command
+thee, I will rack thee with old cramps'; better, 'if thou _neglect_ or
+_do_ unwillingly,' or 'if thou should neglect.' The indicative would be
+justified by the speaker's belief that the supposition is sure to turn
+out to be the fact.
+
+"The past subjunctive may imply denial; as, 'if the book _were_ in the
+library (as it is not), it should be at your service.'
+
+"'If the book _be_ in the library,' means, 'I do not know whether it be
+or not.' We have thus the power of discriminating _three_ different
+suppositions. 'If the book _is_ in the library' (as I know it is); 'if
+it _be_' (I am uncertain); 'if it _were_' (as I know it is not). So, 'if
+it rains,' 'if it rain,' 'if it rained.' 'Nay, and the villains march
+wide between the legs, as if they _had_ gyves on,' implying that they
+had not.
+
+"The same power of the past tense is exemplified in 'if I _could_, I
+would,' which means, 'I can not'; whereas, 'if I can, I will,' means 'I
+do not know.'
+
+"The past subjunctive may be expressed by an inversion: '_Had_ I the
+power,' '_were_ I as I have been.'
+
+"In Principal Clauses.--The principal clause in a conditional statement
+also takes the subjunctive form when it refers to what is future and
+contingent, and when it refers to what is past and uncertain, or denied.
+'If he should try, he _would_ succeed'; 'if I had seen him, I _should_
+have asked him.'
+
+"The usual forms of the subjunctive in the principal clause are 'would,'
+'should,' 'would have,' 'should have'; and it is to be noted that in
+this application the second persons take the inflexional ending of the
+indicative: 'shouldst,' 'wouldst.'
+
+    "'If 'twere done when 'tis done, then 't_were_ (would be) well
+    It _were_ (should be) done quickly.'
+
+"The English idiom appears sometimes to permit the use of an indicative
+where we should expect a subjunctive form. 'Many acts, that _had_ been
+otherwise blamable, were employed'; 'I _had_ fainted, unless I had
+believed,' etc.
+
+    "'Which else _lie_ furled and shrouded in the soul.'
+
+"In 'else' there is implied a conditional clause that would suit 'lie';
+or the present may be regarded as a more vivid form of expression. 'Had'
+may be indicative; just as we sometimes find pluperfect indicative for
+pluperfect subjunctive in the same circumstances in Latin. We may refer
+it to the general tendency, as already seen in the uses of 'could,'
+'would,' 'should,' etc., to express conditionality by a past tense; or
+the indicative may be used as a more direct and vivid mode. 'Had' may be
+subjunctive; 'I _had_ fainted' is, in construction, analogous to 'I
+_should_ have fainted'; the word for futurity, 'shall,' not being
+necessary to the sense, is withdrawn, and its past inflexion transferred
+to 'have.' Compare Germ. _würde haben_ and _hätte_."
+
+In addition to the foregoing, we find in Professor Bain's "Composition
+Grammar" the following:
+
+"The case most suited to the subjunctive is _contingent futurity_, or
+the expression of an event unknown absolutely, as being still in the
+future: 'If to-morrow _be_ fine, I will walk with you.'
+
+"'Unless I _were_ prepared,' insinuates pretty strongly that I am or am
+not prepared, according to the manner of the principal clause.
+
+    "'What's a tall man unless he _fight_?'
+
+    "'The sword hath ended him: so shall it thee,
+    Unless thou _yield_ thee as my prisoner.'
+
+    "'Who but must laugh, if such a man there _be_?
+    Who would not weep, if Atticus _were_ he?'
+
+"'I am to second Ion if he _fail_'; the failing is left quite doubtful.
+'I should very imperfectly execute the task which I have undertaken if I
+_were_ merely to treat of battles and sieges.' Macaulay thus implies
+that the scope of his work is to be wider than mere battles and sieges.
+
+"The subjunctive appears in some other constructions. 'I hope to see the
+exhibition before _it close_'; 'wait till he _return_'; 'thou shall
+stand by the river's brink against he _come_'; 'take heed lest passion
+_sway_ thy judgment'; 'speak to me, though it _be_ in wrath'; 'if he
+_smite_ him with an instrument of iron so that he _die_, he is a
+murderer'; 'beware this night that thou _cross_ not my footsteps'
+(Shelley).
+
+"Again. 'Whatever this _be_'; 'whoever he _be_'; 'howe'er it _be_'
+(Tennyson); and such like.
+
+    "'And _as long_, O God, _as_ she
+    _Have_ a grain of love for me,
+    So long, no doubt, no doubt,
+    Shall I nurse in my dark heart,
+    However weary, a spark of will
+    Not to be trampled out.'
+
+"The Future Subjunctive is given in our scheme of the verb as 'should'
+in all persons: 'If I should, if thou should, if he should.' In old
+English, we have 'thou _shouldst_': 'if thou, Lord, _shouldst_ mark
+iniquities.'
+
+"An inverted conditional form has taken deep root in our language, and
+may be regarded as an elegant and forcible variety. While dispensing
+with the conjunction, it does not cause ambiguity; nevertheless,
+conditionality is well marked.
+
+"'_If_ you _should_ abandon your Penelope and your home for Calypso,
+----': '_should_ you abandon ----.'
+
+            "'_Go_ not my horse the better,
+    I must become a borrower of the night
+    For a dark hour or twain.'
+
+    "'Here had we now our country's honor roof'd
+    _Were_ the graced person of our Banquo present.'
+
+    "'_Be_ thou a spirit of health or goblin damn'd,
+    _Bring_ with thee airs from heaven or blasts from hell,
+    _Be_ thy intents wicked or charitable,
+    Thou com'st in such a questionable shape
+    That I will speak to thee.'
+
+    "'_Come_ one, _come_ all, this rock shall fly
+    From its firm base as soon as I.'--Scott.
+
+"The following examples are given by Mätzner:
+
+"'Varney's communications, _be_ they what they might, were operating in
+his favor.'--Scott.
+
+"'Governing persons, _were_ they never so insignificant intrinsically,
+have for most part plenty of Memoir-writers.'--Carlyle.
+
+"'Even _were_ I disposed, I could not gratify the reader.'--Warren.
+
+"'Bring them back to me, _cost_ what it may.'--Coleridge, 'Wallenstein.'
+
+"'And _will_ you, _nill_ you, I will marry you.'--'Taming of the Shrew.'
+
+"_Were_ is used in the principal clause for 'should be' or 'would
+be.'[32]
+
+    "'I _were_ (=should be) a fool, not less than if a panther
+    Were panic-stricken by the antelope's eye,
+    If she escape me.'--Shelley.
+
+    "'Were you but riding forth to air yourself,
+    Such parting _were_ too petty.'
+
+"'He _were_ (=would be) no lion, were not Romans hinds.'
+
+    "'Should he be roused out of his sleep to-night, ...
+    It _were_ not well; indeed it _were_ not well.'--Shelley.
+
+"_Had_ is sometimes used in the principal clause for 'should have' or
+'would have.'[33]
+
+"'Had I known this before we set out, I think I _had_ (= would have)
+remained at home.'--Scott.
+
+    "'Hadst thou been kill'd when first thou didst presume,
+    Thou _hadst_ not lived to kill a son of mine.'
+
+                                        "'If he
+    Had killed me, he _had_ done a kinder deed.'
+
+    "'For once he _had_ been ta'en or slain,
+    An it had not been his ministry.'--Scott.
+
+    "'If thou hadst said him nay, it _had_ been sin.'[34]
+
+"'_Had_ better, rather, best, as lief, as well, etc.,' is a form that is
+explained under this heading. 'Had' stands for 'would have.' The
+exploded notion that 'had' is a corrupted 'would' must be guarded
+against.
+
+"'I _had_ as lief not be.' That is--'I _would_ as lief _have_ not (_to_)
+be' = 'I would as willingly (or as soon) have non-existence.'
+
+"'_Had_ you rather Cæsar were living----?' '_Would_ you rather _have_
+(_would_ you _prefer_ that) Cæsar were living?'
+
+"'He _had_ better reconsider the matter' is 'he _would_ better _have_
+(_to_) reconsider the matter.'
+
+    "'I _had_ rather be a kitten and cry mew
+    Than one of these same metre ballad-mongers;
+    I _had_ rather hear a brazen canstick turned.'
+
+"Let us compare this form with another that appears side by side with it
+in early writers. (Cp. Lat. 'habeo' and 'mihi est.')
+
+"The construction of 'had' is thus illustrated in Chaucer, as in--Nonne
+Prestes Tale, 300:
+
+    "'By God, I _hadde_ levere than my scherte,
+    That ye hadde rad his legend, as I have.'
+
+"Compare now:
+
+    "'Ah _me were levere_ with lawe _loose_ my lyf
+    Then so to fote hem _falle_.'--Wright, 'Polit. S.'
+
+"Here 'were' is unquestionably for 'would be'; and the whole expression
+might be given by 'had,' thus: 'Ah, _I hadde_ levere ----,' '(to)
+_loose_' and '(to) _falle_,' changing from subjects of 'were' to objects
+of 'hadde.'
+
+"So, in the Chaucer example above, if we substitute 'be' for 'have,' we
+shall get the same meaning, thus: 'By God, _me were_ levere ----.' The
+interchange helps us to see more clearly that 'hadde' is to be explained
+as subjunctive for 'would have.'" See INDICATIVE AND SUBJUNCTIVE.
+
+SUCH. "I have never before seen _such_ a large ox." By a little
+transposing of the words of this sentence, we have, "I have never before
+seen an ox _such_ large," which makes it quite clear that we should say
+_so large an ox_ and not _such a large ox_. As proof that this error in
+the use of _such_ is common, we find in Mr. George Washington Moon's
+"Dean's English and Bad English," the sentence, "With all due deference
+to _such_ a high authority on _such_ a very important matter." With a
+little transposing, this sentence is made to read, "With all due
+deference to an authority _such_ high on a matter _such_ very
+important." It is clear that the sentence should read, "With all due
+deference to _so_ high an authority on _so_ very important a matter."
+The phrases, _such_ a handsome, _such_ a lovely, _such_ a long, _such_
+narrow, etc., are incorrect, and should be _so_ handsome, _so_ lovely,
+_so_ long, and so on.
+
+SUMMON. This verb comes in for its full share of mauling. We often hear
+such expressions as "I will _summons_ him," instead of _summon_ him;
+and "He was _summonsed_," instead of _summoned_.
+
+SUPERFLUOUS WORDS. "Whenever I try to write well, I _always_ find I can
+do it." "I shall have finished by the _latter_ end of the week." "Iron
+sinks _down_ in water." "He combined _together_ all the facts." "My
+brother called on me, and we _both_ took a walk." "I can do it _equally_
+as well as he." "We could not forbear _from_ doing it." "Before I go, I
+must _first_ be paid." "We were compelled to return _back_." "We forced
+them to retreat _back_ fully a mile." "His conduct was approved _of_ by
+everybody." "They conversed _together_ for a long time." "The balloon
+rose _up_ very rapidly." "Give me another _one_." "Come home as soon as
+_ever_ you can." "Who finds him _in_ money?" "He came in last _of all_."
+"He has _got_ all he can carry." "What have you _got_?" "No matter what
+I have _got_." "I have _got_ the headache." "Have you _got_ any
+brothers?" "No, but I have _got_ a sister." All the words in _italics_
+are superfluous.
+
+SUPERIOR. This word is not unfrequently used for able, excellent,
+gifted; as, "She is a _superior_ woman," meaning an _excellent_ woman;
+"He is a _superior_ man," meaning an _able_ man. The expression _an
+inferior man_ is not less objectionable.
+
+SUPPOSITITIOUS. This word is _properly_ used in the sense of put by a
+trick into the place or character belonging to another, spurious,
+counterfeit, not genuine; and _improperly_ in the sense of conjectural,
+hypothetical, imaginary, presumptive; as, "This is a _supposititious_
+case," meaning an _imaginary_ or _presumptive_ case. "The English critic
+derived his materials from a stray copy of some _supposititious_ indexes
+devised by one of the 'Post' reporters."--"Nation." Here is a correct
+use of the word.
+
+SWOSH. There is a kind of ill-balanced brain in which the reflective and
+the imaginative very much outweight the perceptive. Men to whom this
+kind of an organization has been given generally have active minds, but
+their minds never present anything clearly. To their mental vision all
+is ill-defined, chaotic. They see everything in a haze. Whether such men
+talk or write, they are verbose, illogical, intangible,
+will-o'-the-wispish. Their thoughts are phantomlike; like shadows, they
+continually escape their grasp. In their talk they will, after long
+dissertations, tell you that they have not said just what they would
+like to say; there is always a subtle, lurking something still
+unexpressed, which something is the real essence of the matter, and
+which your penetration is expected to divine. In their writings they are
+eccentric, vague, labyrinthine, pretentious, transcendental,[35] and
+frequently ungrammatical. These men, if write they must, should confine
+themselves to the descriptive; for when they enter the essayist's
+domain, which they are very prone to do, they write what I will venture
+to call _swosh_.
+
+We find examples in plenty of this kind of writing in the essays of Mr.
+Ralph Waldo Emerson. Indeed, the impartial critic who will take the
+trouble to examine any of Mr. Emerson's essays at all carefully, is
+quite sure to come to the conclusion that Mr. Emerson has seen
+everything he has ever made the subject of his essays very much as
+London is seen from the top of Saint Paul's in a fog.
+
+Mr. Emerson's definition of Nature runs thus: "Philosophically
+considered, the universe is composed of Nature and the Soul. Strictly
+speaking, therefore, all that is separate from us, all which philosophy
+distinguishes from the _Not Me_--that is, both Nature and Art, and all
+other men, and my own body--must be ranked under this name 'NATURE.' In
+enumerating the values of Nature and casting up their sum, I shall use
+the word in both senses--in its common and in its philosophical import.
+In inquiries so general as our present one, the inaccuracy is not
+material; no confusion of thought will occur. _Nature_, in the common
+sense, refers to essences unchanged by man: space, the air, the river,
+the leaf. _Art_ is applied to the mixture of his will with the same
+things, as in a house, a canal, a picture, a statue. But his operations,
+taken together, are so insignificant--a little chipping, baking,
+patching, and washing--that in an impression so grand as that of the
+world on the human mind they do not vary the result."
+
+In "Letters and Social Aims" Mr. Emerson writes: "Eloquence is the power
+to translate a truth into language perfectly intelligible to the person
+to whom you speak. He who would convince the worthy Mr. Dunderhead of
+any truth which Dunderhead does not see, must be a master of his art.
+Declamation is common; but such possession of thought as is here
+required, such practical chemistry as the conversion of a truth written
+in God's language into a truth in Dunderhead's language, is one of the
+most beautiful and cogent weapons that is forged in the shop of the
+Divine Artificer."
+
+The first paragraph of Mr. Emerson's "Essay on Art" reads: "All
+departments of life at the present day--Trade, Politics, Letters,
+Science, or Religion--seem to feel, and to labor to express, the
+identity of their law. They are rays of one sun; they translate each
+into a new language the sense of the other. They are sublime when seen
+as emanations of a Necessity contradistinguished from the vulgar Fate by
+being instant and alive, and dissolving man, as well as his works, in
+its flowing beneficence. This influence is conspicuously visible in the
+principles and history of Art."
+
+Another paragraph from Mr. Emerson's "Essay on Eloquence": "The orator,
+as we have seen, must be a substantial personality. Then, first, he must
+have power of statement--must have the fact, and know how to tell it. In
+a knot of men conversing on any subject, the person who knows most about
+it will have the ear of the company, if he wishes it, and lead the
+conversation, no matter what genius or distinction other men there
+present may have; and, in any public assembly, him who has the facts,
+and can and will state them, people will listen to, though he is
+otherwise ignorant, though he is hoarse and ungrateful, though he
+stutters and screams."
+
+Mr. Emerson, in his "Essay on Prudence," writes: "There are all degrees
+of proficiency in knowledge of the world. It is sufficient to our
+present purpose to indicate three. One class live to the utility of the
+symbol, esteeming health and wealth a final good. Another class live
+above this mark to the beauty of the symbol, as the poet and artist, and
+the naturalist and man of science. A third class live above the beauty
+of the symbol to the beauty of the thing signified; these are wise men.
+The first class have common sense; the second, taste; and the third,
+spiritual perception. Once in a long time a man traverses the whole
+scale, and sees and enjoys the symbol solidly; then, also, has a clear
+eye for its beauty; and, lastly, whilst he pitches his tent on this
+sacred volcanic isle of nature, does not offer to build houses and
+barns thereon, reverencing the splendor of God which he sees bursting
+through each chink and cranny."
+
+Those who are wont to accept others at their self-assessment and to see
+things through other people's eyes--and there are many such--are in
+danger of thinking this kind of writing very fine, when in fact it is
+not only the veriest _swosh_, but that kind of swosh that excites at
+least an occasional doubt with regard to the writer's sanity. We can
+make no greater mistake than to suppose that the reason we do not
+understand these rhetorical contortionists is because they are so subtle
+and profound. We understand them quite as well as they understand
+themselves. At their very best, they are but incoherent diluters of
+other men's ideas. They have but one thing to recommend them--honesty.
+They believe in themselves.
+
+"Whatever is dark is deep. Stir a puddle, and it is deeper than a
+well."--Swift.
+
+SYNECDOCHE. The using of the name of a part for that of the whole, the
+name of the whole for that of a part, or the using of a definite number
+for an indefinite, is called, in rhetoric, _synecdoche_. "The bay was
+covered with _sails_"; i. e., with _ships_. "The man was old, careworn,
+and gray"; i. e., literally, _his hair_, not the man, was gray. "_Nine
+tenths_ of every man's happiness depends on the reception he meets with
+in the world." "He had seen seventy _winters_." "Thus spoke the
+_tempter_": here the part of the character is named that suits the
+occasion.
+
+"His roof was at the service of the outcast; the unfortunate ever found
+a welcome at his threshold."
+
+TAKE. I copy from the "London Queen": "The verb _to take_ is open to
+being considered a vulgar verb when used in reference to dinner, tea, or
+to refreshments of any kind. 'Will you _take_' is not considered _comme
+il faut_; the verb in favor for the offering of civilities being _to
+have_." According to "The Queen," then, we must say, "Will you _have_
+some dinner, tea, coffee, wine, fish, beef, salad," etc.
+
+TASTE OF. The redundant _of_, often used, in this country, in connection
+with the transitive verbs _to taste_ and _to smell_, is a Yankeeism. We
+_taste_ or _smell_ a thing, not taste _of_ nor smell _of_ a thing. The
+neuter verbs _to taste_ and _to smell_ are often followed by _of_. "If
+butter _tastes of_ brass." "For age but _tastes of_ pleasures."
+
+    "You shall stifle in your own report,
+    and _smell of_ calumny."--Shakespeare.
+
+TAUTOLOGY. Among the things to be avoided in writing is _tautology_,
+which is _the repeating of the same thought_, whether in the same or in
+different words.
+
+TAUTOPHONY. "A regard for harmony requires us, in the progress of a
+sentence, to avoid repeating a sound by employing the same word more
+than once, or using, in contiguous words, similar combinations of
+letters. This fault is known as _tautology_."--Dr. G. P. Quackenbos,
+"Advanced Course of Composition and Rhetoric," p. 300. Dr. Quackenbos is
+in error. The repetition of the same _sense_ is tautology, and the
+repetition of the same _sound_, or, as Dr. Quackenbos has it, "the
+repeating of a sound by employing the same word more than once, or by
+using in contiguous words similar combinations of letters," is
+_tautophony_.
+
+TEACH. To impart knowledge, to inform, to instruct; as, "_Teach_ me how
+to do it"; "_Teach_ me to swim"; "He _taught_ me to write." The
+uncultured often misuse _learn_ for _teach_. See LEARN.
+
+TENSE. The errors made in the use of the tenses are manifold. The one
+most frequently made by persons of culture--the one that everybody
+makes would, perhaps, be nearer the fact--is that of using the
+_imperfect_ instead of the _perfect_ tense; thus, "I never _saw_ it
+played but once": say, _have seen_. "He was the largest man I ever
+_saw_": say, _have seen_. "I never in my life _had_ such trouble": say,
+_have had_. Another frequent error, the making of which is not confined
+to the unschooled, is that of using two verbs in a past tense when only
+one should be in that time; thus, "I intended to _have gone_": say, _to
+go_. "It was my intention to _have_ come": say, _to come_. "I expected
+to _have found_ you here": say, _to find_. "I was very desirous to _have
+gone_": say, _to go_. "He was better than I expected to _have found_
+him": say, _to find_.
+
+Among other common errors are the following: "I _seen_ him when he
+_done_ it": say, "I _saw_ him when he _did_ it." "I should have _went_
+home": say, _gone_. "If he had _went_": say, _gone_. "I wish you had
+_went_": say, _gone_. "He has _went_ out": say, _gone_. "I _come_ to
+town this morning": say, _came_. "He _come_ to me for advice": say,
+_came_. "It _begun_ very late": say, _began_. "It had already _began_":
+say, _begun_. "The following toasts were _drank_": say, _drunk_. "His
+text was that God _was_ love": say, _is_ love. Another error is made in
+such sentences as these: "If I had _have_ known": say, _had known_. "If
+he had _have_ come as he promised": say, _had come_. "If you had _have_
+told me": say, _had told_.
+
+TESTIMONY. See EVIDENCE.
+
+THAN. _Than_ and _as_ implying comparison have the same case after as
+before them. "He owes more than _me_": read, than _I_--i. e., more than
+_I owe_. "John is not so old as _her_": read, as _she_--i. e., as _she
+is_. We should say, then, "He is stronger than _she_," "She is older
+than _he_," "You are richer than _I_," etc. But it does not always
+happen that the nominative case comes after _than_ or _as_. "I love you
+more than _him_," "I give you more than _him_," "I love you as well as
+_him_"; that is to say, "I love you more than _I love him_," "I give you
+more than _I give him_," "I love you as well as _I love him_." Take away
+_him_ and put _he_ in all these cases, and the grammar is just as good,
+but the meaning is quite different. "I love you as well as _him_," means
+that I love you as well _as I love him_; but, "I love you as well as
+_he_," means that I love you as well _as he loves you_.
+
+THAN WHOM. Cobbett, in his "Grammar of the English Language," says:
+"There is an erroneous way of employing _whom_, which I must point out
+to your particular attention, because it is so often seen in very good
+writers, and because it is very deceiving. 'The Duke of Argyll, _than
+whom_ no man was more hearty in the cause.' 'Cromwell, _than whom_ no
+man was better skilled in artifice.' A hundred such phrases might be
+collected from Hume, Blackstone, and even from Drs. Blair and Johnson.
+Yet they are bad grammar. In all such cases, _who_ should be made use
+of: for it is _nominative_ and not objective. 'No man was more hearty in
+the cause _than he was_'; 'No man was better skilled in artifice _than
+he was_.'[36] It is a very common Parliament-house phrase, and therefore
+presumably _corrupt_; but it is a Dr. Johnson phrase, too: 'Pope, _than
+whom_ few men had more vanity.' The Doctor did not say, 'Myself, _than
+whom_ few men have been found more base, having, in my dictionary,
+described a pensioner as a slave of state, and having afterward myself
+become a pensioner.'
+
+"I differ in this matter from Bishop Lowth, who says that 'The relative
+_who_, having reference to no verb or preposition understood, but only
+to its antecedent, when it follows _than_, is _always in the objective
+case_; even though the pronoun, if substituted in its place, would be in
+the nominative.' And then he gives an instance from Milton. 'Beelzebub,
+_than whom_, Satan except, none higher sat.' It is curious enough that
+this sentence of the Bishop is, itself, ungrammatical! Our poor
+unfortunate _it_ is so placed as to make it a matter of doubt whether
+the Bishop meant it to relate to _who_ or to _its antecedent_. However,
+we know its meaning; but, though he says that _who_, when it follows
+_than_, is always in the objective case, he gives us no reason for this
+departure from a clear general principle; unless we are to regard as a
+reason the example of Milton, who has committed many hundreds, if not
+thousands, of grammatical errors, many of which the Bishop himself has
+pointed out. There is a sort of side-wind attempt at reason in the
+words, 'having reference to no _verb_ or _preposition_ understood.' I do
+not see the _reason_, even if this could be; but it appears to me
+impossible that a noun or pronoun can exist in a grammatical state
+without having reference to some _verb_ or _preposition_, either
+expressed or understood. What is meant by Milton? 'Than Beelzebub, none
+_sat_ higher, except Satan.' And when, in order to avoid the repetition
+of the word Beelzebub, the relative becomes necessary, the full
+construction must be, 'no devil sat higher _than who_ sat, except
+Satan'; and not, 'no devil sat higher _than whom_ sat.'[37] The
+supposition that there can be a noun or pronoun which has reference to
+_no verb_ and _no preposition_, is certainly a mistake."
+
+Of this, Dr. Fitzedward Hall remarks, in his "Recent Exemplifications of
+False Philology": "That any one but Cobbett would abide this as English
+is highly improbable; and how the expression--a quite classical
+one--which he discards can be justified grammatically, except by calling
+its _than_ a preposition, others may resolve at their leisure and
+pleasure."
+
+THANKS. There are many persons who think it in questionable taste to use
+_thanks_ for _thank you_.
+
+THAT. The best writers often appear to grope after a separate employment
+for the several relatives.
+
+"'THAT' _is the proper restrictive, explicative, limiting, or defining
+relative_.
+
+"'_That_,' the neuter of the definite article, was early in use as a
+neuter relative. All the other oldest relatives gradually dropt away,
+and 'that' came to be applied also to plural antecedents, and to
+masculines and feminines. When 'as,' 'which,' and 'who' came forward to
+share the work of 'that,' there seems to have arisen not a little
+uncertainty about the relatives, and we find curious double forms: 'whom
+that,' 'which that,' 'which as,' etc. Gower has, 'Venus _whose_ priest
+_that_ I am'; Chaucer writes--'This Abbot _which that_ was an holy man,'
+'his love _the which that_ he oweth.' By the Elizabethan period, these
+double forms have disappeared, and all the relatives are used singly
+without hesitation. From then till now, 'that' has been struggling with
+'who' and 'which' to regain superior favor, with varying success. 'Who'
+is used for persons, 'which' for things, in both numbers; so is 'that';
+and the only opportunity of a special application of 'that' lies in the
+important distinction between coördination and restriction. Now, as
+'who' and 'which' are most commonly preferred for coördination, it would
+be a clear gain to confine them to this sense, and to reserve 'that' for
+the restrictive application alone. This arrangement, then, would _fall
+in with the most general use of 'that,' especially beyond the limits of
+formal composition_.
+
+"The use of 'that' solely as restrictive, with 'who' and 'which' solely
+as coördinating, _also avoids ambiguities_ that often attend the
+indiscriminate use of 'who' and 'which' for coördinate and for
+restrictive clauses. Thus, when we say, 'his conduct surprised his
+English friends, _who_ had not known him long,' we may mean either that
+his English friends generally were surprised (the relative being, in
+that case, _coördinating_), or that only a portion of them--namely, the
+particular portion that had not known him long--were surprised. In this
+last case the relative is meant to define or explain the antecedent, and
+the doubt would be removed by writing thus: 'his English friends _that_
+had not known him long.' So in the following sentence there is a similar
+ambiguity in the use of 'which': 'the next winter _which_ you will spend
+in town will give you opportunities of making a more prudent choice.'
+This may mean, either 'you will spend next winter in town' ('which'
+being coördinating), or 'the next of the winters when you are to live in
+town,' let that come when it may. In the former case, 'which' is the
+proper relative; in the latter case, the meaning is restrictive or
+defining, and would be best brought out by 'that': 'the next winter
+_that_ you will spend in town.'
+
+"A further consideration in favor of employing 'that' for explicative
+clauses is the unpleasant effect arising from the _too frequent
+repetition of 'who' and 'which.'_ Grammarians often recommend 'that' as
+a means of varying the style; but this end ought to be sought in
+subservience to the still greater end of perspicuity.
+
+"The following examples will serve further to illustrate the distinction
+between _that_, on the one hand, and _who_ and _which_, on the other:
+
+"'In general, Mr. Burchell was fondest of the company of children,
+_whom_ he used to call harmless little men.' 'Whom' is here
+idiomatically used, being the equivalent of '_and them_ he used to
+call,' etc.
+
+    "'Bacon at last, a mighty man, arose,
+    _Whom_ a wise king and nation chose
+    Lord Chancellor of both their laws.'
+
+Here, also, 'whom' is equal to 'and him.'
+
+"In the following instance the relative is restrictive or defining, and
+'that' would be preferable: 'the conclusion of the "Iliad" is like the
+exit of a great man out of company _whom_ he has entertained
+magnificently.' Compare another of Addison's sentences: 'a man of polite
+imagination is let into a great many pleasures _that_ the vulgar are not
+capable of receiving.'
+
+"Both relatives are introduced discriminatingly in this passage:--'She
+had learned that from Mrs. Wood, _who_ had heard it from her husband,
+_who_ had heard it at the public-house from the landlord, _who_ had been
+let into the secret by the boy _that_ carried the beer to some of the
+prisoners.'
+
+"The following sentences are ambiguous under the modern system of using
+'who' for both purposes:--'I met the boatman _who_ took me across the
+ferry.' If 'who' is the proper relative here, the meaning is, 'I met the
+boatman, _and he_ took me across,' it being supposed that the boatman is
+known and definite. But if there be several boatmen, and I wish to
+indicate one in particular by the circumstance that he had taken me
+across the ferry, I should use 'that.' 'The youngest boy _who_ has
+learned to dance is James.' This means either 'the youngest boy is
+James, _and he_ has learned to dance,' or, 'of the boys, the youngest
+that has learned to dance is James.' This last sense is restrictive, and
+'that' should be used.
+
+"Turning now to 'which,' we may have a series of parallel examples. 'The
+court, _which_ gives currency to manners, should be exemplary': here the
+meaning is 'the court should be exemplary, _for the court_ gives
+currency to manners.' 'Which' is the idiomatic relative in this case.
+'The cat, _which_ you despise so much, is a very useful animal.' The
+relative here also is coördinating, and not restrictive. If it were
+intended to point out one individual cat specially despised by the
+person addressed, 'that' would convey the sense. 'A theory _which_ does
+not tend to the improvement of practice is utterly unworthy of regard.'
+The meaning is restrictive; 'a theory _that_ does not tend.' The
+following sentence is one of many from Goldsmith that give 'that'
+instead of 'which':--'Age, _that_ lessens the enjoyment of life,
+increases our desire of living.' Thackeray also was fond of this usage.
+But it is not very common.
+
+"'Their faith tended to make them improvident; but a wise instinct
+taught them that if there was one thing _which_ ought not to be left to
+fate, or to the precepts of a deceased prophet, it was the artillery'; a
+case where 'that' is the proper relative.
+
+"'All words, _which_ are signs of complex ideas, furnish matter of
+mistake.' This gives an erroneous impression, and should be 'all words
+_that_ are signs of complex ideas.'
+
+"'In all cases of prescription, the universal practice of judges is to
+direct juries by analogy to the Statute of Limitations, to decide
+against incorporeal rights _which_ have for many years been
+relinquished': say instead, 'incorporeal rights _that_ have for many
+years,' and the sense is clear.
+
+"It is necessary for the proper understanding of 'which' to advert to
+its peculiar function of referring to a whole clause as the antecedent:
+'William ran along the top of the wall, _which_ alarmed his mother very
+much.' The antecedent is obviously not the noun 'wall,' but the fact
+expressed by the entire clause--'William ran,' etc. 'He by no means
+wants sense, _which_ only serves to aggravate his former folly'; namely,
+(not 'sense,' but) the circumstance 'that he does not want sense.' 'He
+is neither over-exalted by prosperity, nor too much depressed by
+misfortune; _which_ you must allow marks a great mind.' 'We have done
+many things _which_ we ought not to have done,' might mean 'we ought not
+_to have done many things_'; that is, 'we ought to have done few
+things.' 'That' would give the exact sense intended: 'we have done many
+things _that_ we ought not to have done.' 'He began to look after his
+affairs himself, _which_ was the way to make them prosper.'
+
+"We must next allude to the cases where the relative is governed by a
+preposition. We can use a preposition before 'who' and 'which,' but when
+the relative is 'that,' the preposition must be thrown to the end of the
+clause. Owing to an imperfect appreciation of the genius of our
+language, offense was taken at this usage by some of our leading writers
+at the beginning of last century, and to this circumstance we must refer
+the disuse of 'that' as the relative of restriction.[38]
+
+"'It is curious that the only circumstance connected with Scott, and
+related by Lockhart, _of which_ I was a witness, is incorrectly stated
+in the "Life of Sir Walter."'--Leslie's 'Memoirs.' The relative should
+be restrictive: '_that_ I was a witness _of_.'
+
+"'There are many words _which_ are adjectives _which_ have nothing to do
+with the qualities of the nouns _to which_ they are put.'--Cobbett.
+Better: 'there are many words _that_ are adjectives _that_ have nothing
+to do with the qualities of the nouns (_that_) they are put _to_.'
+
+"'Other objects, _of which_ we have not occasion to speak so frequently,
+we do not designate by a name of their own.' This, if amended, would be:
+'other objects _that_ we have not occasion to speak _of_ so frequently,
+we do not,' etc.
+
+"'Sorrow for the dead is the only sorrow _from which_ we refuse to be
+divorced': 'the only sorrow (_that_) we refuse to be divorced _from_.'
+
+"'Why, there is not a single sentence in this play _that_ I do not know
+the meaning _of_.'--Addison.
+
+"'Originality is a thing we constantly clamor _for_, and constantly
+quarrel _with_.'--Carlyle.
+
+"'A spirit more amiable, but less vigorous, than Luther's would have
+shrunk back from the dangers _which_ he braved and surmounted': '_that_
+he braved'; 'the dangers _braved_ and _surmounted_ by him.'
+
+"'Nor is it at all improbable that the emigrants had been guilty of
+those faults _from which_ civilized men _who_ settle among an
+uncivilized people are rarely free.'--Macaulay. 'Nor is it at all
+improbable that the emigrants had been guilty of _the_ faults _that_
+(_such_ faults _as_) civilized men _that settle_ (_settling_, or
+_settled_) among an uncivilized people are rarely free _from_.'
+
+"'Prejudices are notions or opinions _which_ the mind entertains without
+knowing the grounds and reasons of them, and _which_ are assented to
+without examination.'--Berkeley. The 'which' in both cases should be
+'that,' but the relative may be entirely dispensed with by participial
+conversion: 'prejudices are notions or opinions _entertained_ by the
+mind without knowing the grounds and reasons of them, and _assented_ to
+without examination.'
+
+"The too frequent repetition of 'who' and 'which' may be avoided by
+resolving them into the conjunction and personal or other pronoun: 'In
+such circumstances, the utmost that Bosquet could be expected to do was
+to hold his ground, (_which_) _and this_ he did.'"--Bain's "Higher
+English Grammar."
+
+This word is sometimes vulgarly used for _so_; thus, "I was _that_
+nervous I forgot everything"; "I was _that_ frightened I could hardly
+stand."
+
+THE. Bungling writers sometimes write sheer nonsense, or say something
+very different from what they have in their minds, by the simple
+omission of the definite article; thus, "The indebtedness of the
+English tongue to the French, Latin and Greek is disclosed in almost
+every sentence framed." According to this, there is such a thing as a
+French, Latin and Greek tongue. Professor Townsend meant to say: "The
+indebtedness of the English tongue to the French, _the_ Latin, and _the_
+Greek," etc.
+
+THEN. The use of this word as an adjective is condemned in very emphatic
+terms by some of our grammarians, and yet this use of it has the
+sanction of such eminent writers as Addison, Johnson, Whately, and Sir
+J. Hawkins. Johnson says, "In his _then_ situation," which, if brevity
+be really the soul of wit, certainly has much more soul in it than "In
+the situation he then occupied." However, it is doubtful whether _then_,
+as an adjective, will ever again find favor with careful writers.
+
+THENCE. See WHENCE.
+
+THINK FOR. We not unfrequently hear a superfluous _for_ tacked to a
+sentence; thus, "You will find that he knows more about the affair than
+you think _for_."
+
+THOSE KIND. "_Those_ kind of apples _are_ best": read, "_That_ kind of
+apples _is_ best." It is truly remarkable that many persons who can
+justly lay claim to the possession of considerable culture use this
+barbarous combination. It would be just as correct to say, "Those flock
+of geese," or "Those drove of cattle," as to say, "Those _sort_ or
+_kind_ of people."
+
+THOSE WHO. This phrase, applied in a restrictive sense, is the modern
+substitute for the ancient idiom _they that_, an idiom in accordance
+with the true meaning of _that_.
+
+"'_They that_ told me the story said'; 'Blessed are _they that_ mourn';
+'and Simon and _they that_ were with him'; 'I love _them that_ love me,
+and _they that_ seek me early shall find me'; '_they that_ are whole
+have no need of a physician'; 'how sweet is the rest of _them that_
+labor!' 'I can not tell who to compare them to so fitly as to _them
+that_ pick pockets in the presence of the judge'; '_they that_ enter
+into the state of marriage cast a die of the greatest contingency' (J.
+Taylor).
+
+    "'_That_ man hath perfect blessedness
+    _Who_ walketh not astray,'
+
+if expressed according to the old idiom would be, '_the_ man
+hath--_that_ walketh.'
+
+"'That' and 'those,' as demonstrative adjectives, refer backward, and
+are not therefore well suited for the forward reference implied in
+making use of 'that which' and 'those who' as restrictive relatives. It
+is also very cumbrous to say '_that_ case _to which_ you allude' for
+'the case (_that_) you allude _to_.'
+
+"Take now the following: 'The Duke of Wellington is not one of _those
+who_ interfere with matters _over which_ he has no control': 'the Duke
+is not one of _them that_ interfere in matters _that_ they have no
+control _over_ (matters _that_ they can not control, _beyond their
+control_, _out of their province_).' If 'them that' sounds too
+antiquated, we may adopt as a convenient compromise, 'the Duke is not
+one of _those that_'; or, 'the Duke is not one to _interfere_ in matters
+out of his province'; 'the duke is not one _that interferes_ with _what_
+he has no control _over_.'"--Bain.
+
+THREADBARE QUOTATIONS. Among the things that are in bad taste in
+speaking and writing, the use of threadbare quotations and expressions
+is in the front rank. Some of these _usés et cassés_ old-timers are the
+following: "Their name is legion"; "hosts of friends"; "the upper ten";
+"Variety is the spice of life"; "Distance lends enchantment to the
+view"; "A thing of beauty is a joy for ever"; "the light fantastic toe";
+"own the soft impeachment"; "fair women and brave men"; "revelry by
+night"; "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
+
+TO. It is a well-established rule of grammar that _to_, the sign of the
+infinitive mood, should not be used for the infinitive itself: thus, "He
+has not done it, nor is he likely _to_." It should be, "nor is he likely
+_to do it_."
+
+We often find _to_, when the sign of the infinitive, separated by an
+adverb from the verb to which it belongs. Professor A. P. Peabody says
+that no standard English writer makes this mistake, and that, so far as
+he knows, it occurs frequently with but one respectable American writer.
+
+Very often _to_ is used instead of _at_; thus, "I have been _to_ the
+theatre, _to_ church, _to_ my uncle's, _to_ a concert," and so on. In
+all these cases, the preposition to use is clearly _at_, and not _to_.
+See, also, AND.
+
+TO THE FORE. An old idiomatic phrase, now freely used again.
+
+TONGUE. "Much _tongue_ and much judgment seldom go
+together."--L'Estrange. See LANGUAGE.
+
+TOWARD. Those who profess to know about such things say that etymology
+furnishes no pretext for the adding of _s_ to _ward_ in such words as
+_backward_, _forward_, _toward_, _upward_, _onward_, _downward_,
+_afterward_, _heavenward_, _earthward_, and the like.
+
+TRANSFERRED EPITHET. This is the shifting of a qualifying word from its
+proper subject to some allied subject. Examples:
+
+    "The little fields made green
+    By husbandry of many _thrifty years_."
+
+"He plods his _weary way_." "Hence to your _idle bed_!" By this figure
+the diction is rendered more terse and vigorous; it is much used in
+verse. For the sake of conciseness, it is used in prose in such phrases
+as the _lunatic asylum_, the _criminal court_, the _condemned cell_,
+the _blind asylum_, the _cholera hospital_, the _foundling asylum_, and
+the like.
+
+    "Still in harmonious intercourse they lived
+    The rural day, and talked the flowing heart."
+
+"There be some who, with everything to make them happy, plod their
+discontented and melancholy way through life, less grateful than the dog
+that licks the hand that feeds it."
+
+TRANSPIRE. This is one of the most frequently misused words in the
+language. Its primary meaning is to evaporate insensibly through the
+pores, but in this sense it is not used; in this sense we use its twin
+sister _per_spire. _Transpire_ is now properly used in the sense of to
+escape from secrecy, to become known, to leak out; and improperly used
+in the sense of to occur, to happen, to come to pass, and to elapse. The
+word is correctly used thus: "You will not let a word concerning the
+matter _transpire_"; "It _transpires_ [leaks out] that S. & B. control
+the enterprise"; "Soon after the funeral it _transpired_ [became known]
+that the dead woman was alive"; "It has _transpired_ [leaked out] that
+the movement originated with John Blank"; "No report of the proceedings
+was allowed to _transpire_"; "It has not yet _transpired_ who the
+candidate is to be." The word is incorrectly used thus: "The Mexican war
+_transpired_ in 1847"; "The drill will _transpire_ under shelter"; "The
+accident _transpired_ one day last week"; "Years will _transpire_ before
+it will be finished"; "More than a century _transpired_ before it was
+revisited by civilized man."
+
+TRIFLING MINUTIÆ. The meaning of _trifles_ and of _minutiæ_ is so nearly
+the same that no one probably ever uses the phrase _trifling minutiæ_
+except from thoughtlessness.
+
+TRUSTWORTHY. See RELIABLE.
+
+TRY. This word is often improperly used for _make_. We _make_
+experiments, not _try_ them, which is as incorrect as it would be to
+say, _try_ the _attempt_, or the _trial_.
+
+UGLY. In England, this word is restricted to meaning ill-favored; with
+us it is often used--and not without authority--in the sense of
+ill-tempered, vicious, unmanageable.
+
+UNBEKNOWN. This word is no longer used except by the unschooled.
+
+UNDERHANDED. This word, though found in the dictionaries, is a
+vulgarism, and as such is to be avoided. The proper word is _underhand_.
+An _underhand_, not an _underhanded_, proceeding.
+
+UNIVERSAL--ALL. "He is _universally_ esteemed by _all_ who know him." If
+he is _universally_ esteemed, he must be esteemed by _all_ who know him;
+and, if he is esteemed by _all_ who know him, he must be _universally_
+esteemed.
+
+UPWARD OF. This phrase is often used, if not improperly, at least
+inelegantly, for _more than_; thus, "I have been here for _upward of_ a
+year"; "For _upward of_ three quarters of a century she has," etc.,
+meaning, for _more than_ three quarters of a century.
+
+UTTER. This verb is often misused for _say_, _express_. To _utter_ means
+to _speak_, to _pronounce_; and its derivative _utterance_ means the
+act, manner, or power of uttering, vocal expression; as, "the utterance
+of articulate sounds." We _utter_ a cry; _express_ a thought or
+sentiment; _speak_ our mind; and, though prayers are _said_, they may be
+_uttered_ in a certain tone or manner. "Mr. Blank is right in all he
+_utters_": read, _says_. "The court _uttered_ a sentiment that all will
+applaud": read, _expressed_ a sentiment.
+
+The primary meaning of the adjective _utter_ is outer, on the outside;
+but it is no longer used in this sense. It is now used in the sense of
+complete, total, perfect, mere, entire; but he who uses it
+indiscriminately as a synonym of these words will frequently utter
+_utter_ nonsense--i. e., he will utter that which is without the pale of
+sense. For example, we can not say _utter_ concord, but we can say
+_utter_ discord--i. e., without the pale of concord.
+
+VALUABLE. The following sentence, which recently appeared in one of the
+more fastidious of our morning papers, is offered as an example of
+extreme slipshodness in the use of language: "Sea captains are among the
+most _valuable_ contributors to the Park aviary." What the writer
+probably meant to say is, "Sea captains are among those whose
+contributions to the Park aviary are the most valuable."
+
+VAST. This word is often met with in forcible-feeble diction, where it
+is used instead of _great_ or _large_ to qualify such words as number,
+majority, multitude, and the like. Big words and expletives should be
+used only where they are really needed; where they are not really
+needed, they go wide of the object aimed at. The sportsman that hunts
+small game with buck-shot comes home empty-handed.
+
+VERACITY. The loss would be a small one if we were to lose this word and
+its derivatives. Truth and its derivatives would supply all our needs.
+In the phrase so often heard, "A man of truth and veracity," _veracity_
+is entirely superfluous, it having precisely the same meaning as truth.
+The phrase, "A big, large man," is equally good diction.
+
+VERBIAGE. An unnecessary profusion of words is called _verbiage_:
+verbosity, wordiness.
+
+"I thought what I read of it _verbiage_."--Johnson.
+
+Sometimes a better name than verbiage for wordiness would be
+_emptiness_. Witness: "Clearness may be developed and cultivated in
+three ways, (_a_) By constantly practicing in heart and life the
+thoughts and ways of honesty and frankness." The first sentence
+evidently means, "Clearness may be _attained_ in three ways"; but what
+the second sentence means--if it means anything--is more than I can
+tell. Professor L. T. Townsend, "Art of Speech," vol. i, p. 130, adds:
+"This may be regarded as the surest path to greater transparency of
+style." The transparency of Dr. Townsend's style is peculiar. Also, p.
+144, we find: "The laws and rules[1] thus far laid down[2] furnish ample
+foundation for[3] the general statement that an easy and natural[4]
+expression, an exact verbal incarnation of one's thinking,[5] together
+with the power of using appropriate figures, and of making nice
+discriminations between approximate synonyms,[6] each being an important
+factor in correct style, are attained in two ways.[7] (1) Through
+moral[8] and mental discipline. (2) Through continuous and intimate[9]
+acquaintance with such authors as best exemplify those attainments."[10]
+
+1. Would not _laws_ cover the whole ground? 2. _En passant_ I would
+remark that Dr. Townsend did not make these laws, though he so
+intimates. 3. I suggest the word _justify_ in place of these four. 4.
+What is natural is easy; _easy_, therefore, is superfluous. 5. If this
+means anything, it does not mean more than the adjective _clear_ would
+express, if properly used in the sentence. 6. _Approximate_ synonyms!!
+Who ever heard of any antagonistic or even of dissimilar synonyms? 7.
+The transparency of this sentence is not unlike the transparency of
+corrugated glass. 8. What has morality to do with correctness? 9. An
+intimate acquaintance would suffice for most people. 10. Those
+attainments! What are they? Dr. Townsend's corrugated style makes it
+hard to tell.
+
+This paragraph is so badly conceived throughout that it is well-nigh
+impossible to make head, middle, or tail of it; still, if I am at all
+successful in guessing what Professor Townsend wanted to say in it,
+then--when shorn of its redundancy and high-flown emptiness--it will
+read somewhat like this: "The laws thus far presented justify the
+general statement that a clear and natural mode of expression--together
+with that art of using appropriate figures and that ability properly to
+discriminate between synonyms which are necessary to correctness--is
+attained in two ways. (1) By mental discipline. (2) By the study of our
+best authors."
+
+The following sentence is from a leading magazine: "If we begin a system
+of interference, _regulating men's gains_, bolstering here, _in order to
+strengthen this interest_, [and] repressing _elsewhere_ [there], in
+order to equalize wealth, we shall do _an_ [a] _immense_ deal of
+mischief, and without bringing about a more agreeable condition of
+things _than now_ [we] shall _simply_ discourage enterprise, repress
+industry, and check material growth _in all directions_." Read without
+the eighteen words in italics and with the four inclosed.
+
+"Nothing disgusts sooner than the empty pomp of language."
+
+VICE. See CRIME.
+
+VICINITY. This word is sometimes incorrectly used without the possessive
+pronoun; thus, "Washington and vicinity," instead of "Washington and
+_its_ vicinity." The primary meaning of _vicinity_ is nearness,
+proximity. In many of the cases in which vicinity is used,
+_neighborhood_ would be the better word, though _vicinity_ is perhaps
+preferable where it is a question of mere locality.
+
+VOCATION--AVOCATION. These words are frequently confounded. A man's
+_vocation_ is his profession, his calling, his business; and his
+_avocations_ are the things that occupy him incidentally. Mademoiselle
+Bernhardt's _vocation_ is acting; her _avocations_ are painting and
+sculpture. "The tracing of resemblances among the objects and events of
+the world is a constant _avocation_ of the human mind."
+
+VULGAR. By the many, this word is probably more frequently used
+improperly than properly. As a noun, it means the common people, the
+lower orders, the multitude, the many; as an adjective, it means coarse,
+low, unrefined, as "the _vulgar_ people." The sense in which it is
+misused is that of immodest, indecent. The wearing, for example, of a
+gown too short at the top may be _indecent_, but is not _vulgar_.
+
+WAS. "He said he had come to the conclusion that there _was_ no God."
+"The greatest of Byron's works _was_ his whole work taken
+together."--Matthew Arnold. What is true at all times should be
+expressed by using the verb in the present tense. The sentences above
+should read _is_, not _was_.
+
+WHARF. See DOCK.
+
+WHAT. "He would not believe but _what_ I did it": read, but _that_. "I
+do not doubt _but what_ I shall go to Boston to-morrow": read, doubt
+_that_. We say properly, "I have nothing _but what_ you see"; "You have
+brought everything _but what_ I wanted."
+
+WHENCE. As this adverb means--unaided--_from_ what place, source, or
+cause, it is, as Dr. Johnson styled it, "a vicious mode of speech" to
+say _from whence_, Milton to the contrary notwithstanding. Nor is there
+any more propriety in the phrase _from thence_, as _thence_
+means--unaided--from that place. "_Whence_ do you come?" not "_From
+whence_ do you come?" Likewise, "He went _hence_," not "_from hence_."
+
+WHETHER. This conjunction is often improperly repeated in a sentence;
+thus, "I have not decided whether I shall go to Boston or _whether I
+shall go_ to Philadelphia."
+
+WHICH. This pronoun as an _interrogative_ applies to _persons_ as well
+as to _things_; as a _relative_, it is now made to refer to _things
+only_.
