national,-purity itself, according to the character of the person speaking. The author, of course, is not chargeable with violations of purity put into his characters' mouths, unless they are inconsistent with his own portrayals of these characters. Indeed, peculiarities of speech may go far to individualize a character and at the same time to describe him the more fully. Thus, Fluellen, in Henry V., would be much less the valiant Welsh gentleman, did he not use ƒ for v, p for b, and otherwise show his contempt for the King's English; the pomposity of Mr. Trumbull1 is chiefly pictured in his peculiar diction; and Mr. Swiveller and the Marchioness' have their characterizing modes of expression. 161. 5. Literal quotations are not chargeable against the quoting writer. The latter is responsible for introducing the quotation, but for nothing more. At the same time, excessive quotation in foreign languages has the effect of alienism; and, hence, many writers translate or paraphrase in their text, adding the original in footnotes. Especially, in technical works, in which the citation of authorities must be pushed very far, the footnote serves as a most useful storehouse for much that would embarrass or destroy the text. 162. 6. Colloquialisms, forms admissible only in conversation, are also excepted from the law of Purity that holds in writing or formal speech. One ought not to "talk like a book," if the talk is informal; for a certain negligé in conversation is a positive virtue. On the other hand, strictness will vary as speech becomes less and less colloquial; and even conversation must never sink into vulgarisms or other positive errors of speech. 1 The auctioneer in Middlemarch, who "never used poor language without immediately correcting himself," and who therefore fell into numberless repetitions;-"A very nice thing, a very superior publication, entitled 'Ivanhoe.'" 2 The Old Curiosity Shop. VI. DIVIDED USAGE. 163. Not infrequently, several "different, though resembling modes of expression for the same thing" are equally in good use. Competent authority can be urged for each, or the same good writer uses both forms. Usage is then said to be "divided;" and even the most assured believers in Good Use concede that the Standard of Purity must be found elsewhere. As a basis for the discussion of such cases, the following principles have been widely agreed upon. 164. First, the dissent (conscious or unconscious) of a single writer or coterie of writers does not set up a divided usage. The alternative form may not be a mere idiotism,—that is, it may have sufficient support to make it reputable; but it can not be said to divide usage, unless its supporting minority is respectable. The authorities on each side must be equal or nearly so. From an overwhelming weight of authority on one side may be inferred the support of underlying truth; and the feeble minority struggles in vain. Thus, the pronunciations i-ther and ni-ther are certainly heard in reputable use, but usage can not yet be said to be divided in this case, for the supporting minority is too small. "Custom, when wavering," says Dr. Campbell, "may be swayed, but, when reluctant, will not be forced. And in this department a person never effects so little, as when he attempts too much."1 For this reason, it is to no purpose with Johnson to pronounce the word news a plural, whatever it might [may?] have been in the days of Sidney and Raleigh; nor is Johnson's rule well founded, that no noun singular should end with single s.' So, in spite of much opposition from conservative writers and speakers, telegram was quickly accepted as "good English;" is being done and other passive forms with being are widely used,' and the subjunctive mood is quite as widely disused." On the other hand, though scholars of no mean rank have espoused the cause of Phonetic Spelling, it is still unadopted, and seems destined to share the fate of those other "reforms" that would write Herodotos and Keltic, and pronounce Cæsar Kaisar and Virgil Wergil (with hard g.) 165. Secondly, in no case of Divided Usage can a man "be said to speak barbarously," whichever side he conforms to. Each of the contending forms has sufficient authority, and is, therefore, in good use. Thus, an important class of English words end indifferently in -wise, -way, or -ways; and the last ending (a genitive long since forgotten) is, perhaps, the most truly English form. Yet Dr. Johnson, in his Dictionary, condemns "all those who either write or pronounce" noways "ignorant barbarians.” These, as Campbell points out, "are only Pope, and Swift, and Addison, and Locke, and several others of our most celebrated writers'; while the form is in no way a violation of Etymology. 166. At the same time, thirdly, one or another of such contending forms may be preferable, or the case can be settled by an appeal to underlying principles. The superiority of one of the disputing forms is so great as to give it a decided preference over the other, and thus virtually to settle the case between the two. Some of these principles-those most commonly appealed tohave been stated by Campbell in his famous "Canons," 1 At the same time, John Henry Newman and Grant White are not the only protestants against this latest coinage of the English mint. Many men of learning, judgment, and good taste, as well as of genuine sympathy with the true progress of the age, can not tolerate it. 2 Were is perhaps the only exception. 3 II. ii. I. a condensation of which, with examples, is given below. In using them, the student should always remember that other principles are equally valid, and that any principle known to be a law of thought or speech may be brought forward either in approval or in condemnation of a proposed use. 167. Canons for Divided Use ;— Of two (or more) forms equally in Good Use, that which is- 168. Examples of the application of these rules may be given as follows, the numbers referring, of course, to those of the canons. (1) Beside, as preposition to mean "by the side of," "aside from," "out of," and besides, (a) as preposition to mean "in addition to,” (b) as adverb or conjunction to mean “moreover," "beyond," are better than beside or besides used indifferently. Some of the confusion, at least, that has existed and still exists between the forms is cleared away by the distinction.1 So forward, upward, backward, etc., the adjectives, may be distinguished from forwards, upwards, backwards, etc., the adverbs; unless, indeed, the fact that, in these cases, the part of speech is always made clear by the meaning as determined by the context, is to be considered a sufficient reason for writing both adjectives and adverbs without the s. (See the last foot 1Skeat, Etymological Dictionary, says the oldest form was beside, that the s was added because many English adverbs ended in s, that besides as a preposition is really incorrect, but that the s-form in both uses is very old. The same is true of many other adverbs in s. note; and add Grant White's chief objections that the s-forms increase the already constant sibilation of English, and that all these words were originally written without s; in other words, that the omission of s is right under Canons 3. and 5). By consequence is preferable to of consequence, where the meaning is consequently, because of consequence may also mean of importance. Scarce, as adjective, and scarcely, as adverb. Recall rather than recal, as more likely to suggest its meaning, call back. Bi-cy-cle rather than bi-cy'-cle or even bi'-cj-cle, if only because cycle has now a meaning so remote from wheel, that bi'-cy-cle is most certain to be understood. Sideways, lengthways, crossways, etc., and nowise, likewise, otherwise, etc., seem right, since the terminations ways and wise are of different derivation and meaning; the forms in ways being preferable whenever the ending means direction, and those in -wise when the ending means manner or mode. But the distinction has been lost sight of; and, under the influence of Canon 2, -wise is gradually usurping the place of -ways. Hence, noways, often used for nowise, would seem to have a province of its own; but the confusion of way-direction with way= mode, manner, easily promotes an exchange of the two forms. (2) Ever so wise, rather than never so wise; whether or not, rather than whether or no; needs and dares, when the verbs are principal, as "he needs no influence,” “he dares as much as man may dare;" but need and dare, (by analogy with can, will, shall, may, etc.,) when they are auxiliaries; as, “he need (dare) not act in that way; sang as past tense, rather than sung.2 1 (3) For conscience' sake, not conscience's; boys', not boys's;3. godly, not