+
+"_Which_ is employed in coördinate sentences, where _it_, or _they_, and
+a conjunction might answer the purpose; thus, 'At school I studied
+geometry, _which_ (and it) I found useful afterward.' Here the new
+clause is something independent added to the previous clause, and not
+limiting that clause in any way. So in the adjectival clause; as, 'He
+struck the poor dog, _which_ (and it, or although it) had never done him
+harm.' Such instances represent the most accurate meaning of _which_.
+_Who_ and _which_ might be termed the COÖRDINATING RELATIVES.
+
+"_Which_ is likewise used in _restrictive_ clauses that limit or explain
+the antecedent; as, 'The house _which_ he built still remains.' Here the
+clause introduced by _which_ specifies, or points out, the house that is
+the subject of the statement, namely, by the circumstance that a certain
+person built it. As remarked with regard to _who_, our most idiomatic
+writers prefer _that_ in this particular application, and would say,
+'The house _that_ he built still remains.'"
+
+"_Which_ sometimes has a special reference attaching to it, as the
+neuter relative: 'Cæsar crossed the Rubicon, _which_ was in effect a
+declaration of war.' The antecedent in this instance is not _Rubicon_,
+but the entire clause.
+
+"There is a peculiar usage where _which_ may _seem_ to be still
+regularly used in reference to persons, as in 'John is a soldier,
+_which_ I should like to be,' that is, 'And I should like _to be a
+soldier_.'" See THAT.
+
+WHO. There are few persons, even among the most cultivated, who do not
+make frequent mistakes in the use of this pronoun. They say, "_Who_ did
+you see?" "_Who_ did you meet?" "_Who_ did he marry?" "_Who_ did you
+hear?" "_Who_ did he know?" "_Who_ are you writing to?" "_Who_ are you
+looking at?" In all these sentences the interrogative pronoun is in the
+objective case, and should be used in the objective form, which is
+_whom_, and not _who_. To show that these sentences are not correct, and
+are not defensible by supposing any ellipsis whatsoever, we have only to
+put the questions in another form. Take the first one, and, instead of
+"Who did you see?" say, "Who saw you?" which, if correct, justifies us
+in saying, "Who knew he," which is the equivalent of "Who did he know?"
+But "Who saw you?" in this instance, is clearly not correct, since it
+says directly the opposite of what is intended.
+
+_Who_ was little used as a relative till about the sixteenth century.
+Bain says: "In modern use, more especially in books, _who_ is frequently
+employed to introduce a clause intended to restrict, define, limit, or
+explain a noun (or its equivalent); as, 'That is the man _who_ spoke to
+us yesterday.'"
+
+"Here the clause introduced by _who_ is necessary to define or explain
+the antecedent _the man_; without it, we do not know who _the man_ is.
+Such relative clauses are typical _adjective_ clauses--i. e., they have
+the same effect as adjectives in limiting nouns. This may be called the
+RESTRICTIVE use of the relative.
+
+"Now it will be found that the practice of our most idiomatic writers
+and speakers is to prefer _that_ to _who_ in this application.
+
+"_Who_ is properly used in such coördinate sentences as, 'I met the
+watchman, _who_ told me there had been a fire.' Here the two clauses are
+distinct and independent; in such a case, _and he_ might be substituted
+for _who_.
+
+"Another form of the same use is when the second clause is of the kind
+termed adverbial, where we may resolve _who_ into a personal or
+demonstrative pronoun and conjunction. 'Why should we consult Charles,
+_who_ (_for he_, _seeing that he_) knows nothing of the matter?'
+
+"_Who_ may be regarded as a modern objective form, side by side with
+_whom_. For many good writers and speakers say '_who_ are you talking
+of?' '_who_ does the garden belong to?' '_who_ is this for?' '_who_
+from?'" etc.
+
+If this be true--if _who may_ be regarded as a modern objective form,
+side by side with _whom_--then, of course, such expressions as "_Who_
+did you see?" "_Who_ did you meet?" "_Who_ did he marry?" "_Who_ were
+you with?" "_Who_ will you give it to?" and the like, are correct. That
+they are used colloquially by well-nigh everybody, no one will dispute;
+but that they are _correct_, few grammarians will concede. See THAT.
+
+WHOLE. This word is sometimes most improperly used for _all_; thus, "The
+_whole_ Germans seem to be saturated with the belief that they are
+really the greatest people on earth, and that they would be universally
+recognized as being the greatest, if they were not so exceeding modest."
+"The whole Russians are inspired with the belief that their mission is
+to conquer the world."--Alison.
+
+WHOLESOME. See HEALTHY.
+
+WHOSE. Mr. George Washington Moon discountenances the use of _whose_ as
+the possessive of _which_. He says, "The best writers, when speaking of
+inanimate objects, use _of which_ instead of _whose_." The correctness
+of this statement is doubtful. The truth is, I think, that good writers
+use that form for the possessive case of _which_ that in their judgment
+is, in each particular case, the more euphonious, giving the preference,
+perhaps, to _of which_. On this subject Dr. Campbell says: "The
+possessive of _who_ is properly _whose_. The pronoun _which_,
+originally indeclinable, had no possessive. This was supplied, in the
+common periphrastic manner, by the help of the preposition and the
+article. But, as this could not fail to enfeeble the expression, when so
+much time was given to mere conjunctives, all our best authors, both in
+prose and verse, have now come regularly to adopt, in such cases, the
+possessive of _who_, and thus have substituted one syllable in the room
+of three, as in the example following: 'Philosophy, _whose_ end is to
+instruct us in the knowledge of nature,' for 'Philosophy, _the_ end _of
+which_ is to instruct us.' Some grammarians remonstrate; but it ought to
+be remembered that use, well established, must give law to grammar, and
+not grammar to use."
+
+Professor Bain says: "_Whose_, although the possessive of _who_, and
+practically of _which_, is yet frequently employed for the purpose of
+restriction: 'We are the more likely to guard watchfully against those
+faults _whose_ deformity we have seen fully displayed in others.' This
+is better than 'the deformity _of which_ we have seen.' 'Propositions of
+_whose_ truth we have no certain knowledge.'--Locke." Dr. Fitzedward
+Hall says that the use of _whose_ for _of which_, where the antecedent
+is not only irrational but inanimate, has had the support of high
+authority for several hundred years.
+
+WIDOW WOMAN. Since widows are always women, why say a widow _woman_? It
+would be perfectly correct to say a _widowed_ woman.
+
+WIDOWHOOD. There is good authority for using this word in speaking of
+men as well as of women.
+
+WITHOUT. This word is often improperly used instead of _unless_; as,
+"You will never live to my age _without_ you keep yourself in breath and
+exercise"; "I shall not go _without_ my father consents": properly,
+_unless_ my father consents, or, _without_ my father's consent.
+
+WORST. We should say _at the worst_, not _at worst_.
+
+WOVE. The past participle of the verb _to weave_ is _woven_. "Where was
+this cloth _woven_?" not _wove_.
+
+YOU ARE MISTAKEN. See MISTAKEN.
+
+YOU WAS. Good usage does, and it is to be hoped always will, consider
+_you was_ a gross vulgarism, certain grammarians to the contrary
+notwithstanding. _You_ is the form of the pronoun in the second person
+plural, and must, if we would speak correctly, be used with the
+corresponding form of the verb. The argument that we use _you_ in the
+singular number is so nonsensical that it does not merit a moment's
+consideration. It is a custom we have--and have in common with other
+peoples--to speak to one another in the second person plural, and that
+is all there is of it. The Germans speak to one another in the _third_
+person plural. The exact equivalent in German of our _How are you?_ is,
+_How are they?_ Those who would say _you was_ should be consistent, and
+in like manner say _you has_ and _you does_.
+
+YOURS, &C. The ignorant and obtuse not unfrequently profess themselves
+at the bottom of their letters "Yours, &c." And so forth! forth what?
+Few vulgarisms are equally offensive, and none could be more so. In
+printing correspondence, the newspapers often content themselves with
+this short-hand way of intimating that the writer's name was preceded by
+some one of the familiar forms of ending letters; this an occasional
+dunderhead seems to think is sufficient authority for writing himself,
+_Yours, &c._
+
+
+THE END.
+
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] If this is true in England, it is not true in America. Nowhere in
+the United States is such "questionable grammar" as this frequently
+heard in cultivated circles.
+
+[2] "It may be confidently affirmed that with good speakers, in the case
+of negation, _not me_ is the usual practice."--Bain. This, I confidently
+affirm, is not true in America.--A. A.
+
+[3] Should be, _a text-book for his course_, and not, _for his course a
+text-book_.
+
+[4] Mr. Gould criticises the Dean's _diction_, not his _style_.
+
+[5] Better, "to revise it."
+
+[6] "Is _to put them_ in tabular form."
+
+[7] Bullions' "Grammar" was published in 1867.
+
+[8] "L. W. K., CLK., LL. D., EX. SCH., T. C., D. Of this reverend
+gentleman's personality I know nothing. He does not say exactly what he
+means; but what he means is, yet, unmistakable. The extract given above
+is from 'Public Opinion,' January 20, 1866."
+
+[9] "The analysis, taken for granted in this quotation, of 'are being
+thrown up' into 'are being' and 'thrown up' will be dealt with in the
+sequel, and shown to be untenable."
+
+[10] "Vol. xlv, p. 504 (1837)."
+
+[11] "'The Life and Correspondence of the late Robert Southey,' vol. i,
+p. 249."
+
+[12] "Vol. i, p. 338. 'A student who _is being crammed_'; 'that verb is
+eternally _being declined_.'--'The Doctor,' pp. 38 and 40 (mono-tome
+ed.)."
+
+[13] "In 'Put Yourself in his Place,' chapter x, he writes: 'She basked
+in the present delight, and looked as if she _was being taken_ to heaven
+by an angel.'"
+
+[14] "'Words,' etc., p. 340."
+
+[15] "Thomas Fuller writes: 'At his arrival, the last stake of the
+Christians was _on losing_.'--'The Historie of the Holy Warre,' p. 218
+(ed. 1647)."
+
+[16] "I express myself in this manner because I distinguish between _be_
+and _exist_."
+
+[17] "Samuel Richardson writes: 'Jenny, who attends me here, has more
+than once hinted to me that Miss Jervis loves to sit up late, either
+reading or _being read to_ by Anne, who, though she reads well, is not
+fond of the task.'--'Sir Charles Grandison,' vol. iii, p. 46 (ed. 1754).
+
+"The transition is very slight by which we pass from 'sits being read
+to' to 'is being read to.'"
+
+[18] "I am here indebted to the last edition of Dr. Worcester's
+'Dictionary,' preface, p. xxxix."
+
+[19] "'Words and their Uses,' p. 353."
+
+[20] "'_It is being_ is simply equal to _it is_. And, in the supposed
+corresponding Latin phrases, _ens factus est_, _ens ædificatus est_ (the
+obsoleteness of _ens_ as a participle being granted), the monstrosity is
+not in the use of _ens_ with _factus_, but in that of _ens_ with _est_.
+The absurdity is, in Latin, just what it is in English, the use of _is_
+with _being_, the making of the verb _to be_ a complement to
+itself.'--_Ibid._, pp. 354, 355.
+
+"Apparently, Mr. White recognizes no more difference between
+_supplement_ and _complement_ than he recognizes between _be_ and
+_exist_. See the extract I have made above, from p. 353."
+
+[21] "'But those things which, _being not now doing_, or having not yet
+been done, have a natural aptitude to exist hereafter, may be properly
+said to appertain to the future.'--Harris's 'Hermes,' book I, chap. viii
+(p. 155, foot-note, ed. 1771). For Harris's _being not now doing_, which
+is to translate μὴ γινόμενα, the modern school, if they pursued
+uniformity with more of fidelity than of taste, would have to put _being
+not now being done_. There is not much to choose between the two."
+
+[22] "'Words and their Uses,' p. 343."
+
+[23] The possessive construction here is, in my judgment, not
+imperatively demanded. There is certainly no lack of authority for
+putting the three substantives in the accusative. The possessive
+construction seems to me, however, to be preferable.
+
+[24] "The use of the plural for the singular was established as early
+the beginning of the fourteenth century."--Morris, p. 118, § 153.
+
+[25] "Some writers omit the comma in cases where the conjunction is
+used. But, as the conjunction is generally employed in such cases for
+emphasis, commas ought to be used; although, where the words are very
+closely connected, or where they constitute a clause in the midst of a
+long sentence, they may be omitted."--Bigelow's "Handbook of
+Punctuation."
+
+[26] "This usage violates one of the fundamental principles of
+punctuation; it indicates, very improperly, that the noun _man_ is more
+closely connected with _learned_ than with the other adjectives. Analogy
+and perspicuity require a comma after _learned_."--Quackenbos.
+
+[27] Many writers would omit the last two commas in this sentence.
+
+[28] The commas before and after _particularly_ are hardly necessary.
+
+[29] The only exception to this rule is the occasional use of the colon
+to separate two short sentences that are closely connected.
+
+[30] "Dr. Angus on the 'English Tongue,' art. 527."
+
+[31] "In the following passages, the indicative mood would be more
+suitable than the subjunctive: 'If thou _be_ the Son of God, command
+that these stones be made bread'; 'if thou _be_ the Son of God, come
+down from the cross.' For, although the address was not sincere on the
+part of the speakers, they really meant to make the supposition or to
+grant that he was the Son of God; 'seeing that thou _art_ the Son of
+God.' Likewise in the following: 'Now if Christ _be_ preached, that He
+rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection
+from the dead?' The meaning is, 'Seeing now that Christ _is_ preached.'
+In the continuation, the conditional clauses are of a different
+character, and 'be' is appropriate: 'But if there _be_ no resurrection
+from the dead, then is Christ not risen. And if Christ _be_ not risen,
+then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.' Again, 'If
+thou _bring_ thy gift to the altar, and there remember_est_,' etc.
+Consistency and correctness require 'remember.'"--Harrison on the
+"English Language," p. 287.
+
+[32] "So, in German, _wäre_ for _würde sein_. 'Hätt' ich Schwingen,
+hätt' ich Flügel, nach den Hügeln _zög_' ich hin,' for '_würde_ ich
+_ziehen_.'"
+
+[33] "So, in German, _hätte_ occurs for _würde haben_. 'Wäre er da
+gewesen, so _hätten_ wir ihn gesehen,' for 'so _würden_ wir ihn gesehen
+_haben_.' _Hätten_ is still conditional, not indicative. In Latin, the
+pluperfect _indicative_ is occasionally used; which is explained as a
+more vivid form."
+
+[34] "In _principal_ clauses the inflection of the second person is
+always retained: 'thou had_st_,' 'thou would_st_, should_st_,' etc. In
+the example, the subordinate clause, although subjunctive, shows,
+'had_st_.' And this usage is exceedingly common."
+
+[35] To those who are not quite clear as to what transcendentalism is,
+the following lucid definition will be welcome: "It is the spiritual
+cognoscence of psychological irrefragability connected with concutient
+ademption of incolumnient spirituality and etherealized contention of
+subsultory concretion." Translated by a New York lawyer, it stands thus:
+"Transcendentalism is two holes in a sand-bank: a storm washes away the
+sand-bank without disturbing the holes."
+
+[36] "Cromwell--_than he_ no man was more skilled in artifice; or,
+Cromwell--no man was more skilled in artifice _than he_ (was)."
+
+[37] "No devil sat higher than _he_ sat, except Satan."
+
+[38] "Speaking of Dryden, Hallam says, 'His "Essay on Dramatic Poesy,"
+published in 1668, was reprinted sixteen years afterward, and it is
+curious to observe the changes which Dryden made in the expression.
+Malone has carefully noted all these; they show both the care the author
+took with his own style, and the change which was gradually working in
+the English language. The Anglicism of terminating the sentence with a
+preposition is rejected. Thus, "I can not think so contemptibly of the
+age I live in," is exchanged for "the age in which I live." "A deeper
+expression of belief than all the actor can persuade us to," is altered,
+"can insinuate into us." And, though the old form continued in use long
+after the time of Dryden, it has of late years been reckoned inelegant,
+and proscribed in all cases, perhaps with an unnecessary fastidiousness,
+to which I have not uniformly deferred, since our language is of
+Teutonic structure, and the rules of Latin and French grammar are not
+always to bind us.'
+
+"The following examples, taken from Massinger's 'Grand Duke of
+Florence,' will show what was the usage of the Elizabethan writers:--
+
+    "'For I must use the freedom I _was born with_.'
+
+    "'In that dumb rhetoric _which_ you _make use of_.'
+
+                          "'---- if I had been heir
+    Of all the globes and sceptres mankind _bows to_.'
+
+                    "'---- the name of friend
+    _Which_ you are pleased to _grace me with_.'
+
+          "'---- wilfully ignorant in my opinion
+    Of what it did _invite him to_.'
+
+    "'I look to her as on a princess
+    _I dare not be ambitious of_.'
+
+                      "'---- a duty
+    _That I was born with_.'"
+
+
+
+
+                            THE ORTHOËPIST:
+
+
+                         _A PRONOUNCING MANUAL_,
+
+              CONTAINING ABOUT THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED
+                WORDS, INCLUDING A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF
+              THE NAMES OF FOREIGN AUTHORS, ARTISTS, ETC.,
+                     THAT ARE OFTEN MISPRONOUNCED.
+
+                            By ALFRED AYRES.
+
+̤
+SELECTIONS FROM THE WORK.
+
+ ạb-dō´mẹn, _not_ ăb´dọ-mĕn.
+
+ ạc-crṳe´, _not_ -crū´.
+   The orthoëpists agree that _u_, preceded by _r_ in the same syllable,
+   generally becomes simply _oo_, as in _rude_, _rumor_, _rural_, _rule_,
+   _ruby_.
+
+ ạl-lŏp´ạ-thy; ạl-lŏp´ạ-thĭst.
+
+ Ăr´ạ-bĭc, _not_ Ạ-rā´bĭc.
+
+ Asia--ā´shẹ-ȧ, _not_ ā´zhȧ.
+
+ ay, _or_ aye (meaning _yes_)--ī.
+
+ aye (meaning _always_)--ā.
+
+ Bĭs´märck, _not_ bĭz´-.
+   At the end of a syllable, _s_, in German, has invariably its sharp,
+   hissing sound.
+
+ Cairo--in Egypt, kī´rō; in the United States, kā´rō.
+
+ Courbet--ko̤r´bā´.
+
+ dĕc´ạde, _not_ dẹ-kād´.
+
+ dẹ-cō´roŭs.
+   The authority is small, and is becoming less, for saying
+   _dĕc´o-roŭs_, which is really as incorrect as it would be to say
+   _sŏn´o-roŭs_.
+
+ dĕf´ị-cĭt, _not_ dẹ-fĭç´it.
+
+ dịs̱-dāin´, _not_ dis-.
+
+ dịs̱-hŏn´or, _not_ dis-.
+
+ ĕc-ọ-nŏm´ị-cạl, _or_ ē-cọ-nŏm´ị-cạl.
+   The first is the marking of a large majority of the orthoëpists.
+
+ ẹ-nēr´vāte.
+   The only authority for saying _ĕn´er-vāte_ is popular usage; all
+   the orthoëpists say _e-nẽr´vāte_.
+
+ ĕp´ọc̵h, _not_ ē´pŏc̵h.
+   The latter is a Websterian pronunciation, which is not even permitted
+   in the late editions.
+
+ fĭn-ạn-ciēr´.
+   This much-used word is rarely pronounced correctly.
+
+ Heī´nẹ, _not_ hine.
+   Final _e_ in German is never silent.
+
+ honest--ŏn´est, _not_ -ĭst, _nor_ -ŭst.
+   "Hon_est_, hon_est_ Iago," is preferable to "hon_ust_, hon_ust_ Iago,"
+   some of our accidental Othellos to the contrary notwithstanding.
+
+ ĭs̱´ọ-lāte, _or_ ĭs´ọ-late, _not_ ī´sọ-lāt.
+   The first marking is Walker's, Worcester's, and Smart's; the second,
+   Webster's.
+
+
+                  ONE VOL., 18MO, CLOTH. PRICE, $1.00.
+
+          New York: D. APPLETON & CO., 1, 3, & 5 Bond Street.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Verbalist, by 
+Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+***** This file should be named 22457-0.txt or 22457-0.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/2/2/4/5/22457/
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/22457-0.zip b/old/22457-0.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1da488f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-0.zip
diff --git a/old/22457-8.txt b/old/22457-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..65e3ed8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,7635 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Verbalist, by Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: 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.
+
+Author: Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+Release Date: August 30, 2007 [EBook #22457]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                                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.
+
+                          [Illustration]
+
+                             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_.
+
+CHEAP. The dictionaries define this adjective as meaning, bearing a low
+price, or to be had at a low price; but nowadays good usage makes it
+mean that a thing may be had, or has been sold, at a bargain. Hence, in
+order to make sure of being understood, it is better to say
+_low-priced_, when one means low-priced, than to use the word _cheap_.
+What is low-priced, as everybody knows, is often _dear_, and what is
+high-priced is often _cheap_. A diamond necklace might be _cheap_ at
+ten thousand dollars, and a pinchbeck necklace dear at ten dollars.
+
+CHERUBIM. The Hebrew plural of _cherub_. "We are authorized," says Dr.
+Campbell, "both by use and analogy, to say either _cherubs_ and
+_seraphs_, according to the English idiom, or _cherubim_ and _seraphim_,
+according to the Oriental. The former suits better the familiar, the
+latter the solemn, style. As the words _cherubim_ and _seraphim_ are
+plural, the terms _cherubims_ and _seraphims_, as expressing the plural,
+are quite improper."--"Philosophy of Rhetoric."
+
+CITIZEN. This word properly means one who has certain political rights;
+when, therefore, it is used, as it often is, to designate persons who
+may be aliens, it, to say the least, betrays a want of care in the
+selection of words. "Several _citizens_ were injured by the explosion."
+Here some other word--_persons_, for example--should be used.
+
+CLEVER. In this country the word _clever_ is most improperly used in the
+sense of good-natured, well-disposed, good-hearted. It is properly used
+in the sense in which we are wont most inelegantly to use the word
+_smart_, though it is a less colloquial term, and is of wider
+application. In England the phrase "a _clever_ man" is the equivalent of
+the French phrase, "_un homme d'esprit_." The word is properly used in
+the following sentences: "Every work of Archbishop Whately must be an
+object of interest to the admirers of _clever_ reasoning"; "Cobbett's
+letter ... very _clever_, but very mischievous"; "Bonaparte was
+certainly as _clever_ a man as ever lived."
+
+CLIMAX. A clause, a sentence, a paragraph, or any literary composition
+whatsoever, is said to end with a _climax_ when, by an artistic
+arrangement, the more effective is made to follow the less effective in
+regular gradation. Any great departure from the order of ascending
+strength is called an _anti-climax_. Here are some examples of climax:
+
+"Give all diligence; add to your faith, virtue; and to virtue,
+knowledge; and to knowledge, temperance; and to temperance, patience;
+and to patience, godliness; and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to
+brotherly kindness, charity."
+
+"What is every year of a wise man's life but a criticism on the past!
+Those whose life is the shortest live long enough to laugh at one half
+of it; the boy despises the infant, the man the boy, the sage both, and
+the Christian all."
+
+"What a piece of work is man! how noble in reason! how infinite in
+faculties! in form and moving, how express and admirable! in action, how
+like an angel! in apprehension, how like a god!"
+
+CO. The prefix _co_ should be used only when the word to which it is
+joined begins with a vowel, as in _co-eval_, _co-incident_,
+_co-operate_, etc. _Con_ is used when the word begins with a consonant,
+as in _con-temporary_, _con-junction_, etc. _Co-partner_ is an exception
+to the rule.
+
+COMMENCE. The Britons use or misuse this word in a manner peculiar to
+themselves. They say, for example, "commenced merchant," "commenced
+actor," "commenced politician," and so on. Dr. Hall tells us that
+_commence_ has been employed in the sense of "begin to be," "become,"
+"set up as," by first-class writers, for more than two centuries.
+Careful speakers make small use of _commence_ in any sense; they prefer
+to use its Saxon equivalent, _begin_. See, also, BEGIN.
+
+COMPARISON. When only two objects are compared, the comparative and not
+the superlative degree should be used; thus, "Mary is the _older_ of the
+two"; "John is the _stronger_ of the two"; "Brown is the _richer_ of
+the two, and the _richest_ man in the city"; "Which is the _more_
+desirable, health or wealth?" "Which is the _most_ desirable, health,
+wealth, or genius?"
+
+    "Of two such lessons, why forget
+    The _nobler_ and the _manlier_ one?"
+
+COMPLETED. This word is often incorrectly used for _finished_. That is
+_complete_ which lacks nothing; that is _finished_ which has had all
+done to it that was intended. The builder of a house may _finish_ it and
+yet leave it very _incomplete_.
+
+CONDIGN. It is safe to say that most of those who use this word do not
+know its meaning, which is, suitable, deserved, merited, proper. "His
+endeavors shall not lack _condign_ praise"; i. e., his endeavors shall
+not lack _proper_ or their _merited_ praise. "A villain _condignly_
+punished" is a villain punished _according to his deserts_. To use
+_condign_ in the sense of _severe_ is just as incorrect as it would be
+to use _deserved_ or _merited_ in the sense of _severe_.
+
+CONFIRMED INVALID. This phrase is a convenient mode of expressing the
+idea it conveys, but it is difficult to defend, inasmuch as _confirmed_
+means strengthened, established.
+
+CONSEQUENCE. This word is sometimes used instead of _importance_ or
+_moment_; as, "They were all persons of more or less _consequence_":
+read, "of more or less _importance_." "It is a matter of no
+_consequence_": read, "of no _moment_."
+
+CONSIDER. "This word," says Mr. Richard Grant White, in his "Words and
+Their Uses," "is perverted from its true meaning by most of those who
+use it." _Consider_ means, to meditate, to deliberate, to reflect, to
+revolve in the mind; and yet it is made to do service for _think_,
+_suppose_, and _regard_. Thus: "I _consider_ his course very
+unjustifiable"; "I have always _considered_ it my duty," etc.; "I
+_consider_ him as being the cleverest man of my acquaintance."
+
+CONTEMPTIBLE. This word is sometimes used for _contemptuous_. An old
+story says that a man once said to Dr. Parr, "Sir, I have a
+_contemptible_ opinion of you." "That does not surprise me," returned
+the Doctor; "all your opinions are _contemptible_." What is worthless or
+weak is _contemptible_. Despicable is a word that expresses a still more
+intense degree of the contemptible. A traitor is a _despicable_
+character, while a poltroon is only _contemptible_.
+
+CONTINUALLY. See PERPETUALLY.
+
+CONTINUE ON. The _on_ in this phrase is generally superfluous. "We
+continued on our way" is idiomatic English, and is more euphonious than
+the sentence would be without the particle. The meaning is, "We
+continued to travel _on_ our way." In such sentences, however, as
+"Continue _on_," "He continued to read _on_," "The fever continued _on_
+for some hours," and the like, the _on_ generally serves no purpose.
+
+CONVERSATIONIST. This word is to be preferred to _conversationalist_.
+Mr. Richard Grant White says that _conversationalist_ and
+_agriculturalist_ are inadmissible. On the other hand, Dr. Fitzedward
+Hall says: "As for _conversationist_ and _conversationalist_,
+_agriculturist_ and _agriculturalist_, as all are alike legitimate
+formations, it is for convention to decide which we are to prefer."
+
+CONVOKE--CONVENE. At one time and another there has been some discussion
+with regard to the correct use of these two words. According to Crabb,
+"There is nothing imperative on the part of those that _assemble_, or
+_convene_, and nothing binding on those _assembled_, or _convened_: one
+_assembles_, or _convenes_, by invitation or request; one attends to the
+notice or not, at pleasure. _Convoke_, on the other hand, is _an act of
+authority_; it is the call of one who has the authority to give the
+call; it is heeded by those who feel themselves bound to attend."
+Properly, then, President Arthur _convokes_, not _convenes_, the Senate.
+
+CORPOREAL--CORPORAL. These adjectives, though regarded as synonyms, are
+not used indiscriminately. _Corporal_ is used in reference to the body,
+or animal frame, in its proper sense; _corporeal_, to the animal
+substance in an extended sense--opposed to spiritual. _Corporal_
+punishment; _corporeal_ or _material_ form or substance.
+
+    "That to _corporeal_ substances could add
+    Speed most spiritual."--Milton.
+
+    "What seemed _corporal_
+    Melted as breath into the wind."--Shakespeare.
+
+COUPLE. In its primitive signification, this word does not mean simply
+two, but two that are united by some bond; such as, for example, the tie
+that unites the sexes. It has, however, been so long used to mean two of
+a kind considered together, that in this sense it may be deemed
+permissible, though the substitution of the word _two_ for it would
+often materially improve the diction.
+
+COURAGE. See BRAVERY.
+
+CRIME--VICE--SIN. The confusion that exists in the use of these words is
+due largely to an imperfect understanding of their respective meanings.
+_Crime_ is the violation of the law of a state; hence, as the laws of
+states differ, what is crime in one state may not be crime in another.
+_Vice_ is a course of wrong-doing, and is not modified either by
+country, religion, or condition. As for _sin_, it is very difficult to
+define what it is, as what is sinful in the eyes of one man may not be
+sinful in the eyes of another; what is sinful in the eyes of a Jew may
+not be sinful in the eyes of a Christian; and what is sinful in the eyes
+of a Christian of one country may not be sinful in the eyes of a
+Christian of another country. In the days of slavery, to harbor a
+runaway slave was a _crime_, but it was, in the eyes of most people,
+neither a _vice_ nor a _sin_.
+
+CRUSHED OUT. "The rebellion was finally _crushed out_." Out of what? We
+may _crush_ the life out of a man, or _crush_ a man to death, and
+_crush_, not _crush out_, a rebellion.
+
+CULTURED. This word is said to be a product of Boston--an excellent
+place for anybody or anything to come from. Many persons object to its
+use on the ground that there can be no such participial adjective,
+because there is no verb in use from which to form it. We have in use
+the substantive _culture_, but, though the dictionaries recognize the
+verb _to culture_, we do not use it. Be this objection valid or be it
+not, _cultured_ having but two syllables, while its synonym _cultivated_
+has four, it is likely to find favor with those who employ short words
+when they convey their meaning as well as long ones. Other adjectives of
+this kind are, moneyed, whiskered, slippered, lettered, talented,
+cottaged, lilied, anguished, gifted, and so forth.
+
+CURIOUS. This word is often used instead of _strange_ or _remarkable_.
+"A _curious_ fact": better, "a _remarkable_ fact." "A _curious_
+proceeding": better, "a _strange_ proceeding."
+
+DANGEROUS. "He is pretty sick, but not _dangerous_." Dangerous people
+are generally most dangerous when they are most vigorous. Say, rather,
+"He is sick, but not _in danger_."
+
+DEAREST. "A gentleman once began a letter to his bride thus: 'My
+_dearest_ Maria.' The lady replied: 'My dear John, I beg that you will
+mend either your morals or your grammar. You call me your "_dearest_
+Maria"; am I to understand that you have other Marias'?"--Moon's "Bad
+English."
+
+DECEIVING. "You are _deceiving_ me." Not unfrequently _deceiving_ is
+used when the speaker means _trying to deceive_. It is when we do not
+suspect deception that we are deceived.
+
+DECIMATE. This word, meaning as it properly does to tithe, to take the
+tenth part, is hardly permissible in the sense in which it is used in
+such sentences as, "The regiment held its position, though terribly
+_decimated_ by the enemy's artillery." "Though terribly _tithed_" would
+be equally correct.
+
+DEMEAN. This word is sometimes erroneously used in the sense of _to
+debase_, _to disgrace_, _to humble_. It is a reflexive verb, and its
+true meaning is _to behave_, _to carry_, _to conduct_; as, "He _demeans
+himself_ in a gentlemanly manner," i. e., He _behaves_, or _carries_, or
+_conducts_, himself in a gentlemanly manner.
+
+DENUDE. "The vulture," says Brande, "has some part of the head and
+sometimes of the neck _denuded_ of feathers." Most birds might be
+_denuded_ of the feathers on their heads; not so, however, the vulture,
+for his head is always featherless. A thing can not be _denuded_ of what
+it does not have. Denuding a vulture's head and neck of the feathers is
+like _denuding_ an eel of its scales.
+
+DEPRECATE. Strangely enough, this word is often used in the sense of
+disapprove, censure, condemn; as, "He _deprecates_ the whole
+proceeding"; "Your course, from first to last, is universally
+_deprecated_." But, according to the authorities, the word really means,
+to endeavor to avert by prayer; to pray exemption or deliverance from;
+to beg off; to entreat; to urge against.
+
+"Daniel kneeled upon his knees to _deprecate_ the captivity of his
+people."--Hewyt.
+
+DESPITE. This word is often incorrectly preceded by _in_ and followed by
+_of_; thus, "_In_ despite _of_ all our efforts to detain him, he set
+out"; which should be, "Despite all our efforts," etc., or "_In spite
+of_ all our efforts," etc.
+
+DETERMINED. See BOUND.
+
+DICTION. This is a general term, and is applicable to a single sentence
+or to a connected composition. _Bad diction_ may be due to errors in
+grammar, to a confused disposition of words, or to an improper use of
+words. _Diction_, to be good, requires to be only correct and clear. Of
+excellent examples of bad diction there are very many in a little work
+by Dr. L. T. Townsend, Professor of Sacred Rhetoric in Boston
+University, the first volume of which has lately come under my notice.
+The first ten lines of Dr. Townsend's preface are:
+
+"The leading genius[1] of the People's College at Chautauqua Lake, with
+a [the?] view of providing for his course[2] a text-book, asked for the
+publication of the following laws and principles of speech.[3]
+
+"The author, not seeing sufficient reason[4] for withholding what had
+been of much practical benefit[5] to himself, consented.[6]
+
+"The subject-matter herein contained is an outgrowth from[7] occasional
+instructions[8] given[9] while occupying the chair[10] of Sacred
+Rhetoric."
+
+1. The phrase _leading genius_ is badly chosen. Founder, projector,
+head, organizer, principal, or president--some one of these terms would
+probably have been appropriate. 2. What course? Race-course, course of
+ethics, æsthetics, rhetoric, or what?[3] 3. "The following laws and
+principles of speech." And how came these laws and principles in
+existence? Who made them? We are to infer, it would seem, that Professor
+Townsend made them, and that the world would have had to go without the
+laws that govern language and the principles on which language is formed
+had it pleased Professor Townsend to withhold them. 4. "_Sufficient_
+reason"! Then there were reasons why Professor Townsend ought to have
+kept these good things all to himself; only, they were not _sufficient_.
+5. "Practical benefit"! Is there _any_ such thing as impractical
+benefit? Are not all benefits practical? and, if they are, what purpose
+does the epithet _practical_ serve? 6. Consented to what? It is easy to
+see that the Doctor means _acceded to the request_, but he is a long way
+from saying so. The object writers usually have in view is to convey
+thought, not to set their readers to guessing. 7. _The outgrowth of_
+would be English. 8. "Occasional instructions"! Very vague, and well
+calculated to set the reader to guessing again. 9. Given to whom? 10.
+"_The_ chair." The definite article made it necessary for the writer to
+specify what particular chair of Sacred Rhetoric he meant.
+
+These ten lines are a fair specimen of the diction of the entire volume.
+
+Page 131. "To render a _given ambiguous or_ unintelligible sentence
+transparent, the following suggestions are recommended." The words in
+italics are unnecessary, since what is ambiguous is unintelligible. Then
+who has ever heard of _recommending suggestions_?
+
+Dr. Townsend speaks of _mastering a subject before publishing it_.
+Publishing a subject?
+
+Page 133. "Violations of simplicity, whatever the type, show either that
+_the mind of_ the writer is tainted with affectation, or _else_ that _an
+effort is making_ to conceal _conscious_ poverty of _sentiment_ under
+loftiness of expression." Here is an example of a kind of sentence that
+can be mended in only one way--by rewriting, which might be done thus:
+Violations of simplicity, whatever the type, show either that the writer
+is tainted with affectation, or that he is making an effort to conceal
+poverty of thought under loftiness of expression.
+
+Page 143. "This _quality_ is fully _stated_ and recommended," etc. Who
+has ever heard of _stating a quality_?
+
+On page 145 Dr. Townsend says: "A person can not read a single book of
+poor style without having his own style vitiated." _A book of poor
+style_ is an awkward expression, to say the least. _A single
+badly-written book_ would have been unobjectionable.
+
+Page 160. "The presented picture produces instantly a definite effect."
+Why this unusual disposition of words? Why not say, in accordance with
+the idiom of the language, "The picture presented instantly produces,"
+etc.?
+
+Page 161. "The boy studies ... geography and hates everything connected
+with the sea and land." Why _the_ boy? As there are few things besides
+seals and turtles that are connected with the sea _and_ land, the boy in
+question has few things to hate.
+
+On page 175, Dr. Townsend heads a chapter thus: "_Art_ of acquiring
+_Skill_ in the use of Poetic Speech." This reminds one of the man who
+tried to lift himself over a fence by taking hold of the seat of his
+breeches. "_How_ to acquire skill" is probably what is meant.
+
+On page 232, "Jeremy Taylor is among the best models of long sentences
+which are both clear and logical." Jeremy Taylor is a clear and logical
+long sentence?! True, our learned rhetorician says so, but he doesn't
+mean it. He means, "In Jeremy Taylor we find some of the best examples
+of long sentences which are at once clear and logical."
+
+Since the foregoing was written, the second volume of Professor
+Townsend's "Art of Speech" has been published. In the brief preface to
+this volume we find this characteristic sentence: "The author has felt
+that _clergymen_ more than _those_ of other professions will study this
+treatise." The antecedent of the relative _those_ being _clergymen_, the
+sentence, it will be perceived, says: "The author has felt that
+_clergymen_ more than _clergymen of other professions_ will study this
+treatise." Comment on such "art" as Professor Townsend's is not
+necessary.
+
+I find several noteworthy examples of bad diction in an article in a
+recent number of an Australian magazine. The following are some of them:
+"_Large capital_ always manages to make _itself_ master of the
+situation; it is the small capitalist and the small landholder that
+would suffer," etc. Should be, "_The large capitalist ... himself_,"
+etc. Again: "The small farmer would ... be despoiled ... of the meager
+profit which _strenuous_ labor had conquered from the _reluctant_ soil."
+Not only are the epithets in italics superfluous, and consequently
+weakening in their effect, but idiom does not permit _strenuous_ to be
+used to qualify _labor_: _hard_ labor and _strenuous_ effort. Again:
+"Capital has always the choice _of_ a large field." Should be, "the
+choice _offered by_ a large field." Again: "Should capital be withdrawn,
+tenements would soon prove insufficient." Should be, "_the number of_
+tenements would," etc. Again: "Men of wealth, therefore, would find
+their Fifth Avenue mansions and their summer villas a little more
+burdened with taxes, but with this increase happily balanced by the
+exemption of their bonds and mortgages, their plate and furniture." The
+thought here is so simple that we easily divine it; but, if we look at
+the sentence at all carefully, we find that, though we supply the
+ellipses in the most charitable manner possible, the sentence really
+says: "Men would find their mansions more burdened, but would find them
+with this increased burden happily balanced by the exemption," etc. The
+sentence should have been framed somewhat in this wise: "Men ... would
+find their ... mansions ... more burdened with taxes, but this increase
+in the taxes on their real estate would be happily balanced by the
+exemption from taxation of their bonds, mortgages, plate, and
+furniture." Again: "Men generally ... would be inclined to laugh at the
+idea of intrusting the modern politician with such gigantic
+opportunities for enriching his favorites." We do not _intrust_ one
+another with _opportunities_. _To enrich_ would better the diction.
+Again: "The value of land that has accrued from labor is not ... a just
+object for confiscation." Correctly: "The value of land that has
+_resulted_ from labor is not _justly_ ... an object _of_ confiscation."
+_Accrue_ is properly used more in the sense of _spontaneous growth_.
+Again: "If the state attempts to confiscate this increase by means of
+taxes, either rentals will increase correspondingly, or such a check
+will be put upon _the_ growth _of each place_ and _all the_ enterprises
+_connected with it_ that greater injury would be done than if things had
+been left untouched." We have here, it will be observed, a confusion of
+moods; the sentence begins in the indicative and ends in the
+conditional. The words in italics are worse than superfluous. Rewritten:
+"If the state _should_ attempt to confiscate this increase by means of
+taxes, either rentals _would_ increase correspondingly, or such a check
+_would_ be put upon growth and enterprise that greater injury would,"
+etc. Again: "The _theory_ that land ... is a _boon_ of Nature, to which
+every person has an inalienable right equal to every other person, is
+not new." The words _theory_ and _boon_ are here misused. A _theory_ is
+a system of suppositions. The things man receives from Nature are
+_gifts_, not _boons_: the gift of reason, the gift of speech, etc. The
+sentence should be: "The _declaration_ (or _assertion_) that land ... is
+a _gift_ of Nature, to which every person has an inalienable right equal
+to _that of any_ other person, is not new." Or, more simply and quite as
+forcibly: "... to which one person has an inalienable right equal to
+that of another, is not new." Or, more simply still, and more forcibly:
+"... to which one _man_ has as good a right as another, is not new." By
+substituting the word _man_ for _person_, we have a word of one syllable
+that expresses, in this connection, all that the longer word expresses.
+The fewer the syllables, if the thought be fully expressed, the more
+vigorous the diction. Inalienability being foreign to the discussion,
+the long word _inalienable_ only encumbers the sentence.
+
+"We have thus[1] passed in review[2] the changes and improvements[3]
+which the revision contains[4] in the First Epistle to the Corinthians.
+It has[5] not, indeed,[6] been possible to refer to[7] them all; but so
+many illustrations[8] have been given in[9] the several classes
+described that the reader will have[10] a satisfactory[11] survey of the
+whole subject. Whatever may be said of other portions[12] of the New
+Testament, we think it will be generally admitted that in this Epistle
+the changes have improved the old[13] translation. They are such as[14]
+make the English version[15] conform more completely[16] to the Greek
+original. If this be[17] true, the revisers have done a good work for
+the Church.[18] If it be true[19] with regard to all the New Testament
+books, the work which they have done will remain[20] a blessing to the
+readers of those books for[21] generations to come. But the blessing
+will be only in the clearer presentation of the Divine truth, and,
+therefore, it will be only to the glory of God."
+
+This astonishingly slipshod bit of composition is from the pen of the
+Rev. Dr. Timothy Dwight. If the learned Professor of Divinity in Yale
+College deemed it worth while to give a little thought to manner as well
+as to matter, it is probable that his diction would be very different
+from what it is; and, if he were to give a few minutes to the making of
+verbal corrections in the foregoing paragraph, he would, perhaps, do
+something like this: 1, change _thus_ to _now_; 2, write _some of_ the
+changes; 3, strike out _and improvements_; 4, for _contains changes_
+substitute some other form of expression; 5, instead of _has been_,
+write _was_; 6, strike out _indeed_; 7, instead of _refer to_, write
+_cite_; 8, change _illustrations_ to _examples_; 9, instead of _in_,
+write _of_; 10, instead of _the reader will have_, write _the reader
+will be able to get_; 11, change _satisfactory_ to _tolerable_; 12,
+change _portions_ to _parts_; 13, not talk of the _old_ translation, as
+we have no new one; 14, strike out as superfluous the words _are such
+as_; 15, change _version_ to _text_; 16, substitute _nearly_ for
+_completely_, which does not admit of comparison; 17, substitute the
+indicative for the conditional; 18, end sentence with the word _work_;
+19, introduce _also_ after _be_; 20, instead of _remain_, in the sense
+of _be_, use _be_; 21, introduce _the_ after _for_. As for the last
+sentence, it reminds one of Mendelssohn's "Songs without Words," though
+here we have, instead of a song and no words, words and no song, or
+rather no meaning. As is often true of cant, we have here simply a
+syntactical arrangement of words signifying--nothing.
+
+If Professor Dwight were of those who, in common with the Addisons and
+Macaulays and Newmans, think it worth while to give some attention to
+diction, the thought conveyed in the paragraph under consideration
+would, perhaps, have been expressed somewhat in this wise:
+
+"We have now passed in review some of the changes that, in the revision,
+have been made in the First Epistle to the Corinthians. It was not
+possible to cite them all, but a sufficient number of examples of the
+several classes described have been given to enable the reader to get a
+tolerable survey of the whole subject. Whatever may be said of the other
+parts of the New Testament, we think it will be generally admitted that
+in this Epistle the changes have improved the translation. They make the
+English text conform more nearly to the Greek. This being true, the
+revisers have done a good work; and, if it be also true with regard to
+all the New Testament books, the work which they have done will be a
+blessing to the readers of these books for the generations to come."
+
+DIE WITH. Man and brute die _of_, and not _with_, fevers, consumption,
+the plague, pneumonia, old age, and so on.
+
+DIFFER. Writers differ _from_ one another in opinion with regard to the
+particle we should use with this verb. Some say they differ _with_,
+others that they differ _from_, their neighbors in opinion. The weight
+of authority is on the side of always using _from_, though A may differ
+_with_ C from D in opinion with regard, say, to the size of the fixed
+stars. "I differ, as to this matter, _from_ Bishop Lowth."--Cobbett.
+_Different to_ is heard sometimes instead of _different from_.
+
+DIRECTLY. The Britons have a way of using this word in the sense of
+_when_, _as soon as_. This is quite foreign to its true meaning, which
+is immediately, at once, straightway. They say, for example,
+"_Directly_ he reached the city, he went to his brother's." "Directly he
+[the saint] was dead, the Arabs sent his woolen shirt to the
+sovereign."--"London News." Dr. Hall says of its use in the sense of _as
+soon as_: "But, after all, it may simply anticipate on the English of
+the future."
+
+DIRT. This word means filth or anything that renders foul and unclean,
+and means nothing else. It is often improperly used for earth or loam,
+and sometimes even for sand or gravel. We not unfrequently hear of a
+_dirt_ road when an unpaved road is meant.
+
+DISCOMMODE. This word is rarely used; _incommode_ is accounted the
+better form.
+
+DISREMEMBER. This is a word vulgarly used in the sense of _forget_. It
+is said to be more frequently heard in the South than in the North.
+
+DISTINGUISH. This verb is sometimes improperly used for _discriminate_.
+We _distinguish_ by means of the senses as well as of the understanding;
+we _discriminate_ by means of the understanding only. "It is difficult,
+in some cases, to _distinguish between_," etc.: should be, "It is
+difficult, in some cases, to _discriminate between_," etc. We
+_distinguish_ one thing _from another_, and _discriminate between_ two
+or more things.
+
+DOCK--WHARF. The first of these words is often improperly used for the
+second. Of docks there are several kinds: a _naval dock_ is a place for
+the keeping of naval stores, timber, and materials for ship-building; a
+_dry dock_ is a place where vessels are drawn out of the water for
+repairs; a _wet dock_ is a place where vessels are kept afloat at a
+certain level while they are loaded and unloaded; a _sectional dock_ is
+a contrivance for raising vessels out of the water on a series of
+air-tight boxes. A _dock_, then, is a place into which things are
+received; hence, a man might fall _into_ a dock, but could no more fall
+_off_ a dock than he could fall off a hole. A _wharf_ is a sort of quay
+built by the side of the water. A similar structure built at a right
+angle with the shore is generally called a _pier_. Vessels lie at
+_wharves_ and _piers_, not at _docks_.
+
+DONATE. This word, which is defined as meaning to give, to contribute,
+is looked upon by most champions of good English as being an
+abomination. _Donation_ is also little used by careful writers.
+"_Donate_," says Mr. Gould, "may be dismissed with this remark: so long
+as its place is occupied by _give_, _bestow_, _grant_, _present_, etc.,
+it is not needed; and it should be unceremoniously bowed out, or thrust
+out, of the seat into which it has, temporarily, intruded."
+
+DONE. This past participle is often very inelegantly, if not improperly,
+used thus: "He did not cry out as some have _done_ against it," which
+should read, "He did not cry out as some have against it"; i. e., "as
+some _have cried out_ against it."
+
+"Done is frequently a very great offender against grammar," says
+Cobbett. "_To do_ is the _act of doing_. We see people write, 'I _did_
+not speak yesterday so well as I wished to have _done_.' Now, what is
+meant by the writer? He means to say that he _did_ not speak so well as
+he then _wished_, or was wishing, _to speak_. Therefore, the sentence
+should be, 'I did not speak yesterday so well as I wished _to do_.' That
+is to say, 'so well as I wished to do it'; that is to say, to do or to
+perform _the act of speaking_.
+
+"Take great care not to be too free in your use of the verb _to do_ in
+any of its times or modes. It is a nice little handy word, and, like our
+oppressed _it_, it is made use of very often when the writer is at a
+_loss_ for what to put down. _To do_ is to _act_, and therefore it never
+can, in any of its parts, supply the place of a _neuter_ verb. 'How do
+you do?' Here _do_ refers to the _state_, and is essentially passive or
+neuter. Yet, to employ it for this purpose is very common. Dr. Blair, in
+his 23d Lecture, says: 'It is somewhat unfortunate that this Number of
+the "Spectator" did not _end_, as it might have _done_, with the former
+beautiful period.' That is to say, _done it_. And then we ask, Done
+what? Not the _act of ending_, because in this case there is _no action_
+at all. The verb means _to come to an end_, _to cease_, _not to go any
+further_. This same verb _to end_ is sometimes an active verb: 'I _end_
+my sentence'; _then_ the verb _to do_ may supply its place; as, 'I have
+not ended my sentence so well as I might have _done_'; that is, done
+_it_; that is, done, or performed, the _act of ending_. But the Number
+of the 'Spectator' was no _actor_; it was expected to _perform_ nothing;
+it was, by the Doctor, wished to have _ceased_ to proceed. 'Did not
+_end_ as it very well might have ended....' This would have been
+correct; but the Doctor wished to avoid the _repetition_, and thus he
+fell into bad grammar. 'Mr. Speaker, I do not _feel_ so well satisfied
+as I should have _done_ if the Right Honorable Gentleman had explained
+the matter more fully.' To _feel_ satisfied is--when the satisfaction is
+to arise from conviction produced by fact or reasoning--a senseless
+expression; and to supply its place, when it is, as in this case, a
+neuter verb, by _to do_, is as senseless. Done _what_? Done _the act of
+feeling_! 'I do not _feel_ so well satisfied as I should have _done_, or
+_executed_, or _performed_ the _act of feeling_'! What incomprehensible
+words!"
+
+DON'T. Everybody knows that _don't_ is a contraction of _do not_, and
+that _doesn't_ is a contraction of _does not_; and yet _nearly_
+everybody is guilty of using _don't_ when he should use _doesn't_. "So
+you _don't_ go; John _doesn't_ either, I hear."
+
+DOUBLE GENITIVE. An anecdote of Mr. Lincoln--an anecdote of Mr.
+Lincoln's. We see at a glance that these two phrases are very different
+in meaning. So, also, a portrait of Brown--a portrait of Brown's. No
+precise rule has ever been given to guide us in our choice between these
+two forms of the possessive case. Sometimes it is not material which
+form is employed; where, however, it is material--and it generally
+is--we must consider the thought we wish to express, and rely on our
+discrimination.
+
+DRAMATIZE. See ADAPT.
+
+DRAWING-ROOM. See PARLOR.
+
+DRESS--GOWN. Within the memory of many persons the outer garment worn by
+women was properly called a _gown_ by everybody, instead of being
+improperly called a _dress_, as it now is by nearly everybody.
+
+DRIVE. See RIDE.
+
+DUE--OWING. These two words, though close synonyms, should not be used
+indiscriminately. The mistake usually made is in using _due_ instead of
+_owing_. That is _due_ which ought to be paid as a debt; that is _owing_
+which is to be referred to as a source. "It was _owing_ to his exertions
+that the scheme succeeded." "It was _owing_ to your negligence that the
+accident happened." "A certain respect is _due_ to men's prejudices."
+"This was _owing_ to an indifference to the pleasures of life." "It is
+_due_ to the public that I should tell all I know of the matter."
+
+EACH OTHER. "Their great authors address themselves, not to their
+country, but to _each other_."--Buckle. _Each other_ is properly applied
+to two only; _one another_ must be used when the number considered
+exceeds two. Buckle should have written _one another_ and not _each
+other_, unless he meant to intimate that the Germans had only two great
+authors, which is not probable.
+
+EAT. Grammarians differ very widely with regard to the conjugation of
+this verb; there is no doubt, however, that from every point of view the
+preferable forms for the preterite and past participle are respectively
+_ate_ and _eaten_. To refined ears the other forms smack of vulgarity,
+although supported by good authority. "I _ate_ an apple." "I have
+_eaten_ dinner." "John _ate_ supper with me." "As soon as you have
+_eaten_ breakfast we will set out."
+
+EDITORIAL. The use of this adjective as a substantive is said to be an
+Americanism.
+
+EDUCATION. This is one of the most misused of words. A man may be well
+acquainted with the contents of text-books, and yet be a person of
+little _education_; on the other hand, a man may be a person of good
+education, and yet know little of the contents of text-books. Abraham
+Lincoln and Edwin Forrest knew comparatively little of what is generally
+learned in schools; still they were men of culture, men of _education_.
+A man may have ever so much book-knowledge and still be a boor; but a
+man can not be a person of good education and not be--so far as manner
+is concerned--a gentleman. _Education_, then, is a whole of which
+Instruction and Breeding are the parts. The man or the woman--even in
+this democratic country of ours--who _deserves_ the title of gentleman
+or lady is always a person of education; i. e., he or she has a
+sufficient acquaintance with books and with the usages of social
+intercourse to acquit himself or herself creditably in the society of
+cultivated people. Not moral worth, nor learning, nor wealth, nor all
+three combined, can unaided make a gentleman, for with all three a man
+might be _uneducated_--i. e., coarse, unbred, unschooled in those things
+which alone make men welcome in the society of the refined.
+
+EFFECTUATE. This word, together with _ratiocinate_ and _eventuate_, is
+said to be a great favorite with the rural members of the Arkansas
+legislature.
+
+EFFLUVIUM. The plural of this word is _effluvia_. It is a common error
+with those who have no knowledge of Latin to speak of "a disagreeable
+effluvia," which is as incorrect as it would be to talk about "a
+disagreeable vapors."
+
+EFFORT WITHOUT EFFECT. "Some writers deal in expletives to a degree that
+tires the ear and offends the understanding. With them everything is
+_excessively_, or _immensely_, or _extremely_, or _vastly_, or
+_surprisingly_, or _wonderfully_, or _abundantly_, or the like. The
+notion of such writers is that these words give _strength_ to what they
+are saying. This is a great error. Strength must be found in the
+_thought_, or it will never be found in the _words_. Big-sounding words,
+without thoughts corresponding, are effort without effect."--William
+Cobbett. See FORCIBLE-FEEBLE.
+
+EGOIST. "One of a class of philosophers who professed to be sure of
+nothing but their own existence."--Reid.
+
+EGOTIST. "One who talks much of himself."
+
+"A tribe of _egotists_ for whom I have always had a mortal
+aversion."--"Spectator."
+
+EITHER. This word means, strictly, the _one_ or the _other_ of two.
+Unlike _both_, which means two taken collectively, _either_, like
+_each_, may mean _two considered separately_; but in this sense _each_
+is the better word to use. "Give me _either_ of them" means, Give me the
+one or the other of two. "He has a farm on _either_ side of the river"
+would mean that he has two farms, one on each (or either) side of the
+river. "He has a farm on _both_ sides of the river" would mean that his
+farm lies partly on the one side of the river and partly on the other.
+The use of _either_ in the sense of _each_, though biblical and
+defensible, may be accounted little if any better than an affectation.
+_Neither_ is the negative of _either_. _Either_ is responded to by
+_or_, _neither_ by _nor_; as, "_either_ this _or_ that," "_neither_ this
+_nor_ that." _Either_ and _neither_ should not--strictly--be used in
+relation to more than two objects. But, though both _either_ and
+_neither_ are strictly applicable to two only, they have been for a very
+long time used in relation to more than two by many good writers; and,
+as it is often convenient so to use them, it seems probable that the
+custom will prevail. When more than two things are referred to, _any_
+and _none_ should be used instead of _either_ and _neither_; as, "_any_
+of the three," not, "_either_ of the three"; "_none_ of the four," not,
+"_neither_ of the four."
+
+EITHER ALTERNATIVE. The word _alternative_ means a choice offered
+between two things. An _alternative writ_, for example, offers the
+_alternative_ of choosing between the doing of a specified act or of
+showing cause why it is not done. Such propositions, therefore, as, "You
+are at liberty to choose _either_ alternative," "_Two_ alternatives are
+presented to me," "_Several_ alternatives presented themselves," and the
+like, are not correct English. The word is correctly used thus: "I am
+confronted with a hard _alternative_: I must either denounce a friend or
+betray my trust." We rarely hear the word _alternate_ or any of its
+derivatives correctly pronounced.
+
+ELDER. See OLDER.
+
+ELEGANT. Professor Proctor says: "If you say to an American, 'This is a
+fine morning,' he is likely to reply, 'It is an _elegant_ morning,' or
+perhaps oftener by using simply the word _elegant_. This is not a
+pleasing use of the word." This is not American English, Professor, but
+popinjay English.
+
+ELLIPSIS. The omission of a word or of words necessary to complete the
+grammatical construction, but not necessary to make the meaning clear,
+is called an _ellipsis_. We almost always, whether in speaking or in
+writing, leave out some of the words necessary to the _full_ expression
+of our meaning. For example, in dating a letter to-day, we should write,
+"New York, August 25, 1881," which would be, if fully written out, "I am
+now writing in the city of New York; this is the twenty-fifth day of
+August, and this month is in the one thousand eight hundred and
+eighty-first year of the Christian era." "I am going to Wallack's"
+means, "I am going to Wallack's _theatre_." "I shall spend the summer at
+my aunt's"; i. e., at my aunt's _house_.
+
+By supplying the _ellipses_ we can often discover the errors in a
+sentence, if there are any.
+
+ENJOY BAD HEALTH. As no one has ever been known to _enjoy_ bad health,
+it is better to employ some other form of expression than this. Say, for
+example, he is in _feeble_, or _delicate_, health.
+
+ENTHUSE. This is a word that is occasionally heard in conversation, and
+is sometimes met with in print; but it has not as yet made its
+appearance in the dictionaries. What its ultimate fate will be, of
+course, no one can tell; for the present, however, it is studiously
+shunned by those who are at all careful in the selection of their
+language. It is said to be most used in the South. The writer has never
+seen it anywhere in the North but in the columns of the "Boston
+Congregationalist."
+
+EPIGRAM. "The word _epigram_ signified originally an inscription on a
+monument. It next came to mean a short poem containing some single
+thought pointedly expressed, the subjects being very various--amatory,
+convivial, moral, eulogistic, satirical, humorous, etc. Of the various
+devices for brevity and point employed in such compositions, especially
+in modern times, the most frequent is a play upon words.... In the
+_epigram_ the mind is roused by a conflict or contradiction between the
+form of the language and the meaning really conveyed."--Bain.
+
+Some examples are:
+
+"When you have nothing to say, say it."
+
+"We can not see the wood for the trees"; that is, we can not get a
+general view because we are so engrossed with the details.
+
+"Verbosity is cured by a large vocabulary"; that is, he who commands a
+large vocabulary is able to select words that will give his meaning
+tersely.
+
+"By indignities men come to dignities."
+
+"Some people are too foolish to commit follies."
+
+"He went to his imagination for his facts, and to his memory for his
+tropes."
+
+EPITHET. Many persons use this word who are in error with regard to its
+meaning; they think that to "apply epithets" to a person is to vilify
+and insult him. Not at all. An _epithet_ is a word that expresses a
+quality, good or bad; a term that expresses an attribute. "All
+_adjectives_ are _epithets_, but all _epithets_ are not _adjectives_,"
+says Crabb; "thus, in Virgil's Pater Æneas, the _pater_ is an _epithet_,
+but not an _adjective_." _Epithet_ is the technical term of the
+rhetorician; _adjective_, that of the grammarian.
+
+EQUALLY AS WELL. A redundant form of expression, as any one will see who
+for a moment considers it. _As well_, or _equally well_, expresses quite
+as much as _equally as well_.
+
+EQUANIMITY OF MIND. This phrase is tautological, and expresses no more
+than does _equanimity_ (literally, "equalmindedness") alone; hence, _of
+mind_ is superfluous, and consequently inelegant. _Anxiety of mind_ is a
+scarcely less redundant form of expression. _A capricious mind_ is in
+the same category.
+
+ERRATUM. Plural, _errata_.
+
+ESQUIRE. An esquire was originally the shield-bearer of a knight. It is
+much, and, in the opinion of some, rather absurdly, used in this
+country. Mr. Richard Grant White says on the subject of its use: "I have
+yet to discover what a man means when he addresses a letter to John
+Dash, _Esqr._" He means no more nor less than when he writes _Mr._
+(master). The use of _Esq._ is quite as prevalent in England as in
+America, and has little more meaning there than here. It simply belongs
+to our stock of courteous epithets.
+
+EUPHEMISM. A description which describes in inoffensive language that
+which is of itself offensive, or a figure which uses agreeable
+phraseology when the literal would be offensive, is called a
+_euphemism_.
+
+EVENTUATE. See EFFECTUATE.
+
+EVERLASTINGLY. This adverb is misused in the South in a manner that is
+very apt to excite the risibility of one to whom the peculiar misuse is
+new. The writer recently visited the upper part of New York with a
+distinguished Southern poet and journalist. It was the gentleman's first
+ride over an elevated road. When we were fairly under way, in admiration
+of the rate of speed at which the cars were moving, he exclaimed, "Well,
+they do just _everlastingly_ shoot along, don't they!"
+
+EVERY. This word, which means simply each or all taken separately, is of
+late years frequently made, by slipshod speakers, to do duty for
+perfect, entire, great, or all possible. Thus we have such expressions
+as _every_ pains, _every_ confidence, _every_ praise, _every_ charity,
+and so on. We also have such diction as, "_Every one_ has this in
+common"; meaning, "_All of us_ have this in common."
+
+EVERY-DAY LATIN. _A fortiori_: with stronger reason. _A posteriori_:
+from the effect to the cause. _A priori_: from the cause to the effect.
+_Bona fide_: in good faith; in reality. _Certiorari_: to be made more
+certain. _Ceteris paribus_: other circumstances being equal. _De facto_:
+in fact; in reality. _De jure_: in right; in law. _Ecce homo_: behold
+the man. _Ergo_: therefore. _Et cetera_: and the rest; and so on.
+_Excerpta_: extracts. _Exempli gratia_: by way of example; abbreviated,
+_e. g._, and _ex. gr._ _Ex officio_: by virtue of his office. _Ex
+parte_: on one side; an _ex parte_ statement is a statement on one side
+only. _Ibidem_: in the same place; abbreviated, _ibid._ _Idem_: the
+same. _Id est_: that is; abbreviated, _i. e._ _Imprimis_: in the first
+place. _In statu quo_: in the former state; just as it was. _In statu
+quo ante bellum_: in the same state as before the war. _In transitu_: in
+passing. _Index expurgatorius_: a purifying index. _In extremis_: at the
+point of death. _In memoriam_: in memory. _Ipse dixit_: on his sole
+assertion. _Item_: also. _Labor omnia vincit_: labor overcomes every
+difficulty. _Locus sigilli_: the place of the seal. _Multum in parvo_:
+much in little. _Mutatis mutandis_: after making the necessary changes.
+_Ne plus ultra_: nothing beyond; the utmost point. _Nolens volens_:
+willing or unwilling. _Nota bene_: mark well; take particular notice.
+_Omnes_: all. _O tempora, O mores!_ O the times and the manners! _Otium
+cum dignitate_: ease with dignity. _Otium sine dignitate_: ease without
+dignity. _Particeps criminis_: an accomplice. _Peccavi_: I have sinned.
+_Per se_: by itself. _Prima facie_: on the first view or appearance; at
+first sight. _Pro bono publico_: for the public good. _Quid nunc_: what
+now? _Quid pro quo_: one thing for another; an equivalent. _Quondam_:
+formerly. _Rara avis_: a rare bird; a prodigy. _Resurgam_: I shall rise
+again. _Seriatim_: in order. _Sine die_: without specifying any
+particular day; to an indefinite time. _Sine qua non_: an indispensable
+condition. _Sui generis_: of its own kind. _Vade mecum_: go with me.
+_Verbatim_: word by word. _Versus_: against. _Vale_: fare-well. _Via_:
+by the way of. _Vice_: in the place of. _Vide_: see. _Vi et armis_: by
+main force. _Viva voce_: orally; by word of mouth. _Vox populi, vox
+Dei_: the voice of the people is the voice of God.
+
+EVIDENCE--TESTIMONY. These words, though differing widely in meaning,
+are often used indiscriminately by careless speakers. _Evidence_ is that
+which _tends_ to convince; _testimony_ is that which is _intended_ to
+convince. In a judicial investigation, for example, there might be a
+great deal of _testimony_--a great deal of _testifying_--and very little
+_evidence_; and the _evidence_ might be quite the reverse of the
+_testimony_. See PROOF.
+
+EXAGGERATION. "Weak minds, feeble writers and speakers delight in
+_superlatives_." See EFFORT WITHOUT EFFECT.
+
+EXCEPT. "No one need apply _except_ he is thoroughly familiar with the
+business," should be, "No one need apply _unless_," etc.
+
+EXCESSIVELY. That class of persons who are never content with any form
+of expression that falls short of the superlative, frequently use
+_excessively_ when _exceedingly_ or even the little word _very_ would
+serve their turn better. They say, for example, that the weather is
+_excessively hot_, when they should content themselves with saying
+simply that the weather is _very warm_, or, if the word suits them
+better, _hot_. Intemperance in the use of language is as much to be
+censured as intemperance in anything else; like intemperance in other
+things, its effect is vulgarizing.
+
+EXECUTE. This word means to follow out to the end, to carry into effect,
+to accomplish, to fulfill, to perform; as, to execute an order, to
+execute a purpose. And the dictionaries and almost universal usage say
+that it also means to put to death in conformity with a judicial
+sentence; as, to execute a criminal. Some of our careful speakers,
+however, maintain that the use of the word in this sense is
+indefensible. They say that _laws_ and _sentences_ are executed, but not
+_criminals_, and that their execution only rarely results in the death
+of the persons upon whom they are executed. In the hanging of a
+criminal, it is, then, not the criminal who is executed, but the law and
+the sentence. The criminal is _hanged_.
+
+EXPECT. This verb always has reference to what is to come, never to what
+is past. We can not _expect_ backward. Instead, therefore, of saying, "I
+_expect_, you thought I would come to see you yesterday," we should say,
+"I _suppose_," etc.
+
+EXPERIENCE. "We _experience_ great difficulty in getting him to take his
+medicine." The word _have_ ought to be big enough, in a sentence like
+this, for anybody. "We _experienced_ great hardships." Better, "We
+_suffered_."
+
+EXTEND. This verb, the primary meaning of which is to stretch out, is
+used, especially by lovers of big words, in connections where to give,
+to show, or to offer would be preferable. For example, it is certainly
+better to say, "They _showed_ me every courtesy," than "They _extended_
+every courtesy to me." See EVERY.
+
+FALSE GRAMMAR. Some examples of false grammar will show what every one
+is the better for knowing: that in literature nothing should be taken on
+trust; that errors of grammar even are found where we should least
+expect them. "I do not know whether the imputation _were_ just or
+not."--Emerson. "I proceeded to inquire if the 'extract' ... _were_ a
+veritable quotation."--Emerson. Should be _was_ in both cases. "How
+_sweet_ the moonlight sleeps!"--Townsend, "Art of Speech," vol. i, p.
+114. Should be _sweetly_. "There is no question _but_ these arts ...
+will greatly aid him," etc.--Ibid., p. 130. Should be _that_. "Nearly
+all who have been distinguished in literature or oratory have made ...
+the generous confession that their attainments _have been_ reached
+through patient and laborious industry. They have declared that speaking
+and writing, though once difficult for them, _have become_ well-nigh
+recreations."--Ibid., p. 143. The _have been_ should be _were_, and the
+_have become_ should be _became_. "Many pronominal adverbs are
+correlatives of _each other_."--Harkness's "New Latin Grammar," p. 147.
+Should be _one another_. "Hot and cold springs, boiling springs, and
+quiet springs lie within a few feet of _each other_, but _none of them
+are properly geysers_."--Appletons' "Condensed Cyclopædia," vol. ii, p.
+414. Should be _one another_, and _not one of them is properly a
+geyser_. "How much better for you as seller and the nation as buyer ...
+than to sink ... in cutting _one another's_ throats." Should be _each
+other's_. "A minister, noted for prolixity of style, was once preaching
+before the inmates of a lunatic asylum. In one of his illustrations he
+painted a scene of a man condemned to be hung, but reprieved under the
+gallows." These two sentences are so faulty that the only way to mend
+them is to rewrite them. They are from a work that professes to teach
+the "art of speech." Mended: "A minister, noted for his prolixity, once
+_preached_ before the inmates of a lunatic asylum. By way of
+illustration he painted a scene in which a man, _who had been_ condemned
+to be _hanged_, _was_ reprieved under the gallows."
+
+FEMALE. The terms _male_ and _female_ are not unfrequently used where
+good taste would suggest some other word. For example, we see over the
+doors of school-houses, "Entrance for males," "Entrance for females."
+Now bucks and bulls are males as well as boys and men, and cows and sows
+are females as well as girls and women.
+
+FETCH. See BRING.
+
+FEWER. See LESS.
+
+FINAL COMPLETION. If there were such a thing as a plurality or a series
+of completions, there would, of course, be such a thing as the _final_
+completion; but, as every completion is final, to talk about a _final
+completion_ is as absurd as it would be to talk about a _final
+finality_.
+
+FIRST RATE. There are people who object to this phrase, and yet it is
+well enough when properly placed, as it is, for example, in such a
+sentence as this: "He's a 'first class' fellow, and I like him _first
+rate_; if I didn't, 'you bet' I'd just give him 'hail Columbia' for
+'blowing' the thing all round town like the big fool that he is."
+
+FIRSTLY. George Washington Moon says in defense of _firstly_: "I do not
+object to the occasional use of _first_ as an adverb; but, in sentences
+where it would be followed by _secondly_, _thirdly_, etc., I think that
+the adverbial form is preferable." To this, one of Mr. Moon's critics
+replies: "However desirable it may be to employ the word _firstly_ on
+certain occasions, the fact remains that the employment of it on any
+occasion is not the best usage." Webster inserts _firstly_, but remarks,
+"Improperly used for _first_."
+
+FLEE--FLY. These verbs, though near of kin, are not interchangeable. For
+example, we can not say, "He _flew_ the city," "He _flew_ from his
+enemies," "He _flew_ at the approach of danger," _flew_ being the
+imperfect tense of _to fly_, which is properly used to express the
+action of birds on the wing, of kites, arrows, etc. The imperfect tense
+of _to flee_ is _fled_; hence, "He _fled_ the city," etc.
+
+FORCIBLE-FEEBLE. This is a "novicy" kind of diction in which the
+would-be forcible writer defeats his object by the overuse of
+expletives. Examples: "And yet the _great_ centralization of wealth is
+one of the [great] evils of the day. All that Mr. ---- _utters_ [says]
+upon this point is _forcible and_ just. This centralization is due to
+the _enormous_ reproductive power of capital, to the _immense_ advantage
+that _costly and complicated_ machinery gives to _great_ [large]
+establishments, and to _the marked_ difference of personal force among
+men." The first _great_ is misplaced; the word _utters_ is misused; the
+second _great_ is ill-chosen. The other words in italics only enfeeble
+the sentence. Again: "In countries where _immense_ [large] estates
+exist, a breaking up of these _vast_ demesnes into _many_ minor
+freeholds would no doubt be a [of] _very_ great advantage." Substitute
+_large_ for _immense_, and take out _vast_, _many_, and _very_, and the
+language becomes much more forcible. Again: "The _very_ first effect of
+the ---- taxation plan would be destructive to the interests of this
+_great multitude_ [class]; it would impoverish our _innumerable_
+farmers, _it would_ confiscate the earnings of [our] _industrious_
+tradesmen and artisans, _it would_ [and] paralyze the hopes of
+_struggling_ millions." What a waste of portly expletives is here! With
+them the sentence is high-flown and weak; take them out, and introduce
+the words inclosed in brackets, and it becomes simple and forcible.
+
+FRIEND--ACQUAINTANCE. Some philosopher has said that he who has half a
+dozen friends in the course of his life may esteem himself fortunate;
+and yet, to judge from many people's talk, one would suppose they had
+friends by the score. No man knows whether he has any friends or not
+until he has "their adoption tried"; hence, he who is desirous to call
+things by their right names will, as a rule, use the word _acquaintance_
+instead of _friend_. "Your friend" is a favorite and very objectionable
+way many people, especially young people, have of writing themselves at
+the bottom of their letters. In this way the obscure stripling protests
+himself the FRIEND of the first man in the land, and that, too, when he
+is, perhaps, a comparative stranger and asking a favor.
+
+GALSOME. Here is a good, sonorous Anglo-Saxon word--meaning malignant,
+venomous, churlish--that has fallen into disuse.
+
+GENTLEMAN. Few things are in worse taste than to use the term
+_gentleman_, whether in the singular or plural, to designate the sex.
+"If I was a _gentleman_," says Miss Snooks. "_Gentlemen_ have just as
+much curiosity as _ladies_," says Mrs. Jenkins. "_Gentlemen_ have so
+much more liberty than we _ladies_ have," says Mrs. Parvenue. Now, if
+these ladies were ladies, they would in each of these cases use the word
+_man_ instead of _gentleman_, and _woman_ instead of _lady_; further,
+Miss Snooks would say, "If I _were_." Well-bred men, men of culture and
+refinement--gentlemen, in short--use the terms _lady_ and _gentleman_
+comparatively little, and they are especially careful not to call
+themselves _gentlemen_ when they can avoid it. A gentleman, for example,
+does not say, "I, with some _other_ gentlemen, went," etc.; he is
+careful to leave out the word _other_. The men who use these terms most,
+and especially those who lose no opportunity to proclaim themselves
+_gentlemen_, belong to that class of men who cock their hats on one side
+of their heads, and often wear them when and where gentlemen would
+remove them; who pride themselves on their familiarity with the latest
+slang; who proclaim their independence by showing the least possible
+consideration for others; who laugh long and loud at their own wit; who
+wear a profusion of cheap finery, such as outlandish watch-chains hooked
+in the lowest button-hole of their vests, Brazilian diamonds in their
+shirt-bosoms, and big seal-rings on their little fingers; who use bad
+grammar and interlard their conversation with big oaths. In business
+correspondence Smith is addressed as _Sir_, while Smith & Brown are
+often addressed as _Gentlemen_--or, vulgarly, as _Gents_. Better, much,
+is it to address them as _Sirs_.
+
+Since writing the foregoing, I have met with the following paragraph in
+the London publication, "All the Year Round": "Socially, the term
+'gentleman' has become almost vulgar. It is certainly less employed by
+gentlemen than by inferior persons. The one speaks of 'a man I know,'
+the other of 'a gentleman I know.' In the one case the gentleman is
+taken for granted, in the other it seems to need specification. Again,
+as regards the term 'lady.' It is quite in accordance with the usages of
+society to speak of your acquaintance the duchess as 'a very nice
+person.' People who would say 'very nice lady' are not generally of a
+social class which has much to do with duchesses; and if you speak of
+one of these as a 'person,' you will soon be made to feel your mistake."
+
+GENTS. Of all vulgarisms, this is, perhaps, the most offensive. If we
+say _gents_, why not say _lades_?
+
+GERUND. "'I have work _to do_,' 'there is no more _to say_,' are phrases
+where the verb is not in the common infinitive, but in the form of the
+_gerund_. 'He is the man _to do_ it, or _for doing_ it.' 'A house _to
+let_,' 'the course _to steer_ by,' 'a place _to lie_ in,' 'a thing _to
+be_ done,' 'a city _to take_ refuge in,' 'the means _to do_ ill deeds,'
+are adjective gerunds; they may be expanded into clauses: 'a house that
+the owner lets or will let'; 'the course that we should steer by'; 'a
+thing that should be done'; 'a city wherein one may take refuge'; 'the
+means whereby ill deeds may be done.' When the _to_ ceased in the
+twelfth century to be a distinctive mark of the dative infinitive or
+gerund, _for_ was introduced to make the writer's intention clear. Hence
+the familiar form in 'what went ye out _for to see_?' 'they came _for to
+show_ him the temple.'"--Bain.
+
+GET. In sentences expressing simple possession--as, "I have _got_ a
+book," "What has he _got_ there?" "Have you _got_ any news?" "They have
+_got_ a new house," etc.--_got_ is entirely superfluous, if not, as some
+writers contend, absolutely incorrect. Possession is completely
+expressed by _have_. "Foxes have holes; the birds of the air have
+nests"; not, "Foxes have _got_ holes; the birds of the air have _got_
+nests." Formerly the imperfect tense of this verb was _gat_, which is
+now obsolete, and the perfect participle was _gotten_, which, some
+grammarians say, is growing obsolete. If this be true, there is no good
+reason for it. If we say _eaten_, _written_, _striven_, _forgotten_, why
+not say _gotten_, where this form of the participle is more
+euphonious--as it often is--than _got_?
+
+GOODS. This term, like other terms used in trade, should be restricted
+to the vocabulary of commerce. Messrs. Arnold & Constable, in common
+with the Washington Market huckster, very properly speak of their wares
+as their _goods_; but Mrs. Arnold and Mrs. Constable should, and I doubt
+not do, speak of their gowns as being made of fine or coarse _silk_,
+_cashmere_, _muslin_, or whatever the material may be.
+
+GOULD AGAINST ALFORD. Mr. Edward S. Gould, in his review of Dean
+Alford's "Queen's English," remarks, on page 131 of his "Good English":
+"And now, as to the style[4] of the Dean's book, taken as a whole. He
+must be held responsible for every error in it; because, as has been
+shown, he has had full leisure for its revision.[5] The errors are,
+nevertheless, numerous; and the shortest way to exhibit them is[6] in
+tabular form." In several instances Mr. Gould would not have taken the
+Dean to task had he known English better. The following are a few of Mr.
+Gould's corrections in which he is clearly in the right:
+
+Paragraph
+
+4. "Into _another_ land _than_"; should be, "into a land _other than_."
+
+16. "We do not follow rule in spelling other words, but custom"; should
+be, "we do not follow _rule, but custom_, in spelling," etc.
+
+18. "The distinction is observed in French, but _never appears_ to have
+been made," etc.; read, "_appears never_ to have been made."
+
+61. "_Rather_ to aspirate more _than_ less"; should be, "to aspirate
+more _rather than_ less."
+
+9. "It is said also _only_ to occur three times," etc.; read, "_occur
+only_ three times."
+
+44. "This doubling _only takes place_ in a syllable," etc.; read,
+"_takes place only_."
+
+142. "Which can _only_ be decided when those circumstances are known";
+read, "_can be decided only_ when," etc.
+
+166. "I will _only_ say that it produces," etc.; read, "I will _say
+only_," etc.
+
+170. "It is said that this can _only_ be filled in thus"; read, "can be
+_filled in only_ thus."
+
+368. "I can _only_ deal with the complaint in a general way"; read,
+"_deal with the complaint only_," etc.
+
+86. "_In_ so far as they are idiomatic," etc. What is the use of _in_?
+
+171. "Try the experiment"; "_tried_ the experiment." Read, _make_ and
+_made_.
+
+345. "It is _most_ generally used of that very sect," etc. Why _most_?
+
+362. "The joining together two clauses with a third," etc.; read, "_of
+two_ clauses," etc.
+
+GOWN. See DRESS.
+
+GRADUATED. Students do not _graduate_; they _are_ graduated. Hence most
+writers nowadays say, "I _was_, he _was_, or they _were_ graduated"; and
+ask, "When _were_ you, or _was_ he, graduated?"
+
+GRAMMATICAL ERRORS. "The correctness of the expression _grammatical
+errors_ has been disputed. 'How,' it has been asked, 'can an error be
+grammatical?' How, it may be replied, can we with propriety say,
+_grammatically incorrect_? Yet we can do so.
+
+"No one will question the propriety of saying _grammatically correct_.
+Yet the expression is the acknowledgment of things _grammatically
+INcorrect_. Likewise the phrase _grammatical correctness_ implies the
+existence of _grammatical INcorrectness_. If, then, a sentence is
+_grammatically incorrect_, or, what is the same thing, has _grammatical
+incorrectness_, it includes a GRAMMATICAL ERROR. _Grammatically
+incorrect_ signifies INCORRECT WITH RELATION TO THE RULES OF GRAMMAR.
+_Grammatical errors_ signifies ERRORS WITH RELATION TO THE RULES OF
+GRAMMAR.
+
+"They who ridicule the phrase _grammatical errors_, and substitute the
+phrase _errors in grammar_, make an egregious mistake. Can there, it may
+be asked with some show of reason, be an error in grammar? Why, grammar
+is a science founded in our nature, referable to our ideas of time,
+relation, method; imperfect, doubtless, as to the system by which it is
+represented; but surely we can speak of error in that which is error's
+criterion! All this is hypercritical, but hypercriticism must be met
+with its own weapons.
+
+"Of the two expressions--_a grammatical error_, and _an error in
+grammar_--the former is preferable. If one's judgment can accept
+neither, one must relinquish the belief in the possibility of tersely
+expressing the idea of an offense against grammatical rules. Indeed, it
+would be difficult to express the idea even by circumlocution. Should
+some one say, 'This sentence is, according to the rules of grammar,
+incorrect.' 'What!' the hypercritic may exclaim, 'incorrect! and
+according to the rules of grammar!' 'This sentence, then,' the corrected
+person would reply, 'contains an error in grammar.' 'Nonsense!' the
+hypercritic may shout, 'grammar is a science; you may be wrong in its
+interpretation, but principles are immutable!'
+
+"After this, it need scarcely be added that, grammatically, no one can
+make a mistake, that there can be no grammatical mistake, that there can
+be no bad grammar, and, consequently, no bad English; a very pleasant
+conclusion, which would save us a great amount of trouble if it did not
+lack the insignificant quality of being true."--"Vulgarisms and Other
+Errors of Speech."
+
+GRATUITOUS. There are those who object to the use of this word in the
+sense of unfounded, unwarranted, unreasonable, untrue. Its use in this
+sense, however, has the sanction of abundant authority. "Weak and
+_gratuitous_ conjectures."--Porson. "A _gratuitous_ assumption."--Godwin.
+"The _gratuitous_ theory."--Southey. "A _gratuitous_ invention."--De
+Quincey. "But it is needless to dwell on the improbability of a
+hypothesis which has been shown to be altogether _gratuitous_."--Dr.
+Newman.
+
+GROW. This verb originally meant to increase in size, but has normally
+come to be also used to express a change from one state or condition to
+another; as, to _grow_ dark, to _grow_ weak or strong, to _grow_ faint,
+etc. But it is doubtful whether what is large can properly be said to
+_grow_ small. In this sense, _become_ would seem to be the better word.
+
+GUMS. See RUBBERS.
+
+HAD HAVE. Nothing could be more incorrect than the bringing together of
+these two auxiliary verbs in this manner; and yet we occasionally find
+it in writers of repute. Instead of "Had I known it," "Had you seen it,"
+"Had we been there," we hear, "Had I _have_ known it," "Had you _have_
+seen it," "Had we _have_ been there."
+
+HAD OUGHT. This is a vulgarism of the worst description, yet we hear
+people, who would be highly indignant if any one should intimate that
+they were not ladies and gentlemen, say, "He _had_ ought to go." A
+fitting reply would be, "Yes, I think he better had." _Ought_ says all
+that _had ought_ says.
+
+HAD RATHER. This expression and _had better_ are much used, but, in the
+opinion of many, are indefensible. We hear them in such sentences as, "I
+_had_ rather not do it," "You _had_ better go home." "Now, what tense,"
+it is asked, "is _had do_ and _had go_?" If we transpose the words thus,
+"You _had do_ better (to) go home," it becomes at once apparent, it is
+asserted, that the proper word to use in connection with _rather_ and
+_better_ is not _had_, but _would_; thus, "I _would_ rather not do it,"
+"You _would_ better go home." Examples of this use of _had_ can be found
+in the writings of our best authors. For what Professor Bain has to say
+on this subject in his "Composition Grammar," see SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
+
+HALF. "It might have been expressed in _one_ half the space." We see at
+a glance that _one_ here is superfluous.
+
+HANGED--HUNG. The irregular form, _hung_, of the past participle of the
+verb _to hang_ is most used; but, when the word denotes suspension by
+the neck for the purpose of destroying life, the regular form,
+_hanged_, is always used by careful writers and speakers.
+
+HASTE. See HURRY.
+
+HEADING. See CAPTION.
+
+HEALTHY--WHOLESOME. The first of these two words is often improperly
+used for the second; as, "Onions are a _healthy_ vegetable." A man, if
+he is in good health, is _healthy_; the food he eats, if it is not
+deleterious, is _wholesome_. A _healthy_ ox makes _wholesome_ food. We
+speak of _healthy_ surroundings, a _healthy_ climate, situation,
+employment, and of _wholesome_ food, advice, examples. _Healthful_ is
+generally used in the sense of conducive to health, virtue, morality;
+as, _healthful_ exercise, the _healthful_ spirit of the
+community--meaning that the spirit that prevails in the community is
+conducive to virtue and good morals.
+
+HELPMATE. The dictionaries suggest that this word is a corruption of
+_help_ and _meet_, as we find these words used in Gen. ii, 18, "I will
+make him a help meet for him," and that the proper word is _helpmeet_.
+If, as is possible, the words in Genesis mean, "I will make him a help,
+meet [suitable] for him," then neither _helpmate_ nor _helpmeet_ has any
+_raison d'être_.
+
+HIGHFALUTIN. This is a style of writing often called the freshman style.
+It is much indulged in by very young men, and by a class of older men
+who instinctively try to make up in clatter for what they lack in
+matter. Examples of this kind of writing are abundant in Professor L. T.
+Townsend's "Art of Speech," which, as examples, are all the better for
+not being of that exaggerated description sometimes met within the
+newspapers. Vol. i, p. 131: "Very often adverbs, prepositions, and
+relatives drift so far from their moorings as to lose themselves, or
+make attachments where they do not belong." Again, p. 135: "Every law of
+speech enforces the statement that there is no excuse for such inflated
+and defective style. [Such style!] To speak thus is treason in the
+realms and under the laws of language." Again, p. 175: "Cultivate
+figure-making habitudes. This is done by asking the spiritual import of
+every physical object seen; also by forming the habit of constantly
+metaphorizing. Knock at the door of anything met which interests, and
+ask, 'Who lives here?' The process is to look, then close the eyes, then
+look within." The blundering inanity of this kind of writing is equaled
+only by its bumptious grandiloquence. On p. 137 Dr. Townsend quotes this
+wholesome admonition from Coleridge: "If men would only say what they
+have to say in plain terms, how much more eloquent they would be!" As an
+example of reportorial highfalutin, I submit the following: "The spirit
+of departed day had joined communion with the myriad ghosts of
+centuries, and four full hours fled into eternity before the citizens of
+many parts of the town found out there was a freshet here at all."
+
+HINTS. "Never write about any matter that you do not well understand. If
+you clearly understand all about your matter, you will never want
+thoughts, and thoughts instantly become words.
+
+"One of the greatest of all faults in writing and in speaking is this:
+the using of many words to _say little_. In order to guard yourself
+against this fault, inquire what is the _substance_, or _amount_, of
+what you have said. Take a long speech of some talking Lord and put down
+upon paper what the amount of it is. You will most likely find that the
+_amount_ is very small; but at any rate, when you get it, you will then
+be able to examine it and to tell what it is worth. A very few
+examinations of the sort will so frighten you that you will be for ever
+after upon your guard against _talking a great deal_ and _saying
+little_."--Cobbett.
+
+"Be simple, be unaffected, be honest in your speaking and writing. Never
+use a long word where a short one will do. Call a spade _a spade_, not a
+_well-known oblong instrument of manual husbandry_; let home be _home_,
+not a _residence_; a place a _place_, not a _locality_; and so of the
+rest. Where a short word will do, you always lose by using a long one.
+You lose in clearness; you lose in honest expression of your meaning;
+and, in the estimation of all men who are qualified to judge, you lose
+in reputation for ability. The only true way to shine, even in this
+false world, is to be modest and unassuming. Falsehood may be a very
+thick crust, but, in the course of time, truth will find a place to
+break through. Elegance of language may not be in the power of all of
+us; but simplicity and straightforwardness are. Write much as you would
+speak; speak as you think. If with your inferiors, speak no coarser than
+usual; if with your superiors, no finer. Be what you say; and, within
+the rules of prudence, say what you are."--Dean Alford.
+
+"Go critically over what you have written, and strike out every word,
+phrase, and clause which it is found will leave the sentence neither
+less clear nor less forcible than it is without them."--Swinton.
+
+"With all watchfulness, it is astonishing what slips are made, even by
+good writers, in the employment of an inappropriate word. In Gibbon's
+'Rise and Fall,' the following instance occurs: 'Of nineteen tyrants who
+started up after the reign of Gallienus, there was not one who _enjoyed_
+a life of peace or a natural _death_.' Alison, in his 'History of
+Europe,' writes: 'Two great sins--one of _omission_ and one of
+commission--have been _committed_ by the states of Europe in modern
+times.' And not long since a worthy Scotch minister, at the close of
+the services, intimated his intention of visiting some of his people as
+follows: 'I intend, during this week, to visit in Mr. M----'s district,
+and will on this occasion take the opportunity of _embracing_ all the
+servants in the district.' When worthies such as these offend, who shall
+call the bellman in question as he cries, 'Lost, a silver-handled silk
+lady's parasol'?
+
+"The proper arrangement of words into sentences and paragraphs gives
+clearness and strength. To attain a clear and pithy style, it may be
+necessary to cut down, to rearrange, and to rewrite whole passages of an
+essay. Gibbon wrote his 'Memoirs' six times, and the first chapter of
+his 'History' three times. Beginners are always slow to prune or cast
+away any thought or expression which may have cost labor. They forget
+that brevity is no sign of thoughtlessness. Much consideration is needed
+to compress the details of any subject into small compass. Essences are
+more difficult to prepare, and therefore more valuable, than weak
+solutions. Pliny wrote to one of his friends, 'I have not time to write
+you a short letter, therefore I have written you a long one.' Apparent
+elaborateness is always distasteful and weak. Vividness and strength are
+the product of an easy command of those small trenchant Saxon
+monosyllables which abound in the English language."--"Leisure Hour."
+
+"As a rule, the student will do well to banish for the present all
+thought of ornament or elegance, and to aim only at expressing himself
+plainly and clearly. The best ornament is always that which comes
+unsought. Let him not beat about the bush, but go straight to the point.
+Let him remember that what is written is meant to be read; that time is
+short; and that--other things being equal--the fewer words the
+better.... Repetition is a far less serious fault than obscurity. Young
+writers are often unduly afraid of repeating the same word, and require
+to be reminded that it is always better to use the right word over again
+than to replace it by a wrong one--and a word which is liable to be
+misunderstood is a wrong one. A frank repetition of a word has even
+sometimes a kind of charm--as bearing the stamp of _truth_, the
+foundation of all excellence of style."--Hall.
+
+"A young writer is afraid to be simple; he has no faith in beauty
+unadorned, hence he crowds his sentences with superlatives. In his
+estimation, turgidity passes for eloquence, and simplicity is but
+another name for that which is weak and unmeaning."--George Washington
+Moon.
+
+HONORABLE. See REVEREND.
+
+HOW. "I have heard _how_ in Italy one is beset on all sides by beggars":
+read, "heard _that_." "I have heard _how_ some critics have been
+pacified with claret and a supper, and others laid asleep with soft
+notes of flattery."--Dr. Johnson. The _how_ in this sentence also should
+be _that_. _How_ means the _manner in which_. We may, therefore, say, "I
+have heard _how_ he went about it to circumvent you."
+
+"And it is good judgment alone can dictate _how far_ to proceed in it
+and _when_ to stop." Cobbett comments on this sentence in this wise:
+"Dr. Watts is speaking here of writing. In such a case, an adverb, like
+_how far_, expressive of longitudinal space, introduces a _rhetorical
+figure_; for the plain meaning is, that judgment will dictate _how much
+to write on it_ and not _how far to proceed in it_. The figure, however,
+is very proper and much better than the literal words. But when a figure
+is _begun_ it should be carried on throughout, which is not the case
+here; for the Doctor begins with a figure of longitudinal space and
+ends with a figure of _time_. It should have been, _where_ to stop. Or,
+how _long_ to proceed in it and _when_ to stop. To tell a man _how far_
+he is to go into the Western countries of America, and _when_ he is to
+stop, is a very different thing from telling him _how far_ he is to go
+and _where_ he is to stop. I have dwelt thus on this distinction for the
+purpose of putting you on the watch and guarding you against confounding
+figures. The less you use them the better, till you understand more
+about them."
+
+HUMANITARIANISM. This word, in its original, theological sense, means
+the doctrine that denies the godhead of Jesus Christ, and avers that he
+was possessed of a human nature only; a _humanitarian_, therefore, in
+the theological sense, is one who believes this doctrine. The word and
+its derivatives are, however, nowadays, both in this country and in
+England, most used in a humane, philanthropic sense; thus, "The audience
+enthusiastically endorsed the _humanitarianism_ of his eloquent
+discourse."--Hatton.
+
+HUNG. See HANGED.
+
+HURRY. Though widely different in meaning, both the verb and the noun
+_hurry_ are continually used for _haste_ and _hasten_. _Hurry_ implies
+not only _haste_, but haste with confusion, flurry; while _haste_
+implies only rapidity of action, an eager desire to make progress, and,
+unlike _hurry_, is not incompatible with deliberation and dignity. It is
+often wise to _hasten_ in the affairs of life; but, as it is never wise
+to proceed without forethought and method, it is never wise to _hurry_.
+Sensible people, then, may be often in _haste_, but are never in a
+_hurry_; and we tell others to _make haste_, and not to _hurry up_.
+
+HYPERBOLE. The magnifying of things beyond their natural limits is
+called _hyperbole_. Language that signifies, literally, more than the
+exact truth, more than is really intended to be represented, by which a
+thing is represented greater or less, better or worse than it really is,
+is said to be _hyperbolical_. Hyperbole is exaggeration.
+
+"Our common forms of compliment are almost all of them extravagant
+_hyperboles_."--Blair.
+
+Some examples are the following:
+
+"Rivers of blood and hills of slain."
+
+"They were swifter than eagles; they were stronger than lions."
+
+    "The sky shrunk upward with unusual dread,
+    And trembling Tiber div'd beneath his bed."
+
+    "So frowned the mighty combatants, that hell
+    Grew darker at their frown."
+
+"I saw their chief tall as a rock of ice; his spear the blasted fir; his
+shield the rising moon; he sat on the shore like a cloud of mist on a
+hill."
+
+ICE-CREAM--ICE-WATER. As for ice-cream, there is no such thing, as
+ice-cream would be the product of frozen cream, i. e., cream made from
+ice by melting. What is called ice-cream is cream _iced_; hence,
+properly, _iced_ cream and not _ice_-cream. The product of melted ice is
+_ice_-water, whether it be cold or warm; but water made cold with ice is
+_iced_ water, and not _ice_-water.
+
+IF. "I doubt _if_ this will ever reach you": say, "I doubt _whether_
+this will ever reach you."
+
+ILL. See SICK.
+
+ILLY. It will astonish not a few to learn that there is no such word as
+_illy_. The form of the adverb, as well as of the adjective and the
+noun, is _ill_. A thing is _ill_ formed, or _ill_ done, or _ill_ made,
+or _ill_ constructed, or _ill_ put together.
+
+    "_Ill_ fares the land, to hastening ills a prey,
+    Where wealth accumulates and men decay."--Goldsmith.
+
+IMMODEST. This adjective and its synonyms, _indecent_ and _indelicate_,
+are often used without proper discrimination being made in their
+respective meanings. _Indecency_ and _immodesty_ are opposed to
+morality: the former in externals, as dress, words, and looks; the
+latter in conduct and disposition. "_Indecency_," says Crabb, "may be a
+partial, _immodesty_ is a positive and entire breach of the moral law.
+_Indecency_ is less than _immodesty_, but more than _indelicacy_." It is
+_indecent_ for a man to marry again very soon after the death of his
+wife. It is _indelicate_ for any one to obtrude himself upon another's
+retirement. It is _indecent_ for women to expose their persons as do
+some whom we can not call _immodest_.
+
+    "Immodest words admit of no defense,
+    For want of decency is want of sense."
+                          --Earl of Roscommon.
+
+IMPROPRIETY. As a rhetorical term, defined as an error in using words in
+a sense different from their recognized signification.
+
+IMPUTE. Non-painstaking writers not unfrequently use _impute_ instead of
+_ascribe_. "The numbers [of blunders] that have been _imputed_ to him
+are endless."--"Appletons' Journal." The use of _impute_ in this
+connection is by no means indefensible; still it would have been better
+to use _ascribe_.
+
+IN OUR MIDST. The phrases _in our midst_ and _in their midst_ are
+generally supposed to be of recent introduction; and, though they have
+been used by some respectable writers, they nevertheless find no favor
+with those who study propriety in the use of language. To the phrase _in
+the midst_ no one objects. "Jesus came and stood in the midst." "There
+was a hut _in the midst_ of the forest."
+
+IN RESPECT OF. "The deliberate introduction of incorrect forms, whether
+by the coinage of new or the revival of obsolete and inexpressive
+syntactical combinations, ought to be resisted even in trifles,
+especially where it leads to the confusion of distinct ideas. An example
+of this is the recent use of the adverbial phrases _in respect of_, _in
+regard of_, for _in_ or _with_ respect _to_, or regard _to_. This
+innovation is without any syntactical ground, and ought to be condemned
+and avoided as a mere grammatical crotchet."--George P. Marsh, "Lectures
+on the English Language," p. 660.
+
+IN SO FAR AS. A phrase often met with, and in which the _in_ is
+superfluous. "A want of proper opportunity would suffice, _in_ so far as
+the want could be shown." "We are to act up to the extent of our
+knowledge; but, _in_ so far as our knowledge falls short," etc.
+
+INAUGURATE. This word, which means to install in office with certain
+ceremonies, is made, by many lovers of big words, to do service for
+_begin_; but the sooner these rhetorical high-fliers stop _inaugurating_
+and content themselves with simply _beginning_ the things they are
+called upon to do in the ordinary routine of daily life, the sooner they
+will cease to set a very bad example.
+
+INDECENT. See IMMODEST.
+
+INDEX EXPURGATORIUS. William Cullen Bryant, who was a careful student of
+English, while he was editor of the "New York Evening Post," sought to
+prevent the writers for that paper from using "over and above (for 'more
+than'); artiste (for 'artist'); aspirant; authoress; beat (for
+'defeat'); bagging (for 'capturing'); balance (for 'remainder'); banquet
+(for 'dinner' or 'supper'); bogus; casket (for 'coffin'); claimed (for
+'asserted'); collided; commence (for 'begin'); compete; cortége (for
+'procession'); cotemporary (for 'contemporary'); couple (for 'two');
+darky (for 'negro'); day before yesterday (for 'the day before
+yesterday'); début; decrease (as a verb); democracy (applied to a
+political party); develop (for 'expose'); devouring element (for
+'fire'); donate; employé; enacted (for 'acted'); indorse (for
+'approve'); en route; esq.; graduate (for 'is graduated'); gents (for
+'gentlemen'); 'Hon.'; House (for 'House of Representatives'); humbug;
+inaugurate (for 'begin'); in our midst; item (for 'particle, extract, or
+paragraph'); is being done, and all passives of this form; jeopardize;
+jubilant (for 'rejoicing'); juvenile (for 'boy'); lady (for 'wife');
+last (for 'latest'); lengthy (for 'long'); leniency (for 'lenity');
+loafer; loan or loaned (for 'lend' or 'lent'); located; majority
+(relating to places or circumstances, for 'most'); Mrs. President, Mrs.
+Governor, Mrs. General, and all similar titles; mutual (for 'common');
+official (for 'officer'); ovation; on yesterday; over his signature;
+pants (for 'pantaloons'); parties (for 'persons'); partially (for
+'partly'); past two weeks (for 'last two weeks,' and all similar
+expressions relating to a definite time); poetess; portion (for 'part');
+posted (for 'informed'); progress (for 'advance'); reliable (for
+'trustworthy'); rendition (for 'performance'); repudiate (for 'reject'
+or 'disown'); retire (as an active verb); Rev. (for 'the Rev.'); rôle
+(for 'part'); roughs; rowdies; secesh; sensation (for 'noteworthy
+event'); standpoint (for 'point of view'); start, in the sense of
+setting out; state (for 'say'); taboo; talent (for 'talents' or
+'ability'); talented; tapis; the deceased; war (for 'dispute' or
+'disagreement')."
+
+This index is offered here as a curiosity rather than as a guide, though
+in the main it might safely be used as such. No valid reason, however,
+can be urged for discouraging the use of several words in the list; the
+words aspirant, banquet, casket, compete, decrease, progress, start,
+talented, and deceased, for example.
+
+INDICATIVE AND SUBJUNCTIVE. "'I _see_ the signal,' is unconditional;
+'_if_ I _see_ the signal,' is the same fact expressed in the form of a
+condition. The one form is said to be in the _indicative_ mood, the mood
+that simply _states or indicates_ the action; the other form is in the
+_subjunctive_, conditional, or conjunctive mood. There is sometimes a
+slight variation made in English, to show that an affirmation is made as
+a condition. The mood is called 'subjunctive,' because the affirmation
+_is subjoined to_ another affirmation: '_If I see the signal_, I will
+call out.'
+
+"Such forms as 'I may see,' 'I can see,' have sometimes been considered
+as a variety of mood, to which the name 'Potential' is given. But this
+can not properly be maintained. There is no trace of any inflection
+corresponding to this meaning, as we find with the subjunctive.
+Moreover, such a mood would have itself to be subdivided into indicative
+and subjunctive forms: 'I may go,' 'if I may go.' And further, we might
+proceed to constitute other moods on the same analogy, as, for example,
+an obligatory mood--'I must go,' or 'I ought to go'; a mood of
+resolution--'I will go, you shall go'; a mood of gratification--'I am
+delighted to go'; of deprecation--'I am grieved to go.' The only
+difference in the two last instances is the use of the sign of the
+infinitive 'to,' which does not occur after 'may,' 'can,' 'must,'
+'ought,' etc.; but that is not an essential difference. Some grammarians
+consider the form 'I do go' a separate mood, and term it the emphatic
+mood. But all the above objections apply to it likewise, as well as many
+others."--Bain. See SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
+
+INDIVIDUAL. This word is often most improperly used for _person_; as,
+"The _individual_ I saw was not over forty"; "There were several
+_individuals_ on board that I had never seen before." _Individual_
+means, etymologically, that which can not be divided, and is used, in
+speaking of things as well as of persons, to express unity. It is
+opposed to the whole, or that which is divisible into parts.
+
+INDORSE. Careful writers generally discountenance the use of _indorse_
+in the sense of _sanction_, _approve_, _applaud_. In this signification
+it is on the list of prohibited words in some of our newspaper offices.
+"The following rules are _indorsed_ by nearly all writers upon this
+subject."--Dr. Townsend. It is plain that the right word to use here is
+_approved_. "The public will heartily _indorse_ the sentiments uttered
+by the court."--New York "Evening Telegram." "The public will heartily
+_approve_ the sentiments _expressed_ by the court," is what the sentence
+should be.
+
+INFINITIVE MOOD. When we can choose, it is generally better to use the
+verb in the infinitive than in the participial form. "Ability being in
+general the power _of doing_," etc. Say, _to do_. "I desire to reply ...
+to the proposal _of substituting_ a tax upon land values ... and
+_making_ this tax, as near [nearly] as may be, equal to rent," etc. Say,
+_to substitute_ and _to make_. "This quality is of prime importance when
+the chief object is _the imparting of_ knowledge." Say, _to impart_.
+
+INITIATE. This is a pretentious word, which, with its derivatives, many
+persons--especially those who like to be grandiloquent--use, when homely
+English would serve their turn much better.
+
+INNUMERABLE NUMBER. A repetitional expression to be avoided. We may say
+_innumerable_ times, or _numberless_ times, but we should not say an
+_innumerable number_ of times.
+
+INTERROGATION. The rhetorical figure that asks a question in order to
+emphasize the reverse of what is asked is called _interrogation_; as,
+"Do we mean to submit to this measure? Do we mean to submit, and consent
+that we ourselves, our country and its rights, shall be trampled on?"
+
+"Doth God pervert judgment? or doth the Almighty pervert justice?"
+
+INTRODUCE. See PRESENT.
+
+IRONY. That mode of speech in which what is meant is contrary to the
+literal meaning of the words--in which praise is bestowed when censure
+is intended--is called _irony_. Irony is a kind of delicate sarcasm or
+satire--raillery, mockery.
+
+"In writings of humor, figures are sometimes used of so delicate a
+nature that it shall often happen that some people will see things in a
+direct contrary sense to what the author and the majority of the readers
+understand them: to such the most innocent _irony_ may appear
+irreligion."--Cambridge.
+
+IRRITATE. See AGGRAVATE.
+
+IS BEING BUILT. A tolerable idea of the state of the discussion
+regarding the propriety of using the locution _is being built_, and all
+like expressions, will, it is hoped, be obtained from the following
+extracts. The Rev. Peter Bullions, in his "Grammar of the English
+Language," says:
+
+"There is properly _no passive_ form, in English, _corresponding to the
+progressive_ form in the _active_ voice, except where it is made by the
+participle _ing_, in a passive sense; thus, 'The house is building';
+'The garments are making'; 'Wheat is selling,' etc. An attempt has been
+made by some grammarians, of late, to banish such expressions from the
+language, though they have been used in all time past by the best
+writers, and to justify and defend a clumsy solecism, which has been
+recently introduced chiefly through the newspaper press, but which has
+gained such currency, and is becoming so familiar to the ear, that it
+seems likely to prevail, with all its uncouthness and deformity. I refer
+to such expressions as 'The house is being built'; 'The letter is being
+written'; 'The mine is being worked'; 'The news is being telegraphed,'
+etc., etc.
+
+"This mode of expression _had no existence_ in the language till _within
+the last fifty years_.[7] This, indeed, would not make the expression
+wrong, were it otherwise unexceptionable; but its recent origin shows
+that it is not, as is pretended, a _necessary_ form.
+
+"This form of expression, when analyzed, is found not to express what it
+is intended to express, and would be used only by such as are either
+ignorant of its import or are careless and loose in their use of
+language. To make this manifest, let it be considered, first, that there
+is _no progressive form_ of the verb _to be_, and no need of it; hence,
+there is no such expression in English as _is being_. Of course the
+expression '_is being_ built,' for example, is not a compound of _is
+being_ and _built_, but of _is_ and _being built_; that is, of the verb
+_to be_ and the _present participle passive_. Now, let it be observed
+that the only verbs in which the present participle passive expresses a
+continued action are those mentioned above as the first class, in which
+the regular passive form expresses a _continuance_ of the action; as,
+_is loved_, _is desired_, etc., and in which, of course, the form in
+question (_is being built_) is not required. Nobody would think of
+saying, 'He is being loved'; 'This result is being desired.'
+
+"The use of this form is justified only by _condemning an established
+usage_ of the language; namely, the passive sense in some verbs of the
+participle in _ing_. In reference to this it is flippantly asked, 'What
+does the house build?' 'What does the letter write?' etc.--taking for
+granted, without attempting to prove, that the participle in _ing_ can
+not have a passive sense in any verb. The following are a few examples
+from writers of the best reputation, which this novelty would condemn:
+'While the ceremony was performing.'--Tom. Brown. 'The court was then
+holding.'--Sir G. McKenzie. 'And still be doing, never done.'--Butler.
+'The books are selling.'--Allen's 'Grammar.' 'To know nothing of what is
+transacting in the regions above us.'--Dr. Blair. 'The spot where this
+new and strange tragedy was acting.'--E. Everett. 'The fortress was
+building.'--Irving. 'An attempt is making in the English
+parliament.'--D. Webster. 'The church now erecting in the city of New
+York.'--'N. A. Review.' 'These things were transacting in
+England.'--Bancroft.
+
+"This new doctrine is in _opposition_ to the almost _unanimous judgment_
+of the _most distinguished grammarians_ and critics, who have considered
+the subject, and expressed their views concerning it. The following are
+a specimen: 'Expressions of this kind are condemned by some critics; but
+the usage is unquestionably of far better authority, and (according to
+my apprehension) in far better taste, than the more complex phraseology
+which some late writers adopt in its stead; as, "The books are now being
+sold."'--Goold Brown. 'As to the notion of introducing a new and more
+complex passive form of conjugation, as, "The bridge _is being built_,"
+"The bridge _was being built_," and so forth, it is one of the most
+absurd and monstrous innovations ever thought of. "The work _is now
+being published_," is certainly no better English than, "The work _was
+being published_, _has been being published_, _had been being
+published_, _shall or will be being published_, _shall or will have
+been being published_," and so on through all the moods and tenses. What
+a language shall we have when our verbs are thus conjugated!'--Brown's
+'Gr. of Eng. Gr.,' p. 361. De War observes: 'The participle in _ing_ is
+also passive in many instances; as, "The house is building," "I heard of
+a plan forming,"' etc.--Quoted in 'Frazee's Grammar,' p. 49. 'It would
+be an absurdity, indeed, to give up the only way we have of denoting the
+incomplete state of action by a passive form (viz., by the participle in
+_ing_ in the passive sense).'--Arnold's 'English Grammar,' p. 46. 'The
+present participle is often used passively; as, "The ship is building."
+The form of expression, _is being built_, _is being committed_, etc., is
+almost universally condemned by grammarians, but it is sometimes met
+with in respectable writers; it occurs most frequently in newspaper
+paragraphs and in hasty compositions. See Worcester's "Universal and
+Critical Dictionary."'--Weld's 'Grammar,' pp. 118 and 180. 'When we say,
+"The house is building," the advocates of the new theory ask, "Building
+what?" We might ask, in turn, when you say, "The field ploughs
+well,"--"Ploughs what?" "Wheat sells well,"--"Sells what?" If usage
+allows us to say, "Wheat sells at a dollar," in a sense that is not
+active, why may we not say, "Wheat is selling at a dollar," in a sense
+that is not active?'--Hart's 'Grammar,' p. 76. 'The prevailing practice
+of the best authors is in favor of the simple form; as, "The house is
+building."'--Wells' 'School Grammar,' p. 148. 'Several other expressions
+of this sort now and then occur, such as the newfangled and most uncouth
+solecism "_is being done_," for the good old English idiom "_is
+doing_"--an absurd periphrasis driving out a pointed and pithy turn of
+the English language.'--'N. A. Review,' quoted by Mr. Wells, p. 148.
+'The phrase, "is being built," and others of a similar kind, have been
+for a few years insinuating themselves into our language; still they are
+not English.'--Harrison's 'Rise, Progress, and Present Structure of the
+English Language.' 'This mode of expression [the house is being built]
+is becoming quite common. It is liable, however, to several important
+objections. It appears formal and pedantic. It has not, as far as I
+know, the support of any respectable grammarian. The easy and natural
+expression is, "The house is building."'--Prof. J. W. Gibbs."
+
+Mr. Richard Grant White, in his "Words and Their Uses," expresses his
+opinion of the locution _is being_ in this wise: "In bad eminence, at
+the head of those intruders in language which to many persons seem to be
+of established respectability, but the right of which to be at all is
+not fully admitted, stands out the form of speech _is being done_, or
+rather, _is being_, which, about seventy or eighty years ago, began to
+affront the eye, torment the ear, and assault the common sense of the
+speaker of plain and idiomatic English." Mr. White devotes thirty pages
+of his book to the discussion of the subject, and adduces evidence that
+is more than sufficient to convince those who are content with an _ex
+parte_ examination that "it can hardly be that such an incongruous and
+ridiculous form of speech as _is being done_ was contrived by a man who,
+by any stretch of the name, should be included among grammarians."
+
+Mr. George P. Marsh, in his "Lectures on the English Language," says
+that the deviser of the locution in question was "some grammatical
+pretender," and that it is "an awkward neologism, which neither
+convenience, intelligibility, nor syntactical congruity demands."
+
+To these gentlemen, and to those who are of their way of thinking with
+regard to _is being_, Dr. Fitzedward Hall replies at some length, in an
+article published in "Scribner's Monthly" for April, 1872. Dr. Hall
+writes:
+
+"'All really well educated in the English tongue lament the many
+innovations introduced into our language from America; and I doubt if
+more than one of these novelties deserve acceptation. That one is,
+substituting a compound participle for an active verb used in a neuter
+signification: for instance, "The house is _being built_," instead of,
+"The house is _building_."' Such is the assertion and such is the
+opinion of some anonymous luminary,[8] who, for his liberality in
+welcoming a supposed Americanism, is somewhat in advance of the herd of
+his countrymen. Almost any popular expression which is considered as a
+novelty, a Briton is pretty certain to assume, off-hand, to have
+originated on our side of the Atlantic. Of the assertion I have quoted,
+no proof is offered; and there is little probability that its author had
+any to offer. 'Are being,' in the phrase 'are being thrown up,'[9] is
+spoken of in 'The North American Review'[10] as 'an outrage upon English
+idiom, "to be detested, abhorred, execrated, and given over to six
+thousand" penny-paper editors'; and the fact is, that phrases of the
+form here pointed at have hitherto enjoyed very much less favor with us
+than with the English.
+
+"As lately as 1860, Dr. Worcester, referring to _is being built_, etc.,
+while acknowledging that 'this new form has been used by some
+respectable writers,' speaks of it as having 'been introduced' 'within a
+few years.' Mr. Richard Grant White, by a most peculiar process of
+ratiocination, endeavors to prove that what Dr. Worcester calls 'this
+new form' came into existence just fifty-six years ago. He premises that
+in Jarvis's translation of 'Don Quixote,' published in 1742, there
+occurs 'were carrying,' and that this, in the edition of 1818, is
+sophisticated into 'were being carried.' 'This change,' continues our
+logician, 'and the appearance of _is being_ with a perfect participle in
+a very few books published between A. D. 1815 and 1820, indicate the
+former period as that of the origin of this phraseology, which, although
+more than half a century old, is still pronounced a novelty as well as a
+nuisance.'
+
+"Who, in the next place, devised our modern imperfects passive? The
+question is not, originally, of my asking; but, as the learned are at
+open feud on the subject, it should not be passed by in silence. Its
+deviser is, more than likely, as undiscoverable as the name of the
+valiant antediluvian who first tasted an oyster. But the deductive
+character of the miscreant is another thing; and hereon there is a war
+between the philosophers. Mr. G. P. Marsh, as if he had actually spotted
+the wretched creature, passionately and categorically denounces him as
+'some grammatical pretender.' 'But,' replies Mr. White, 'that it is the
+work of any grammarian is more than doubtful. Grammarians, with all
+their faults, do not deform language with fantastic solecisms, or even
+seek to enrich it with new and startling verbal combinations. They
+rather resist novelty, and devote themselves to formulating that which
+use has already established.' In the same page with this, Mr. White
+compliments the great unknown as 'some precise and feeble-minded soul,'
+and elsewhere calls him 'some pedantic writer of the last generation.'
+To add even one word toward a solution of the knotty point here
+indicated transcends, I confess, my utmost competence. It is painful to
+picture to one's self the agonizing emotions with which certain
+philologists would contemplate an authentic effigy of the Attila of
+speech who, by his _is being built_ or _is being done_, first offered
+violence to the whole circle of the proprieties. So far as I have
+observed, the first grammar that exhibits them is that of Mr. R. S.
+Skillern, M. A., the first edition of which was published at Gloucester
+in 1802. Robert Southey had not, on the 9th of October, 1795, been out
+of his minority quite two months when, evidently delivering himself in a
+way that had already become familiar enough, he wrote of 'a fellow whose
+uttermost upper grinder _is being torn out_ by the roots by a
+mutton-fisted barber.'[11] This is in a letter. But repeated instances
+of the same kind of expression are seen in Southey's graver writings.
+Thus, in his 'Colloquies,' etc.,[12] we read of 'such [nunneries] as at
+this time _are being reëstablished_.'
+
+"'While my hand _was being drest_ by Mr. Young, I spoke for the first
+time,' wrote Coleridge, in March, 1797.
+
+"Charles Lamb speaks of realities which '_are being acted_ before us,'
+and of 'a man who _is being strangled_.'
+
+"Walter Savage Landor, in an imaginary conversation, represents Pitt as
+saying: 'The man who possesses them may read Swedenborg and Kant while
+he _is being tossed_ in a blanket.' Again: 'I have seen nobles, men and
+women, kneeling in the street before these bishops, when no ceremony of
+the Catholic Church _was being performed_.' Also, in a translation from
+Catullus: 'Some criminal _is being tried_ for murder.'
+
+"Nor does Mr. De Quincey scruple at such English as 'made and _being
+made_,' 'the bride that _was being married_ to him,' and 'the shafts of
+Heaven _were_ even now _being forged_.' On one occasion he writes, 'Not
+done, not even (according to modern purism) _being done_'; as if
+'purism' meant exactness, rather than the avoidance of neoterism.
+
+"I need, surely, name no more, among the dead, who found _is being
+built_, or the like, acceptable. 'Simple-minded common people and those
+of culture were alike protected against it by their attachment to the
+idiom of their mother tongue, with which they felt it to be directly at
+variance.' So Mr. White informs us. But the writers whom I have quoted
+are formidable exceptions. Even Mr. White will scarcely deny to them the
+title of 'people of culture.'
+
+"So much for offenders past repentance; and we all know that the sort of
+phraseology under consideration is daily becoming more and more common.
+The best written of the English reviews, magazines, and journals are
+perpetually marked by it; and some of the choicest of living English
+writers employ it freely. Among these, it is enough if I specify Bishop
+Wilberforce and Mr. Charles Reade.[13]
+
+"Extracts from Bishop Jewel downward being also given, Lord Macaulay,
+Mr. Dickens, 'The Atlantic Monthly,' and 'The Brooklyn Eagle' are
+alleged by Mr. White in proof that people still use such phrases as
+'Chelsea Hospital _was building_,' and 'the train _was preparing_.'
+'Hence we see,' he adds,[14] 'that the form _is being done_, _is being
+made_, _is being built_, lacks the support of authoritative usage from
+the period of the earliest classical English to the present day.' I
+fully concur with Mr. White in regarding 'neither "The Brooklyn Eagle"
+nor Mr. Dickens as a very high authority in the use of language'; yet,
+when he has renounced the aid of these contemned straws, what has he to
+rest his inference on, as to the present day, but the practice of Lord
+Macaulay and 'The Atlantic Monthly'? Those who think fit will bow to the
+dictatorship here prescribed to them; but there may be those with whom
+the classic sanction of Southey, Coleridge, and Landor will not be
+wholly void of weight. All scholars are aware that, to convey the sense
+of the imperfects passive, our ancestors, centuries ago, prefixed, with
+_is_, etc., _in_, afterward corrupted into _a_, to a verbal substantive.
+'The house _is in building_' could be taken to mean nothing but _ædes
+ædificantur_; and, when the _in_ gave place to _a_,[15] it was still
+manifest enough, from the context, that _building_ was governed by a
+preposition. The second stage of change, however, namely, when the _a_
+was omitted, entailed, in many cases, great danger of confusion. In the
+early part of the last century, when English was undergoing what was
+then thought to be purification, the polite world substantially resigned
+_is a-building_ to the vulgar. Toward the close of the same century,
+when, under the influence of free thought, it began to be felt that even
+ideas had a right to faithful and unequivocal representation, a just
+resentment of ambiguity was evidenced in the creation of _is being
+built_. The lament is too late that the instinct of reformation did not
+restore the old form. It has gone forever; and we are now to make the
+best of its successors. '"The brass _is forging_,"' in the opinion of
+Dr. Johnson, is 'a vicious expression, probably corrupted from a phrase
+more pure, but now somewhat obsolete, ... "the brass _is a-forging_."'
+Yet, with a true Tory's timidity and aversion to change, it is not
+surprising that he went on preferring what he found established, vicious
+as it confessedly was, to the end. But was the expression 'vicious'
+solely because it was a corruption? In 1787 William Beckford wrote as
+follows of the fortune-tellers of Lisbon: '_I saw one dragging into
+light_, as I passed by the ruins of a palace thrown down by the
+earthquake. Whether a familiar of the Inquisition was griping her in his
+clutches, or _whether she was taking to account by some disappointed
+votary_, I will not pretend to answer.' Are the expressions here
+italicized either perspicuous or graceful? Whatever we are to have in
+their place, we should be thankful to get quit of them.
+
+"Inasmuch as, concurrently with _building_ for the active participle,
+and _being built_ for the corresponding passive participle, we possessed
+the former, with _is_ prefixed, as the active present imperfect, it is
+in rigid accordance with the symmetry of our verb that, to construct the
+passive present-imperfect, we prefix _is_ to the latter, producing the
+form _is being built_. Such, in its greatest simplicity, is the
+procedure which, as will be seen, has provoked a very levanter of ire
+and vilification. But anything that is new will be excepted to by minds
+of a certain order. Their tremulous and impatient dread of removing
+ancient landmarks even disqualifies them for thoroughly investigating
+its character and pretensions. In _has built_ and _will build_, we find
+the active participle perfect and the active infinitive subjoined to
+auxiliaries; and so, in _has been built_ and _will be built_, the
+passive participle perfect and the passive infinitive are subjoined to
+auxiliaries. In _is building_ and _is being built_, we have, in strict
+harmony with the constitution of the perfect and future tenses, an
+auxiliary followed by the active participle present and the passive
+participle present. _Built_ is determined as active or passive by the
+verbs which qualify it, _have_ and _be_; and the grammarians are right
+in considering it, when embodied in _has built_, as active, since its
+analogue, embodied in _has been built_, is the exclusively passive _been
+built_. Besides this, _has been_ + _built_ would signify something like
+_has existed, built_,[16] which is plainly neuter. We are debarred,
+therefore, from such an analysis; and, by parity of reasoning, we may
+not resolve _is being built_ into _is being_ + _built_. It must have
+been an inspiration of analogy, felt or unfelt, that suggested the form
+I am discussing. _Is being_ + _built_, as it can mean, pretty nearly,
+only _exists, built_, would never have been proposed as adequate to
+convey any but a neuter sense; whereas it was perfectly natural for a
+person aiming to express a passive sense to prefix _is_ to the passive
+concretion _being built_.[17]
+
+"The analogical justification of _is being built_ which I have brought
+forward is so obvious that, as it occurred to myself more than twenty
+years ago, so it must have occurred spontaneously to hundreds besides.
+It is very singular that those who, like Mr. Marsh and Mr. White, have
+pondered long and painfully over locutions typified by _is being built_,
+should have missed the real ground of their grammatical defensibleness,
+and should have warmed themselves, in their opposition to them, into
+uttering opinions which no calm judgment can accept.
+
+"'One who _is being beaten_' is, to Archbishop Whately, 'uncouth
+English.' '"The bridge _is being built_," and other phrases of the like
+kind, have pained the eye' of Mr. David Booth. Such phrases, according
+to Mr. M. Harrison, 'are not English.' To Professor J. W. Gibbs 'this
+mode of expression ... appears formal and pedantic'; and 'the easy and
+natural expression is, "The house _is building_."'[18] In all this,
+little or nothing is discernible beyond sheer prejudice, the prejudice
+of those who resolve to take their stand against an innovation,
+regardless of its utility, and who are ready to find an argument against
+it in any random epithet of disparagement provoked by unreasoning
+aversion. And the more recent denouncers in the same line have no more
+reason on their side than their elder brethren.
+
+"In Mr. Marsh's estimation, _is being built_ illustrates 'corruption of
+language'; it is 'clumsy and unidiomatic'; it is 'at best but a
+philological coxcombry'; it 'is an awkward neologism, which neither
+convenience, intelligibility, nor syntactical congruity demands, and the
+use of which ought, therefore, to be discountenanced, as an attempt at
+the artificial improvement of the language in a point which needed no
+amendment.' Again, 'To reject' _is building_ in favor of the modern
+phrase 'is to violate the laws of language by an arbitrary change; and,
+in this particular case, the proposed substitute is at war with the
+genius of the English tongue.' Mr. Marsh seems to have fancied that,
+wherever he points out a beauty in _is building_, he points out,
+inclusively, a blemish in _is being built_.
+
+"The fervor and feeling with which Mr. White advances to the charge are
+altogether tropical. 'The full absurdity of this phrase, the essence of
+its nonsense, seems not to have been hitherto pointed out.' It is not
+'consistent with reason'; and it is not 'conformed to the normal
+development of the language.' It is 'a monstrosity, the illogical,
+confusing, inaccurate, unidiomatic character of which I have at some
+length, but yet imperfectly, set forth.' Finally, 'In fact, it means
+nothing, and is the most incongruous combination of words and ideas that
+ever attained respectable usage in any civilized language.' These be
+'prave 'ords'; and it seems a pity that so much sterling vituperative
+ammunition should be expended in vain. And that it is so expended thinks
+Mr. White himself; for, though passing sentence in the spirit of a
+Jeffreys, he is not really on the judgment-seat, but on the lowest
+hassock of despair. As concerns the mode of expression exemplified by
+_is being built_, he owns that 'to check its diffusion would be a
+hopeless undertaking.' If so, why not reserve himself for service
+against some evil not avowedly beyond remedy?
+
+"Again we read, 'Some precise and feeble-minded soul, having been taught
+that there is a passive voice in English, and that, for instance,
+_building_ is an active participle, and _builded_ or _built_ a passive,
+felt conscientious scruples at saying "the house _is building_." For
+what could the house build?' As children say at play, Mr. White burns
+here. If it had occurred to him that the 'conscientious scruples' of his
+hypothetical, 'precise, and feeble-minded soul' were roused by _been
+built_, not by _built_, I suspect his chapter on _is being built_ would
+have been much shorter than it is at present, and very different. 'The
+fatal absurdity in this phrase consists,' he tells us, 'in the
+combination of _is_ with _being_; in the making of the verb _to be_ a
+supplement, or, in grammarians' phrase, an auxiliary to itself--an
+absurdity so palpable, so monstrous, so ridiculous, that it should need
+only to be pointed out to be scouted.'[19] Lastly, 'The question is thus
+narrowed simply to this, Does _to be being_ (_esse ens_) mean anything
+more or other than _to be_?'
+
+"Having convicted Mr. White of a mistaken analysis, I am not concerned
+with the observations which he founds on his mistake. However, even if
+his analysis had been correct, some of his arguments would avail him
+nothing. For instance, _is being built_, on his understanding of it,
+that is to say, _is being_ + _built_, he represents by _ens ædificatus
+est_, as 'the supposed corresponding Latin phrase.'[20] The Latin is
+illegitimate; and he infers that, therefore, the English is the same.
+But _ædificans est_, a translation, on the model which he offers, of the
+active _is building_, is quite as illegitimate as _ens æedificatus est_.
+By parity of _non-sequitur_, we are, therefore, to surrender the active
+_is building_. Assume that a phrase in a given language is indefensible
+unless it has its counterpart in some other language; from the very
+conception and definition of an idiom every idiom is illegitimate.
+
+"I now pass to another point. '_To be_ and _to exist_ are,' to Mr.
+White's apprehension, 'perfect synonyms, or more nearly perfect,
+perhaps, than any two verbs in the language. In some of their meanings
+there is a shade of difference, but in others there is none whatever;
+and the latter are those which serve our present purpose. When we say,
+"He, _being_ forewarned of danger, fled," we say, "He, _existing_
+forewarned of danger, fled." When we say that a thing _is_ done, we say
+that it _exists_ done.... _Is being done_ is simply _exists existing
+done_.' But, since _is_ and _exists_ are equipollent, and so _being_ and
+_existing, is being_ is the same as the unimpeachable _is existing_. Q.
+_non_ E. D. _Is existing_ ought, of course, to be no less objectionable
+to Mr. White than _is being_. Just as absurd, too, should he reckon the
+Italian _sono stato_, _era stato_, _sia stato_, _fossi stato_, _saro
+stato_, _sarei stato_, _essere stato_, and _essendo stato_. For in
+Italian both _essere_ and _stare_ are required to make up the verb
+substantive, as in Latin both _esse_ and the offspring of _fuere_ are
+required; and _stare_, primarily 'to stand,' is modified into a true
+auxiliary. The alleged 'full absurdity of this phrase,' to wit, _is
+being built_, 'the essence of its nonsense,' vanishes thus into thin
+air. So I was about to comment bluntly, not forgetting to regret that
+any gentleman's cultivation of logic should fructify in the shape of
+irrepressible tendencies to suicide. But this would be precipitate.
+Agreeably to one of Mr. White's judicial placita, which I make no
+apology for citing twice, 'no man who has preserved all his senses will
+doubt for a moment that "to exist a mastiff or a mule" is absolutely the
+same as "to be a mastiff or a mule."' Declining to admit their identity,
+I have not preserved all my senses; and, accordingly--though it may be
+in me the very superfetation of lunacy--I would caution the reader to
+keep a sharp eye on my arguments, hereabouts particularly. The Cretan,
+who, in declaring all Cretans to be liars, left the question of his
+veracity doubtful to all eternity, fell into a pit of his own digging.
+Not unlike the unfortunate Cretan, Mr. White has tumbled headlong into
+his own snare. It was, for the rest, entirely unavailing that he
+insisted on the insanity of those who should gainsay his fundamental
+postulate. Sanity, of a crude sort, may accept it; and sanity may put it
+to a use other than its propounder's.
+
+"Mr. Marsh, after setting forth the all-sufficiency of _is building_, in
+the passive sense, goes on to say: 'The reformers who object to the
+phrase I am defending must, in consistency, employ the proposed
+substitute with all passive participles, and in other tenses as well as
+the present. They must say, therefore, "The subscription-paper _is being
+missed_, but I know that a considerable sum _is being wanted_ to make up
+the amount"; "the great Victoria Bridge _has been being built_ more than
+two years"; "when I reach London, the ship Leviathan _will be being
+built_"; "if my orders had been followed, the coat _would have been
+being made yesterday_"; "if the house _had_ then _been being built_, the
+mortar _would have been being mixed_."' We may reply that, while awkward
+instances of the old form are most abundant in our literature, there is
+no fear that the repulsive elaborations which have been worked out in
+ridicule of the new forms will prove to have been anticipations of
+future usage. There was a time when, as to their adverbs, people
+compared them, to a large extent, with _-er_ and _-est_, or with _more_
+and _most_, just as their ear or pleasure dictated. They wrote
+_plainlier_ and _plainliest_, or _more plainly_ and _most plainly_; and
+some adverbs, as _early_, _late_, _often_, _seldom_, and _soon_, we
+still compare in a way now become anomalous. And as our forefathers
+treated their adverbs we still treat many adjectives. _Furthermore_,
+_obligingness_, _preparedness_, and _designedly_ seem quite natural; yet
+we do not feel that they authorize us to talk of 'the _seeingness_ of
+the eye,' 'the _understoodness_ of a sentence,' or of 'a statement
+_acknowledgedly_ correct.' 'The now too notorious fact' is tolerable;
+but 'the never to be sufficiently execrated monster Bonaparte' is
+intolerable. The sun may be _shorn_ of his splendor; but we do not allow
+cloudy weather to _shear_ him of it. How, then, can any one claim that a
+man who prefers to say _is being built_ should say _has been being
+built_? Are not awkward instances of the old form, typified by _is
+building_, as easily to be picked out of extant literature as such
+instances of the new form, likely ever to be used, are to be invented?
+And 'the reformers' have not forsworn their ears. Mr. Marsh, at p. 135
+of his admirable 'Lectures,' lays down that 'the adjective _reliable_,
+in the sense of _worthy of confidence_, is altogether unidiomatic'; and
+yet, at p. 112, he writes '_reliable_ evidence.' Again, at p. 396 of the
+same work, he rules that _whose_, in 'I passed a house _whose_ windows
+were open,' is 'by no means yet fully established'; and at p. 145 of his
+very learned 'Man and Nature' he writes 'a quadrangular pyramid, the
+perpendicular of _whose_ sides,' etc. Really, if his own judgments sit
+so very loose on his practical conscience, we may, without being
+chargeable with exaction, ask of him to relax a little the rigor of his
+requirements at the hands of his neighbors.
+
+"Beckford's Lisbon fortune-teller, before had into court, was
+'_dragging_ into light,' and, perchance, '_was taking_ to account.' Many
+moderns would say and write '_being dragged_ into light,' and '_was
+being taken_ to account.' But, if we are to trust the conservative
+critics, in comparison with expressions of the former pattern, those of
+the latter are 'uncouth,' 'clumsy,' 'awkward neologisms,' 'philological
+coxcombries,' 'formal and pedantic,' 'incongruous and ridiculous forms
+of speech,' 'illogical, confusing, inaccurate monstrosities.' Moreover,
+they are neither 'consistent with reason' nor 'conformed to the normal
+development of the language'; they are 'at war with the genius of the
+English tongue'; they are 'unidiomatic'; they are 'not English.' In
+passing, if Mr. Marsh will so define the term _unidiomatic_ as to evince
+that it has any applicability to the case in hand, or if he will arrest
+and photograph 'the genius of the English tongue,' so that we may know
+the original when we meet with it, he will confer a public favor. And
+now I submit for consideration whether the sole strength of those who
+decry _is being built_ and its congeners does not consist in their
+talent for calling hard names. If they have not an uneasy
+subconsciousness that their cause is weak, they would, at least, do well
+in eschewing the violence to which, for want of something better, the
+advocates of weak causes proverbially resort.
+
+"I once had a friend who, for some microscopic penumbra of heresy, was
+charged, in the words of his accuser, with 'as near an approach to the
+sin against the Holy Ghost as is practicable to human infirmity.'
+Similarly, on one view, the feeble potencies of philological turpitude
+seem to have exhibited their most consummate realization in engendering
+_is being built_. The supposed enormity perpetrated in its production,
+provided it had fallen within the sphere of ethics, would, at the least,
+have ranked, with its denunciators, as a brand-new exemplification of
+total depravity. But, after all, what incontestable defect in it has any
+one succeeded in demonstrating? Mr. White, in opposing to the
+expression objections based on an erroneous analysis, simply lays a
+phantom of his own evoking; and, so far as I am informed, other
+impugners of _is being built_ have, absolutely, no argument whatever
+against it over and beyond their repugnance to novelty. Subjected to a
+little untroubled contemplation, it would, I am confident, have ceased
+long ago to be matter of controversy; but the dust of prejudice and
+passion, which so distempers the intellectual vision of theologians and
+politicians, is seen to make, with ruthless impartiality, no exception
+of the perspicacity of philologists.
+
+"Prior to the evolution of _is being built_ and _was being built_, we
+possessed no discriminate equivalents to _ædificatur_ and
+_ædificabatur_; _is built_ and _was built_, by which they were rendered,
+corresponding exactly to _ædificatus est_ and _ædificatus erat_. _Cum
+ædificaretur_ was to us the same as _ædificabatur_. On the wealth of the
+Greek in expressions of imperfect passive I need not dwell. With rare
+exceptions, the Romans were satisfied with the present-imperfect and the
+past-imperfect; and we, on the comparatively few occasions which present
+themselves for expressing other imperfects, shall be sure to have
+recourse to the old forms rather than to the new, or else to use
+periphrases.[21] The purists may, accordingly, dismiss their
+apprehensions, especially as the neoterists have, clearly, a keener
+horror of phraseological ungainliness than themselves. One may have no
+hesitation about saying 'the house _is being built_,' and may yet recoil
+from saying that 'it _should have been being built_ last Christmas'; and
+the same person--just as, provided he did not feel a harshness,
+inadequacy, and ambiguity in the passive 'the house _is building_,' he
+would use the expression--will, more likely than not, elect _is in
+preparation_ preferentially to _is being prepared_. If there are any
+who, in their zealotry for the congruous, choose to adhere to the new
+form in its entire range of exchangeability for the old, let it be hoped
+that they will find, in Mr. Marsh's speculative approbation of
+consistency, full amends for the discomfort of encountering smiles or
+frowns. At the same time, let them be mindful of the career of Mr.
+White, with his black flag and no quarter. The dead Polonius was, in
+Hamlet's phrase, at supper, 'not where he eats, but where he _is
+eaten_.' Shakespeare, to Mr. White's thinking, in this wise expressed
+himself at the best, and deserves not only admiration therefor, but to
+be imitated. 'While the ark _was built_,' 'while the ark _was
+prepared_,' writes Mr. White himself.[22] Shakespeare is commended for
+his ambiguous _is eaten_, though _in eating_ or _an eating_ would have
+been not only correct in his day, but, where they would have come in his
+sentence, univocal. With equal reason a man would be entitled to
+commendation for tearing his mutton-chops with his fingers, when he
+might cut them up with a knife and fork. '_Is eaten_,' says Mr. White,
+'does not mean _has been eaten_.' Very true; but a continuous unfinished
+passion--Polonius's still undergoing manducation, to speak
+Johnsonese--was in Shakespeare's mind; and his words describe a passion
+no longer in generation. The King of Denmark's lord chamberlain had no
+precedent in Herod, when 'he _was eaten_ of worms'; the original,
+γενόμενος σκωληκόβρωτος, yielding, but for its participle, 'he became
+worm-eaten.'
+
+"Having now done with Mr. White, I am anxious, before taking leave of
+him, to record, with all emphasis, that it would be the grossest
+injustice to write of his elegant 'Life and Genius of Shakespeare,' a
+book which does credit to American literature, in the tone which I have
+found unavoidable in dealing with his 'Words and their Uses.'"
+
+The student of English who has honestly weighed the arguments on both
+sides of the question, must, I believe, be of opinion that our language
+is the richer for having two forms for expressing the Progressive
+Passive. Further, he must, I believe, be of opinion that in very many
+cases he conforms to the most approved usage of our time by employing
+the old form; that, however, if he were to employ the old form in all
+cases, his meaning would sometimes be uncertain.
+
+IT. Cobbett discourses of this little neuter pronoun in this wise: "The
+word _it_ is the greatest troubler that I know of in language. It is so
+small and so convenient that few are careful enough in using it. Writers
+seldom spare this word. Whenever they are at a loss for either a
+nominative or an objective to their sentence, they, without any kind of
+ceremony, clap in an _it_. A very remarkable instance of this pressing
+of poor _it_ into actual service, contrary to the laws of grammar and of
+sense, occurs in a piece of composition, where we might, with justice,
+insist on correctness. This piece is on the subject of grammar; it is a
+piece written by a _Doctor of Divinity_ and read by him to students in
+grammar and language in an academy; and the very sentence that I am now
+about to quote is selected by the author of a grammar as testimony of
+high authority in favor of the excellence of his work. Surely, if
+correctness be ever to be expected, it must be in a case like this. I
+allude to two sentences in the 'Charge of the Reverend Doctor
+Abercrombie to the Senior Class of the Philadelphia Academy,' published
+in 1806; which sentences have been selected and published by Mr. Lindley
+Murray as a testimonial of the _merits_ of his grammar; and which
+sentences are by Mr. Murray given to us in the following words: 'The
+unwearied exertions of this gentleman _have_ done more toward
+elucidating the obscurities and embellishing the structure of our
+language than any _other writer_ on the subject. _Such a work_ has long
+been wanted, and from the success with which _it_ is executed, can not
+be too highly appreciated.'
+
+"As in the learned Doctor's opinion obscurities can be elucidated, and
+as in the same opinion Mr. Murray is an able hand at this kind of work,
+it would not be amiss were the grammarian to try his skill upon this
+article from the hand of his dignified eulogist; for here is, if one may
+use the expression, a constellation of obscurities. Our poor oppressed
+_it_, which we find forced into the Doctor's service in the second
+sentence, relates to '_such a work_,' though this work is nothing that
+has an existence, notwithstanding it is said to be '_executed_.' In the
+first sentence, the 'exertions' become, all of a sudden, a '_writer_':
+the _exertions_ have done more than 'any _other_ writer'; for, mind you,
+it is not the _gentleman_ that has done anything; it is 'the
+_exertions_' that _have_ done what is said to be done. The word
+_gentleman_ is in the possessive case, and has nothing to do with the
+action of the sentence. Let us give the sentence a turn, and the Doctor
+and the grammarian will hear how it will sound. 'This gentleman's
+_exertions_ have done more than any _other writer_.' This is on a level
+with 'This gentleman's _dog_ has killed more hares than any _other
+sportsman_.' No doubt Doctor Abercrombie _meant_ to say, 'The exertions
+of this gentleman have done more _than those_ of any other writer. Such
+a work as this gentleman's has long been wanted; his work, seeing the
+successful manner of its execution, can not be too highly commended.'
+_Meant!_ No doubt at all of that! And when we hear a Hampshire ploughboy
+say, 'Poll Cherrycheek have giv'd a thick handkecher,' we know very well
+that he _means_ to say, 'Poll Cherrycheek has given me this
+handkerchief'; and yet we are too apt to _laugh at him_ and to call him
+_ignorant_; which is wrong, because he has no pretensions to a knowledge
+of grammar, and he may be very skillful as a ploughboy. However, we will
+not laugh at Doctor Abercrombie, whom I knew, many years ago, for a very
+kind and worthy man. But, if we may, in any case, be allowed to laugh at
+the ignorance of our fellow-creatures, that case certainly does arise
+when we see a professed grammarian, the author of voluminous precepts
+and examples on the subject of grammar, producing, in imitation of the
+possessors of valuable medical secrets, testimonials vouching for the
+efficacy of his literary panacea, and when, in those testimonials, we
+find most flagrant instances of bad grammar.
+
+"However, my dear James, let this strong and striking instance of the
+misuse of the word _it_ serve you in the way of caution. Never put an
+_it_ upon paper without thinking well of what you are about. When I see
+many _its_ in a page, I always tremble for the writer."
+
+JEOPARDIZE. This is a modern word which we could easily do without, as
+it means neither more nor less than its venerable progenitor _to
+jeopard_, which is greatly preferred by all careful writers.
+
+JUST GOING TO. Instead of "I am _just going to_ go," it is better to
+say, "I am just _about_ to go."
+
+KIDS. "This is another vile contraction. Habit blinds people to the
+unseemliness of a term like this. How would it sound if one should speak
+of silk gloves as _silks_?"
+
+KIND. See POLITE.
+
+KNIGHTS TEMPLARS. The name of this ancient body has been adopted by a
+branch of the Masonic fraternity, but in a perverted form--_Knights
+Templar_; and this form is commonly seen in print, whether referring to
+the old knights or to their modern imitators. This doubtless is due to
+the erroneous impression that _Templar_ is an adjective, and so can not
+take the plural form; while in fact it is a case of two nouns in
+apposition--a double designation--meaning Knights of the order of
+Templars. Hence the plural should be _Knights Templars_, and not
+_Knights Templar_. Members of the contemporaneous order of St. John of
+Jerusalem were commonly called Knights Hospitallers.
+
+LADY. To use the term _lady_, whether in the singular or in the plural,
+simply to designate the sex, is in the worst possible taste. There is a
+kind of pin-feather gentility which seems to have a settled aversion to
+using the terms _man_ and _woman_. Gentlemen and ladies establish their
+claims to being called such by their bearing, and not by arrogating to
+themselves, _even indirectly_, the titles. In England, the title _lady_
+is properly correlative to _lord_; but there, as in this country, it is
+used as a term of complaisance, and is appropriately applied to women
+whose lives are exemplary, and who have received that school and home
+education which enables them to appear to advantage in the better
+circles of society. Such expressions as "She is a fine _lady_, a clever
+_lady_, a well-dressed _lady_, a good _lady_, a modest _lady_, a
+charitable _lady_, an amiable _lady_, a handsome _lady_, a fascinating
+_lady_," and the like, are studiously avoided by persons of refinement.
+_Ladies_ say, "we _women_, the _women_ of America, _women's_ apparel,"
+and so on; _vulgar_ women talk about "us _ladies_, the _ladies_ of
+America, _ladies'_ apparel," and so on. If a woman of culture and
+refinement--in short, a lady--is compelled from any cause soever to work
+in a store, she is quite content to be called a sales-_woman_; not so,
+however, with your young woman who, being in a store, is in a better
+position than ever before. She, Heaven bless her! boils with indignation
+if she is not denominated a sales-_lady_. Lady is often the proper term
+to use, and then it would be very improper to use any other; but it is
+very certain that the terms _lady_ and _gentleman_ are least used by
+those persons who are most worthy of being designated by them. With a
+nice discrimination worthy of special notice, one of our daily papers
+recently said: "Miss Jennie Halstead, daughter of the proprietor of the
+'Cincinnati Commercial,' is one of the most brilliant young _women_ in
+Ohio."
+
+In a late number of the "London Queen" was the following: "The terms
+_ladies_ and _gentlemen_ become in themselves vulgarisms when
+misapplied, and the improper application of the wrong term at the wrong
+time makes all the difference in the world to ears polite. Thus, calling
+a man a _gentleman_ when he should be called a _man_, or speaking of a
+man as a _man_ when he should be spoken of as a _gentleman_; or alluding
+to a lady as a _woman_ when she should be alluded to as a _lady_, or
+speaking of a woman as a _lady_ when she should properly be termed a
+_woman_. Tact and a sense of the fitness of things decide these points,
+there being no fixed rule to go upon to determine when a man is a _man_
+or when he is a _gentleman_; and, although he is far oftener termed the
+one than the other, he does not thereby lose his attributes of a
+gentleman. In common parlance, a man is always a _man_ to a man, and
+never a _gentleman_; to a woman, he is occasionally a _man_ and
+occasionally a _gentleman_; but a man would far oftener term a woman a
+_woman_ than he would term her a _lady_. When a man makes use of an
+adjective in speaking of a lady, he almost invariably calls her a
+_woman_. Thus, he would say, 'I met a rather agreeable _woman_ at dinner
+last night'; but he would _not_ say, 'I met an agreeable _lady_'; but he
+might say, 'A _lady_, a friend of mine, told me,' etc., when he would
+_not_ say, 'A _woman_, a friend of mine, told me,' etc. Again, a man
+would say, 'Which of the _ladies_ did you take in to dinner?' He would
+certainly not say, 'Which of the _women_,' etc.
+
+"Speaking of people _en masse_, it would be to belong to a very advanced
+school to refer to them in conversation as 'men and women,' while it
+would be all but vulgar to style them 'ladies and gentlemen,' the
+compromise between the two being to speak of them as 'ladies and men.'
+Thus a lady would say, 'I have asked two or three ladies and several
+men'; she would not say, 'I have asked several men and women'; neither
+would she say, 'I have asked several ladies and gentlemen.' And,
+speaking of numbers, it would be very usual to say, 'There were a great
+many ladies, and but very few men present,' or, 'The ladies were in the
+majority, so few men being present.' Again, a lady would not say, 'I
+expect two or three men,' but she would say, 'I expect two or three
+gentlemen.' When people are on ceremony with each other [_one another_],
+they might, perhaps, in speaking of a man, call him a _gentleman_; but,
+otherwise, it would be more usual to speak of him as a _man_. Ladies,
+when speaking of each other [_one another_], usually employ the term
+_woman_ in preference to that of _lady_. Thus they would say, 'She is a
+very good-natured _woman_,' 'What sort of a _woman_ is she?' the term
+_lady_ being entirely out of place under such circumstances. Again, the
+term young _lady_ gives place as far as possible to the term _girl_,
+although it greatly depends upon the amount of intimacy existing as to
+which term is employed."
+
+LANGUAGE. A note in Worcester's Dictionary says: "_Language_ is a very
+general term, and is not strictly confined to utterance by words, as it
+is also expressed by the countenance, by the eyes, and by signs.
+_Tongue_ refers especially to an original language; as, 'the Hebrew
+_tongue_.' The modern languages are derived from the original
+_tongues_." If this be correct, then he who speaks French, German,
+English, Spanish, and Italian, may properly say that he speaks five
+_languages_, but only one _tongue_.
+
+LAY--LIE. Errors are frequent in the use of these two irregular verbs.
+_Lay_ is often used for _lie_, and _lie_ is sometimes used for _lay_.
+This confusion in their use is due in some measure, doubtless, to the
+circumstance that _lay_ appears in both verbs, it being the imperfect
+tense of _to lie_. We say, "A mason _lays_ bricks," "A ship _lies_ at
+anchor," etc. "I must _lie_ down"; "I must _lay_ myself down"; "I must
+_lay_ this book on the table"; "He _lies_ on the grass"; "He _lays_ his
+plans well"; "He _lay_ on the grass"; "He _laid_ it away"; "He has
+_lain_ in bed long enough"; "He has _laid up_ some money," "_in_ a
+stock," "_down_ the law"; "He is _laying_ out the grounds"; "Ships _lie_
+at the wharf"; "Hens _lay_ eggs"; "The ship _lay_ at anchor"; "The hen
+_laid_ an egg." It will be seen that _lay_ always expresses transitive
+action, and that _lie_ expresses rest.
+
+    "Here _lies_ our sovereign lord, the king,
+      Whose word no man relies on;
+    He never says a foolish thing,
+      Nor ever does a wise one."
+
+--Written on the bedchamber door of Charles II, by the Earl of
+Rochester.
+
+LEARN. This verb was long ago used as a synonym of _teach_, but in this
+sense it is now obsolete. To _teach_ is to give instruction; to _learn_
+is to take instruction. "I will _learn_, if you will _teach_ me." See
+TEACH.
+
+LEAVE. There are grammarians who insist that this verb should not be
+used without an object, as, for example, it is used in such sentences
+as, "When do you leave?" "I leave to-morrow." The object of the
+verb--home, town, or whatever it may be--is, of course, understood; but
+this, say these gentlemen, is not permissible. On this point opinions
+will, I think, differ; they will, however, not differ with regard to the
+vulgarity of using _leave_ in the sense of _let_; thus, "_Leave_ me be";
+"_Leave_ it alone"; "_Leave_ her be--don't bother her"; "_Leave_ me see
+it."
+
+LEND. See LOAN.
+
+LENGTHY. This word is of comparatively recent origin, and, though it is
+said to be an Americanism, it is a good deal used in England. The most
+careful writers, however, both here and elsewhere, much prefer the word
+_long_: "a _long_ discussion," "a _long_ discourse," etc.
+
+LENIENCY. Mr. Gould calls this word and _lenience_ "two philological
+abortions." _Lenity_ is undoubtedly the proper word to use, though both
+Webster and Worcester do recognize _leniency_ and _lenience_.
+
+LESS. This word is much used instead of _fewer_. _Less_ relates to
+quantity; _fewer_ to number. Instead of, "There were not _less_ than
+twenty persons present," we should say, "There were not _fewer_ than
+twenty persons present."
+
+LESSER. This form of the comparative of _little_ is accounted a
+corruption of _less_. It may, however, be used instead of _less_ with
+propriety in verse, and also, in some cases, in prose. We may say, for
+example, "Of two evils choose the _less_," or "the _lesser_." The latter
+form, in sentences like this, is the more euphonious.
+
+LIABLE. Richard Grant White, in inveighing against the misuse of this
+word, cites the example of a member from a rural district, who called
+out to a man whom he met in the village, where he was in the habit of
+making little purchases: "I say, mister, kin yer tell me whar I'd be
+_li'ble_ to find some beans?" See, also, APT.
+
+LIE. See LAY.
+
+LIKE--AS. Both these words express similarity; _like_ (adjective)
+comparing things, _as_ (adverb) comparing action, existence, or quality.
+Like is followed by an object only, and does not admit of a verb in the
+same construction. _As_ must be followed by a verb expressed or
+understood. We say, "He looks _like_ his brother," or "He looks _as_ his
+brother _looks_." "Do _as_ I do," not "_like_ I do." "You must speak
+_as_ James does," not "_like_ James does." "He died _as_ he had lived,
+_like_ a dog." "It is _as_ blue _as_ indigo"; i. e., "as indigo is."
+
+LIKE, TO. See LOVE.
+
+LIKELY. See APT.
+
+LIT. This form of the past participle of the verb _to light_ is now
+obsolete. "Have you _lighted_ the fire?" "The gas is _lighted_." _Het_
+for _heated_ is a similar, but much greater, vulgarism.
+
+LOAN--LEND. There are those who contend that there is no such verb as
+_to loan_, although it has been found in our literature for more than
+three hundred years. Whether there is properly such a verb or not, it is
+quite certain that it is only those having a vulgar _penchant_ for big
+words who will prefer it to its synonym _lend_. Better far to say
+"_Lend_ me your umbrella" than "_Loan_ me your umbrella."
+
+LOCATE--SETTLE. The use of the verb _to locate_ in the sense of _to
+settle_ is said to be an Americanism. Although the dictionaries
+recognize _to locate_ as a neuter verb, as such it is marked "rarely
+used," and, in the sense of _to settle_, it is among the vulgarisms that
+careful speakers and writers are studious to avoid. A man _settles_, not
+_locates_, in Nebraska. "Where do you intend to _settle_?" not _locate_.
+See, also, SETTLE.
+
+LOGGERHEADS. "In the mean time France is at _loggerheads
+internally_."--"New York Herald," April 29, 1881. Loggerheads
+_internally_?!
+
+LOOKS BEAUTIFULLY. It is sometimes interesting to note the difference
+between _vulgar_ bad grammar and _genteel_ bad grammar, or, more
+properly, between non-painstaking and painstaking bad grammar. The
+former uses, for example, adjectives instead of adverbs; the latter uses
+adverbs instead of adjectives. The former says, "This bonnet is trimmed
+_shocking_"; the latter says, "This bonnet looks _shockingly_." In the
+first sentence the epithet qualifies the verb _is trimmed_, and
+consequently should have its adverbial form--_shockingly_; in the second
+sentence the epithet qualifies the _appearance_--a noun--of the bonnet,
+and consequently should have its adjectival form--_shocking_. The second
+sentence means to say, "This bonnet presents a shocking appearance." The
+bonnet certainly does not really _look_; it is _looked at_, and to the
+_looker_ its appearance is _shocking_. So we say, in like manner, of a
+person, that he or she looks _sweet_, or _charming_, or _beautiful_, or
+_handsome_, or _horrid_, or _graceful_, or _timid_, and so on, always
+using an adjective. "Miss Coghlan, as Lady Teazle, looked _charmingly_."
+The grammar of the "New York Herald" would not have been any more
+incorrect if it had said that Miss Coghlan looked _gladly_, or _sadly_,
+or _madly_, or _delightedly_, or _pleasedly_. A person may look _sick_
+or _sickly_, but in both cases the qualifying word is an adjective. The
+verbs to _smell_, to _feel_, to _sound_, and to _appear_ are also found
+in sentences in which the qualifying word must be an adjective and not
+an adverb. We say, for example, "The rose smells _sweet_"; "The butter
+smells _good_, or _bad_, or _fresh_"; "I feel _glad_, or _sad_, or
+_bad_, or _despondent_, or _annoyed_, or _nervous_"; "This construction
+sounds _harsh_"; "How _delightful_ the country appears!"
+
+On the other hand, to _look_, to _feel_, to _smell_, to _sound_, and to
+_appear_ are found in sentences where the qualifying word must be an
+adverb; thus, "He feels his loss _keenly_"; "The king looked
+_graciously_ on her"; "I smell it _faintly_." We might also say, "He
+feels _sad_ [adjective], because he feels his loss _keenly_" (adverb);
+"He appears _well_" (adverb).
+
+The expression, "_She seemed confusedly_, or _timidly_," is not a whit
+more incorrect than "_She looked beautifully_, or _charmingly_." See
+ADJECTIVES.
+
+LOVE--LIKE. Men who are at all careful in the selection of language to
+express their thoughts, and have not an undue leaning toward the
+superlative, _love_ few things: their wives, their sweethearts, their
+kinsmen, truth, justice, and their country. Women, on the contrary, as a
+rule, _love_ a multitude of things, and, among their loves, the thing
+they perhaps love most is--taffy.
+
+LUGGAGE--BAGGAGE. The former of these words is generally used in
+England, the latter in America.
+
+LUNCH. This word, when used as a substantive, may at the best be
+accounted an inelegant abbreviation of _luncheon_. The dictionaries
+barely recognize it. The proper phraseology to use is, "Have you
+_lunched_?" or, "Have you had your _luncheon_?" or, better, "Have you
+had _luncheon_?" as we may in most cases presuppose that the person
+addressed would hardly take anybody's else luncheon.
+
+LUXURIOUS--LUXURIANT. The line is drawn much more sharply between these
+two words now than it was formerly. Luxurious was once used, to some
+extent at least, in the sense of _rank growth_, but now all careful
+writers and speakers use it in the sense of _indulging_ or _delighting
+in luxury_. We talk of a _luxurious_ table, a _luxurious_ liver,
+_luxurious_ ease, _luxurious_ freedom. Luxuriant, on the other hand, is
+restricted to the sense of _rank_, or _excessive_, growth or production;
+thus, _luxuriant_ weeds, _luxuriant_ foliage or branches, _luxuriant_
+growth.
+
+    "Prune the _luxuriant_, the uncouth refine,
+    But show no mercy to an empty line."--Pope.
+
+MAD. Professor Richard A. Proctor, in a recent number of "The
+Gentleman's Magazine," says: "The word _mad_ in America seems nearly
+always to mean _angry_. For _mad_, as we use the word, Americans say
+_crazy_. Herein they have manifestly impaired the language." Have they?
+
+                "Now, in faith, Gratiano,
+    You give your wife too unkind a cause of grief;
+    An 'twere, to me, I would be _mad at_ it."
+                              --"Merchant of Venice."
+
+"And being exceedingly _mad_ against them, I persecuted them even unto
+strange cities."--Acts xxvi, II.
+
+MAKE A VISIT. The phrase "_make_ a visit," according to Dr. Hall,
+whatever it once was, is no longer English.
+
+MALE. See FEMALE.
+
+MARRY. There has been some discussion, at one time and another, with
+regard to the use of this word. Is John Jones married _to_ Sally Brown
+or _with_ Sally Brown, or are they married to each other? Inasmuch as
+the woman loses her name in that of the man to whom she is wedded, and
+becomes a member of his family, not he of hers--inasmuch as, with few
+exceptions, it is her life that is merged in his--it would seem that,
+_properly_, Sally Brown is married _to_ John Jones, and that this would
+be the proper way to make the announcement of their having been wedded,
+and not John Jones _to_ Sally Brown.
+
+There is also a difference of opinion as to whether the active or the
+passive form is preferable in referring to a person's wedded state. In
+speaking definitely of the _act_ of marriage, the passive form is
+necessarily used with reference to either spouse. "John Jones was
+married to Sally Brown on Dec. 1, 1881"; not, "John Jones _married_
+Sally Brown" on such a date, for (unless they were Quakers) some third
+person married him to her and her to him. But, in speaking indefinitely
+of the _fact_ of marriage, the active form is a matter of course. "Whom
+did John Jones marry?" "He married Sally Brown." "John Jones, when he
+had sown his wild oats, married [married himself, as the French say] and
+settled down." _Got married_ is a vulgarism.
+
+MAY. In the sense of _can_, _may_, in a negative clause, has become
+obsolete. "Though we _may_ say a horse, we _may_ not say a ox." The
+first _may_ here is permissible; not so, however, the second, which
+should be _can_.
+
+MEAT. At table, we ask for and offer beef, mutton, veal, steak, turkey,
+duck, etc., and do not ask for nor offer _meat_, which, to say the
+least, is inelegant. "Will you have [not, take] another piece of _beef_
+[not, of _the_ beef]?" not, "Will you have another piece of _meat_?"
+
+MEMORANDUM. The plural is _memoranda_, except when the singular means a
+book; then the plural is _memorandums_.
+
+MERE. This word is not unfrequently misplaced, and sometimes, as in the
+following sentence, in consequence of being misplaced, it is changed to
+an adverb: "It is true of men as of God, that words _merely_ meet with
+no response." What the writer evidently intended to say is, that _mere_
+words meet with no response.
+
+METAPHOR. An _implied_ comparison is called a metaphor; it is a more
+terse form of expression than the simile. Take, for example, this
+sentence from Spenser's "Philosophy of Style": "As, in passing through
+the crystal, beams of white light are decomposed into the colors of the
+rainbow; so, in traversing the soul of the poet, the colorless rays of
+truth are transformed into brightly-tinted poetry." Expressed in
+metaphors, this becomes: "The white light of truth, in traversing the
+many-sided, transparent soul of the poet, is refracted into iris-hued
+poetry."
+
+Worcester's definition of a _metaphor_ is: "A figure of speech founded
+on the resemblance which one object is supposed to bear, in some
+respect, to another, or a figure by which a word is transferred from a
+subject to which it properly belongs to another, in such a manner that a
+_comparison is implied, though not formally expressed_; a comparison or
+simile comprised in a word; as, 'Thy word is a _lamp_ to my feet.'" A
+_metaphor_ differs from a _simile_ in being expressed without any sign
+of comparison; thus, "the _silver_ moon" is a _metaphor_; "the moon is
+bright as silver" is a simile. Examples:
+
+    "But look, the morn, in russet mantle clad,
+    Walks o'er the dew of yon high eastern hill."
+
+    "Canst thou not minister to a mind diseased--
+    Pluck from the memory a rooted sorrow?"
+
+                      "At length Erasmus
+    Stemmed the wild torrent of a barbarous age,
+    And drove those holy Vandals off the stage."
+
+"Censure is the tax a man pays to the public for being eminent."
+
+METONYMY. The rhetorical figure that puts the effect for the cause, the
+cause for the effect, the container for the thing contained, the sign,
+or symbol, for the thing signified, or the instrument for the agent, is
+called _metonymy_.
+
+"One very common species of _metonymy_ is, when the badge is put for the
+office. Thus we say the _miter_ for the priesthood; the _crown_ for
+royalty; for military occupation we say the _sword_; and for the
+literary professions, those especially of theology, law, and physic, the
+common expression is the _gown_."--Campbell.
+
+Dr. Quackenbos, in his "Course of Composition and Rhetoric," says:
+"_Metonymy_ is the exchange of names between things related. It is
+founded, not on resemblance, but on the relation of, 1. Cause and
+effect; as,'They have _Moses_ and _the prophets_,' i. e., their
+writings; '_Gray hairs_ should be respected,' i. e., _old age_. 2.
+Progenitor and posterity; as, 'Hear, O Israel!' i. e., _descendants of
+Israel_. 3. Subject and attribute; as, '_Youth_ and _beauty_ shall be
+laid in dust,' i. e., _the young_ and _beautiful_. 4. Place and
+inhabitant; as, 'What _land_ is so barbarous as to allow this
+injustice?' i. e., what _people_. 5. Container and thing contained; as,
+'Our _ships_ next opened fire,' i. e., our _sailors_. 6. Sign and thing
+signified; as, 'The _scepter_ shall not depart from Judah,' i. e.,
+_kingly_ power. 7. Material and thing made of it; as, 'His _steel_
+gleamed on high,' i. e., his _sword_."
+
+"Petitions having proved unsuccessful, it was determined to approach the
+throne more boldly."
+
+MIDST, THE. See IN OUR MIDST.
+
+MIND--CAPRICIOUS. "Lord Salisbury's _mind_ is _capricious_."--"Tribune,"
+April 3, 1881. See EQUANIMITY OF MIND.
+
+MISPLACED CLAUSES. In writing and speaking, it is as important to give
+each clause its proper place as it is to place the words properly. The
+following are a few instances of misplaced clauses and adjuncts: "All
+these circumstances brought close to us a state of things which we never
+thought to have witnessed [_to witness_] in peaceful England. _In the
+sister island, indeed, we had read of such horrors_, but now they were
+brought home to our very household hearth."--Swift. Better: "We had
+read, indeed, of such horrors occurring in the sister island," etc.
+
+"The savage people in many places in America, except the government of
+families, have no government at all, and live at this day in that savage
+manner as I have said before."--Hobbes. Better: "The savage people ...
+in America have no government at all, except the government of
+families," etc.
+
+"I shall have a comedy for you, in a season or two at farthest, that I
+believe will be worth your acceptance."--Goldsmith. Bettered: "In a
+season or two at farthest, I shall have a comedy for you that I believe
+will be worth your acceptance."
+
+Among the following examples of the wrong placing of words and clauses,
+there are some that are as amusing as they are instructive: "This
+orthography is regarded as normal _in England_." What the writer
+intended was, "in England _as normal_"--a very different thought. "The
+Normal School is a commodious building capable of accommodating three
+hundred students four stories high." "HOUSEKEEPER.--A highly respectable
+middle-aged Person who has been filling the above Situation with a
+gentleman for upwards of eleven years and who is now deceased is anxious
+to meet a similar one." "TO PIANO-FORTE MAKERS.--A lady keeping a
+first-class school requiring a good piano, is desirous of receiving a
+daughter of the above in exchange for the same." "The Moor, seizing a
+bolster boiling over with rage and jealousy, smothers her." "The Dying
+Zouave the most wonderful mechanical representation ever seen of the
+last breath of life being shot in the breast and life's blood leaving
+the wound." "Mr. T---- presents his compliments to Mr. H----, and I have
+got a hat that is not his, and, if he have a hat that is not yours, no
+doubt they are the expectant ones." See ONLY.
+
+MISPLACED WORDS. "Of all the faults to be found in writing," says
+Cobbett, "this is one of the most common, and perhaps it leads to the
+greatest number of misconceptions. All the words may be the proper words
+to be used upon the occasion, and yet, by a _misplacing_ of a part of
+them, the meaning may be wholly destroyed; and even made to be the
+contrary of what it ought to be."
+
+"I asked the question with no other intention than to set the gentleman
+free from the necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of
+mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly from which, _however
+uneasy_, he could not then _escape_, _by a kind introduction_ of the
+only subject on which I believed him to be able to speak with
+propriety."--Dr. Johnson.
+
+"This," says Cobbett, "is a very bad sentence altogether. '_However
+uneasy_' applies to _assembly_ and not to _gentleman_. Only observe how
+easily this might have been avoided. 'From which _he_, _however uneasy_,
+could not then escape.' After this we have, '_he_ could not then
+_escape_, _by a kind introduction_.' We know what is _meant_; but the
+Doctor, with all his _commas_, leaves the sentence confused. Let us see
+whether we can not make it clear. 'I asked the question with no other
+intention than, by a kind introduction of the only subject on which I
+believed him to be able to speak with propriety, to set the gentleman
+free from the necessity of silence, and to give him an opportunity of
+mingling on equal terms with a polite assembly from which he, however
+uneasy, could not then escape.'"
+
+"Reason is the glory of human nature, and one of the chief eminences
+whereby we are raised above our fellow-creatures, the brutes, _in this
+lower world_."--Doctor Watts' "Logic."
+
+"I have before showed an error," Cobbett remarks, "in the _first_
+sentence of Doctor Watts' work. This is the _second_ sentence. The words
+_in this lower world_ are not words _misplaced_ only; they are wholly
+_unnecessary_, and they do great harm; for they do these two things:
+first, they imply _that there are brutes in the higher world_; and,
+second, they excite a doubt _whether we are raised above those brutes_.
+
+"I might greatly extend the number of my extracts from these authors;
+but here, I trust, are enough. I had noted down about _two hundred
+errors_ in Dr. Johnson's 'Lives of the Poets'; but, afterward perceiving
+that he had revised and corrected 'The Rambler' with _extraordinary
+care_, I chose to make my extracts from that work rather than from the
+'Lives of the Poets.'"
+
+The position of the adverb should be as near as possible to the word it
+qualifies. Sometimes we place it before the auxiliary and sometimes
+after it, according to the thought we wish to express. The difference
+between "The fish should _properly_ be broiled" and "The fish should be
+_properly_ broiled" is apparent at a glance. "The colon may be
+_properly_ used in the following cases": should be, "may _properly_ be
+used." "This mode of expression _rather suits_ a familiar than a grave
+style": should be, "suits a familiar _rather than_ a grave style." "It
+is a frequent error _in the writings even_ of some good authors": should
+be, "in the writings of _even some good_ authors." "_Both_ the
+circumstances of contingency and futurity are necessary": should be,
+"The circumstances of contingency and futurity are _both_ necessary."
+"He has made charges ... which he has failed _utterly_ to
+sustain."--"New York Tribune." Here it is uncertain at first sight which
+verb the adverb is intended to qualify; but the nature of the case makes
+it probable that the writer meant "has utterly failed to sustain."
+
+MISTAKEN. "If I am not _mistaken_, you are in the wrong": say, "If I
+_mistake not_." "I tell you, you are _mistaken_." Here _mistaken_ means,
+"You are wrong; you do not understand"; but it might be taken to mean,
+"I _mistake you_." For "you are _mistaken_," say, "you _mistake_." If,
+as Horace and Professor Davidson aver, usage in language makes right,
+then the grammarians ought long ago to have invented some theory upon
+which the locution _you are mistaken_ could be defended. Until they do
+invent such a theory, it will be better to say _you mistake_, _he
+mistakes_, and so on; or _you are_, or _he is_--as the case may be--_in
+error_.
+
+MORE PERFECT. Such expressions as, "the _more_ perfect of the two," "the
+_most_ perfect thing of the kind I have ever seen," "the _most_ complete
+cooking-stove ever invented," and the like, can not be defended
+logically, as nothing can be more perfect than perfection, or more
+complete than completeness. Still such phrases are, and probably will
+continue to be, used by good writers.
+
+MOST. "Everybody abuses this word," says Mr. Gould in his "Good
+English"; and then, in another paragraph, he adds: "If a man would cross
+out _most_ wherever he can find it in any book in the English language,
+he would in _al_most every instance improve the style of the book." That
+this statement may appear within bounds, he gives many examples from
+good authors, some of which are the following: "a _most_ profound
+silence"; "a _most_ just idea"; "a _most_ complete orator"; "this was
+_most_ extraordinary"; "an object of _most_ perfect esteem"; "a _most_
+extensive erudition"; "he gave it _most_ liberally away"; "it is, _most_
+assuredly, not because I value his services least"; "would _most_
+seriously affect us"; "that such a system must _most_ widely and _most_
+powerfully," etc.; "it is _most_ effectually nailed to the counter"; "it
+is _most_ undeniable that," etc.
+
+This word is much, and very erroneously, used for _almost_. "He comes
+here _most_ every day." The user of such a sentence as this means to say
+that he comes _nearly_ every day, but he _really says_, if he says
+anything, that he comes more every day than he does every night. In such
+sentences _almost_, and not _most_, is the word to use.
+
+MUTUAL. This word is much misused in the phrase "our _mutual_ friend."
+Macaulay says: "_Mutual_ friend is a low vulgarism for _common_ friend."
+_Mutual_ properly relates to two persons, and implies reciprocity of
+sentiment--sentiment, be it what it may, received and returned. Thus, we
+say properly, "John and James have a _mutual_ affection, or a _mutual_
+aversion," i. e., they like or dislike each other; or, "John and James
+are _mutually_ dependent," i. e., they are dependent on each other. In
+using the word _mutual_, care should be taken not to add the words _for
+each other_ or _on each other_, the thought conveyed by these words
+being already expressed in the word _mutual_. "Dependent on each other"
+is the exact equivalent of "mutually dependent"; hence, saying that John
+and James are _mutually_ dependent _on each other_ is as redundant in
+form as it would be to say that the editors of "The Great Vilifier" are
+the biggest, greatest mud-slingers in America.
+
+MYSELF. This form of the personal pronoun is properly used in the
+nominative case only where _increased emphasis_ is aimed at.
+
+    "I had as lief not be as live to be
+    In awe of such a thing as I _myself_."
+
+"I will do it _myself_," "I saw it _myself_." It is, therefore,
+incorrect to say, "Mrs. Brown and myself were both very much pleased."
+
+NAME. This word is sometimes improperly used for _mention_; thus, "I
+never _named_ the matter to any one": should be, "I never _mentioned_
+the matter to any one."
+
+NEIGHBORHOOD. See VICINITY.
+
+NEITHER. See EITHER.
+
+NEITHER--NOR. "He would _neither_ give wine, _nor_ oil, _nor_
+money."--Thackeray. The conjunction should be placed before the excluded
+object; "neither _give_" implies neither some other _verb_, a meaning
+not intended. Rearrange thus, taking all the common parts of the
+contracted sentences together: "He would give _neither_ wine, _nor_ oil,
+_nor_ money." So, "She can _neither_ help her beauty, _nor_ her courage,
+_nor_ her cruelty" (Thackeray), should be, "She can help _neither_,"
+etc. "He had _neither_ time to intercept _nor_ to stop her" (Scott),
+should be, "He had time _neither_ to intercept," etc. "Some _neither_
+can for wits _nor_ critics pass" (Pope), should be, "Some can _neither_
+for wits _nor_ critics pass."
+
+NEVER. Grammarians differ with regard to the correctness of using
+_never_ in such sentences as, "He is in error, though _never_ so wise,"
+"Charm he _never_ so wisely." In sentences like these, to say the least,
+it is better, in common with the great majority of writers, to use
+_ever_.
+
+NEW. This adjective is often misplaced. "He has a _new_ suit of clothes
+and a _new_ pair of gloves." It is not the _suit_ and the _pair_ that
+are new, but the _clothes_ and the _gloves_.
+
+NICE. Archdeacon Hare remarks of the use, or rather misuse, of this
+word: "That stupid vulgarism by which we use the word _nice_ to denote
+almost every mode of approbation, for almost every variety of quality,
+and, from sheer poverty of thought, or fear of saying anything definite,
+wrap up everything indiscriminately in this characterless domino,
+speaking at the same breath of a _nice_ cheese-cake, a _nice_ tragedy, a
+_nice_ sermon, a _nice_ day, a _nice_ country, as if a universal deluge
+of _niaiserie_--for _nice_ seems originally to have been only
+_niais_--had whelmed the whole island." Nice is as good a word as any
+other in its place, but its place is not everywhere. We talk very
+properly about a _nice_ distinction, a _nice_ discrimination, a _nice_
+calculation, a _nice_ point, and about a person's being _nice_, and
+over-_nice_, and the like; but we certainly ought not to talk about
+"Othello's" being a _nice_ tragedy, about Salvini's being a _nice_
+actor, or New York bay's being a _nice_ harbor.[23]
+
+NICELY. The very quintessence of popinjay vulgarity is reached when
+_nicely_ is made to do service for _well_, in this wise: "How do you
+do?" "_Nicely_." "How are you?" "_Nicely_."
+
+NO. This word of negation is responded to by _nor_ in sentences like
+this: "Let your meaning be obscure, and _no_ grace of diction _nor_ any
+music of well-turned sentences will make amends."
+
+"Whether he is there or _no_." Supply the ellipsis, and we have,
+"Whether he is there or _no_ there." Clearly, the word to use in
+sentences like this is not _no_, but _not_. And yet our best writers
+sometimes inadvertently use _no_ with _whether_. Example: "But perhaps
+some people are quite indifferent _whether_ or _no_ it is said,"
+etc.--Richard Grant White, in "Words and Their Uses," p. 84. Supply the
+ellipsis, and we have, "said or _no_ said." In a little book entitled
+"Live and Learn," I find, "No _less_ than fifty persons were there; No
+_fewer_," etc. In correcting one mistake, the writer himself makes one.
+It should be, "_Not_ fewer," etc. If we ask, "There were fifty persons
+there, were there or were there _not_?" the reply clearly would be,
+"There were _not_ fewer than fifty." "There was _no_ one of them who
+would not have been proud," etc., should be, "There was _not_ one of
+them."
+
+NOT. The correlative of _not_, when it stands in the first member of a
+sentence, is _nor_ or _neither_. "_Not_ for thy ivory _nor_ thy gold
+will I unbind thy chain." "I will _not_ do it, _neither_ shall you."
+
+The wrong placing of _not_ often gives rise to an imperfect negation;
+thus, "John and James were _not_ there," means that John and James were
+not there _in company_. It does not exclude the presence of one of them.
+The negative should precede in this case: "Neither John _nor_ James was
+there." "Our company was _not_ present" (as a company, but some of us
+might have been), should be, "No member of our company was present."
+
+NOT--BUT ONLY. "Errors frequently arise in the use of _not_--but _only_,
+to understand which we must attend to the force of the whole
+expression. 'He did _not_ pretend to extirpate French music, _but only_
+to cultivate and civilize it.' Here the _not_ is obviously misplaced.
+'He pretended, or professed, _not_ to extirpate.'"--Bain.
+
+NOTORIOUS. Though this word can not be properly used in any but a bad
+sense, we sometimes see it used instead of _noted_, which may be used in
+either a good or a bad sense. _Notorious_ characters are always persons
+to be shunned, whereas _noted_ characters may or may not be persons to
+be shunned.
+
+"This is the tax a man must pay for his virtues--they hold up a torch to
+his vices and render those frailties _notorious_ in him which would pass
+without observation in another."--Lacon.
+
+NOVICE. See AMATEUR.
+
+NUMBER. It is not an uncommon thing for a pronoun in the plural number
+to be used in connection with an antecedent in the singular. At present,
+the following notice may be seen in some of our Broadway omnibuses:
+"Fifty dollars reward for the conviction of any person caught collecting
+or keeping fares given to _them_ to deposit in the box." Should be, to
+_him_. "A person may be very near-sighted if _they_ can not recognize an
+acquaintance ten feet off." Should be, if _he_.
+
+The verb _to be_ is often used in the singular instead of in the plural;
+thus, "There _is_ several reasons why it would be better": say, _are_.
+"How many _is_ there?" say, _are_. "There _is_ four": say, _are_. "_Was_
+there many?" say, _were_. "No matter how many there _was_": say, _were_.
+
+A verb should agree in number with its subject, and not with its
+predicate. We say, for example, "Death _is_ the wages of sin," and "The
+wages of sin _are_ death."
+
+"When singular nouns connected by _and_ are preceded by _each_,
+_every_, or _no_, the verb must be singular." We say, for example,
+"_Each_ boy and _each_ girl _studies_." "_Every_ leaf, and _every_ twig,
+and _every_ drop of water _teems_ with life." "_No_ book and _no_ paper
+_was_ arranged."
+
+_Each_ being singular, a pronoun or verb to agree with it must also be
+singular; thus, "Let them depend each on _his_ own exertions"; "Each
+city has _its_ peculiar privileges"; "Everybody has a right to look
+after _his_ own interest."
+
+Errors are often the result of not repeating the verb; thus, "Its
+significance is as varied as the passions": correctly, "as _are_ the
+passions." "The words are as incapable of analysis as the thing
+signified": correctly, "as _is_ the thing signified."
+
+OBSERVE. The dictionaries authorize the use of this word as a synonym of
+_say_ and _remark_; as, for example, "What did you _observe_?" for "What
+did you _say_, or _remark_?" In this sense, however, it is better to
+leave _observe_ to the exclusive use of those who delight in being fine.
+
+O'CLOCK. "It is a quarter _to_ ten o'clock." What does this statement
+mean, literally? We _understand_ by it that it lacks a quarter of ten,
+i. e., of being ten; but it does not really mean that. Inasmuch as _to_
+means toward, it _really_ means a quarter after nine. We should say,
+then, a quarter _of_, which means, literally, a quarter _out of_ ten.
+
+OF ALL OTHERS. "The vice of covetousness, _of all others_, enters
+deepest into the soul." This sentence says that covetousness is one of
+the _other_ vices. A thing can not be _another_ thing, nor can it be one
+of a number of _other_ things. The sentence should be, "Of all the
+vices, covetousness enters deepest into the soul"; or, "The vice of
+covetousness, of all the vices, enters," etc.; or, "The vice of
+covetousness, _above_ all others, enters," etc.
+
+OF ANY. This phrase is often used when _of all_ is meant; thus, "This is
+the largest _of any_ I have seen." Should be, "the largest _of all_,"
+etc.
+
+OFF OF. In such sentences as, "Give me a yard _off of_ this piece of
+calico," either the _off_ or the _of_ is vulgarly superfluous. The
+sentence would be correct with either one, but not with both of them.
+"The apples fell _off of_ the tree": read, "fell _off_ the tree."
+
+OFTEN. This adverb is properly compared by changing its termination:
+often, oftener, oftenest. Why some writers use _more_ and _most_ to
+compare it, it is not easy to see; this mode of comparing it is
+certainly not euphonious.
+
+OH--O. It is only the most careful writers who use these two
+interjections with proper discrimination. The distinction between them
+is said to be modern. _Oh_ is simply an exclamation, and should always
+be followed by some mark of punctuation, usually by an exclamation
+point. "Oh! you are come at last." "Oh, help him, you sweet heavens!"
+"Oh, woe is me!" "Oh! I die, Horatio." _O_, in addition to being an
+exclamation, denotes a calling to or adjuration; thus, "Hear, O heavens,
+and give ear, O earth!" "O grave, where is thy victory?" "O heavenly
+powers, restore him!" "O shame! where is thy blush?"
+
+OLDER--ELDER. "He is the _older_ man of the two, and the _oldest_ in the
+neighborhood." "He is the _elder_ of the two sons, and the _eldest_ of
+the family." "The _elder_ son is heir to the estate; he is _older_ than
+his brother by ten years."
+
+ON TO. We get _on_ a chair, _on_ an omnibus, _on_ a stump, and _on_ a
+spree, and not on _to_.
+
+ONE. Certain pronouns of demonstrative signification are called
+indefinite because they refer to no particular subject. This is one of
+them. If we were putting a supposition by way of argument or
+illustration, we might say, "Suppose _I_ were to lose my way in a
+wood"; or, "Suppose _you_ were to lose your way in a wood"; or, "Suppose
+_one_ were to lose _one's_ way in a wood." All these forms are used,
+but, as a rule, the last is to be preferred. The first verges on
+egotism, and the second makes free with another's person, whereas the
+third is indifferent. "If _one's_ honesty were impeached, what should
+_one_ do?" is more courtly than to take either one's self or the person
+addressed for the example.
+
+_One_ should be followed by _one_, and not by _he_. "The better
+acquainted _one_ is with any kind of rhetorical trick, the less liable
+_he_ is to be misled by it." Should be, "the less liable _one_ is to be
+misled by it."
+
+In the phrase, "any of the little _ones_," _one_ is the numeral employed
+in the manner of a pronoun, by indicating something that has gone
+before, or, perhaps, has to come after. "I like peaches, but I must have
+a ripe _one_, or ripe _ones_."
+
+Professor Bain says, in his "Composition Grammar":
+
+"This pronoun continually lands writers in difficulties. English idiom
+requires that, when the pronoun has to be again referred to, it should
+be used itself a second time. The correct usage is shown by Pope: '_One_
+may be ashamed to consume half _one's_ days in bringing sense and rhyme
+together.' It would be against idiom to say 'half _his_ days.'
+
+"Still, the repetition of the pronoun is often felt to be heavy, and
+writers have recourse to various substitutions. Even an ear accustomed
+to the idiom can scarcely accept with unmixed pleasure this instance
+from Browning:
+
+                        "'Alack! _one_ lies _oneself_
+    Even in the stating that _one's_ end was truth,
+    Truth only, if _one_ states so much in words.'
+
+"The representative 'I' or 'we' occasionally acts the part of 'one.' The
+following sentence presents a curious alternation of 'we' with
+'one'--possibly not accidental (George Eliot): 'It's a desperately
+vexatious thing that, after all _one's_ reflections and quiet
+determinations, _we_ should be ruled by moods that _one_ can't calculate
+on beforehand.' By the use of 'we' here, a more pointed reference is
+suggested, while the vagueness actually remains.
+
+"Fenimore Cooper, like Scott, is not very particular; an example may be
+quoted: 'Modesty is a poor man's wealth; but, as _we_ grow substantial
+in the world, patroon, _one_ can afford to begin to speak truth of
+_himself_ as well as of _his_ neighbor.' Were Cooper a careful writer,
+we might persuade ourselves that he chose 'we' and 'one' with a purpose:
+'we' might indicate that the speaker had himself and the patroon
+directly in his eye, although at the same time he wanted to put it
+generally; and 'one' might hint that modesty succeeded in getting the
+better of him. But 'himself' and 'his' would alone show that such
+speculations are too refined for the occasion.
+
+"The form 'a man,' which was at one time common, seems to be reviving.
+In 'Adam Bede' we have, '_A man_ can never do anything at variance with
+his own nature.' We might substitute 'one.'
+
+"'Men' was more frequent in good writing formerly than now. 'Neither do
+_men_ light a candle, and put it under a bushel.' 'Do _men_ gather
+grapes of thorns?' Hume is fond of expressing a general subject by
+'men.'
+
+"'Small birds are much more exposed to the cold than large _ones_.' This
+usage is hardly 'indefinite'; and it needs no further exemplification."
+
+ONLY. This word, when used as an adjective, is more frequently misplaced
+than any other word in the language. Indeed, I am confident that it is
+not correctly placed half the time, either in conversation or in
+writing. Thus, "In its pages, papers of sterling merit [only] will
+_only_ appear" (Miss Braddon); "Things are getting dull down in Texas;
+they _only_ shot [only] three men down there last week"; "I have _only_
+got [only] three." _Only_ is sometimes improperly used for _except_ or
+_unless_; thus, "The trains will not stop _only_ when the bell rings."
+The meaning here is clearly "_except_ when the bell rings."
+
+Dr. Bain, in his "Higher English Grammar," speaking of the order of
+words, says:
+
+"The word requiring most attention is _only_.
+
+"According to the position of _only_, the same words may be made to
+express very different meanings.
+
+"'He _only_ lived for their sakes.' Here _only_ must be held as
+qualifying '_lived_ for their sakes,' the emphasis being on _lived_, the
+word immediately adjoining. The meaning then is 'he _lived_,' but did
+not _work_, did not _die_, did not do any other thing for their sakes.
+
+"'He lived _only_ for their sakes.' _Only_ now qualifies 'for their
+sakes,' and the sentence means he lived for this one reason, namely, for
+their sakes, and not for any other reason.
+
+"'He lived for their sakes _only_.' The force of the word when placed at
+the end is peculiar. Then it often has a diminutive or disparaging
+signification. 'He lived for their sakes,' and not for any more worthy
+reason. 'He gave sixpence _only_,' is an insinuation that more was
+expected.
+
+"By the use of _alone_, instead of _only_, other meanings are expressed.
+'He _alone_ lived for their sakes'; that is, _he, and nobody else_, did
+so. 'He lived for their sakes _alone_,' or, 'for the sake of them
+_alone_'; that is, not for the sake of any other persons. 'It was
+_alone_ by the help of the Confederates that any such design could be
+carried out.' Better _only_.
+
+"'When men grow virtuous in their old age, they _only_ make a sacrifice
+to God of the devil's leavings.'--Pope. Here _only_ is rightly placed.
+'Think _only_ of the past as its remembrance gives you pleasure,' should
+be, 'think of the past, _only_ as its remembrance,' etc. 'As he did not
+leave his name, it was _only_ known that a gentleman had called on
+business': it was known _only_. 'I can _only_ refute the accusation by
+laying before you the whole': this would mean, 'the only thing I am able
+to do is to refute; I may not retaliate, or let it drop, I must _refute_
+it.' 'The negroes are to appear at church _only_ in boots'; that is,
+when the negroes go to church they are to have no clothing but boots.
+'The negroes are to appear _only_ at church in boots' might mean that
+they are not to appear anywhere but at church, whether in boots or out
+of them. The proper arrangement would be to connect the adverbial
+adjunct, _in boots_, with its verb, _appear_, and to make _only_ qualify
+_at church_ and no more: 'the negroes are to appear in boots _only_ at
+church.'"
+
+It thus appears very plain that we should look well to our _onlys_.
+
+OUGHT--SHOULD. These two words, though they both imply obligation,
+should not be used indiscriminately. _Ought_ is the stronger term; what
+we _ought_ to do, we are morally bound to do. We _ought_ to be truthful
+and honest, and _should_ be respectful to our elders and kind to our
+inferiors.
+
+OVERFLOWN. _Flown_ is the past participle of _to fly_, and _flowed_ of
+_to flow_. As, therefore, a river does not _fly_ over its banks, but
+_flows_ over them, we should say of it that it has over_flowed_, and not
+that it has over_flown_.
+
+OVERLY. This word is now used only by the unschooled.
+
+OWING. See DUE.
+
+PANTS. This abbreviation is not used by those who are careful in the
+choice of words. The purist does not use the word _pantaloons_ even, but
+_trousers_. _Pants_ are worn by _gents_ who eat _lunches_ and _open_
+wine, and _trousers_ are worn by _gentlemen_ who eat _luncheons_ and
+_order_ wine.
+
+PARAPHERNALIA. This is a law term. In Roman law, it meant the goods
+which a woman brought to her husband besides her dowry. In English law,
+it means the goods which a woman is allowed to have after the death of
+her husband, besides her dower, consisting of her apparel and ornaments
+suitable to her rank. When used in speaking of the affairs of every-day
+life, it is generally misused.
+
+PARLOR. This word, in the sense of _drawing-room_, according to Dr.
+Hall, except in the United States and some of the English colonies, is
+obsolete.
+
+PARTAKE. This is a very fine word to use for _eat_; just the word for
+young women who hobble on French heels.
+
+PARTIALLY--PARTLY. "It is only _partially_ done." This use of the adverb
+_partially_ is sanctioned by high authority, but that does not make it
+correct. A thing done in part is _partly_, not _partially_, done.
+
+PARTICIPLES. When the present participle is used substantively, in
+sentences like the following, it is preceded by the definite article and
+followed by the preposition _of_. The omitting of the preposition is a
+common error. Thus, "Or, it is _the drawing_ a conclusion which was
+before either unknown or dark," should be, "the drawing _of_ a
+conclusion." "Prompted by the most extreme vanity, he persisted in the
+writing bad verses," should be, "in writing bad verses," or "in the
+writing _of_ bad verses." "There is a misuse of the article _a_ which is
+very common. It is the using it before the word _most_."--Moon. Most
+writers would have said "the using _of_ it." Mr. Moon argues for his
+construction.
+
+PARTICLES. "Nothing but study of the best writers and practice in
+composition will enable us to decide what are the prepositions and
+conjunctions that ought to go with certain verbs. The following examples
+illustrate some common blunders:
+
+"'It was characterized _with_ eloquence': read, 'by.'
+
+"'A testimonial _of_ the merits of his grammar': read, 'to.'
+
+"'It was an example of the love _to form_ comparisons': read, 'of
+forming.'
+
+"'Repetition is always to be preferred _before_ obscurity': read, 'to.'
+
+"'He made an effort _for meeting_ them': read, 'to meet.'
+
+"'They have no _other_ object _but_ to come': read, 'other object than,'
+or omit 'other.'
+
+"Two verbs are not unfrequently followed by a single preposition, which
+accords with one only; e. g., 'This duty _is repeated_ and inculcated
+_upon_ the reader.' 'Repeat _upon_' is nonsense; we must read 'is
+repeated _to_ and inculcated upon.'"--Nichol's "English Composition," p.
+39. We often see _for_ used with the substantive _sympathy_; the best
+practice, however, uses _with_; thus, "Words can not express the deep
+sympathy I feel _with_ you."--Queen Victoria.
+
+PARTY. This is a very good word in its place, but it is very much out of
+its place when used--as it often is by the vulgar--where good taste
+would use the word _person_.
+
+PATRONIZE. This word and its derivatives would be much less used by the
+American tradesman than they are, if he were better acquainted with
+their true meaning. Then he would solicit his neighbors' _custom_, not
+their _patronage_. A man can have no _patrons_ without incurring
+obligations--without becoming a _protégé_; while a man may have
+customers innumerable, and, instead of placing himself under obligations
+to them, he may place them under obligations to him. Princes are the
+_patrons_ of those tradesmen whom they allow to call themselves their
+purveyors; as, "John Smith, Haberdasher to H. R. H. the Prince of
+Wales." Here the Prince _patronizes_ John Smith.
+
+PELL-MELL. This adverb means mixed or mingled together; as, "Men,
+horses, chariots, crowded _pell-mell_." It can not properly be applied
+to an individual. To say, for example, "He rushed pell-mell down the
+stairs," is as incorrect as it would be to say, "He rushed down the
+stairs _mixed together_."
+
+PER. This Latin preposition is a good deal used in English, as, for
+example, in such phrases as _per_ day, _per_ man, _per_ pound, _per_
+ton, and so on. In all such cases it is better to use plain English, and
+say, _a_ day, _a_ man, _a_ pound, _a_ ton, etc. _Per_ is correct before
+Latin nouns only; as, per annum, per diem, per cent., etc.
+
+PERFORM. "She _performs_ on the piano beautifully." In how much better
+taste it is to say simply, "She _plays_ the piano well," or, more
+superlatively, "exceedingly well," or "admirably"! If we talk about
+_performing_ on musical instruments, to be consistent, we should call
+those who _perform_, piano-performers, cornet-performers,
+violin-performers, and so on.
+
+PERPETUALLY. This word is sometimes misused for _continually_. Dr.
+William Mathews, in his "Words, their Use and Abuse," says: "The Irish
+are _perpetually_ using _shall_ for _will_." _Perpetual_ means never
+ceasing, continuing without intermission, uninterrupted; while
+_continual_ means that which is constantly renewed and recurring with
+perhaps frequent stops and interruptions. As the Irish do something
+_besides_ misuse _shall_, the Doctor should have said that they
+_continually_ use _shall_ for _will_. I might perhaps venture to
+intimate that _perpetually_ is likewise misused in the following
+sentence, which I copy from the "London Queen," if I were not conscious
+that the monster who can write and print such a sentence would not
+hesitate to cable a thunderbolt at an offender on the slightest
+provocation. Judge, if my fears are groundless: "But some few people
+contract the ugly habit of making use of these expressions unconsciously
+and continuously, _perpetually_ interlarding their conversation with
+them."
+
+PERSON. See PARTY; also, INDIVIDUAL.
+
+PERSONALTY. This word does not, as some persons think, mean the articles
+worn on one's person. It is properly a law term, and means _personal
+property_. "There is but one case on record of a peer of England leaving
+over $7,500,000 personalty."
+
+PERSONIFICATION. That rhetorical figure which attributes sex, life, or
+action to inanimate objects, or ascribes to objects and brutes the acts
+and qualities of rational beings, is called _personification_ or
+_prosopopœia_.
+
+"The mountains _sing together_, the hills rejoice and _clap their
+hands_." "The worm, _aware_ of his intent, _harangued_ him thus."
+
+    "See, _Winter_ comes to _rule_ the varied year,
+    _Sullen_ and _sad_ with all his rising train."--Thomson.
+
+    "So saying, her rash hand, in evil hour,
+    Forth reaching to the fruit, she plucked, she ate!
+    _Earth felt the wound; and Nature from her seat,
+    Sighing through all her works, gave signs of woe,
+    That all was lost._"--Milton.
+
+    "War and Love are strange compeers.
+    War sheds blood, and Love sheds tears;
+    War has swords, and Love has darts;
+    War breaks heads, and Love breaks hearts."
+
+"Levity is often less foolish and gravity less wise than each of them
+appears."
+
+"The English language, by reserving the distinction of gender for living
+beings that have sex, gives especial scope for personification. The
+highest form of personification should be used seldom, and only when
+justified by the presence of strong feeling."--Bain.
+
+    "Knowledge and wisdom, far from being one,
+    Have ofttimes no connection. Knowledge dwells
+    In heads replete with thoughts of other men;
+    Wisdom in minds attentive to their own.
+    Knowledge is proud that he has learned so much;
+    Wisdom is humble that he knows no more."--Cowper.
+
+PHENOMENON. Plural, _phenomena_.
+
+PLEAD. The imperfect tense and the perfect participle of the verb _to
+plead_ are both _pleaded_ and not _plead_. "He _pleaded_ not guilty."
+"You should have _pleaded_ your cause with more fervor."
+
+PLENTY. In Worcester's Dictionary we find the following note: "_Plenty_
+is much used colloquially as an adjective, in the sense of _plentiful_,
+both in this country and in England; and this use is supported by
+respectable authorities, though it is condemned by various critics.
+Johnson says: 'It is used barbarously, I think, for _plentiful_'; and
+Dr. Campbell, in his 'Philosophy of Rhetoric,' says: '_Plenty_ for
+_plentiful_ appears to me so gross a vulgarism that I should not have
+thought it worthy of a place here if I had not sometimes found it in
+works of considerable merit.'" We should say, then, that money is
+_plentiful_, and not that it is _plenty_.
+
+PLEONASM. Redundancy or pleonasm is the use of more words than are
+necessary to express the thought clearly. "They returned _back again_ to
+the _same_ city _from_ whence they came _forth_": the five words in
+italics are _redundant_ or _pleonastic_. "The different departments of
+science and of art _mutually_ reflect light _on each other_": either of
+the expressions in italics embodies the whole idea. "The _universal_
+opinion of _all_ men" is a pleonastic expression often heard. "I wrote
+you _a letter_ yesterday": here _a letter_ is redundant.
+
+Redundancy is _sometimes_ permissible for the surer conveyance of
+meaning, for emphasis, and in the language of poetic embellishment.
+
+POLITE. This word is much used by persons of doubtful culture, where
+those of the better sort use the word _kind_. We accept _kind_, not
+_polite_ invitations; and, when any one has been obliging, we tell him
+that he has been _kind_; and, when an interviewing reporter tells us of
+his having met with a _polite_ reception, we may be sure that the person
+by whom he has been received deserves well for his considerate kindness.
+"I thank you and Mrs. Pope for my _kind_ reception."--Atterbury.
+
+PORTION. This word is often incorrectly used for _part_. A _portion_ is
+properly a part assigned, allotted, set aside for a special purpose; a
+share, a division. The verb _to portion_ means to divide, to parcel, to
+endow. We ask, therefore, "In what _part_ [not, in what _portion_] of
+the country, state, county, town, or street do you live?"--or, if we
+prefer grandiloquence to correctness, _reside_. In the sentence, "A
+large _portion_ of the land is unfilled," the right word would be
+either _part_ or _proportion_, according to the intention of the writer.
+
+POSTED. A word very much and very inelegantly used for _informed_. Such
+expressions as, "I will _post_ you," "I must _post_ myself up," "If I
+had been better _posted_," and the like, are, at the best, but one
+remove from slang.
+
+PREDICATE. This word is often very incorrectly used in the sense of _to
+base_; as, "He _predicates_ his opinion on insufficient data." Then we
+sometimes hear people talk about predicating an action upon certain
+information or upon somebody's statement. To predicate means primarily
+_to speak before_, and has come to be properly used in the sense of
+_assumed_ or believed to be the consequence of. Examples: "Contentment
+is _predicated_ of virtue"; "Good health may be _predicated_ of a good
+constitution." He who is not very sure that he uses the word correctly
+would do better not to use it at all.
+
+PREJUDICE--PREPOSSESS. Both these words mean, to incline in one
+direction or the other for some reason not founded in justice; but by
+common consent _prejudice_ has come to be used in an unfavorable sense,
+and _prepossess_ in a favorable one. Thus, we say, "He is _prejudiced_
+against him," and "He is _prepossessed_ in his favor." We sometimes hear
+the expression, "He is _prejudiced_ in his favor," but this can not be
+accounted a good use of the word.
+
+PREPOSITIONS. The errors made in the use of the prepositions are very
+numerous. "The indolent child is one who [that?] has a strong aversion
+_from_ action of any sort."--Graham's "English Synonymes," p. 236. The
+prevailing and best modern usage is in favor of _to_ instead of _from_
+after _averse_ and _aversion_, and before the object. "Clearness ...
+enables the reader to see thoughts without noticing the language _with_
+which they are clothed."--Townsend's "Art of Speech." We clothe thoughts
+_in_ language. "Shakespeare ... and the Bible are ... models _for_ the
+English-speaking tongue."--Ibid. If this means models of English, then
+it should be _of_; but if it means models for English organs of speech
+to practice on, then it should be _for_; or if it means models to model
+English tongues after, then also it should be _for_. "If the resemblance
+is too faint, the mind is fatigued _while_ attempting to trace the
+analogies." "Aristotle is in error _while_ thus describing
+governments."--Ibid. Here we have two examples, not of the misuse of the
+preposition, but of the erroneous use of the adverb _while_ instead of
+the preposition _in_. "For my part I can not think that Shelley's
+poetry, except _by_ snatches and fragments, has the value of the good
+work of Wordsworth or Byron."--Matthew Arnold. Should be, "except _in_
+snatches." "Taxes with us are collected nearly [almost] solely _from_
+real and personal estate."--"Appletons' Journal." Taxes are levied _on_
+estates and collected _from_ the owners.
+
+"If I am not commended _for_ the beauty of my works, I may hope to be
+pardoned for their brevity." Cobbett comments on this sentence as
+follows: "We may commend him _for_ the beauty of his works, and we may
+_pardon_ him _for_ their brevity, if we deem the brevity _a fault_; but
+this is not what he means. He means that, at any rate, he shall have the
+_merit_ of brevity. 'If I am not commended for the beauty of my works, I
+may hope to be pardoned _on account of_ their brevity.' This is what the
+Doctor meant; but this would have marred a little the antithesis: it
+would have unsettled a little of the balance of that _seesaw_ in which
+Dr. Johnson so much delighted, and which, falling into the hands of
+novel-writers and of members of Parliament, has, by moving unencumbered
+with any of the Doctor's reason or sense, lulled so many thousands
+asleep! Dr. Johnson created a race of writers and speakers. 'Mr.
+Speaker, that the state of the nation is very critical, all men will
+allow; but that it is wholly desperate, few will believe.' When you hear
+or see a sentence like this, be sure that the person who speaks or
+writes it has been reading Dr. Johnson, or some of his imitators. But,
+observe, these imitators go no further than the frame of the sentences.
+They, in general, take care not to imitate the Doctor in knowledge and
+reasoning."
+
+The rhetoricians would have us avoid such forms of expression as, "The
+boy went _to_ and asked the advice _of_ his teacher"; "I called _on_ and
+had a conversation _with_ my brother."
+
+Very often the preposition is not repeated in a sentence, when it should
+be. We say properly, "He comes from Ohio or _from_ Indiana"; or, "He
+comes _either_ from Ohio or Indiana."
+
+PREPOSSESS. See PREJUDICE.
+
+PRESENT--INTRODUCE. Few errors are more common, especially among those
+who are always straining to be fine, than that of using _present_, in
+the social world, instead of _introduce_. _Present_ means to place in
+the presence of a superior; _introduce_, to bring to be acquainted. A
+person is presented at court, and on an official occasion to our
+President; but persons who are unknown to each other are _introduced_ by
+a common acquaintance. And in these introductions, it is the younger who
+is introduced to the older; the lower to the higher in place or social
+position; the gentleman to the lady. A lady should say, as a rule, that
+Mr. Blank was introduced to her, not that she was introduced to Mr.
+Blank.
+
+PRESUMPTIVE. This word is sometimes misused by the careless for
+_presumptuous_.
+
+PREVENTIVE. A useless and unwarranted syllable is sometimes added to
+this word--_preventative_.
+
+PREVIOUS. This adjective is much used in an adverbial sense; thus,
+"_Previous_ to my return," etc. Until _previous_ is recognized as an
+adverb, if we would speak grammatically, we must say, "_Previously_ to
+my return." "_Previously_ to my leaving England, I called on his
+lordship."
+
+PROCURE. This is a word much used by people who strive to be fine.
+"Where did you _get_ it?" with them is, "Where did you _procure_ it?"
+
+PROFANITY. The extent to which some men habitually interlard their talk
+with oaths is disgusting even to many who, on occasion, do not
+themselves hesitate to give expression to their feelings in oaths portly
+and unctuous. If these fellows could be made to know how offensive to
+decency they make themselves, they would, perhaps, be less profane.
+
+PROMISE. This word is sometimes very improperly used for _assure_; thus,
+"I _promise_ you I was very much astonished."
+
+PRONOUNS OF THE FIRST PERSON. "The ordinary uses of 'I' and 'we,' as the
+singular and plural pronouns of the first person, would appear to be
+above all ambiguity, uncertainty, or dispute. Yet when we consider the
+force of the plural 'we,' we are met with a contradiction; for, as a
+rule, only one person can speak at the same time to the same audience.
+It is only by some exceptional arrangement, or some latitude or license
+of expression, that several persons can be conjoint speakers. For
+example, a plurality may sing together in chorus, and may join in the
+responses at church, or in the simultaneous repetition of the Lord's
+Prayer or the Creed. Again, one person may be the authorized spokesman
+in delivering a judgment or opinion held by a number of persons in
+common. Finally, in written compositions, the 'we' is not unsuitable,
+because a plurality of persons may append their names to a document.
+
+"A speaker using 'we' may speak for himself and one or more others;
+commonly he stands forward as the representative of a class, more or
+less comprehensive. 'As soon as my companion and I had entered the
+field, _we_ saw a man coming toward _us_'; '_we_ like _our_ new curate';
+'you do _us_ poets the greatest injustice'; '_we_ must see to the
+efficiency of _our_ forces.' The widest use of the pronoun will be
+mentioned presently.
+
+"'We' is used for 'I' in the decrees of persons in authority; as when
+King Lear says:
+
+        'Know that _we_ have divided
+    In three _our_ kingdom.'
+
+By the fiction of plurality a veil of modesty is thrown over the
+assumption of vast superiority over human beings generally. Or, 'we' may
+be regarded as an official form whereby the speaker personally is
+magnified or enabled to rise to the dignity of the occasion.
+
+"The editorial 'we' is to be understood on the same principle. An author
+using 'we' appears as if he were not alone, but sharing with other
+persons the responsibility of his views.
+
+"This representative position is at its utmost stretch in the practice
+of using 'we' for human beings generally; as in discoursing on the laws
+of human nature. The preacher, the novelist, or the philosopher, in
+dwelling upon the peculiarity of our common constitution, being himself
+an example of what he is speaking of, associates the rest of mankind
+with him, and speaks collectively by means of 'we.' '_We_ are weak and
+fallible'; '_we_ are of yesterday'; '_we_ are doomed to dissolution.'
+'Here have _we_ no continuing city, but _we_ seek one to come.'
+
+"It is not unfrequent to have in one sentence, or in close proximity,
+both the editorial and the representative meaning, the effect being
+ambiguity and confusion. 'Let _us_ [the author] now consider why _we_
+[humanity generally] overrate distant good.' In such a case the author
+should fall back upon the singular for himself--'_I_ will now
+consider--.' '_We_ [speaker] think _we_ [himself and hearers together]
+should come to the conclusion.' Say, either '_I_ think,' or '_you_
+would.'
+
+"The following extract from Butler exemplifies a similar confusion:
+'Suppose _we_ [representative] are capable of happiness and of misery in
+degrees equally intense and extreme, yet _we_ [rep.] are capable of the
+latter for a much longer time, beyond all comparison. _We_ [change of
+subject to a limited class] see men in the tortures of pain--. Such is
+_our_ [back to representative] make that anything may become the
+instrument of pain and sorrow to _us_.' The 'we' at the commencement of
+the second sentence--'_We_ see men in the tortures'--could be
+advantageously changed to 'you,' or the passive construction could be
+substituted; the remaining _we_'s would then be consistently
+representative.
+
+"From the greater emphasis of singularity, energetic speakers and
+writers sometimes use 'I' as representative of mankind at large. Thus:
+'The current impressions received through the senses are not voluntary
+in origin. What _I_ see in walking is seen because _I_ have an organ of
+vision.' The question of general moral obligation is forcibly stated by
+Paley in the individual form, 'Why am _I_ obliged to keep my word?' It
+is sometimes well to confine the attention of the hearer or reader to
+his own relation to the matter under consideration, more especially in
+difficult or non-popular argument or exposition. The speaker, by using
+'I,' does the action himself, or makes himself the example, the hearer
+being expected to put himself in the same position."--Bain's
+"Composition Grammar."
+
+PRONOUNS OF THE SECOND PERSON. "Anomalous usages have sprung up in
+connection with these pronouns. The plural form has almost wholly
+superseded the singular; a usage more than five centuries old.[24]
+
+"The motive is courtesy. The singling out of one person for address is
+supposed to be a liberty or an excess of familiarity; and the effect is
+softened or diluted by the fiction of taking in others. If our address
+is uncomplimentary, the sting is lessened by the plural form; and if the
+reverse, the shock to modesty is not so great. This is a refinement that
+was unknown to the ancient languages. The orators of Greece delighted in
+the strong, pointed, personal appeal implied in the singular 'thou.' In
+modern German, 'thou' (_du_) is the address of familiarity and intimacy;
+while the ordinary pronoun is the curiously indirect 'they' (_Sie_). On
+solemn occasions, we may revert to 'thou.' Cato, in his meditative
+soliloquy on reading Plato's views on the immortality of the soul before
+killing himself, says: 'Plato, _thou_ reasonest well.' So in the
+Commandments, 'thou' addresses to each individual an unavoidable appeal:
+'_Thou_ shall not----.' But our ordinary means of making the personal
+appeal is, 'you, _sir_,' 'you, _madam_,' 'my _Lord_, you----,' etc.; we
+reserve 'thou' for the special case of addressing the Deity. The
+application of the motive of courtesy is here reversed; it would be
+irreverent to merge this vast personality in a promiscuous assemblage.
+
+"'You' is not unfrequently employed, like 'we,' as a representative
+pronoun. The action is represented with great vividness, when the person
+or persons addressed may be put forward as the performers: 'There is
+such an echo among the old ruins, and vaults, that if _you_ stamp a
+little louder than ordinary, _you_ hear the sound repeated'; 'Some
+practice is required to see these animals in the thick forest, even when
+_you_ hear them close by _you_.'
+
+"There should not be a mixture of 'thou' and 'you' in the same passage.
+Thus, Thackeray (Adventures of Philip): 'So, as _thy_ sun rises, friend,
+over the humble house-tops round about _your_ home, shall _you_ wake
+many and many a day to duty and labor.' So, Cooper (Water-Witch):
+'_Thou_ hast both master and mistress? _You_ have told us of the latter,
+but we would know something of the former. Who is _thy_ master?'
+Shakespeare, Scott, and others might also be quoted.
+
+"'Ye' and 'you' were at one time strictly distinguished as different
+cases; 'ye' was nominative, 'you' objective (dative or accusative). But
+the Elizabethan dramatists confounded the forms irredeemably; and 'you'
+has gradually ousted 'ye' from ordinary use. 'Ye' is restricted to the
+expression of strong feeling, and in this employment occurs chiefly in
+the poets."--Bain's "Composition Grammar."
+
+PROOF. This word is much and very improperly used for _evidence_, which
+is only the medium of _proof_, _proof_ being the effect of _evidence_.
+"What _evidence_ have you to offer in _proof_ of the truth of your
+statement?" See also EVIDENCE.
+
+PROPOSE--PURPOSE. Writers and speakers often fail to discriminate
+properly between the respective meanings of these two verbs. _Propose_,
+correctly used, means, to put forward or to offer for _the
+consideration of others_; hence, _a proposal_ is a scheme or design
+offered for acceptance or consideration, a proposition. _Purpose_ means,
+to intend, to design, to resolve; hence, _a purpose_ is an intention, an
+aim, that which one sets _before one's self_. Examples: "What do you
+_purpose_ doing in the matter?" "What do you _propose_ that we shall do
+in the matter?" "I will do" means "I _purpose_ doing, or to do." "I
+_purpose_ to write a history of England from the accession of King James
+the Second down to a time which is within the memory of men still
+living."--Macaulay. It will be observed that Macaulay says, "I purpose
+_to write_" and not, "I purpose _writing_," using the verb in the
+infinitive rather than in the participial form. "On which he _purposed_
+to mount one of his little guns." See INFINITIVE.
+
+PROPOSITION. This word is often used when _proposal_ would be better,
+for the reason that _proposal_ has but one meaning, and is shorter by
+one syllable. "He demonstrated the _proposition_ of Euclid, and rejected
+the _proposal_ of his friend."
+
+PROSAIST. Dr. Hall is of opinion that this is a word we shall do well to
+encourage. It is used by good writers.
+
+PROVEN. This form for the past participle of the verb _to prove_ is said
+to be a Scotticism. It is not used by careful writers and speakers. The
+correct form is _proved_.
+
+PROVIDING. The present participle of the verb _to provide_ is sometimes
+vulgarly used for the conjunction _provided_, as in this sentence from
+the "London Queen": "Society may be congratulated, ... _providing_
+that," etc.
+
+PROVOKE. See AGGRAVATE.
+
+PUNCTUATION. The importance of punctuation can not be overestimated; it
+not only helps to make plain the meaning of what one writes, but it may
+prevent one's being misconstrued. Though no two writers could be found
+who punctuate just alike, still in the main those who pay attention to
+the art put in their stops in essentially the same manner. The
+difference that punctuation may make in the meaning of language is well
+illustrated by the following anecdote:
+
+At Ramessa there lived a benevolent and hospitable prior, who caused
+these lines to be painted over his door:
+
+    "Be open evermore,
+    O thou my door!
+    To none be shut--to honest or to poor!"
+
+In time the good prior was succeeded by a man as selfish as his
+predecessor was generous. The lines over the door of the priory were
+allowed to remain; one stop, however, was altered, which made them read
+thus:
+
+    "Be open evermore,
+    O thou my door!
+    To none--be shut to honest or to poor!"
+
+He punctuates best who makes his punctuation contribute most to the
+clear expression of his thought; and that construction is best that has
+least need of being punctuated.
+
+  THE COMMA.--The chief difference in the punctuation of different
+  writers is usually in their use of the comma, in regard to which there
+  is a good deal of latitude; much is left to individual taste. Nowadays
+  the best practice uses it sparingly. An idea of the extent to which
+  opinions differ with regard to the use of the comma may be formed from
+  the following excerpt from a paper prepared for private use:
+
+  "In the following examples, gathered from various sources--chiefly
+  from standard books--the superfluous commas are inclosed in
+  parentheses:
+
+  "1. 'It remains(,) perhaps(,) to be said(,) that, if any lesson at
+  all(,) as to these delicate matters(,) is needed(,) in this period, it
+  is not so much a lesson,' etc. 2. 'The obedience is not due to the
+  power of a right authority, but to the spirit of fear, and(,)
+  therefore(,) is(,) in reality(,) no obedience at all.' 3. 'The patriot
+  disturbances in Canada ... awakened deep interest among the people of
+  the United States(,) who lived adjacent to the frontier.' 4.
+  'Observers(,) who have recently investigated this point(,) do not all
+  agree,' etc. 5. 'The wind did(,) in an instant(,) what man and steam
+  together had failed to do in hours.' 6. 'All the cabin passengers(,)
+  situated beyond the center of the boat(,) were saved.' 7. 'No other
+  writer has depicted(,) with so much art or so much accuracy(,) the
+  habits, the manners,' etc. 8. 'If it shall give satisfaction to those
+  who have(,) in any way(,) befriended it, the author will feel,' etc.
+  9. 'Formed(,) or consisting of(,) clay.' 10. 'The subject [witchcraft]
+  grew interesting; and(,) to examine Sarah Cloyce and Elizabeth
+  Proctor, the deputy-governor(,) and five other magistrates(,) went to
+  Salem.' 11. 'The Lusitanians(,) who had not left their home(,) rose as
+  a man,' etc. 12. 'Vague reports ... had preceded him to Washington,
+  and his Mississippi friends(,) who chanced to be at the capital(,)
+  were not backward to make their boast of him.' 13. 'Our faith has
+  acquired a new vigor(,) and a clearer vision.' 14. 'In 1819(,) he
+  removed to Cambridge.' 15. 'Doré was born at Strasburg(,) in 1832, and
+  labors,' etc. 16. 'We should never apply dry compresses, charpie, or
+  wadding(,) to the wound.' 17. '--to stand idle, to look, act, or
+  think(,) in a leisurely way.' 18. '--portraits taken from the farmers,
+  schoolmasters, and peasantry(,) of the neighborhood.' 19. '--gladly
+  welcomed painters of Flanders, Holland, and Spain(,) to their
+  shores.'
+
+  "In all these cases, the clauses between or following the inclosed
+  commas are so closely connected grammatically with the immediately
+  preceding words or phrases, that they should be read without a
+  perceptible pause, or with only a slight one for breath, without
+  change of voice. Some of the commas would grossly pervert the meaning
+  if strictly construed. Thus, from No. 3 it would appear that the
+  people of the United States in general lived adjacent to the frontier;
+  from No. 4, that all observers have recently investigated the point in
+  question; from No. 6, that all the cabin passengers were so situated
+  that they were saved, whereas it is meant that only a certain small
+  proportion of them were saved; from No. 10 (Bancroft), that somebody
+  whose name is accidentally omitted went to Salem 'to examine Sarah
+  Cloyce and Elizabeth Proctor, the deputy-governor, and five other
+  magistrates'; from No. 11, that none of the Lusitanians had left their
+  home, whereas it was the slaughter by the Romans of a great number of
+  them who _had_ left their home that caused the rising.
+
+  "Commas are frequently omitted, and in certain positions very
+  generally, where the sense and correct reading require a pause. In the
+  following examples, such commas, omitted in the works from which they
+  were taken, are inclosed in brackets:
+
+  "1. 'The modes of thought[,] and the types of character which those
+  modes produce[,] are essentially and universally transformed.' 2.
+  'Taken by itself[,] this doctrine could have no effect whatever;
+  indeed[,] it would amount to nothing but a verbal proposition.' 3.
+  'Far below[,] the little stream of the Oder foamed over the rocks.' 4.
+  'When the day returned[,] the professor, the artist[,] and I rowed to
+  within a hundred yards of the shore.' 5. 'Proceeding into the interior
+  of India[,] they passed through Belgaum.' 6. 'If Loring is defeated
+  in the Sixth District[,] it can be borne.'
+
+  "In No. 3, the reader naturally enunciates 'the little stream of the
+  Oder' as in the objective case after 'below'; but there he comes to a
+  predicate which compels him to go back and read differently. In No. 4,
+  it appears that 'the day returned the professor,' and then 'the artist
+  and I rowed,' etc."
+
+  All clauses should generally be isolated by commas; where, however,
+  the connection is very close or the clause is very short, no point may
+  be necessary. "But his pride is greater than his ignorance, and what
+  he wants in knowledge he supplies by sufficiency." "A man of polite
+  imagination can converse with a picture, and find an agreeable
+  companion in a statue." "Though he slay me, yet will I trust him."
+  "The prince, his father being dead, succeeded." "To confess the truth,
+  I was much at fault." "As the heart panteth after the water-brooks, so
+  panteth my soul after thee." "Where the bee sucks, there suck I." "His
+  father dying, he succeeded to the estate." "The little that is known,
+  and the circumstance that little is known, must be considered as
+  honorable to him."
+
+  The comma is used before and after a phrase when coördinating and not
+  restrictive. "The jury, having retired for half an hour, brought in a
+  verdict." "The stranger, unwilling to obtrude himself on our notice,
+  left in the morning." "Rome, the city of the Emperors, became the city
+  of the Popes." "His stories, which made everybody laugh, were often
+  made to order." "He did not come, which I greatly regret." "The
+  younger, who was yet a boy, had nothing striking in his appearance."
+  "They passed the cup to the stranger, who drank heartily." "Peace at
+  any price, which these orators seem to advocate, means war at any
+  cost." "Sailors, who are generally superstitious, say it is unlucky to
+  embark on Friday."
+
+  Adverbs and short phrases, _when they break the connection_, should be
+  between commas. Some of the most common words and phrases so used are
+  the following: Also, too, there, indeed, perhaps, surely, moreover,
+  likewise, however, finally, namely, therefore, apparently, meanwhile,
+  consequently, unquestionably, accordingly, notwithstanding, in truth,
+  in fact, in short, in general, in reality, no doubt, of course, as it
+  were, at all events, to be brief, to be sure, now and then, on the
+  contrary, in a word, by chance, in that case, in the mean time, for
+  the most part. "History, in a word, is replete with moral lessons."
+  "As an orator, however, he was not great." "There is, remember, a
+  limit at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue." "Our civilization,
+  therefore, is not an unmixed good." "This, I grant you, is not of
+  great importance."
+
+  If, however, the adverb does not break the connection, but readily
+  coalesces with the rest of the sentence, the commas are omitted.
+  "Morning will come at last, however dark the night may be." "We then
+  proceeded on our way." "Our civilization is therefore not an unmixed
+  good." "Patience, I say; your mind perhaps may change."
+
+  Adverbial phrases and clauses beginning a sentence are set off by
+  commas. "In truth, I could not tell." "To sum up, the matter is this."
+  "Everything being ready, they set out." "By looking a little deeper,
+  the reason will be found." "Finally, let me sum up the argument." "If
+  the premises were admitted, I should deny the conclusion." "Where your
+  treasure is, there will your heart be also."
+
+  Words used in apposition should be isolated by commas. "Newton, the
+  great mathematician, was very modest." "And he, their prince, shall
+  rank among my peers." In such sentences, however, as, "The
+  mathematician Newton was very modest," and "The Emperor Napoleon was a
+  great soldier," commas are not used.
+
+  The name or designation of a person addressed is isolated by commas.
+  "It touches you, my lord, as well as me." "John, come here." "Mr.
+  President, my object is peace." "Tell me, boy, where do you live?"
+  "Yes, sir, I will do as you say." "Mr. Brown, what is your number?"
+
+  Pairs of words.--"Old and young, rich and poor, wise and foolish, were
+  involved." "Sink or swim, live or die, survive or perish, I give my
+  hand and heart to this vote." "Interest and ambition, honor and shame,
+  friendship and enmity, gratitude and revenge, are the prime movers in
+  public transactions."
+
+  A restrictive clause is not separated by a comma from the noun. "Every
+  one must love a boy who [that] is attentive and docile." "He preaches
+  sublimely who [that] lives a holy life." "The things which [that] are
+  seen are temporal." "A king depending on the support of his subjects
+  can not rashly go to war." "The sailor who [that] is not superstitious
+  will embark any day."
+
+  The comma is used after adjectives, nouns, and verbs in sentences like
+  the following:
+
+      "Are all thy conquests, glories, triumphs, spoils
+      Shrunk to this little measure?"
+
+      "He fills, he bounds, connects and equals all."
+
+      "Who to the enraptured heart, and ear, and eye
+      Teach beauty, virtue, truth, and love, and melody."[25]
+
+  "He rewarded his friends, chastised his foes, set Justice on her seat,
+  and made his conquest secure."
+
+  The comma is used to separate adjectives in opposition, but closely
+  connected. "Though deep, yet clear; though gentle, yet not dull."
+  "Liberal, not lavish, is kind Nature's hand." "Though black, yet
+  comely; and though rash, benign."
+
+  After a nominative, where the verb is understood. "To err is human; to
+  forgive, divine." "A wise man seeks to shine in himself; a fool, in
+  others." "Conversation makes a ready man; writing, an exact man;
+  reading, a full man."
+
+  A long subject is often separated from the predicate by a comma. "Any
+  one that refuses to earn an honest livelihood, is not an object of
+  charity." "The circumstance of his being unprepared to adopt immediate
+  and decisive measures, was represented to the Government." "That he
+  had persistently disregarded every warning and persevered in his
+  reckless course, had not yet undermined his credit with his dupes."
+  "That the work of forming and perfecting the character is difficult,
+  is generally allowed."
+
+  In a series of adjectives that precede their noun, a comma is placed
+  after each except the last; there usage omits the point. "A beautiful,
+  tall, willowy, sprightly girl." "A quick, brilliant, studious, learned
+  man."[26]
+
+  A comma is placed between short members of compound sentences,
+  connected by _and_, _but_, _for_, _nor_, _or_, _because_, _whereas_,
+  _that_ expressing purpose (so that, in order that), and other
+  conjunctions. "Be virtuous, that you may be respected." "Love not
+  sleep, lest you come to poverty." "Man proposes, but God disposes."
+
+  A comma must not be placed before _that_ except when it is equivalent
+  to _in order that_. "He says that he will be here."
+
+  A comma must not be placed before _and_ when it connects two words
+  only. "Time and tide wait for no man." "A rich and prosperous people."
+  "Plain and honest truth wants no artificial covering."
+
+  A comma is sometimes necessary to prevent ambiguity. "He who pursues
+  pleasure only defeats the object of his creation." Without a comma
+  before or after _only_, the meaning of this sentence is doubtful.
+
+  The following sentences present some miscellaneous examples of the use
+  of the comma by writers on punctuation: "Industry, as well as genius,
+  is essential to the production of great works." "Prosperity is secured
+  to a state, not by the acquisition of territory or riches, but by the
+  encouragement of industry." "Your manners are affable, and, for the
+  most part, pleasing."[27]
+
+  "However fairly a bad man may appear to act, we distrust him." "Why,
+  this is rank injustice." "Well, follow the dictates of your
+  inclination." "The comma may be omitted in the case of _too_, _also_,
+  _therefore_, and _perhaps_, when introduced so as not to interfere
+  with the harmonious flow of the period; and, particularly, when the
+  sentence is short."[28] "Robert Horton, M. D., F. R. S." "To those who
+  labor, sleep is doubly pleasant"; "Sleep is doubly pleasant to those
+  who labor." "Those who persevere, succeed." "To be overlooked,
+  slighted, and neglected; to be misunderstood, misrepresented, and
+  slandered; to be trampled under foot by the envious, the ignorant, and
+  the vile; to be crushed by foes, and to be distrusted and betrayed
+  even by friends--such is too often the fate of genius." "She is tall,
+  though not so handsome as her sister." "Verily, verily, I say unto
+  you." "Whatever is, is right." "What is foreordained to be, will be."
+  "The Emperor Augustus was a patron of the fine arts." "Augustus, the
+  Emperor, was a patron of the fine arts." "United, we stand; divided,
+  we fall." "God said, Let there be light." "July 21, 1881." "President
+  Garfield was shot, Saturday morning, July 2, 1881; he died, Monday
+  night, Sept. 19, 1881." "I am, sir, very respectfully, your obedient
+  servant, John Jones." "New York, August, 1881." "Room 20, Equitable
+  Building, Broadway, New York."
+
+  "_When you are in doubt as to the propriety of inserting commas, omit
+  them_; IT IS BETTER TO HAVE TOO FEW THAN TOO MANY."--Quackenbos.
+
+  THE SEMICOLON.--Reasons are preceded by semicolons; "Economy is no
+  disgrace; for it is better to live on a little than to outlive a great
+  deal." Clauses in opposition are separated by a semicolon when the
+  second is introduced by an adversative: "Straws swim at the surface;
+  but pearls lie at the bottom"; "Lying lips are an abomination to the
+  Lord; but they that deal truly are his delight." Without the
+  adversative, the colon is to be preferred: "Prosperity showeth vice:
+  adversity, virtue." The great divisions of a sentence must be pointed
+  with a semicolon when the minor divisions are pointed with commas:
+  "Mirth should be the embroidery of conversation, not the web; and wit
+  the ornament of the mind, not the furniture." The things enumerated
+  must be separated by semicolons, when the enunciation of particulars
+  is preceded by a colon: "The value of a maxim depends on four things:
+  the correctness of the principle it embodies; the subject to which it
+  relates; the extent of its application; and the ease with which it may
+  be practically carried out." When _as_ introduces an example, it is
+  preceded by a semicolon. When several successive clauses have a common
+  connection with a preceding or following clause, they are separated by
+  semicolons; as, "Children, as they gamboled on the beach; reapers, as
+  they gathered the harvest; mowers, as they rested from using the
+  scythe; mothers, as they busied themselves about the household--were
+  victims to an enemy, who disappeared the moment a blow was struck."
+  "Reason as we may, it is impossible not to read in such a fate much
+  that we know not how to interpret; much of provocation to cruel deeds
+  and deep resentment; much of apology for wrong and perfidy; much of
+  doubt and misgiving as to the past; much of painful recollections;
+  much of dark foreboding." "Philosophers assert that Nature is
+  unlimited; that her treasures are endless; that the increase of
+  knowledge will never cease."
+
+  THE COLON.--This point is less used now than formerly: its place is
+  supplied by the period, the semicolon, or the dash; and sometimes,
+  even by the comma. The colon is used very differently by different
+  writers. "He was heard to say, 'I have done with this world.'" Some
+  writers would put a colon, some a comma, after _say_. "When the quoted
+  passage is brought in without any introductory word, if short," says
+  Quackenbos, "it is generally preceded by a comma; if long, by a colon;
+  as, 'A simpleton, meeting a philosopher, asked him, "What affords wise
+  men the greatest pleasure?" Turning on his heel, the sage replied,
+  "To get rid of fools."'"
+
+  Formal enumerations of particulars, and direct quotations, when
+  introduced by such phrases as _in these words_, _as follows_, _the
+  following_, _namely_, _this_, _these_, _thus_, etc., are properly
+  preceded by a colon. "We hold these truths to be self-evident: that
+  all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with
+  certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and
+  the pursuit of happiness." "Lord Bacon has summed up the whole matter
+  in the following words: 'A little philosophy inclineth men's minds to
+  atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds to religion.'"
+  "The human family is composed of five races: first, the Caucasian;
+  second, the Mongolian; third, the," etc.
+
+      "All were attentive to the godlike man
+      When from his lofty couch he thus began:
+      'Great queen,'" etc.--Dryden.
+
+  When the quotation, or other matter, begins a new paragraph, the colon
+  is, by many writers, followed with a dash; as, "The cloth being
+  removed, the President rose and said:--
+
+      "'Ladies and gentlemen, we are,'" etc.
+
+  The colon is used to mark the greater breaks in sentences, when the
+  lesser breaks are marked by semicolons. "You have called yourself an
+  atom in the universe; you have said that you are but an insect in the
+  solar blaze: is your present pride consistent with these professions?"
+  "A clause is either independent or dependent: independent, if it forms
+  an assertion by itself; dependent, if it enters into some other clause
+  with the value of a part of speech." A colon is sometimes used instead
+  of a period to separate two short sentences, which are closely
+  connected. "Never flatter people: leave that to such as mean to
+  betray them." "Some things we can, and others we can not do: we can
+  walk, but we can not fly."
+
+  THE PERIOD.--Complete sentences are always followed either by a
+  period, or by an exclamation or an interrogation point.[29]
+
+  The period is also used after abbreviations; as, R. D. Van Nostrand,
+  St. Louis, Mo.; Jno. B. Morris, M. D., F. R. S., London, Eng.; Jas. W.
+  Wallack, Jr., New York City, N. Y.; Jas. B. Roberts, Elocutionist,
+  Phila., Pa.
+
+  INTERROGATION-POINT.--This point is used after questions put by the
+  writer, and after questions reported directly. "What can I do for
+  you?" "Where are you going?" "What do you say?" cried the General.
+  "The child still lives?" It should not be used when the question is
+  reported indirectly. "He asked me where I was going." "The Judge asked
+  the witness if he believed the man to be guilty."
+
+  EXCLAMATION-POINT.--This mark is placed after interjections, after
+  sentences and clauses of sentences of passionate import, and after
+  solemn invocations and addresses. "Zounds! the man's in earnest."
+  "Pshaw! what can we do?" "Bah! what's that to me?" "Indeed! then I
+  must look to it." "Look, my lord, it comes!" "Rest, rest, perturbed
+  spirit!" "O heat, dry up my brains!" "Dear maid, kind sister, sweet
+  Ophelia!" "While in this part of the country, I once more
+  revisited--and, alas, with what melancholy presentiments!--the home of
+  my youth." "O rose of May!" "Oh, from this time forth, my thoughts be
+  bloody or be nothing worth!" "O heavens! die two months ago, and not
+  forgotten yet?"
+
+      "Night, sable goddess! from her ebon throne,
+      In rayless majesty now stretches forth
+      Her leaden scepter o'er a slumbering world.
+      Silence, how dead! and darkness, how profound!"--Young.
+
+      "Hail, holy light! offspring of heaven just born!"--Milton.
+
+      "But thou, O Hope! with eyes so fair,
+      What was thy delighted measure?"--Collins.
+
+  It will be observed that the interjection O is an exception to the
+  rule: it is often followed by a comma, but never by an
+  exclamation-point.
+
+  An exclamation-point sometimes gives the same words quite another
+  meaning. The difference between "What's that?" and "What's that!" is
+  obvious.
+
+  THE DASH.--Cobbett did not favor the use of this mark, as we see from
+  the following: "Let me caution you against the use of what, by some,
+  is called the _dash_. The dash is a stroke along the line; thus, 'I am
+  rich--I was poor--I shall be poor again.' This is wild work indeed!
+  Who is to know what is intended by these _dashes_? Those who have
+  thought proper, like Mr. Lindley Murray, to place the _dash_ amongst
+  the _grammatical points_, ought to give us some rule relative to its
+  different longitudinal dimensions in different cases. The _inch_, the
+  _three-quarter-inch_, the _half-inch_, the _quarter-inch_: these would
+  be something determinate; but '_the dash_,' without measure, must be a
+  perilous thing for the young grammarian to handle. In short, '_the
+  dash_' is a cover for ignorance as to the use of points, and it can
+  answer no other purpose."
+
+  This is one of the few instances in which Cobbett was wrong. The
+  _dash_ is the proper point with which to mark an unexpected or
+  emphatic pause, or a sudden break or transition. It is very often
+  preceded by another point. "And Huitzilopochtli--a sweet name to roll
+  under one's tongue--for how many years has this venerable war-god
+  blinked in the noonday sun!" "Crowds gathered about the newspaper
+  bulletins, recalling the feverish scenes that occurred when the
+  President's life was thought to be hanging by a thread. 'Wouldn't it
+  be too bad,' said one, 'if, after all--no, I won't allow myself to
+  think of it.'" "Was there ever--but I scorn to boast." "You are--no,
+  I'll not tell you what you are."
+
+      "He suffered--but his pangs are o'er;
+        Enjoyed--but his delights are fled;
+      Had friends--his friends are now no more;
+        And foes--his foes are dead."--Montgomery.
+
+  "Greece, Carthage, Rome,--where are they?" "He chastens;--but he
+  chastens to save."
+
+  Dashes are much used where parentheses were formerly employed. "In the
+  days of Tweed the expression to divide fair--forcible, if not
+  grammatical--acquired much currency." "In truth, the character of the
+  great chief was depicted two thousand five hundred years before his
+  birth, and depicted--such is the power of genius--in colors which will
+  be fresh as many years after his death." "To render the Constitution
+  perpetual--which God grant it may be!--it is necessary that its
+  benefits should be practically felt by all parts of the country."
+
+  PARENTHESIS.--This mark is comparatively little used nowadays. The
+  dash is preferred, probably because it disfigures the page less. The
+  office of the parenthesis is to isolate a phrase which is merely
+  incidental, and which might be omitted without detriment to the
+  grammatical construction.
+
+      "Know then this truth (enough for man to know),
+      Virtue alone is happiness below."--Pope.
+
+      "The bliss of man (could pride that blessing find)
+      Is not to act or think beyond mankind."
+
+  BRACKETS.--This mark is used principally to inclose words improperly
+  omitted by the writer, or words introduced for the purpose of
+  explanation or to correct an error. The bracket is often used in this
+  book.
+
+  THE APOSTROPHE.--This point is used to denote the omission of letters
+  and sometimes of figures; as, Jan'y, '81; _I've_ for _I have_;
+  _you'll_ for _you will_; _'tis_ for _it is_; _don't_ for _do not_;
+  _can't_ for _can not_; It was in the year '93; the spirit of '76; It
+  was in the years 1812, '13, and '14.
+
+  Also to denote the possessive case; as, Brown's house; the king's
+  command; Moses' staff; for conscience' sake; the boys' garden.
+
+  Also with _s_ to denote the plural of letters, figures, and signs; as,
+  Cross your _t_'s, dot your _i_'s, and mind your _p_'s and _q_'s; make
+  your 5's better, and take out the _x_'s.
+
+  CAPITALS.--A capital letter should begin every sentence, every line of
+  verse, and every direct quotation.
+
+  All names of the Deity, of Jesus Christ, of the Trinity, and of the
+  Virgin Mary must begin with a capital. Pronouns are usually
+  capitalized when they refer to the Deity.
+
+  Proper names, and nouns and adjectives formed from proper names, names
+  of streets, of the months, of the days of the week, and of the
+  holidays, are capitalized.
+
+  Titles of nobility and of high office, when used to designate
+  particular persons, are capitalized; as, the Earl of Dunraven, the
+  Mayor of Boston, the Baron replied, the Cardinal presided.
+
+  THE PARAGRAPH.--In writing for the press, the division of matter into
+  paragraphs is often quite arbitrary; in letter-writing, on the
+  contrary, the several topics treated of should, as a rule, be isolated
+  by paragraphic divisions. These divisions give one's letters a
+  shapely appearance that they otherwise never have.
+
+PURCHASE. This word is much preferred to its synonym _buy_, by that
+class of people who prefer the word _reside_ to _live_, _procure_ to
+_get_, _inaugurate_ to _begin_, and so on. They are generally of those
+who are great in pretense, and who would be greater still if they were
+to pretend to all they have to pretend to.
+
+PURPOSE. See PROPOSE.
+
+QUANTITY. This word is often improperly used for _number_. _Quantity_
+should be used in speaking of what is measured or weighed; _number_, of
+what is counted. Examples: "What _quantity_ of apples have you, and what
+_number_ of pineapples?" "Delaware produces a large _quantity_ of
+peaches and a large _number_ of melons."
+
+QUIT.--This word means, properly, to leave, to go away from, to forsake;
+as, "Avaunt! _quit_ my sight." This is the only sense in which the
+English use it. In America, it is generally used in the sense of to
+leave off, to stop; as, "_Quit_ your nonsense"; "_Quit_ laughing";
+"_Quit_ your noise"; "He has _quit_ smoking," and so on.
+
+QUITE. This word originally meant completely, perfectly, totally,
+entirely, fully; and this is the sense in which it was used by the early
+writers of English. It is now often used in the sense of _rather_; as,
+"It is _quite_ warm"; "She is _quite_ tall"; "He is _quite_ proficient."
+Sometimes it is incorrectly used in the sense of _considerable_; as,
+_quite_ an amount, _quite_ a number, _quite_ a fortune. _Quite_,
+according to good modern usage, may qualify an adjective, but not a
+noun. "She is quite the lady," is a vile phrase, meaning, "She is very
+or _quite_ ladylike."
+
+RAILROAD DEPOT. Few things are more offensive to fastidious ears than to
+hear a railway _station_ called a _depot_. A depot is properly a place
+where goods or stores of any kind are kept; and the places at which the
+trains of a railroad--or, better, rail_way_--stop for passengers, or the
+points from which they start and at which they arrive, are, properly,
+the _stations_.
+
+RAILWAY. The English prefer this word to rail_road_.
+
+RAISE THE RENT. An expression incorrectly used for _increase the rent_.
+
+RARELY. It is no uncommon thing to see this adverb improperly used in
+such sentences as, "It is very _rarely_ that the puppets of the romancer
+assume," etc.--"Appletons' Journal," February, 1881, p. 177. "But," says
+the defender of this phraseology, "_rarely_ qualifies a verb--the verb
+_to be_." Not at all. The sentence, if written out in full, would be,
+"It is a very rare thing that," etc., or "The circumstance is a very
+rare one that," etc., or "It is a very rare occurrence that," etc. To
+those who contend for "It is very _rarely_ that," etc., I would say, It
+is very _sadly_ that persons of culture will write and then defend--or
+rather try to defend--such grammar.
+
+RATIOCINATE. See EFFECTUATE.
+
+REAL.--This adjective is often vulgarly used in the sense of the adverb
+_very_; thus, _real_ nice, _real_ pretty, _real_ angry, _real_ cute, and
+so on.
+
+RECOMMEND. This word, which means to commend or praise to another, to
+declare worthy of esteem, trust, or favor, is sometimes put to strange
+uses. Example: "Resolved, that the tax-payers of the county be
+_recommended_ to meet," etc. What the resolving gentlemen meant was,
+that the tax-payers should be _counseled_ to meet.
+
+REDUNDANCY. See PLEONASM.
+
+RELIABLE. This is a modern word which is often met with; but it is not
+used by our careful writers. They prefer its synonym _trustworthy_, and
+argue that, in consequence of being ill-formed, _reliable_ can not
+possibly have the signification in which it is used.
+
+REMAINDER. See BALANCE.
+
+RENDITION. This word is much misused for _rendering_. Example: "The
+excellence of Mr. Gilbert's _rendition_ of certain characters, Sir Peter
+and Sir Antony, for instance, is not equaled," etc. _Rendition_ means
+the act of yielding possession, surrender, as the _rendition_ of a town
+or fortress. The sentence above should read, "The excellence of Mr.
+Gilbert's _rendering_," etc. _Rendition_ is also sometimes improperly
+used for _performance_.
+
+REPLY. See ANSWER.
+
+REPUTATION. See CHARACTER.
+
+RESIDE. A big word that Mr. Wouldbe uses where Mr. Is uses the little
+word _live_.
+
+RESIDENCE. In speaking of a man's domicile, it is not only in better
+taste but more correct to use the term _house_ than _residence_. A man
+has a _residence_ in New York, when he has lived here long enough to
+have the right to exercise the franchise here; and he may have a _house_
+in Fifth Avenue where he _lives_. People who _are_ live in houses;
+people who _would be_ reside in residences. The former _buy_ things; the
+latter _purchase_ them.
+
+REST. See BALANCE.
+
+RESTIVE. Some of the dictionaries, Richard Grant White, and some other
+writers, contend that this word, when properly used, means unwilling to
+go, standing still stubbornly, obstinate, stubborn, and nothing else. In
+combating this opinion, Fitzedward Hall says: "Very few instances, I
+apprehend, can be produced, from our literature, of this use of
+_restive_." Webster gives impatient, uneasy, as a second meaning; and
+this is the sense in which the word is nearly always used.
+
+RETIRE. It is only the over-nice who use _retire_ in the sense of _go to
+bed_.
+
+REVEREND--HONORABLE. Many persons are in doubt whether they should or
+should not put _the_ before these adjectives. Emphatically, yes, they
+should. See "Words and Their Uses," by Richard Grant White, for a full
+discussion of the question; also "Good English," by Edward S. Gould.
+
+RHETORIC. The art which has for its object the rendering of language
+effective is called _rhetoric_. Without some study of the art of
+composition, no one can expect to write well, or to judge the literary
+work of others.
+
+    "True ease in writing comes from art, not chance,
+    As those move easiest who have learned to dance."
+
+RIDE--DRIVE. Fashion, both in England and in this country, says that we
+must always use the second of these words when we speak of going out in
+a carriage, although _ride_ means, according to all the lexicographers,
+"to be carried on a horse or other animal, or in any kind of vehicle or
+carriage."
+
+RIGHT. Singularly enough, this word is made, by some people, to do
+service for _ought_, _in duty bound_, under _obligation_ to; thus, "You
+had a _right_ to tell me," meaning, "You should have told me." "The
+Colonists contended that they _had no right_ to pay taxes," meaning,
+"They were _under no obligation_ to pay taxes," i. e., that it was
+unjust to tax them.
+
+RIGHT HERE. The expressions "right here" and "right there" are
+Americanisms. Correctly, "just here" and "just there."
+
+ROLLING. The use of this participial adjective in the sense of
+undulating is said to be an Americanism. Whether an Americanism or not,
+it would seem to be quite unobjectionable.
+
+RUBBERS. This word, in common with _gums_ and _arctics_, is often, in
+defiance of good taste, used for _overshoes_.
+
+SABBATH. This term was first used in English for Sunday, or Lord's day,
+by the Puritans. Nowadays it is little used in this sense. The word to
+use is _Sunday_.
+
+SARCASM. Bain says that _sarcasm_ is vituperation softened in the
+outward expression by the arts and figures of disguise--epigram,
+innuendo, irony--and embellished with the figures of illustration. Crabb
+says that _sarcasm_ is the indulgence only of personal resentment, and
+is never justifiable.
+
+SATIRE. The holding up to ridicule of the follies and weaknesses of
+mankind, by way of rebuke, is called _satire_. Satire is general rather
+than individual, its object being the reformation of abuses. A
+_lampoon_, which has been defined as a _personal satire_, attacks the
+individual rather than his fault, and is intended to injure rather than
+to reform.
+
+Said Sheridan: "Satires and lampoons on particular people circulate more
+by giving copies in confidence to the friends of the parties than by
+printing them."
+
+SAW. The imperfect tense of the verb _to see_ is carelessly used by good
+writers and speakers when they should use the perfect; thus, "I never
+_saw_ anything like it before," when the meaning intended is, "I _have_
+never [in all my life] _seen_ anything like it before [until now]." We
+say properly, "I never _saw_ anything like it _when I was in Paris_";
+but, when the period of time referred to extends to the time when the
+statement is made, it must be _have seen_. Like mistakes are made in
+the use of other verbs, but they are hardly as common; yet we often hear
+such expressions as, "I _was_ never in Philadelphia," "I never _went_ to
+the theatre in my life," instead of _have been_ in Philadelphia, and
+_have gone_ to the theatre.
+
+SECTION. The use of this word for region, neighborhood, vicinity, part
+(of the town or country), is said to be a Westernism. A _section_ is a
+division of the public lands containing six hundred and forty acres.
+
+SEEM--APPEAR. Graham, in his "English Synonymes," says of these two
+words: "What _seems_ is in the mind; what _appears_ is external. Things
+_appear_ as they present themselves to the eye; they _seem_ as they are
+represented to the mind. Things _appear_ good or bad, as far as we can
+judge by our senses. Things _seem_ right or wrong as we determine by
+reflection. Perception and sensation have to do with appearing;
+reflection and comparison, with seeming. When things are not what they
+_appear_, our senses are deceived; when things are not what they _seem_,
+our judgment is at fault."
+
+"No man had ever a greater power over himself, or was less the man he
+_seemed_ to be, which shortly after _appeared_ to everybody, when he
+cared less to keep on the mask."--Clarendon.
+
+SELDOM OR EVER. This phrase should be "seldom _if_ ever," or "seldom or
+_never_."
+
+SERAPHIM. This is the plural of _seraph_. "One of the _seraphim_." "To
+Thee cherubim and seraphim continually do cry." See CHERUBIM.
+
+SET--SIT. The former of these two verbs is often incorrectly used for
+the latter. To _set_; imperfect tense, _set_; participles, _setting_,
+_set_. To _sit_; imperfect tense, _sat_; participles, _sitting_, _sat_.
+To _set_ means to put, to place, to plant; to put in any place,
+condition, state, or posture. We say, to _set_ about, to _set_ against,
+to _set_ out, to _set_ going, to _set_ apart, to _set_ aside, to _set_
+down (to put in writing). To _sit_ means to rest on the lower part of
+the body, to repose on a seat, to perch, as a bird, etc. We say, "_Sit_
+up," i. e., rise from lying to sitting; "We will _sit_ up," i. e., will
+not go to bed; "_Sit_ down," i. e., place yourself on a seat. We _sit_ a
+horse and we _sit_ for a portrait. Garments _sit_ well or otherwise.
+Congress _sits_, so does a court. "I have _sat_ up long enough." "I have
+_set_ it on the table." We _set_ down figures, but we _sit_ down on the
+ground. We _set_ a hen, and a hen _sits_ on eggs. We should say,
+therefore, "as cross as a _sitting_ [not, as a _setting_] hen."
+
+SETTLE. This word is often inelegantly, if not incorrectly, used for
+_pay_. We _pay_ our way, _pay_ our fare, _pay_ our hotel-bills, and the
+like. See, also, LOCATE.
+
+SHALL AND WILL. The nice distinctions that should be made between these
+two auxiliaries are, in some parts of the English-speaking world, often
+disregarded, and that, too, by persons of high culture. The proper use
+of _shall_ and _will_ can much better be learned from example than from
+precept. Many persons who use them, and also _should_ and _would_, with
+well-nigh unerring correctness, do so unconsciously; it is simply habit
+with them, and they, though their culture may be limited, will receive a
+sort of verbal shock from Biddy's inquiry, "_Will_ I put the kettle on,
+ma'am?" when your Irish or Scotch countess would not be in the least
+disturbed by it.
+
+  SHALL, _in an affirmative sentence, in the first person, and_ WILL _in
+  the second and third persons, merely announce future action_. Thus, "I
+  _shall_ go to town to-morrow." "I _shall_ not; I _shall_ wait for
+  better weather." "We _shall_ be glad to see you." "I _shall_ soon be
+  twenty." "We _shall_ set out early, and _shall_ try to arrive by
+  noon." "You _will_ be pleased." "You _will_ soon be twenty." "You
+  _will_ find him honest." "He _will_ go with us."
+
+  SHALL, _in an affirmative sentence, in the second and third persons,
+  announces the speaker's intention to control_. Thus, "You _shall_ hear
+  me out." "You _shall_ go, sick or well." "He _shall_ be my heir."
+  "They _shall_ go, whether they want to go or not."
+
+  WILL, _in the first person, expresses a promise, announces the
+  speaker's intention to control, proclaims a determination_. Thus, "I
+  _will_ [I promise to] assist you." "I _will_ [I am determined to] have
+  my right." "We _will_ [we promise to] come to you in the morning."
+
+  SHALL, _in an interrogative sentence, in the first and third persons,
+  consults the will or judgment of another; in the second person, it
+  inquires concerning the intention or future action of another_. Thus,
+  "_Shall_ I go with you?" "When _shall_ we see you again?" "When
+  _shall_ I receive it?" "When _shall_ I get well?" "When _shall_ we get
+  there?" "_Shall_ he come with us?" "_Shall_ you demand indemnity?"
+  "_Shall_ you go to town to-morrow?" "What _shall_ you do about it?"
+
+  WILL, _in an interrogative sentence, in the second person, asks
+  concerning the wish, and, in the third person, concerning the purpose
+  or future action of others_. Thus, "_Will_ you have an apple?" "_Will_
+  you go with me to my uncle's?" "_Will_ he be of the party?" "_Will_
+  they be willing to receive us?" "When _will_ he be here?"
+
+  _Will_ can not be used interrogatively in the first person singular or
+  plural. We can not say, "_Will_ I go?" "_Will_ I help you?" "_Will_ I
+  be late?" "_Will_ we get there in time?" "_Will_ we see you again
+  soon?"
+
+  Official courtesy, in order to avoid the semblance of compulsion,
+  conveys its commands in the _you-will_ form instead of the strictly
+  grammatical _you-shall_ form. It says, for example, "You _will_
+  proceed to Key West, where you will find further instructions awaiting
+  you."
+
+  A clever writer on the use of _shall_ and _will_ says that whatever
+  concerns one's beliefs, hopes, fears, likes, or dislikes, can not be
+  expressed in conjunction with _I will_. Are there no exceptions to
+  this rule? If I say, "I think I _shall_ go to Philadelphia to-morrow,"
+  I convey the impression that my going depends upon circumstances
+  beyond my control; but if I say, "I think I _will_ go to Philadelphia
+  to-morrow," I convey the impression that my going depends upon
+  circumstances within my control--that my going or not depends on mere
+  inclination. We certainly must say, "I fear that I _shall_ lose it";
+  "I hope that I _shall_ be well"; "I believe that I _shall_ have the
+  ague"; "I hope that I _shall_ not be left alone"; "I fear that we
+  _shall_ have bad weather"; "I _shall_ dislike the country"; "I _shall_
+  like the performance." The writer referred to asks, "How can one say,
+  'I _will_ have the headache'?" I answer, Very easily, as every young
+  woman knows. Let us see: "Mary, you know you promised John to drive
+  out with him to-morrow; how _shall_ you get out of it?" "Oh, I _will_
+  have the headache!" We request that people _will_ do thus or so, and
+  not that they _shall_. Thus, "It is requested that no one _will_ leave
+  the room."
+
+  _Shall_ is rarely, if ever, used for _will_; it is _will_ that is used
+  for _shall_. Expressions like the following are common: "Where _will_
+  you be next week?" "I _will_ be at home." "We _will_ have dinner at
+  six o'clock." "How _will_ you go about it?" "When _will_ you begin?"
+  "When _will_ you set out?" "What _will_ you do with it?" In all such
+  expressions, when it is a question of mere future action on the part
+  of the person speaking or spoken to, the auxiliary must be _shall_,
+  and not _will_.
+
+  _Should_ and _would_ follow the regimen of _shall_ and _will_. _Would_
+  is often used for _should_; _should_ rarely for _would_. Correct
+  speakers say, "I _should_ go to town to-morrow if I had a horse." "I
+  _should_ not; I _should_ wait for better weather." "We _should_ be
+  glad to see you." "We _should_ have started earlier, if the weather
+  had been clear." "I _should_ like to go to town, and _would_ go if I
+  could." "I _would_ assist you if I could." "I _should_ have been ill
+  if I had gone." "I _would_ I were home again!" "I _should_ go fishing
+  to-day if I were home." "I _should_ so like to go to Europe!" "I
+  _should_ prefer to see it first." "I _should_ be delighted." "I
+  _should_ be glad to have you sup with me." "I knew that I _should_ be
+  ill." "I feared that I _should_ lose it." "I hoped that I _should_ see
+  him." "I thought I _should_ have the ague." "I hoped that I _should_
+  not be left alone." "I was afraid that we _should_ have bad weather."
+  "I knew I _should_ dislike the country." "I _should_ not like to do
+  it, and _will_ not [determination] unless compelled to."
+
+SHIMMY. "We derive from the French language our word
+_chemise_--pronounced _shemmeeze_. In French, the word denotes a man's
+shirt, as well as the under garment worn by women. In this country, it
+is often pronounced by people who should know better--_shimmy_. Rather
+than call it _shimmy_, resume the use of the old English words _shift_
+and _smock_. Good usage unqualifiedly condemns _gents_, _pants_, _kids_,
+_gums_, and _shimmy_."--"Vulgarisms and Other Errors of Speech."
+
+SHOULD. See OUGHT.
+
+SICK--ILL. These words are often used indiscriminately. _Sick_, however,
+is the stronger word, and generally the better word to use. _Ill_ is
+used in England more than with us: there _sick_ is generally limited to
+the expressing of nausea; as, "sick at the stomach."
+
+SIGNATURE, OVER OR UNDER? A man writes _under_, not _over_, a signature.
+Charles Dickens wrote _under_ the signature of "Boz"; Mr. Samuel L.
+Clemens writes _under_ the signature of "Mark Twain." The reason given
+in Webster's Dictionary for preferring the use of _under_ is absurd;
+viz., that the paper is _under_ the hand in writing. The expression is
+elliptical, and has no reference to the position either of the signature
+or of the paper. "Given under my hand and seal" means "under the
+guarantee of my signature and my seal." "Under his own signature" or
+"name" means "under his own character, without disguise." "Under the
+signature of Boz" means "under the disguise of the assumed name Boz." We
+always write _under_ a certain date, though the date be placed, as it
+often is, at the bottom of the page.
+
+SIGNS. In one of the principal business streets of New York there is a
+sign which reads, "German Lace Store." Now, whether this is a store that
+makes a specialty of German laces, or whether it is a store where all
+kinds of lace are sold, kept by a German or after the German fashion, is
+something that the sign doubtless means to tell us, but, owing to the
+absence of a hyphen ("German-Lace Store," or "German Lace-Store"), does
+not tell us. Nothing is more common than erroneous punctuation in signs,
+and gross mistakes by the unlettered in the wording of the simplest
+printed matter.
+
+The bad taste, incorrect punctuation, false grammar, and ridiculous
+nonsense met with on signs and placards, and in advertisements, are
+really surprising. An advertisement tells us that "a pillow which
+assists in procuring sleep is a _benediction_"; a placard, that they
+have "Charlotte _de_ Russe" for sale within, which means, if it means
+anything, that they have for sale somebody or something called Charlotte
+of Russian; and, then, on how many signs do we see the possessive case
+when the plural number is intended!
+
+SIMILE. In rhetoric, a direct and formal comparison is called a
+_simile_. It is generally denoted by _like_, _as_, or _so_; as,
+
+                            "I have ventured,
+    _Like_ little wanton boys that swim on bladders,
+    These many summers in a sea of glory."
+
+    "Thy smile is _as_ the dawn of vernal day."--Shakespeare.
+
+    "_As_, down in the sunless retreats of the ocean,
+      Sweet flow'rets are springing no mortal can see;
+    _So_, deep in my bosom, the prayer of devotion,
+      Unheard by the world, rises silent to thee."--Moore.
+
+    "'Tis with our judgments _as_ with our watches; none
+    Go just alike, yet each believes his own."--Pope.
+
+    "Grace abused brings forth the foulest deeds,
+    _As_ richest soil the most luxuriant weeds."--Cowper.
+
+"_As_ no roads are so rough as those that have just been mended, _so_ no
+sinners are so intolerant as those who have just turned
+saints."--"Lacon."
+
+SIN. See CRIME.
+
+SINCE--AGO. Dr. Johnson says of these two adverbs: "Reckoning time
+toward the present, we use _since_; as, 'It is a year _since_ it
+happened': reckoning from the present, we use _ago_; as, 'It is a year
+_ago_.' This is not, perhaps, always observed."
+
+Dr. Johnson's rule will hardly suffice as a sure guide. _Since_ is often
+used for _ago_, but _ago_ never for _since_. _Ago_ is derived from the
+participle _agone_, while _since_ comes from a preposition. We say
+properly, "not long" or "some time _ago_ [agone]." _Since_ requires a
+verbal clause after it; as, "_Since_ I saw you"; "_Since_ he was here."
+
+SING. Of the two forms--_sang_ and _sung_--for the imperfect tense of
+the verb to _sing_, the former--_sang_--is to be preferred.
+
+SIT. See SET.
+
+SLANG. The slang that is heard among respectable people is made up of
+genuine words, to which an arbitrary meaning is given. It is always low,
+generally coarse, and not unfrequently foolish. With the exception of
+_cant_, there is nothing that is more to be shunned. We sometimes meet
+with persons of considerable culture who interlard their talk with slang
+expressions, but it is safe to assert that they are always persons of
+coarse natures.
+
+SMART. See CLEVER.
+
+SMELL OF. See TASTE OF.
+
+SO. See AS; SUCH; THAT.
+
+SO MUCH SO. "The shipments by the coast steamers are very large, _so
+much so_ [large?] as to tax the capacity of the different
+lines."--"Telegram," September 19, 1881. The sentence should be, "The
+shipments by the coast steamers are very large, _so large_ as to tax,"
+etc.
+
+SOLECISM. In rhetoric, a solecism is defined as an offense against the
+rules of grammar by the use of words in a wrong construction; false
+syntax.
+
+"Modern grammarians designate by _solecism_ any word or expression which
+does not agree with the established usage of writing or speaking. But,
+as customs change, that which at one time is considered a _solecism_ may
+at another be regarded as correct language. A _solecism_, therefore,
+differs from a _barbarism_, inasmuch as the latter consists in the use
+of a word or expression which is altogether contrary to the spirit of
+the language, and can, properly speaking, never become established as
+correct language."--"Penny Cyclopædia." See, also, BARBARISM.
+
+SOME. This word is not unfrequently misused for _somewhat_; thus, "She
+is _some_ better to-day." It is likewise often misused for _about_;
+thus, "I think it is _some_ ten miles from here": read, "_about_ ten
+miles from here."
+
+SPECIALTY. This form has within a recent period been generally
+substituted for _speciality_. There is no apparent reason, however, why
+the _i_ should be dropped, since it is required by the etymology of the
+word, and is retained in nearly all other words of the same formation.
+
+SPECIOUS FALLACY. A _fallacy_ is a sophism, a logical artifice, a
+deceitful or false appearance; while _specious_ means having the
+appearance of truth, plausible. Hence we see that the very essence of a
+_fallacy_ is its _speciousness_. We may very properly say that a
+_fallacy_ is more or less _specious_, but we can not properly say that a
+fallacy _is_ specious, since without speciousness we can have no
+fallacies.
+
+SPLENDID. This poor word is used by the gentler sex to qualify well-nigh
+everything that has their approval, from a sugar-plum to the national
+capitol. In fact, _splendid_ and _awful_ seem to be about the only
+adjectives some of our superlative young women have in their
+vocabularies.
+
+STANDPOINT. This is a word to which many students of English seriously
+object, and among them are the editors of some of our daily papers, who
+do not allow it to appear in their columns. The phrase to which no one
+objects is, _point of view_.
+
+STATE. This word, which properly means to make known specifically, to
+explain particularly, is often misused for _say_. When _say_ says all
+one _wants_ to say, why use a more pretentious word?
+
+STOP. "Where are you _stopping_?" "At the Metropolitan." The proper word
+to use here is _staying_. _To stop_ means to cease to go forward, to
+leave off; and _to stay_ means to abide, to tarry, to dwell, to sojourn.
+We _stay_, not _stop_, at home, at a hotel, or with a friend, as the
+case may be.
+
+STORM. Many persons indulge in a careless use of this word, using it
+when they mean to say simply that it rains or snows. To a _storm_ a
+violent commotion of the atmosphere is indispensable. A very high wind
+constitutes a storm, though it be dry.
+
+STRAIGHTWAY. Here is a good Anglo-Saxon word of _two_ syllables whose
+place, without any good reason, is being usurped by the Latin word
+_immediately_, of _five_ syllables.
+
+STREET. We live _in_, not _on_--meet our acquaintances _in_, not
+_on_--things occur _in_, not _on_--houses are built _in_, not _on_, the
+street, and so forth.
+
+STYLE. This is a term that is used to characterize the peculiarities
+that distinguish a writer or a composition. Correctness and clearness
+properly belong to the domain of _diction_; simplicity, conciseness,
+gravity, elegance, diffuseness, floridity, force, feebleness,
+coarseness, etc., belong to the domain of _style_.
+
+SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD. This mood is unpopular with not a few now-a-day
+grammarians. One says that it is rapidly falling into disuse; that, in
+fact, there is good reason to suppose it will soon become obsolete.
+Another says that it would, perhaps, be better to abolish it entirely,
+as its use is a continual source of dispute among grammarians and of
+perplexity to schools. Another says that it is a universal
+stumbling-block; that nobody seems to understand it, although almost
+everybody attempts to use it.
+
+That the subjunctive mood is much less used now than it was a hundred
+years ago is certain, but that it is obsolescent is very far from
+certain. It would not be easy, I think, to find a single contemporary
+writer who does not use it. That it is not always easy to determine what
+form of it we should employ is very true; but if we are justified in
+abolishing it altogether, as Mr. Chandler suggests, because its correct
+use is not always easy, then we are also justified in abolishing the use
+of _shall_ and _will_, and of the prepositions, for surely their right
+use is likewise at times most puzzling. Meanwhile, most persons will
+think it well to learn to use the subjunctive mood properly. With that
+object in view, one can not, perhaps, do better than to attend to what
+Dr. Alexander Bain, Professor of Logic in the University of Aberdeen,
+says upon the subject. In Professor Bain's "Higher English Grammar" we
+find:
+
+"In subordinate clauses.--In a clause expressing a condition, and
+introduced by a conjunction of condition, the verb is sometimes, but not
+always, in the subjunctive mood: 'If I _be_ able,' 'if I _were_ strong
+enough,' 'if thou _should_ come.'
+
+"The subjunctive inflexions have been wholly lost. The sense that
+something is wanting appears to have led many writers to use indicative
+forms where the subjunctive might be expected. The tendency appears
+strongest in the case of 'wert,' which is now used as indicative (for
+'wast') only in poetical or elevated language.
+
+"The following is the rule given for the use of the subjunctive mood:
+
+"When in a conditional clause it is intended to express doubt or denial,
+use the subjunctive mood.[30] 'If I _were_ sure of what you tell me, I
+would go.'
+
+"When the conditional clause is _affirmative_ and _certain_, the verb is
+_indicative_: 'If that _is_ the case' (as you now tell me, and as I
+believe), 'I can understand you.' This is equivalent to a clause of
+assumption, or supposition: 'That being the case,' 'inasmuch as that is
+the case,' etc.
+
+"As _futurity_ is by its nature uncertain, the subjunctive is
+extensively used for future conditionality: 'If it _rain_, we shall not
+be able to go'; 'if I _be_ well'; 'if he _come_ shortly'; 'if thou
+_return_ at all in peace'; 'though he _slay_ me, yet will I trust in
+him.' These events are all in the uncertain future, and are put in the
+subjunctive.[31]
+
+"A future result or consequence is expressed by the subjunctive in such
+instances as these: 'I will wait till he _return_'; 'no fear lest dinner
+_cool_'; 'thou shalt stone him with stones, that he _die_'; 'take heed
+lest at any time your hearts _be_ overcharged with surfeiting.'
+
+"Uncertainty as to a past event may arise from our own ignorance, in
+which case the subjunctive is properly employed, and serves the useful
+purpose of distinguishing our ignorance from our knowledge. 'If any of
+my readers _has_ looked with so little attention upon the world around
+him'; this would mean--'as I know that they have.' The meaning intended
+is probably--'as I do not know whether they have or not,' and therefore
+the subjunctive 'have' is preferable. 'If ignorance _is_ bliss,' which I
+(ironically) admit. Had Gray been speaking seriously, he would have
+said, 'if ignorance _be_ bliss,' he himself dissenting from the
+proposition.
+
+"A wish contrary to the fact takes the subjunctive: 'I wish he _were_
+here' (which he is not).
+
+"An intention not yet carried out is also subjunctive: 'The sentence is
+that you _be_ imprisoned.'
+
+"The only correct form of the future subjunctive is--'if I should.' We
+may say, 'I do not know whether or not I _shall_ come'; but 'if I shall
+come,' expressing a condition, is not an English construction. 'If he
+will' has a real meaning, as being the present subjunctive of the verb
+'will': 'if he be willing,' 'if he have the will.' It is in accordance
+with good usage to express a future subjunctive meaning by a present
+tense; but in that case the form must be strictly subjunctive, and not
+indicative. 'If any member _absents_ himself, he shall forfeit a penny
+for the use of the club'; this ought to be either 'absent,' or 'should
+absent.' 'If thou _neglectest_ or _doest_ unwillingly what I command
+thee, I will rack thee with old cramps'; better, 'if thou _neglect_ or
+_do_ unwillingly,' or 'if thou should neglect.' The indicative would be
+justified by the speaker's belief that the supposition is sure to turn
+out to be the fact.
+
+"The past subjunctive may imply denial; as, 'if the book _were_ in the
+library (as it is not), it should be at your service.'
+
+"'If the book _be_ in the library,' means, 'I do not know whether it be
+or not.' We have thus the power of discriminating _three_ different
+suppositions. 'If the book _is_ in the library' (as I know it is); 'if
+it _be_' (I am uncertain); 'if it _were_' (as I know it is not). So, 'if
+it rains,' 'if it rain,' 'if it rained.' 'Nay, and the villains march
+wide between the legs, as if they _had_ gyves on,' implying that they
+had not.
+
+"The same power of the past tense is exemplified in 'if I _could_, I
+would,' which means, 'I can not'; whereas, 'if I can, I will,' means 'I
+do not know.'
+
+"The past subjunctive may be expressed by an inversion: '_Had_ I the
+power,' '_were_ I as I have been.'
+
+"In Principal Clauses.--The principal clause in a conditional statement
+also takes the subjunctive form when it refers to what is future and
+contingent, and when it refers to what is past and uncertain, or denied.
+'If he should try, he _would_ succeed'; 'if I had seen him, I _should_
+have asked him.'
+
+"The usual forms of the subjunctive in the principal clause are 'would,'
+'should,' 'would have,' 'should have'; and it is to be noted that in
+this application the second persons take the inflexional ending of the
+indicative: 'shouldst,' 'wouldst.'
+
+    "'If 'twere done when 'tis done, then 't_were_ (would be) well
+    It _were_ (should be) done quickly.'
+
+"The English idiom appears sometimes to permit the use of an indicative
+where we should expect a subjunctive form. 'Many acts, that _had_ been
+otherwise blamable, were employed'; 'I _had_ fainted, unless I had
+believed,' etc.
+
+    "'Which else _lie_ furled and shrouded in the soul.'
+
+"In 'else' there is implied a conditional clause that would suit 'lie';
+or the present may be regarded as a more vivid form of expression. 'Had'
+may be indicative; just as we sometimes find pluperfect indicative for
+pluperfect subjunctive in the same circumstances in Latin. We may refer
+it to the general tendency, as already seen in the uses of 'could,'
+'would,' 'should,' etc., to express conditionality by a past tense; or
+the indicative may be used as a more direct and vivid mode. 'Had' may be
+subjunctive; 'I _had_ fainted' is, in construction, analogous to 'I
+_should_ have fainted'; the word for futurity, 'shall,' not being
+necessary to the sense, is withdrawn, and its past inflexion transferred
+to 'have.' Compare Germ. _würde haben_ and _hätte_."
+
+In addition to the foregoing, we find in Professor Bain's "Composition
+Grammar" the following:
+
+"The case most suited to the subjunctive is _contingent futurity_, or
+the expression of an event unknown absolutely, as being still in the
+future: 'If to-morrow _be_ fine, I will walk with you.'
+
+"'Unless I _were_ prepared,' insinuates pretty strongly that I am or am
+not prepared, according to the manner of the principal clause.
+
+    "'What's a tall man unless he _fight_?'
+
+    "'The sword hath ended him: so shall it thee,
+    Unless thou _yield_ thee as my prisoner.'
+
+    "'Who but must laugh, if such a man there _be_?
+    Who would not weep, if Atticus _were_ he?'
+
+"'I am to second Ion if he _fail_'; the failing is left quite doubtful.
+'I should very imperfectly execute the task which I have undertaken if I
+_were_ merely to treat of battles and sieges.' Macaulay thus implies
+that the scope of his work is to be wider than mere battles and sieges.
+
+"The subjunctive appears in some other constructions. 'I hope to see the
+exhibition before _it close_'; 'wait till he _return_'; 'thou shall
+stand by the river's brink against he _come_'; 'take heed lest passion
+_sway_ thy judgment'; 'speak to me, though it _be_ in wrath'; 'if he
+_smite_ him with an instrument of iron so that he _die_, he is a
+murderer'; 'beware this night that thou _cross_ not my footsteps'
+(Shelley).
+
+"Again. 'Whatever this _be_'; 'whoever he _be_'; 'howe'er it _be_'
+(Tennyson); and such like.
+
+    "'And _as long_, O God, _as_ she
+    _Have_ a grain of love for me,
+    So long, no doubt, no doubt,
+    Shall I nurse in my dark heart,
+    However weary, a spark of will
+    Not to be trampled out.'
+
+"The Future Subjunctive is given in our scheme of the verb as 'should'
+in all persons: 'If I should, if thou should, if he should.' In old
+English, we have 'thou _shouldst_': 'if thou, Lord, _shouldst_ mark
+iniquities.'
+
+"An inverted conditional form has taken deep root in our language, and
+may be regarded as an elegant and forcible variety. While dispensing
+with the conjunction, it does not cause ambiguity; nevertheless,
+conditionality is well marked.
+
+"'_If_ you _should_ abandon your Penelope and your home for Calypso,
+----': '_should_ you abandon ----.'
+
+            "'_Go_ not my horse the better,
+    I must become a borrower of the night
+    For a dark hour or twain.'
+
+    "'Here had we now our country's honor roof'd
+    _Were_ the graced person of our Banquo present.'
+
+    "'_Be_ thou a spirit of health or goblin damn'd,
+    _Bring_ with thee airs from heaven or blasts from hell,
+    _Be_ thy intents wicked or charitable,
+    Thou com'st in such a questionable shape
+    That I will speak to thee.'
+
+    "'_Come_ one, _come_ all, this rock shall fly
+    From its firm base as soon as I.'--Scott.
+
+"The following examples are given by Mätzner:
+
+"'Varney's communications, _be_ they what they might, were operating in
+his favor.'--Scott.
+
+"'Governing persons, _were_ they never so insignificant intrinsically,
+have for most part plenty of Memoir-writers.'--Carlyle.
+
+"'Even _were_ I disposed, I could not gratify the reader.'--Warren.
+
+"'Bring them back to me, _cost_ what it may.'--Coleridge, 'Wallenstein.'
+
+"'And _will_ you, _nill_ you, I will marry you.'--'Taming of the Shrew.'
+
+"_Were_ is used in the principal clause for 'should be' or 'would
+be.'[32]
+
+    "'I _were_ (=should be) a fool, not less than if a panther
+    Were panic-stricken by the antelope's eye,
+    If she escape me.'--Shelley.
+
+    "'Were you but riding forth to air yourself,
+    Such parting _were_ too petty.'
+
+"'He _were_ (=would be) no lion, were not Romans hinds.'
+
+    "'Should he be roused out of his sleep to-night, ...
+    It _were_ not well; indeed it _were_ not well.'--Shelley.
+
+"_Had_ is sometimes used in the principal clause for 'should have' or
+'would have.'[33]
+
+"'Had I known this before we set out, I think I _had_ (= would have)
+remained at home.'--Scott.
+
+    "'Hadst thou been kill'd when first thou didst presume,
+    Thou _hadst_ not lived to kill a son of mine.'
+
+                                        "'If he
+    Had killed me, he _had_ done a kinder deed.'
+
+    "'For once he _had_ been ta'en or slain,
+    An it had not been his ministry.'--Scott.
+
+    "'If thou hadst said him nay, it _had_ been sin.'[34]
+
+"'_Had_ better, rather, best, as lief, as well, etc.,' is a form that is
+explained under this heading. 'Had' stands for 'would have.' The
+exploded notion that 'had' is a corrupted 'would' must be guarded
+against.
+
+"'I _had_ as lief not be.' That is--'I _would_ as lief _have_ not (_to_)
+be' = 'I would as willingly (or as soon) have non-existence.'
+
+"'_Had_ you rather Cæsar were living----?' '_Would_ you rather _have_
+(_would_ you _prefer_ that) Cæsar were living?'
+
+"'He _had_ better reconsider the matter' is 'he _would_ better _have_
+(_to_) reconsider the matter.'
+
+    "'I _had_ rather be a kitten and cry mew
+    Than one of these same metre ballad-mongers;
+    I _had_ rather hear a brazen canstick turned.'
+
+"Let us compare this form with another that appears side by side with it
+in early writers. (Cp. Lat. 'habeo' and 'mihi est.')
+
+"The construction of 'had' is thus illustrated in Chaucer, as in--Nonne
+Prestes Tale, 300:
+
+    "'By God, I _hadde_ levere than my scherte,
+    That ye hadde rad his legend, as I have.'
+
+"Compare now:
+
+    "'Ah _me were levere_ with lawe _loose_ my lyf
+    Then so to fote hem _falle_.'--Wright, 'Polit. S.'
+
+"Here 'were' is unquestionably for 'would be'; and the whole expression
+might be given by 'had,' thus: 'Ah, _I hadde_ levere ----,' '(to)
+_loose_' and '(to) _falle_,' changing from subjects of 'were' to objects
+of 'hadde.'
+
+"So, in the Chaucer example above, if we substitute 'be' for 'have,' we
+shall get the same meaning, thus: 'By God, _me were_ levere ----.' The
+interchange helps us to see more clearly that 'hadde' is to be explained
+as subjunctive for 'would have.'" See INDICATIVE AND SUBJUNCTIVE.
+
+SUCH. "I have never before seen _such_ a large ox." By a little
+transposing of the words of this sentence, we have, "I have never before
+seen an ox _such_ large," which makes it quite clear that we should say
+_so large an ox_ and not _such a large ox_. As proof that this error in
+the use of _such_ is common, we find in Mr. George Washington Moon's
+"Dean's English and Bad English," the sentence, "With all due deference
+to _such_ a high authority on _such_ a very important matter." With a
+little transposing, this sentence is made to read, "With all due
+deference to an authority _such_ high on a matter _such_ very
+important." It is clear that the sentence should read, "With all due
+deference to _so_ high an authority on _so_ very important a matter."
+The phrases, _such_ a handsome, _such_ a lovely, _such_ a long, _such_
+narrow, etc., are incorrect, and should be _so_ handsome, _so_ lovely,
+_so_ long, and so on.
+
+SUMMON. This verb comes in for its full share of mauling. We often hear
+such expressions as "I will _summons_ him," instead of _summon_ him;
+and "He was _summonsed_," instead of _summoned_.
+
+SUPERFLUOUS WORDS. "Whenever I try to write well, I _always_ find I can
+do it." "I shall have finished by the _latter_ end of the week." "Iron
+sinks _down_ in water." "He combined _together_ all the facts." "My
+brother called on me, and we _both_ took a walk." "I can do it _equally_
+as well as he." "We could not forbear _from_ doing it." "Before I go, I
+must _first_ be paid." "We were compelled to return _back_." "We forced
+them to retreat _back_ fully a mile." "His conduct was approved _of_ by
+everybody." "They conversed _together_ for a long time." "The balloon
+rose _up_ very rapidly." "Give me another _one_." "Come home as soon as
+_ever_ you can." "Who finds him _in_ money?" "He came in last _of all_."
+"He has _got_ all he can carry." "What have you _got_?" "No matter what
+I have _got_." "I have _got_ the headache." "Have you _got_ any
+brothers?" "No, but I have _got_ a sister." All the words in _italics_
+are superfluous.
+
+SUPERIOR. This word is not unfrequently used for able, excellent,
+gifted; as, "She is a _superior_ woman," meaning an _excellent_ woman;
+"He is a _superior_ man," meaning an _able_ man. The expression _an
+inferior man_ is not less objectionable.
+
+SUPPOSITITIOUS. This word is _properly_ used in the sense of put by a
+trick into the place or character belonging to another, spurious,
+counterfeit, not genuine; and _improperly_ in the sense of conjectural,
+hypothetical, imaginary, presumptive; as, "This is a _supposititious_
+case," meaning an _imaginary_ or _presumptive_ case. "The English critic
+derived his materials from a stray copy of some _supposititious_ indexes
+devised by one of the 'Post' reporters."--"Nation." Here is a correct
+use of the word.
+
+SWOSH. There is a kind of ill-balanced brain in which the reflective and
+the imaginative very much outweight the perceptive. Men to whom this
+kind of an organization has been given generally have active minds, but
+their minds never present anything clearly. To their mental vision all
+is ill-defined, chaotic. They see everything in a haze. Whether such men
+talk or write, they are verbose, illogical, intangible,
+will-o'-the-wispish. Their thoughts are phantomlike; like shadows, they
+continually escape their grasp. In their talk they will, after long
+dissertations, tell you that they have not said just what they would
+like to say; there is always a subtle, lurking something still
+unexpressed, which something is the real essence of the matter, and
+which your penetration is expected to divine. In their writings they are
+eccentric, vague, labyrinthine, pretentious, transcendental,[35] and
+frequently ungrammatical. These men, if write they must, should confine
+themselves to the descriptive; for when they enter the essayist's
+domain, which they are very prone to do, they write what I will venture
+to call _swosh_.
+
+We find examples in plenty of this kind of writing in the essays of Mr.
+Ralph Waldo Emerson. Indeed, the impartial critic who will take the
+trouble to examine any of Mr. Emerson's essays at all carefully, is
+quite sure to come to the conclusion that Mr. Emerson has seen
+everything he has ever made the subject of his essays very much as
+London is seen from the top of Saint Paul's in a fog.
+
+Mr. Emerson's definition of Nature runs thus: "Philosophically
+considered, the universe is composed of Nature and the Soul. Strictly
+speaking, therefore, all that is separate from us, all which philosophy
+distinguishes from the _Not Me_--that is, both Nature and Art, and all
+other men, and my own body--must be ranked under this name 'NATURE.' In
+enumerating the values of Nature and casting up their sum, I shall use
+the word in both senses--in its common and in its philosophical import.
+In inquiries so general as our present one, the inaccuracy is not
+material; no confusion of thought will occur. _Nature_, in the common
+sense, refers to essences unchanged by man: space, the air, the river,
+the leaf. _Art_ is applied to the mixture of his will with the same
+things, as in a house, a canal, a picture, a statue. But his operations,
+taken together, are so insignificant--a little chipping, baking,
+patching, and washing--that in an impression so grand as that of the
+world on the human mind they do not vary the result."
+
+In "Letters and Social Aims" Mr. Emerson writes: "Eloquence is the power
+to translate a truth into language perfectly intelligible to the person
+to whom you speak. He who would convince the worthy Mr. Dunderhead of
+any truth which Dunderhead does not see, must be a master of his art.
+Declamation is common; but such possession of thought as is here
+required, such practical chemistry as the conversion of a truth written
+in God's language into a truth in Dunderhead's language, is one of the
+most beautiful and cogent weapons that is forged in the shop of the
+Divine Artificer."
+
+The first paragraph of Mr. Emerson's "Essay on Art" reads: "All
+departments of life at the present day--Trade, Politics, Letters,
+Science, or Religion--seem to feel, and to labor to express, the
+identity of their law. They are rays of one sun; they translate each
+into a new language the sense of the other. They are sublime when seen
+as emanations of a Necessity contradistinguished from the vulgar Fate by
+being instant and alive, and dissolving man, as well as his works, in
+its flowing beneficence. This influence is conspicuously visible in the
+principles and history of Art."
+
+Another paragraph from Mr. Emerson's "Essay on Eloquence": "The orator,
+as we have seen, must be a substantial personality. Then, first, he must
+have power of statement--must have the fact, and know how to tell it. In
+a knot of men conversing on any subject, the person who knows most about
+it will have the ear of the company, if he wishes it, and lead the
+conversation, no matter what genius or distinction other men there
+present may have; and, in any public assembly, him who has the facts,
+and can and will state them, people will listen to, though he is
+otherwise ignorant, though he is hoarse and ungrateful, though he
+stutters and screams."
+
+Mr. Emerson, in his "Essay on Prudence," writes: "There are all degrees
+of proficiency in knowledge of the world. It is sufficient to our
+present purpose to indicate three. One class live to the utility of the
+symbol, esteeming health and wealth a final good. Another class live
+above this mark to the beauty of the symbol, as the poet and artist, and
+the naturalist and man of science. A third class live above the beauty
+of the symbol to the beauty of the thing signified; these are wise men.
+The first class have common sense; the second, taste; and the third,
+spiritual perception. Once in a long time a man traverses the whole
+scale, and sees and enjoys the symbol solidly; then, also, has a clear
+eye for its beauty; and, lastly, whilst he pitches his tent on this
+sacred volcanic isle of nature, does not offer to build houses and
+barns thereon, reverencing the splendor of God which he sees bursting
+through each chink and cranny."
+
+Those who are wont to accept others at their self-assessment and to see
+things through other people's eyes--and there are many such--are in
+danger of thinking this kind of writing very fine, when in fact it is
+not only the veriest _swosh_, but that kind of swosh that excites at
+least an occasional doubt with regard to the writer's sanity. We can
+make no greater mistake than to suppose that the reason we do not
+understand these rhetorical contortionists is because they are so subtle
+and profound. We understand them quite as well as they understand
+themselves. At their very best, they are but incoherent diluters of
+other men's ideas. They have but one thing to recommend them--honesty.
+They believe in themselves.
+
+"Whatever is dark is deep. Stir a puddle, and it is deeper than a
+well."--Swift.
+
+SYNECDOCHE. The using of the name of a part for that of the whole, the
+name of the whole for that of a part, or the using of a definite number
+for an indefinite, is called, in rhetoric, _synecdoche_. "The bay was
+covered with _sails_"; i. e., with _ships_. "The man was old, careworn,
+and gray"; i. e., literally, _his hair_, not the man, was gray. "_Nine
+tenths_ of every man's happiness depends on the reception he meets with
+in the world." "He had seen seventy _winters_." "Thus spoke the
+_tempter_": here the part of the character is named that suits the
+occasion.
+
+"His roof was at the service of the outcast; the unfortunate ever found
+a welcome at his threshold."
+
+TAKE. I copy from the "London Queen": "The verb _to take_ is open to
+being considered a vulgar verb when used in reference to dinner, tea, or
+to refreshments of any kind. 'Will you _take_' is not considered _comme
+il faut_; the verb in favor for the offering of civilities being _to
+have_." According to "The Queen," then, we must say, "Will you _have_
+some dinner, tea, coffee, wine, fish, beef, salad," etc.
+
+TASTE OF. The redundant _of_, often used, in this country, in connection
+with the transitive verbs _to taste_ and _to smell_, is a Yankeeism. We
+_taste_ or _smell_ a thing, not taste _of_ nor smell _of_ a thing. The
+neuter verbs _to taste_ and _to smell_ are often followed by _of_. "If
+butter _tastes of_ brass." "For age but _tastes of_ pleasures."
+
+    "You shall stifle in your own report,
+    and _smell of_ calumny."--Shakespeare.
+
+TAUTOLOGY. Among the things to be avoided in writing is _tautology_,
+which is _the repeating of the same thought_, whether in the same or in
+different words.
+
+TAUTOPHONY. "A regard for harmony requires us, in the progress of a
+sentence, to avoid repeating a sound by employing the same word more
+than once, or using, in contiguous words, similar combinations of
+letters. This fault is known as _tautology_."--Dr. G. P. Quackenbos,
+"Advanced Course of Composition and Rhetoric," p. 300. Dr. Quackenbos is
+in error. The repetition of the same _sense_ is tautology, and the
+repetition of the same _sound_, or, as Dr. Quackenbos has it, "the
+repeating of a sound by employing the same word more than once, or by
+using in contiguous words similar combinations of letters," is
+_tautophony_.
+
+TEACH. To impart knowledge, to inform, to instruct; as, "_Teach_ me how
+to do it"; "_Teach_ me to swim"; "He _taught_ me to write." The
+uncultured often misuse _learn_ for _teach_. See LEARN.
+
+TENSE. The errors made in the use of the tenses are manifold. The one
+most frequently made by persons of culture--the one that everybody
+makes would, perhaps, be nearer the fact--is that of using the
+_imperfect_ instead of the _perfect_ tense; thus, "I never _saw_ it
+played but once": say, _have seen_. "He was the largest man I ever
+_saw_": say, _have seen_. "I never in my life _had_ such trouble": say,
+_have had_. Another frequent error, the making of which is not confined
+to the unschooled, is that of using two verbs in a past tense when only
+one should be in that time; thus, "I intended to _have gone_": say, _to
+go_. "It was my intention to _have_ come": say, _to come_. "I expected
+to _have found_ you here": say, _to find_. "I was very desirous to _have
+gone_": say, _to go_. "He was better than I expected to _have found_
+him": say, _to find_.
+
+Among other common errors are the following: "I _seen_ him when he
+_done_ it": say, "I _saw_ him when he _did_ it." "I should have _went_
+home": say, _gone_. "If he had _went_": say, _gone_. "I wish you had
+_went_": say, _gone_. "He has _went_ out": say, _gone_. "I _come_ to
+town this morning": say, _came_. "He _come_ to me for advice": say,
+_came_. "It _begun_ very late": say, _began_. "It had already _began_":
+say, _begun_. "The following toasts were _drank_": say, _drunk_. "His
+text was that God _was_ love": say, _is_ love. Another error is made in
+such sentences as these: "If I had _have_ known": say, _had known_. "If
+he had _have_ come as he promised": say, _had come_. "If you had _have_
+told me": say, _had told_.
+
+TESTIMONY. See EVIDENCE.
+
+THAN. _Than_ and _as_ implying comparison have the same case after as
+before them. "He owes more than _me_": read, than _I_--i. e., more than
+_I owe_. "John is not so old as _her_": read, as _she_--i. e., as _she
+is_. We should say, then, "He is stronger than _she_," "She is older
+than _he_," "You are richer than _I_," etc. But it does not always
+happen that the nominative case comes after _than_ or _as_. "I love you
+more than _him_," "I give you more than _him_," "I love you as well as
+_him_"; that is to say, "I love you more than _I love him_," "I give you
+more than _I give him_," "I love you as well as _I love him_." Take away
+_him_ and put _he_ in all these cases, and the grammar is just as good,
+but the meaning is quite different. "I love you as well as _him_," means
+that I love you as well _as I love him_; but, "I love you as well as
+_he_," means that I love you as well _as he loves you_.
+
+THAN WHOM. Cobbett, in his "Grammar of the English Language," says:
+"There is an erroneous way of employing _whom_, which I must point out
+to your particular attention, because it is so often seen in very good
+writers, and because it is very deceiving. 'The Duke of Argyll, _than
+whom_ no man was more hearty in the cause.' 'Cromwell, _than whom_ no
+man was better skilled in artifice.' A hundred such phrases might be
+collected from Hume, Blackstone, and even from Drs. Blair and Johnson.
+Yet they are bad grammar. In all such cases, _who_ should be made use
+of: for it is _nominative_ and not objective. 'No man was more hearty in
+the cause _than he was_'; 'No man was better skilled in artifice _than
+he was_.'[36] It is a very common Parliament-house phrase, and therefore
+presumably _corrupt_; but it is a Dr. Johnson phrase, too: 'Pope, _than
+whom_ few men had more vanity.' The Doctor did not say, 'Myself, _than
+whom_ few men have been found more base, having, in my dictionary,
+described a pensioner as a slave of state, and having afterward myself
+become a pensioner.'
+
+"I differ in this matter from Bishop Lowth, who says that 'The relative
+_who_, having reference to no verb or preposition understood, but only
+to its antecedent, when it follows _than_, is _always in the objective
+case_; even though the pronoun, if substituted in its place, would be in
+the nominative.' And then he gives an instance from Milton. 'Beelzebub,
+_than whom_, Satan except, none higher sat.' It is curious enough that
+this sentence of the Bishop is, itself, ungrammatical! Our poor
+unfortunate _it_ is so placed as to make it a matter of doubt whether
+the Bishop meant it to relate to _who_ or to _its antecedent_. However,
+we know its meaning; but, though he says that _who_, when it follows
+_than_, is always in the objective case, he gives us no reason for this
+departure from a clear general principle; unless we are to regard as a
+reason the example of Milton, who has committed many hundreds, if not
+thousands, of grammatical errors, many of which the Bishop himself has
+pointed out. There is a sort of side-wind attempt at reason in the
+words, 'having reference to no _verb_ or _preposition_ understood.' I do
+not see the _reason_, even if this could be; but it appears to me
+impossible that a noun or pronoun can exist in a grammatical state
+without having reference to some _verb_ or _preposition_, either
+expressed or understood. What is meant by Milton? 'Than Beelzebub, none
+_sat_ higher, except Satan.' And when, in order to avoid the repetition
+of the word Beelzebub, the relative becomes necessary, the full
+construction must be, 'no devil sat higher _than who_ sat, except
+Satan'; and not, 'no devil sat higher _than whom_ sat.'[37] The
+supposition that there can be a noun or pronoun which has reference to
+_no verb_ and _no preposition_, is certainly a mistake."
+
+Of this, Dr. Fitzedward Hall remarks, in his "Recent Exemplifications of
+False Philology": "That any one but Cobbett would abide this as English
+is highly improbable; and how the expression--a quite classical
+one--which he discards can be justified grammatically, except by calling
+its _than_ a preposition, others may resolve at their leisure and
+pleasure."
+
+THANKS. There are many persons who think it in questionable taste to use
+_thanks_ for _thank you_.
+
+THAT. The best writers often appear to grope after a separate employment
+for the several relatives.
+
+"'THAT' _is the proper restrictive, explicative, limiting, or defining
+relative_.
+
+"'_That_,' the neuter of the definite article, was early in use as a
+neuter relative. All the other oldest relatives gradually dropt away,
+and 'that' came to be applied also to plural antecedents, and to
+masculines and feminines. When 'as,' 'which,' and 'who' came forward to
+share the work of 'that,' there seems to have arisen not a little
+uncertainty about the relatives, and we find curious double forms: 'whom
+that,' 'which that,' 'which as,' etc. Gower has, 'Venus _whose_ priest
+_that_ I am'; Chaucer writes--'This Abbot _which that_ was an holy man,'
+'his love _the which that_ he oweth.' By the Elizabethan period, these
+double forms have disappeared, and all the relatives are used singly
+without hesitation. From then till now, 'that' has been struggling with
+'who' and 'which' to regain superior favor, with varying success. 'Who'
+is used for persons, 'which' for things, in both numbers; so is 'that';
+and the only opportunity of a special application of 'that' lies in the
+important distinction between coördination and restriction. Now, as
+'who' and 'which' are most commonly preferred for coördination, it would
+be a clear gain to confine them to this sense, and to reserve 'that' for
+the restrictive application alone. This arrangement, then, would _fall
+in with the most general use of 'that,' especially beyond the limits of
+formal composition_.
+
+"The use of 'that' solely as restrictive, with 'who' and 'which' solely
+as coördinating, _also avoids ambiguities_ that often attend the
+indiscriminate use of 'who' and 'which' for coördinate and for
+restrictive clauses. Thus, when we say, 'his conduct surprised his
+English friends, _who_ had not known him long,' we may mean either that
+his English friends generally were surprised (the relative being, in
+that case, _coördinating_), or that only a portion of them--namely, the
+particular portion that had not known him long--were surprised. In this
+last case the relative is meant to define or explain the antecedent, and
+the doubt would be removed by writing thus: 'his English friends _that_
+had not known him long.' So in the following sentence there is a similar
+ambiguity in the use of 'which': 'the next winter _which_ you will spend
+in town will give you opportunities of making a more prudent choice.'
+This may mean, either 'you will spend next winter in town' ('which'
+being coördinating), or 'the next of the winters when you are to live in
+town,' let that come when it may. In the former case, 'which' is the
+proper relative; in the latter case, the meaning is restrictive or
+defining, and would be best brought out by 'that': 'the next winter
+_that_ you will spend in town.'
+
+"A further consideration in favor of employing 'that' for explicative
+clauses is the unpleasant effect arising from the _too frequent
+repetition of 'who' and 'which.'_ Grammarians often recommend 'that' as
+a means of varying the style; but this end ought to be sought in
+subservience to the still greater end of perspicuity.
+
+"The following examples will serve further to illustrate the distinction
+between _that_, on the one hand, and _who_ and _which_, on the other:
+
+"'In general, Mr. Burchell was fondest of the company of children,
+_whom_ he used to call harmless little men.' 'Whom' is here
+idiomatically used, being the equivalent of '_and them_ he used to
+call,' etc.
+
+    "'Bacon at last, a mighty man, arose,
+    _Whom_ a wise king and nation chose
+    Lord Chancellor of both their laws.'
+
+Here, also, 'whom' is equal to 'and him.'
+
+"In the following instance the relative is restrictive or defining, and
+'that' would be preferable: 'the conclusion of the "Iliad" is like the
+exit of a great man out of company _whom_ he has entertained
+magnificently.' Compare another of Addison's sentences: 'a man of polite
+imagination is let into a great many pleasures _that_ the vulgar are not
+capable of receiving.'
+
+"Both relatives are introduced discriminatingly in this passage:--'She
+had learned that from Mrs. Wood, _who_ had heard it from her husband,
+_who_ had heard it at the public-house from the landlord, _who_ had been
+let into the secret by the boy _that_ carried the beer to some of the
+prisoners.'
+
+"The following sentences are ambiguous under the modern system of using
+'who' for both purposes:--'I met the boatman _who_ took me across the
+ferry.' If 'who' is the proper relative here, the meaning is, 'I met the
+boatman, _and he_ took me across,' it being supposed that the boatman is
+known and definite. But if there be several boatmen, and I wish to
+indicate one in particular by the circumstance that he had taken me
+across the ferry, I should use 'that.' 'The youngest boy _who_ has
+learned to dance is James.' This means either 'the youngest boy is
+James, _and he_ has learned to dance,' or, 'of the boys, the youngest
+that has learned to dance is James.' This last sense is restrictive, and
+'that' should be used.
+
+"Turning now to 'which,' we may have a series of parallel examples. 'The
+court, _which_ gives currency to manners, should be exemplary': here the
+meaning is 'the court should be exemplary, _for the court_ gives
+currency to manners.' 'Which' is the idiomatic relative in this case.
+'The cat, _which_ you despise so much, is a very useful animal.' The
+relative here also is coördinating, and not restrictive. If it were
+intended to point out one individual cat specially despised by the
+person addressed, 'that' would convey the sense. 'A theory _which_ does
+not tend to the improvement of practice is utterly unworthy of regard.'
+The meaning is restrictive; 'a theory _that_ does not tend.' The
+following sentence is one of many from Goldsmith that give 'that'
+instead of 'which':--'Age, _that_ lessens the enjoyment of life,
+increases our desire of living.' Thackeray also was fond of this usage.
+But it is not very common.
+
+"'Their faith tended to make them improvident; but a wise instinct
+taught them that if there was one thing _which_ ought not to be left to
+fate, or to the precepts of a deceased prophet, it was the artillery'; a
+case where 'that' is the proper relative.
+
+"'All words, _which_ are signs of complex ideas, furnish matter of
+mistake.' This gives an erroneous impression, and should be 'all words
+_that_ are signs of complex ideas.'
+
+"'In all cases of prescription, the universal practice of judges is to
+direct juries by analogy to the Statute of Limitations, to decide
+against incorporeal rights _which_ have for many years been
+relinquished': say instead, 'incorporeal rights _that_ have for many
+years,' and the sense is clear.
+
+"It is necessary for the proper understanding of 'which' to advert to
+its peculiar function of referring to a whole clause as the antecedent:
+'William ran along the top of the wall, _which_ alarmed his mother very
+much.' The antecedent is obviously not the noun 'wall,' but the fact
+expressed by the entire clause--'William ran,' etc. 'He by no means
+wants sense, _which_ only serves to aggravate his former folly'; namely,
+(not 'sense,' but) the circumstance 'that he does not want sense.' 'He
+is neither over-exalted by prosperity, nor too much depressed by
+misfortune; _which_ you must allow marks a great mind.' 'We have done
+many things _which_ we ought not to have done,' might mean 'we ought not
+_to have done many things_'; that is, 'we ought to have done few
+things.' 'That' would give the exact sense intended: 'we have done many
+things _that_ we ought not to have done.' 'He began to look after his
+affairs himself, _which_ was the way to make them prosper.'
+
+"We must next allude to the cases where the relative is governed by a
+preposition. We can use a preposition before 'who' and 'which,' but when
+the relative is 'that,' the preposition must be thrown to the end of the
+clause. Owing to an imperfect appreciation of the genius of our
+language, offense was taken at this usage by some of our leading writers
+at the beginning of last century, and to this circumstance we must refer
+the disuse of 'that' as the relative of restriction.[38]
+
+"'It is curious that the only circumstance connected with Scott, and
+related by Lockhart, _of which_ I was a witness, is incorrectly stated
+in the "Life of Sir Walter."'--Leslie's 'Memoirs.' The relative should
+be restrictive: '_that_ I was a witness _of_.'
+
+"'There are many words _which_ are adjectives _which_ have nothing to do
+with the qualities of the nouns _to which_ they are put.'--Cobbett.
+Better: 'there are many words _that_ are adjectives _that_ have nothing
+to do with the qualities of the nouns (_that_) they are put _to_.'
+
+"'Other objects, _of which_ we have not occasion to speak so frequently,
+we do not designate by a name of their own.' This, if amended, would be:
+'other objects _that_ we have not occasion to speak _of_ so frequently,
+we do not,' etc.
+
+"'Sorrow for the dead is the only sorrow _from which_ we refuse to be
+divorced': 'the only sorrow (_that_) we refuse to be divorced _from_.'
+
+"'Why, there is not a single sentence in this play _that_ I do not know
+the meaning _of_.'--Addison.
+
+"'Originality is a thing we constantly clamor _for_, and constantly
+quarrel _with_.'--Carlyle.
+
+"'A spirit more amiable, but less vigorous, than Luther's would have
+shrunk back from the dangers _which_ he braved and surmounted': '_that_
+he braved'; 'the dangers _braved_ and _surmounted_ by him.'
+
+"'Nor is it at all improbable that the emigrants had been guilty of
+those faults _from which_ civilized men _who_ settle among an
+uncivilized people are rarely free.'--Macaulay. 'Nor is it at all
+improbable that the emigrants had been guilty of _the_ faults _that_
+(_such_ faults _as_) civilized men _that settle_ (_settling_, or
+_settled_) among an uncivilized people are rarely free _from_.'
+
+"'Prejudices are notions or opinions _which_ the mind entertains without
+knowing the grounds and reasons of them, and _which_ are assented to
+without examination.'--Berkeley. The 'which' in both cases should be
+'that,' but the relative may be entirely dispensed with by participial
+conversion: 'prejudices are notions or opinions _entertained_ by the
+mind without knowing the grounds and reasons of them, and _assented_ to
+without examination.'
+
+"The too frequent repetition of 'who' and 'which' may be avoided by
+resolving them into the conjunction and personal or other pronoun: 'In
+such circumstances, the utmost that Bosquet could be expected to do was
+to hold his ground, (_which_) _and this_ he did.'"--Bain's "Higher
+English Grammar."
+
+This word is sometimes vulgarly used for _so_; thus, "I was _that_
+nervous I forgot everything"; "I was _that_ frightened I could hardly
+stand."
+
+THE. Bungling writers sometimes write sheer nonsense, or say something
+very different from what they have in their minds, by the simple
+omission of the definite article; thus, "The indebtedness of the
+English tongue to the French, Latin and Greek is disclosed in almost
+every sentence framed." According to this, there is such a thing as a
+French, Latin and Greek tongue. Professor Townsend meant to say: "The
+indebtedness of the English tongue to the French, _the_ Latin, and _the_
+Greek," etc.
+
+THEN. The use of this word as an adjective is condemned in very emphatic
+terms by some of our grammarians, and yet this use of it has the
+sanction of such eminent writers as Addison, Johnson, Whately, and Sir
+J. Hawkins. Johnson says, "In his _then_ situation," which, if brevity
+be really the soul of wit, certainly has much more soul in it than "In
+the situation he then occupied." However, it is doubtful whether _then_,
+as an adjective, will ever again find favor with careful writers.
+
+THENCE. See WHENCE.
+
+THINK FOR. We not unfrequently hear a superfluous _for_ tacked to a
+sentence; thus, "You will find that he knows more about the affair than
+you think _for_."
+
+THOSE KIND. "_Those_ kind of apples _are_ best": read, "_That_ kind of
+apples _is_ best." It is truly remarkable that many persons who can
+justly lay claim to the possession of considerable culture use this
+barbarous combination. It would be just as correct to say, "Those flock
+of geese," or "Those drove of cattle," as to say, "Those _sort_ or
+_kind_ of people."
+
+THOSE WHO. This phrase, applied in a restrictive sense, is the modern
+substitute for the ancient idiom _they that_, an idiom in accordance
+with the true meaning of _that_.
+
+"'_They that_ told me the story said'; 'Blessed are _they that_ mourn';
+'and Simon and _they that_ were with him'; 'I love _them that_ love me,
+and _they that_ seek me early shall find me'; '_they that_ are whole
+have no need of a physician'; 'how sweet is the rest of _them that_
+labor!' 'I can not tell who to compare them to so fitly as to _them
+that_ pick pockets in the presence of the judge'; '_they that_ enter
+into the state of marriage cast a die of the greatest contingency' (J.
+Taylor).
+
+    "'_That_ man hath perfect blessedness
+    _Who_ walketh not astray,'
+
+if expressed according to the old idiom would be, '_the_ man
+hath--_that_ walketh.'
+
+"'That' and 'those,' as demonstrative adjectives, refer backward, and
+are not therefore well suited for the forward reference implied in
+making use of 'that which' and 'those who' as restrictive relatives. It
+is also very cumbrous to say '_that_ case _to which_ you allude' for
+'the case (_that_) you allude _to_.'
+
+"Take now the following: 'The Duke of Wellington is not one of _those
+who_ interfere with matters _over which_ he has no control': 'the Duke
+is not one of _them that_ interfere in matters _that_ they have no
+control _over_ (matters _that_ they can not control, _beyond their
+control_, _out of their province_).' If 'them that' sounds too
+antiquated, we may adopt as a convenient compromise, 'the Duke is not
+one of _those that_'; or, 'the Duke is not one to _interfere_ in matters
+out of his province'; 'the duke is not one _that interferes_ with _what_
+he has no control _over_.'"--Bain.
+
+THREADBARE QUOTATIONS. Among the things that are in bad taste in
+speaking and writing, the use of threadbare quotations and expressions
+is in the front rank. Some of these _usés et cassés_ old-timers are the
+following: "Their name is legion"; "hosts of friends"; "the upper ten";
+"Variety is the spice of life"; "Distance lends enchantment to the
+view"; "A thing of beauty is a joy for ever"; "the light fantastic toe";
+"own the soft impeachment"; "fair women and brave men"; "revelry by
+night"; "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet."
+
+TO. It is a well-established rule of grammar that _to_, the sign of the
+infinitive mood, should not be used for the infinitive itself: thus, "He
+has not done it, nor is he likely _to_." It should be, "nor is he likely
+_to do it_."
+
+We often find _to_, when the sign of the infinitive, separated by an
+adverb from the verb to which it belongs. Professor A. P. Peabody says
+that no standard English writer makes this mistake, and that, so far as
+he knows, it occurs frequently with but one respectable American writer.
+
+Very often _to_ is used instead of _at_; thus, "I have been _to_ the
+theatre, _to_ church, _to_ my uncle's, _to_ a concert," and so on. In
+all these cases, the preposition to use is clearly _at_, and not _to_.
+See, also, AND.
+
+TO THE FORE. An old idiomatic phrase, now freely used again.
+
+TONGUE. "Much _tongue_ and much judgment seldom go
+together."--L'Estrange. See LANGUAGE.
+
+TOWARD. Those who profess to know about such things say that etymology
+furnishes no pretext for the adding of _s_ to _ward_ in such words as
+_backward_, _forward_, _toward_, _upward_, _onward_, _downward_,
+_afterward_, _heavenward_, _earthward_, and the like.
+
+TRANSFERRED EPITHET. This is the shifting of a qualifying word from its
+proper subject to some allied subject. Examples:
+
+    "The little fields made green
+    By husbandry of many _thrifty years_."
+
+"He plods his _weary way_." "Hence to your _idle bed_!" By this figure
+the diction is rendered more terse and vigorous; it is much used in
+verse. For the sake of conciseness, it is used in prose in such phrases
+as the _lunatic asylum_, the _criminal court_, the _condemned cell_,
+the _blind asylum_, the _cholera hospital_, the _foundling asylum_, and
+the like.
+
+    "Still in harmonious intercourse they lived
+    The rural day, and talked the flowing heart."
+
+"There be some who, with everything to make them happy, plod their
+discontented and melancholy way through life, less grateful than the dog
+that licks the hand that feeds it."
+
+TRANSPIRE. This is one of the most frequently misused words in the
+language. Its primary meaning is to evaporate insensibly through the
+pores, but in this sense it is not used; in this sense we use its twin
+sister _per_spire. _Transpire_ is now properly used in the sense of to
+escape from secrecy, to become known, to leak out; and improperly used
+in the sense of to occur, to happen, to come to pass, and to elapse. The
+word is correctly used thus: "You will not let a word concerning the
+matter _transpire_"; "It _transpires_ [leaks out] that S. & B. control
+the enterprise"; "Soon after the funeral it _transpired_ [became known]
+that the dead woman was alive"; "It has _transpired_ [leaked out] that
+the movement originated with John Blank"; "No report of the proceedings
+was allowed to _transpire_"; "It has not yet _transpired_ who the
+candidate is to be." The word is incorrectly used thus: "The Mexican war
+_transpired_ in 1847"; "The drill will _transpire_ under shelter"; "The
+accident _transpired_ one day last week"; "Years will _transpire_ before
+it will be finished"; "More than a century _transpired_ before it was
+revisited by civilized man."
+
+TRIFLING MINUTIÆ. The meaning of _trifles_ and of _minutiæ_ is so nearly
+the same that no one probably ever uses the phrase _trifling minutiæ_
+except from thoughtlessness.
+
+TRUSTWORTHY. See RELIABLE.
+
+TRY. This word is often improperly used for _make_. We _make_
+experiments, not _try_ them, which is as incorrect as it would be to
+say, _try_ the _attempt_, or the _trial_.
+
+UGLY. In England, this word is restricted to meaning ill-favored; with
+us it is often used--and not without authority--in the sense of
+ill-tempered, vicious, unmanageable.
+
+UNBEKNOWN. This word is no longer used except by the unschooled.
+
+UNDERHANDED. This word, though found in the dictionaries, is a
+vulgarism, and as such is to be avoided. The proper word is _underhand_.
+An _underhand_, not an _underhanded_, proceeding.
+
+UNIVERSAL--ALL. "He is _universally_ esteemed by _all_ who know him." If
+he is _universally_ esteemed, he must be esteemed by _all_ who know him;
+and, if he is esteemed by _all_ who know him, he must be _universally_
+esteemed.
+
+UPWARD OF. This phrase is often used, if not improperly, at least
+inelegantly, for _more than_; thus, "I have been here for _upward of_ a
+year"; "For _upward of_ three quarters of a century she has," etc.,
+meaning, for _more than_ three quarters of a century.
+
+UTTER. This verb is often misused for _say_, _express_. To _utter_ means
+to _speak_, to _pronounce_; and its derivative _utterance_ means the
+act, manner, or power of uttering, vocal expression; as, "the utterance
+of articulate sounds." We _utter_ a cry; _express_ a thought or
+sentiment; _speak_ our mind; and, though prayers are _said_, they may be
+_uttered_ in a certain tone or manner. "Mr. Blank is right in all he
+_utters_": read, _says_. "The court _uttered_ a sentiment that all will
+applaud": read, _expressed_ a sentiment.
+
+The primary meaning of the adjective _utter_ is outer, on the outside;
+but it is no longer used in this sense. It is now used in the sense of
+complete, total, perfect, mere, entire; but he who uses it
+indiscriminately as a synonym of these words will frequently utter
+_utter_ nonsense--i. e., he will utter that which is without the pale of
+sense. For example, we can not say _utter_ concord, but we can say
+_utter_ discord--i. e., without the pale of concord.
+
+VALUABLE. The following sentence, which recently appeared in one of the
+more fastidious of our morning papers, is offered as an example of
+extreme slipshodness in the use of language: "Sea captains are among the
+most _valuable_ contributors to the Park aviary." What the writer
+probably meant to say is, "Sea captains are among those whose
+contributions to the Park aviary are the most valuable."
+
+VAST. This word is often met with in forcible-feeble diction, where it
+is used instead of _great_ or _large_ to qualify such words as number,
+majority, multitude, and the like. Big words and expletives should be
+used only where they are really needed; where they are not really
+needed, they go wide of the object aimed at. The sportsman that hunts
+small game with buck-shot comes home empty-handed.
+
+VERACITY. The loss would be a small one if we were to lose this word and
+its derivatives. Truth and its derivatives would supply all our needs.
+In the phrase so often heard, "A man of truth and veracity," _veracity_
+is entirely superfluous, it having precisely the same meaning as truth.
+The phrase, "A big, large man," is equally good diction.
+
+VERBIAGE. An unnecessary profusion of words is called _verbiage_:
+verbosity, wordiness.
+
+"I thought what I read of it _verbiage_."--Johnson.
+
+Sometimes a better name than verbiage for wordiness would be
+_emptiness_. Witness: "Clearness may be developed and cultivated in
+three ways, (_a_) By constantly practicing in heart and life the
+thoughts and ways of honesty and frankness." The first sentence
+evidently means, "Clearness may be _attained_ in three ways"; but what
+the second sentence means--if it means anything--is more than I can
+tell. Professor L. T. Townsend, "Art of Speech," vol. i, p. 130, adds:
+"This may be regarded as the surest path to greater transparency of
+style." The transparency of Dr. Townsend's style is peculiar. Also, p.
+144, we find: "The laws and rules[1] thus far laid down[2] furnish ample
+foundation for[3] the general statement that an easy and natural[4]
+expression, an exact verbal incarnation of one's thinking,[5] together
+with the power of using appropriate figures, and of making nice
+discriminations between approximate synonyms,[6] each being an important
+factor in correct style, are attained in two ways.[7] (1) Through
+moral[8] and mental discipline. (2) Through continuous and intimate[9]
+acquaintance with such authors as best exemplify those attainments."[10]
+
+1. Would not _laws_ cover the whole ground? 2. _En passant_ I would
+remark that Dr. Townsend did not make these laws, though he so
+intimates. 3. I suggest the word _justify_ in place of these four. 4.
+What is natural is easy; _easy_, therefore, is superfluous. 5. If this
+means anything, it does not mean more than the adjective _clear_ would
+express, if properly used in the sentence. 6. _Approximate_ synonyms!!
+Who ever heard of any antagonistic or even of dissimilar synonyms? 7.
+The transparency of this sentence is not unlike the transparency of
+corrugated glass. 8. What has morality to do with correctness? 9. An
+intimate acquaintance would suffice for most people. 10. Those
+attainments! What are they? Dr. Townsend's corrugated style makes it
+hard to tell.
+
+This paragraph is so badly conceived throughout that it is well-nigh
+impossible to make head, middle, or tail of it; still, if I am at all
+successful in guessing what Professor Townsend wanted to say in it,
+then--when shorn of its redundancy and high-flown emptiness--it will
+read somewhat like this: "The laws thus far presented justify the
+general statement that a clear and natural mode of expression--together
+with that art of using appropriate figures and that ability properly to
+discriminate between synonyms which are necessary to correctness--is
+attained in two ways. (1) By mental discipline. (2) By the study of our
+best authors."
+
+The following sentence is from a leading magazine: "If we begin a system
+of interference, _regulating men's gains_, bolstering here, _in order to
+strengthen this interest_, [and] repressing _elsewhere_ [there], in
+order to equalize wealth, we shall do _an_ [a] _immense_ deal of
+mischief, and without bringing about a more agreeable condition of
+things _than now_ [we] shall _simply_ discourage enterprise, repress
+industry, and check material growth _in all directions_." Read without
+the eighteen words in italics and with the four inclosed.
+
+"Nothing disgusts sooner than the empty pomp of language."
+
+VICE. See CRIME.
+
+VICINITY. This word is sometimes incorrectly used without the possessive
+pronoun; thus, "Washington and vicinity," instead of "Washington and
+_its_ vicinity." The primary meaning of _vicinity_ is nearness,
+proximity. In many of the cases in which vicinity is used,
+_neighborhood_ would be the better word, though _vicinity_ is perhaps
+preferable where it is a question of mere locality.
+
+VOCATION--AVOCATION. These words are frequently confounded. A man's
+_vocation_ is his profession, his calling, his business; and his
+_avocations_ are the things that occupy him incidentally. Mademoiselle
+Bernhardt's _vocation_ is acting; her _avocations_ are painting and
+sculpture. "The tracing of resemblances among the objects and events of
+the world is a constant _avocation_ of the human mind."
+
+VULGAR. By the many, this word is probably more frequently used
+improperly than properly. As a noun, it means the common people, the
+lower orders, the multitude, the many; as an adjective, it means coarse,
+low, unrefined, as "the _vulgar_ people." The sense in which it is
+misused is that of immodest, indecent. The wearing, for example, of a
+gown too short at the top may be _indecent_, but is not _vulgar_.
+
+WAS. "He said he had come to the conclusion that there _was_ no God."
+"The greatest of Byron's works _was_ his whole work taken
+together."--Matthew Arnold. What is true at all times should be
+expressed by using the verb in the present tense. The sentences above
+should read _is_, not _was_.
+
+WHARF. See DOCK.
+
+WHAT. "He would not believe but _what_ I did it": read, but _that_. "I
+do not doubt _but what_ I shall go to Boston to-morrow": read, doubt
+_that_. We say properly, "I have nothing _but what_ you see"; "You have
+brought everything _but what_ I wanted."
+
+WHENCE. As this adverb means--unaided--_from_ what place, source, or
+cause, it is, as Dr. Johnson styled it, "a vicious mode of speech" to
+say _from whence_, Milton to the contrary notwithstanding. Nor is there
+any more propriety in the phrase _from thence_, as _thence_
+means--unaided--from that place. "_Whence_ do you come?" not "_From
+whence_ do you come?" Likewise, "He went _hence_," not "_from hence_."
+
+WHETHER. This conjunction is often improperly repeated in a sentence;
+thus, "I have not decided whether I shall go to Boston or _whether I
+shall go_ to Philadelphia."
+
+WHICH. This pronoun as an _interrogative_ applies to _persons_ as well
+as to _things_; as a _relative_, it is now made to refer to _things
+only_.
+
+"_Which_ is employed in coördinate sentences, where _it_, or _they_, and
+a conjunction might answer the purpose; thus, 'At school I studied
+geometry, _which_ (and it) I found useful afterward.' Here the new
+clause is something independent added to the previous clause, and not
+limiting that clause in any way. So in the adjectival clause; as, 'He
+struck the poor dog, _which_ (and it, or although it) had never done him
+harm.' Such instances represent the most accurate meaning of _which_.
+_Who_ and _which_ might be termed the COÖRDINATING RELATIVES.
+
+"_Which_ is likewise used in _restrictive_ clauses that limit or explain
+the antecedent; as, 'The house _which_ he built still remains.' Here the
+clause introduced by _which_ specifies, or points out, the house that is
+the subject of the statement, namely, by the circumstance that a certain
+person built it. As remarked with regard to _who_, our most idiomatic
+writers prefer _that_ in this particular application, and would say,
+'The house _that_ he built still remains.'"
+
+"_Which_ sometimes has a special reference attaching to it, as the
+neuter relative: 'Cæsar crossed the Rubicon, _which_ was in effect a
+declaration of war.' The antecedent in this instance is not _Rubicon_,
+but the entire clause.
+
+"There is a peculiar usage where _which_ may _seem_ to be still
+regularly used in reference to persons, as in 'John is a soldier,
+_which_ I should like to be,' that is, 'And I should like _to be a
+soldier_.'" See THAT.
+
+WHO. There are few persons, even among the most cultivated, who do not
+make frequent mistakes in the use of this pronoun. They say, "_Who_ did
+you see?" "_Who_ did you meet?" "_Who_ did he marry?" "_Who_ did you
+hear?" "_Who_ did he know?" "_Who_ are you writing to?" "_Who_ are you
+looking at?" In all these sentences the interrogative pronoun is in the
+objective case, and should be used in the objective form, which is
+_whom_, and not _who_. To show that these sentences are not correct, and
+are not defensible by supposing any ellipsis whatsoever, we have only to
+put the questions in another form. Take the first one, and, instead of
+"Who did you see?" say, "Who saw you?" which, if correct, justifies us
+in saying, "Who knew he," which is the equivalent of "Who did he know?"
+But "Who saw you?" in this instance, is clearly not correct, since it
+says directly the opposite of what is intended.
+
+_Who_ was little used as a relative till about the sixteenth century.
+Bain says: "In modern use, more especially in books, _who_ is frequently
+employed to introduce a clause intended to restrict, define, limit, or
+explain a noun (or its equivalent); as, 'That is the man _who_ spoke to
+us yesterday.'"
+
+"Here the clause introduced by _who_ is necessary to define or explain
+the antecedent _the man_; without it, we do not know who _the man_ is.
+Such relative clauses are typical _adjective_ clauses--i. e., they have
+the same effect as adjectives in limiting nouns. This may be called the
+RESTRICTIVE use of the relative.
+
+"Now it will be found that the practice of our most idiomatic writers
+and speakers is to prefer _that_ to _who_ in this application.
+
+"_Who_ is properly used in such coördinate sentences as, 'I met the
+watchman, _who_ told me there had been a fire.' Here the two clauses are
+distinct and independent; in such a case, _and he_ might be substituted
+for _who_.
+
+"Another form of the same use is when the second clause is of the kind
+termed adverbial, where we may resolve _who_ into a personal or
+demonstrative pronoun and conjunction. 'Why should we consult Charles,
+_who_ (_for he_, _seeing that he_) knows nothing of the matter?'
+
+"_Who_ may be regarded as a modern objective form, side by side with
+_whom_. For many good writers and speakers say '_who_ are you talking
+of?' '_who_ does the garden belong to?' '_who_ is this for?' '_who_
+from?'" etc.
+
+If this be true--if _who may_ be regarded as a modern objective form,
+side by side with _whom_--then, of course, such expressions as "_Who_
+did you see?" "_Who_ did you meet?" "_Who_ did he marry?" "_Who_ were
+you with?" "_Who_ will you give it to?" and the like, are correct. That
+they are used colloquially by well-nigh everybody, no one will dispute;
+but that they are _correct_, few grammarians will concede. See THAT.
+
+WHOLE. This word is sometimes most improperly used for _all_; thus, "The
+_whole_ Germans seem to be saturated with the belief that they are
+really the greatest people on earth, and that they would be universally
+recognized as being the greatest, if they were not so exceeding modest."
+"The whole Russians are inspired with the belief that their mission is
+to conquer the world."--Alison.
+
+WHOLESOME. See HEALTHY.
+
+WHOSE. Mr. George Washington Moon discountenances the use of _whose_ as
+the possessive of _which_. He says, "The best writers, when speaking of
+inanimate objects, use _of which_ instead of _whose_." The correctness
+of this statement is doubtful. The truth is, I think, that good writers
+use that form for the possessive case of _which_ that in their judgment
+is, in each particular case, the more euphonious, giving the preference,
+perhaps, to _of which_. On this subject Dr. Campbell says: "The
+possessive of _who_ is properly _whose_. The pronoun _which_,
+originally indeclinable, had no possessive. This was supplied, in the
+common periphrastic manner, by the help of the preposition and the
+article. But, as this could not fail to enfeeble the expression, when so
+much time was given to mere conjunctives, all our best authors, both in
+prose and verse, have now come regularly to adopt, in such cases, the
+possessive of _who_, and thus have substituted one syllable in the room
+of three, as in the example following: 'Philosophy, _whose_ end is to
+instruct us in the knowledge of nature,' for 'Philosophy, _the_ end _of
+which_ is to instruct us.' Some grammarians remonstrate; but it ought to
+be remembered that use, well established, must give law to grammar, and
+not grammar to use."
+
+Professor Bain says: "_Whose_, although the possessive of _who_, and
+practically of _which_, is yet frequently employed for the purpose of
+restriction: 'We are the more likely to guard watchfully against those
+faults _whose_ deformity we have seen fully displayed in others.' This
+is better than 'the deformity _of which_ we have seen.' 'Propositions of
+_whose_ truth we have no certain knowledge.'--Locke." Dr. Fitzedward
+Hall says that the use of _whose_ for _of which_, where the antecedent
+is not only irrational but inanimate, has had the support of high
+authority for several hundred years.
+
+WIDOW WOMAN. Since widows are always women, why say a widow _woman_? It
+would be perfectly correct to say a _widowed_ woman.
+
+WIDOWHOOD. There is good authority for using this word in speaking of
+men as well as of women.
+
+WITHOUT. This word is often improperly used instead of _unless_; as,
+"You will never live to my age _without_ you keep yourself in breath and
+exercise"; "I shall not go _without_ my father consents": properly,
+_unless_ my father consents, or, _without_ my father's consent.
+
+WORST. We should say _at the worst_, not _at worst_.
+
+WOVE. The past participle of the verb _to weave_ is _woven_. "Where was
+this cloth _woven_?" not _wove_.
+
+YOU ARE MISTAKEN. See MISTAKEN.
+
+YOU WAS. Good usage does, and it is to be hoped always will, consider
+_you was_ a gross vulgarism, certain grammarians to the contrary
+notwithstanding. _You_ is the form of the pronoun in the second person
+plural, and must, if we would speak correctly, be used with the
+corresponding form of the verb. The argument that we use _you_ in the
+singular number is so nonsensical that it does not merit a moment's
+consideration. It is a custom we have--and have in common with other
+peoples--to speak to one another in the second person plural, and that
+is all there is of it. The Germans speak to one another in the _third_
+person plural. The exact equivalent in German of our _How are you?_ is,
+_How are they?_ Those who would say _you was_ should be consistent, and
+in like manner say _you has_ and _you does_.
+
+YOURS, &C. The ignorant and obtuse not unfrequently profess themselves
+at the bottom of their letters "Yours, &c." And so forth! forth what?
+Few vulgarisms are equally offensive, and none could be more so. In
+printing correspondence, the newspapers often content themselves with
+this short-hand way of intimating that the writer's name was preceded by
+some one of the familiar forms of ending letters; this an occasional
+dunderhead seems to think is sufficient authority for writing himself,
+_Yours, &c._
+
+
+THE END.
+
+
+FOOTNOTES:
+
+[1] If this is true in England, it is not true in America. Nowhere in
+the United States is such "questionable grammar" as this frequently
+heard in cultivated circles.
+
+[2] "It may be confidently affirmed that with good speakers, in the case
+of negation, _not me_ is the usual practice."--Bain. This, I confidently
+affirm, is not true in America.--A. A.
+
+[3] Should be, _a text-book for his course_, and not, _for his course a
+text-book_.
+
+[4] Mr. Gould criticises the Dean's _diction_, not his _style_.
+
+[5] Better, "to revise it."
+
+[6] "Is _to put them_ in tabular form."
+
+[7] Bullions' "Grammar" was published in 1867.
+
+[8] "L. W. K., CLK., LL. D., EX. SCH., T. C., D. Of this reverend
+gentleman's personality I know nothing. He does not say exactly what he
+means; but what he means is, yet, unmistakable. The extract given above
+is from 'Public Opinion,' January 20, 1866."
+
+[9] "The analysis, taken for granted in this quotation, of 'are being
+thrown up' into 'are being' and 'thrown up' will be dealt with in the
+sequel, and shown to be untenable."
+
+[10] "Vol. xlv, p. 504 (1837)."
+
+[11] "'The Life and Correspondence of the late Robert Southey,' vol. i,
+p. 249."
+
+[12] "Vol. i, p. 338. 'A student who _is being crammed_'; 'that verb is
+eternally _being declined_.'--'The Doctor,' pp. 38 and 40 (mono-tome
+ed.)."
+
+[13] "In 'Put Yourself in his Place,' chapter x, he writes: 'She basked
+in the present delight, and looked as if she _was being taken_ to heaven
+by an angel.'"
+
+[14] "'Words,' etc., p. 340."
+
+[15] "Thomas Fuller writes: 'At his arrival, the last stake of the
+Christians was _on losing_.'--'The Historie of the Holy Warre,' p. 218
+(ed. 1647)."
+
+[16] "I express myself in this manner because I distinguish between _be_
+and _exist_."
+
+[17] "Samuel Richardson writes: 'Jenny, who attends me here, has more
+than once hinted to me that Miss Jervis loves to sit up late, either
+reading or _being read to_ by Anne, who, though she reads well, is not
+fond of the task.'--'Sir Charles Grandison,' vol. iii, p. 46 (ed. 1754).
+
+"The transition is very slight by which we pass from 'sits being read
+to' to 'is being read to.'"
+
+[18] "I am here indebted to the last edition of Dr. Worcester's
+'Dictionary,' preface, p. xxxix."
+
+[19] "'Words and their Uses,' p. 353."
+
+[20] "'_It is being_ is simply equal to _it is_. And, in the supposed
+corresponding Latin phrases, _ens factus est_, _ens ædificatus est_ (the
+obsoleteness of _ens_ as a participle being granted), the monstrosity is
+not in the use of _ens_ with _factus_, but in that of _ens_ with _est_.
+The absurdity is, in Latin, just what it is in English, the use of _is_
+with _being_, the making of the verb _to be_ a complement to
+itself.'--_Ibid._, pp. 354, 355.
+
+"Apparently, Mr. White recognizes no more difference between
+_supplement_ and _complement_ than he recognizes between _be_ and
+_exist_. See the extract I have made above, from p. 353."
+
+[21] "'But those things which, _being not now doing_, or having not yet
+been done, have a natural aptitude to exist hereafter, may be properly
+said to appertain to the future.'--Harris's 'Hermes,' book I, chap. viii
+(p. 155, foot-note, ed. 1771). For Harris's _being not now doing_, which
+is to translate μὴ γινόμενα, the modern school, if they pursued
+uniformity with more of fidelity than of taste, would have to put _being
+not now being done_. There is not much to choose between the two."
+
+[22] "'Words and their Uses,' p. 343."
+
+[23] The possessive construction here is, in my judgment, not
+imperatively demanded. There is certainly no lack of authority for
+putting the three substantives in the accusative. The possessive
+construction seems to me, however, to be preferable.
+
+[24] "The use of the plural for the singular was established as early
+the beginning of the fourteenth century."--Morris, p. 118, § 153.
+
+[25] "Some writers omit the comma in cases where the conjunction is
+used. But, as the conjunction is generally employed in such cases for
+emphasis, commas ought to be used; although, where the words are very
+closely connected, or where they constitute a clause in the midst of a
+long sentence, they may be omitted."--Bigelow's "Handbook of
+Punctuation."
+
+[26] "This usage violates one of the fundamental principles of
+punctuation; it indicates, very improperly, that the noun _man_ is more
+closely connected with _learned_ than with the other adjectives. Analogy
+and perspicuity require a comma after _learned_."--Quackenbos.
+
+[27] Many writers would omit the last two commas in this sentence.
+
+[28] The commas before and after _particularly_ are hardly necessary.
+
+[29] The only exception to this rule is the occasional use of the colon
+to separate two short sentences that are closely connected.
+
+[30] "Dr. Angus on the 'English Tongue,' art. 527."
+
+[31] "In the following passages, the indicative mood would be more
+suitable than the subjunctive: 'If thou _be_ the Son of God, command
+that these stones be made bread'; 'if thou _be_ the Son of God, come
+down from the cross.' For, although the address was not sincere on the
+part of the speakers, they really meant to make the supposition or to
+grant that he was the Son of God; 'seeing that thou _art_ the Son of
+God.' Likewise in the following: 'Now if Christ _be_ preached, that He
+rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection
+from the dead?' The meaning is, 'Seeing now that Christ _is_ preached.'
+In the continuation, the conditional clauses are of a different
+character, and 'be' is appropriate: 'But if there _be_ no resurrection
+from the dead, then is Christ not risen. And if Christ _be_ not risen,
+then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain.' Again, 'If
+thou _bring_ thy gift to the altar, and there remember_est_,' etc.
+Consistency and correctness require 'remember.'"--Harrison on the
+"English Language," p. 287.
+
+[32] "So, in German, _wäre_ for _würde sein_. 'Hätt' ich Schwingen,
+hätt' ich Flügel, nach den Hügeln _zög_' ich hin,' for '_würde_ ich
+_ziehen_.'"
+
+[33] "So, in German, _hätte_ occurs for _würde haben_. 'Wäre er da
+gewesen, so _hätten_ wir ihn gesehen,' for 'so _würden_ wir ihn gesehen
+_haben_.' _Hätten_ is still conditional, not indicative. In Latin, the
+pluperfect _indicative_ is occasionally used; which is explained as a
+more vivid form."
+
+[34] "In _principal_ clauses the inflection of the second person is
+always retained: 'thou had_st_,' 'thou would_st_, should_st_,' etc. In
+the example, the subordinate clause, although subjunctive, shows,
+'had_st_.' And this usage is exceedingly common."
+
+[35] To those who are not quite clear as to what transcendentalism is,
+the following lucid definition will be welcome: "It is the spiritual
+cognoscence of psychological irrefragability connected with concutient
+ademption of incolumnient spirituality and etherealized contention of
+subsultory concretion." Translated by a New York lawyer, it stands thus:
+"Transcendentalism is two holes in a sand-bank: a storm washes away the
+sand-bank without disturbing the holes."
+
+[36] "Cromwell--_than he_ no man was more skilled in artifice; or,
+Cromwell--no man was more skilled in artifice _than he_ (was)."
+
+[37] "No devil sat higher than _he_ sat, except Satan."
+
+[38] "Speaking of Dryden, Hallam says, 'His "Essay on Dramatic Poesy,"
+published in 1668, was reprinted sixteen years afterward, and it is
+curious to observe the changes which Dryden made in the expression.
+Malone has carefully noted all these; they show both the care the author
+took with his own style, and the change which was gradually working in
+the English language. The Anglicism of terminating the sentence with a
+preposition is rejected. Thus, "I can not think so contemptibly of the
+age I live in," is exchanged for "the age in which I live." "A deeper
+expression of belief than all the actor can persuade us to," is altered,
+"can insinuate into us." And, though the old form continued in use long
+after the time of Dryden, it has of late years been reckoned inelegant,
+and proscribed in all cases, perhaps with an unnecessary fastidiousness,
+to which I have not uniformly deferred, since our language is of
+Teutonic structure, and the rules of Latin and French grammar are not
+always to bind us.'
+
+"The following examples, taken from Massinger's 'Grand Duke of
+Florence,' will show what was the usage of the Elizabethan writers:--
+
+    "'For I must use the freedom I _was born with_.'
+
+    "'In that dumb rhetoric _which_ you _make use of_.'
+
+                          "'---- if I had been heir
+    Of all the globes and sceptres mankind _bows to_.'
+
+                    "'---- the name of friend
+    _Which_ you are pleased to _grace me with_.'
+
+          "'---- wilfully ignorant in my opinion
+    Of what it did _invite him to_.'
+
+    "'I look to her as on a princess
+    _I dare not be ambitious of_.'
+
+                      "'---- a duty
+    _That I was born with_.'"
+
+
+
+
+                            THE ORTHOËPIST:
+
+
+                         _A PRONOUNCING MANUAL_,
+
+              CONTAINING ABOUT THREE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED
+                WORDS, INCLUDING A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF
+              THE NAMES OF FOREIGN AUTHORS, ARTISTS, ETC.,
+                     THAT ARE OFTEN MISPRONOUNCED.
+
+                            By ALFRED AYRES.
+
+̤
+SELECTIONS FROM THE WORK.
+
+ ạb-dō´mẹn, _not_ ăb´dọ-mĕn.
+
+ ạc-crṳe´, _not_ -crū´.
+   The orthoëpists agree that _u_, preceded by _r_ in the same syllable,
+   generally becomes simply _oo_, as in _rude_, _rumor_, _rural_, _rule_,
+   _ruby_.
+
+ ạl-lŏp´ạ-thy; ạl-lŏp´ạ-thĭst.
+
+ Ăr´ạ-bĭc, _not_ Ạ-rā´bĭc.
+
+ Asia--ā´shẹ-ȧ, _not_ ā´zhȧ.
+
+ ay, _or_ aye (meaning _yes_)--ī.
+
+ aye (meaning _always_)--ā.
+
+ Bĭs´märck, _not_ bĭz´-.
+   At the end of a syllable, _s_, in German, has invariably its sharp,
+   hissing sound.
+
+ Cairo--in Egypt, kī´rō; in the United States, kā´rō.
+
+ Courbet--ko̤r´bā´.
+
+ dĕc´ạde, _not_ dẹ-kād´.
+
+ dẹ-cō´roŭs.
+   The authority is small, and is becoming less, for saying
+   _dĕc´o-roŭs_, which is really as incorrect as it would be to say
+   _sŏn´o-roŭs_.
+
+ dĕf´ị-cĭt, _not_ dẹ-fĭç´it.
+
+ dịs̱-dāin´, _not_ dis-.
+
+ dịs̱-hŏn´or, _not_ dis-.
+
+ ĕc-ọ-nŏm´ị-cạl, _or_ ē-cọ-nŏm´ị-cạl.
+   The first is the marking of a large majority of the orthoëpists.
+
+ ẹ-nēr´vāte.
+   The only authority for saying _ĕn´er-vāte_ is popular usage; all
+   the orthoëpists say _e-nẽr´vāte_.
+
+ ĕp´ọc̵h, _not_ ē´pŏc̵h.
+   The latter is a Websterian pronunciation, which is not even permitted
+   in the late editions.
+
+ fĭn-ạn-ciēr´.
+   This much-used word is rarely pronounced correctly.
+
+ Heī´nẹ, _not_ hine.
+   Final _e_ in German is never silent.
+
+ honest--ŏn´est, _not_ -ĭst, _nor_ -ŭst.
+   "Hon_est_, hon_est_ Iago," is preferable to "hon_ust_, hon_ust_ Iago,"
+   some of our accidental Othellos to the contrary notwithstanding.
+
+ ĭs̱´ọ-lāte, _or_ ĭs´ọ-late, _not_ ī´sọ-lāt.
+   The first marking is Walker's, Worcester's, and Smart's; the second,
+   Webster's.
+
+
+                  ONE VOL., 18MO, CLOTH. PRICE, $1.00.
+
+          New York: D. APPLETON & CO., 1, 3, & 5 Bond Street.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Verbalist, by 
+Thomas Embly Osmun, (AKA Alfred Ayres)
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE VERBALIST ***
+
+***** This file should be named 22457-8.txt or 22457-8.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        http://www.gutenberg.org/2/2/4/5/22457/
+
+Produced by Barbara Tozier, Bill Tozier, Stephen Blundell
+and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at
+http://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+http://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+http://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at http://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit http://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations.
+To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     http://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/22457-8.zip b/old/22457-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b922116
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-8.zip
diff --git a/old/22457-h.zip b/old/22457-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0a358f8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-h.zip
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/f001.png b/old/22457-page-images/f001.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..321853d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/f001.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/f002.png b/old/22457-page-images/f002.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d39fecb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/f002.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/f003.png b/old/22457-page-images/f003.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..50aa6bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/f003.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/f004.png b/old/22457-page-images/f004.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..95c0ee4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/f004.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/f005.png b/old/22457-page-images/f005.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..07896c6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/f005.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p007.png b/old/22457-page-images/p007.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..11ded3e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p007.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p008.png b/old/22457-page-images/p008.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6770cb8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p008.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p009.png b/old/22457-page-images/p009.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..910c24d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p009.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p010.png b/old/22457-page-images/p010.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..663039f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p010.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p011.png b/old/22457-page-images/p011.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8c3d827
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p011.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p012.png b/old/22457-page-images/p012.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..aa0cf5e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p012.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p013.png b/old/22457-page-images/p013.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ff8367b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p013.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p014.png b/old/22457-page-images/p014.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c95baf1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p014.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p015.png b/old/22457-page-images/p015.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9495322
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p015.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p016.png b/old/22457-page-images/p016.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..20b0730
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p016.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p017.png b/old/22457-page-images/p017.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..204be53
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p017.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p018.png b/old/22457-page-images/p018.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7ff0ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p018.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p019.png b/old/22457-page-images/p019.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..85c3728
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p019.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p020.png b/old/22457-page-images/p020.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f2b5c5c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p020.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p021.png b/old/22457-page-images/p021.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e3de026
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p021.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p022.png b/old/22457-page-images/p022.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..98b290d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p022.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p023.png b/old/22457-page-images/p023.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..823c829
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p023.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p024.png b/old/22457-page-images/p024.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ee7ffb1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p024.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p025.png b/old/22457-page-images/p025.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e213f26
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p025.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p026.png b/old/22457-page-images/p026.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2eede17
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p026.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p027.png b/old/22457-page-images/p027.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d22e08e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p027.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p028.png b/old/22457-page-images/p028.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fa63e17
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p028.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p029.png b/old/22457-page-images/p029.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3fbc531
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p029.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p030.png b/old/22457-page-images/p030.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..622644e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p030.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p031.png b/old/22457-page-images/p031.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbb4dea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p031.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p032.png b/old/22457-page-images/p032.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5169e27
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p032.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p033.png b/old/22457-page-images/p033.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6a0094e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p033.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p034.png b/old/22457-page-images/p034.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7d82d23
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p034.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p035.png b/old/22457-page-images/p035.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e1e2eb1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p035.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p036.png b/old/22457-page-images/p036.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6234791
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p036.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p037.png b/old/22457-page-images/p037.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..faaf88c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p037.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p038.png b/old/22457-page-images/p038.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9e80bed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p038.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p039.png b/old/22457-page-images/p039.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ec771f3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p039.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p040.png b/old/22457-page-images/p040.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ba734b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p040.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p041.png b/old/22457-page-images/p041.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..afd39a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p041.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p042.png b/old/22457-page-images/p042.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7b86ad8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p042.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p043.png b/old/22457-page-images/p043.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..15269df
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p043.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p044.png b/old/22457-page-images/p044.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..54d2784
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p044.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p045.png b/old/22457-page-images/p045.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b0ac2ca
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p045.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p046.png b/old/22457-page-images/p046.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1248de7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p046.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p047.png b/old/22457-page-images/p047.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..01204bf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p047.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p048.png b/old/22457-page-images/p048.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7a4cc4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p048.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p049.png b/old/22457-page-images/p049.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..de1bf77
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p049.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p050.png b/old/22457-page-images/p050.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf39e45
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p050.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p051.png b/old/22457-page-images/p051.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..78f1c20
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p051.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p052.png b/old/22457-page-images/p052.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c6167ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p052.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p053.png b/old/22457-page-images/p053.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9d39c11
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p053.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p054.png b/old/22457-page-images/p054.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ef6b9bd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p054.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p055.png b/old/22457-page-images/p055.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ce5bf05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p055.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p056.png b/old/22457-page-images/p056.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2b48a91
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p056.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p057.png b/old/22457-page-images/p057.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5c417be
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p057.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p058.png b/old/22457-page-images/p058.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..193ac7d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p058.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p059.png b/old/22457-page-images/p059.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..01b58ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p059.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p060.png b/old/22457-page-images/p060.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ec26ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p060.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p061.png b/old/22457-page-images/p061.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..96ae5d9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p061.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p062.png b/old/22457-page-images/p062.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..087338b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p062.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p063.png b/old/22457-page-images/p063.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..350d116
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p063.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p064.png b/old/22457-page-images/p064.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..518fce6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p064.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p065.png b/old/22457-page-images/p065.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b04fee9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p065.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p066.png b/old/22457-page-images/p066.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..0141fa7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p066.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p067.png b/old/22457-page-images/p067.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5e1a1f5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p067.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p068.png b/old/22457-page-images/p068.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..50a9316
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p068.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p069.png b/old/22457-page-images/p069.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..147e672
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p069.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p070.png b/old/22457-page-images/p070.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..76b9007
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p070.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p071.png b/old/22457-page-images/p071.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fc1c327
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p071.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p072.png b/old/22457-page-images/p072.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ab01715
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p072.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p073.png b/old/22457-page-images/p073.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..67637ae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p073.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p074.png b/old/22457-page-images/p074.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..950d685
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p074.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p075.png b/old/22457-page-images/p075.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1b50634
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p075.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p076.png b/old/22457-page-images/p076.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e5612a1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p076.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p077.png b/old/22457-page-images/p077.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4fc5e78
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p077.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p078.png b/old/22457-page-images/p078.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4143bbf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p078.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p079.png b/old/22457-page-images/p079.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fe90730
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p079.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p080.png b/old/22457-page-images/p080.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..31308dd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p080.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p081.png b/old/22457-page-images/p081.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..518dc9a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p081.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p082.png b/old/22457-page-images/p082.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..80b3f9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p082.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p083.png b/old/22457-page-images/p083.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f36414a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p083.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p084.png b/old/22457-page-images/p084.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..884bf81
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p084.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p085.png b/old/22457-page-images/p085.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..942d24c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p085.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p086.png b/old/22457-page-images/p086.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7524f8b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p086.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p087.png b/old/22457-page-images/p087.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1849d2e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p087.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p088.png b/old/22457-page-images/p088.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cb12b4d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p088.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p089.png b/old/22457-page-images/p089.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e3a1863
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p089.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p090.png b/old/22457-page-images/p090.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a66d921
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p090.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p091.png b/old/22457-page-images/p091.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..832d990
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p091.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p092.png b/old/22457-page-images/p092.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d77acf6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p092.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p093.png b/old/22457-page-images/p093.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7aba853
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p093.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p094.png b/old/22457-page-images/p094.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..67cad20
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p094.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p095.png b/old/22457-page-images/p095.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..500604b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p095.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p096.png b/old/22457-page-images/p096.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..beb8381
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p096.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p097.png b/old/22457-page-images/p097.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..41b5d96
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p097.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p098.png b/old/22457-page-images/p098.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4deafe1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p098.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p099.png b/old/22457-page-images/p099.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2af0713
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p099.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p100.png b/old/22457-page-images/p100.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7d9980b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p100.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p101.png b/old/22457-page-images/p101.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..77e94ae
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p101.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p102.png b/old/22457-page-images/p102.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3350268
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p102.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p103.png b/old/22457-page-images/p103.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4672a41
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p103.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p104.png b/old/22457-page-images/p104.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f8230ab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p104.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p105.png b/old/22457-page-images/p105.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e50a4c2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p105.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p106.png b/old/22457-page-images/p106.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4496b39
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p106.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p107.png b/old/22457-page-images/p107.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a83b51f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p107.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p108.png b/old/22457-page-images/p108.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1869111
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p108.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p109.png b/old/22457-page-images/p109.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5cd14c4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p109.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p110.png b/old/22457-page-images/p110.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3baf02a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p110.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p111.png b/old/22457-page-images/p111.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bff6b74
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p111.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p112.png b/old/22457-page-images/p112.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..be7002a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p112.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p113.png b/old/22457-page-images/p113.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6c40347
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p113.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p114.png b/old/22457-page-images/p114.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..209bc5f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p114.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p115.png b/old/22457-page-images/p115.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..69995fb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p115.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p116.png b/old/22457-page-images/p116.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cb4ec77
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p116.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p117.png b/old/22457-page-images/p117.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4cd960c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p117.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p118.png b/old/22457-page-images/p118.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..79a8fde
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p118.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p119.png b/old/22457-page-images/p119.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..17ad59a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p119.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p120.png b/old/22457-page-images/p120.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..29e2b0a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p120.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p121.png b/old/22457-page-images/p121.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2ca3baf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p121.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p122.png b/old/22457-page-images/p122.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e0a6e9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p122.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p123.png b/old/22457-page-images/p123.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e5bc9d9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p123.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p124.png b/old/22457-page-images/p124.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..5a8b75c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p124.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p125.png b/old/22457-page-images/p125.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ce22c61
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p125.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p126.png b/old/22457-page-images/p126.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c5f3d1d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p126.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p127.png b/old/22457-page-images/p127.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f4b38ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p127.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p128.png b/old/22457-page-images/p128.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3ebc7de
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p128.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p129.png b/old/22457-page-images/p129.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6948be4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p129.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p130.png b/old/22457-page-images/p130.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..615e366
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p130.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p131.png b/old/22457-page-images/p131.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..28a41be
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p131.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p132.png b/old/22457-page-images/p132.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4ee8043
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p132.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p133.png b/old/22457-page-images/p133.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f53fecf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p133.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p134.png b/old/22457-page-images/p134.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2e21a1d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p134.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p135.png b/old/22457-page-images/p135.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1595b3c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p135.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p136.png b/old/22457-page-images/p136.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7dba857
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p136.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p137.png b/old/22457-page-images/p137.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1cd7fed
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p137.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p138.png b/old/22457-page-images/p138.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9d811ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p138.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p139.png b/old/22457-page-images/p139.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..99a8ee4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p139.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p140.png b/old/22457-page-images/p140.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..543267e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p140.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p141.png b/old/22457-page-images/p141.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e91e1b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p141.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p142.png b/old/22457-page-images/p142.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bbc1a72
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p142.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p143.png b/old/22457-page-images/p143.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dcdea93
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p143.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p144.png b/old/22457-page-images/p144.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ea52922
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p144.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p145.png b/old/22457-page-images/p145.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..af83e6e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p145.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p146.png b/old/22457-page-images/p146.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..63c8a0f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p146.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p147.png b/old/22457-page-images/p147.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..494c21c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p147.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p148.png b/old/22457-page-images/p148.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b27c9ab
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p148.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p149.png b/old/22457-page-images/p149.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fb6b726
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p149.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p150.png b/old/22457-page-images/p150.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a022a7c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p150.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p151.png b/old/22457-page-images/p151.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..be1e2bb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p151.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p152.png b/old/22457-page-images/p152.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bda1036
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p152.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p153.png b/old/22457-page-images/p153.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..775f612
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p153.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p154.png b/old/22457-page-images/p154.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..28b1d0d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p154.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p155.png b/old/22457-page-images/p155.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2fd7334
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p155.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p156.png b/old/22457-page-images/p156.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8e1e61c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p156.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p157.png b/old/22457-page-images/p157.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bf0466d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p157.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p158.png b/old/22457-page-images/p158.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fddbe08
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p158.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p159.png b/old/22457-page-images/p159.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7f2720
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p159.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p160.png b/old/22457-page-images/p160.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b2d7aac
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p160.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p161.png b/old/22457-page-images/p161.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8ceb39e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p161.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p162.png b/old/22457-page-images/p162.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1db32d3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p162.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p163.png b/old/22457-page-images/p163.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..caf7102
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p163.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p164.png b/old/22457-page-images/p164.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1570dba
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p164.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p165.png b/old/22457-page-images/p165.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..59b4421
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p165.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p166.png b/old/22457-page-images/p166.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..07fbda7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p166.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p167.png b/old/22457-page-images/p167.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a6dad8b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p167.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p168.png b/old/22457-page-images/p168.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a5c0893
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p168.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p169.png b/old/22457-page-images/p169.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fd447c3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p169.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p170.png b/old/22457-page-images/p170.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b817638
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p170.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p171.png b/old/22457-page-images/p171.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6ec8256
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p171.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p172.png b/old/22457-page-images/p172.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..ec3ef25
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p172.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p173.png b/old/22457-page-images/p173.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7a578cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p173.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p174.png b/old/22457-page-images/p174.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6360f24
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p174.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p175.png b/old/22457-page-images/p175.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6346dbe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p175.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p176.png b/old/22457-page-images/p176.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..251ba9e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p176.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p177.png b/old/22457-page-images/p177.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9a3c722
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p177.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p178.png b/old/22457-page-images/p178.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a1f1f60
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p178.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p179.png b/old/22457-page-images/p179.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..39304b3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p179.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p180.png b/old/22457-page-images/p180.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b1891ec
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p180.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p181.png b/old/22457-page-images/p181.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4c37dcf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p181.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p182.png b/old/22457-page-images/p182.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..26ce4c5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p182.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p183.png b/old/22457-page-images/p183.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..04807cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p183.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p184.png b/old/22457-page-images/p184.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3f14a0a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p184.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p185.png b/old/22457-page-images/p185.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..88355d5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p185.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p186.png b/old/22457-page-images/p186.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f6fa6aa
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p186.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p187.png b/old/22457-page-images/p187.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4298d32
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p187.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p188.png b/old/22457-page-images/p188.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b06c8b7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p188.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p189.png b/old/22457-page-images/p189.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f913036
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p189.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p190.png b/old/22457-page-images/p190.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f1c2985
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p190.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p191.png b/old/22457-page-images/p191.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dbe468b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p191.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p192.png b/old/22457-page-images/p192.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d90d3dd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p192.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p193.png b/old/22457-page-images/p193.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b4a1a9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p193.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p194.png b/old/22457-page-images/p194.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..65144a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p194.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p195.png b/old/22457-page-images/p195.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d8ef882
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p195.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p196.png b/old/22457-page-images/p196.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8758a87
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p196.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p197.png b/old/22457-page-images/p197.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..660a8fd
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p197.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p198.png b/old/22457-page-images/p198.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8c249cb
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p198.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p199.png b/old/22457-page-images/p199.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bb4224c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p199.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p200.png b/old/22457-page-images/p200.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..83c24b8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p200.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p201.png b/old/22457-page-images/p201.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a36d269
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p201.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p202.png b/old/22457-page-images/p202.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..46ee47f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p202.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p203.png b/old/22457-page-images/p203.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8e3fe4a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p203.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p204.png b/old/22457-page-images/p204.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a7a2614
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p204.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p205.png b/old/22457-page-images/p205.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e440190
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p205.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p206.png b/old/22457-page-images/p206.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..61e5d8a
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p206.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p207.png b/old/22457-page-images/p207.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..88e90a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p207.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p208.png b/old/22457-page-images/p208.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e9eb3ad
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p208.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p209.png b/old/22457-page-images/p209.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..450d915
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p209.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p210.png b/old/22457-page-images/p210.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..77ec420
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p210.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p211.png b/old/22457-page-images/p211.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c182e90
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p211.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p212.png b/old/22457-page-images/p212.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2c687f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p212.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p213.png b/old/22457-page-images/p213.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..52f9c9b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p213.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p214.png b/old/22457-page-images/p214.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1520c72
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p214.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p215.png b/old/22457-page-images/p215.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9ebed15
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p215.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p216.png b/old/22457-page-images/p216.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..10daab1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p216.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p217.png b/old/22457-page-images/p217.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e222e70
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p217.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p218.png b/old/22457-page-images/p218.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..02e407e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p218.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p219.png b/old/22457-page-images/p219.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8b9df4b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p219.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p220.png b/old/22457-page-images/p220.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..dfd2ad3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p220.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p221.png b/old/22457-page-images/p221.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b1212af
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p221.png
diff --git a/old/22457-page-images/p222.png b/old/22457-page-images/p222.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d298165
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/22457-page-images/p222.png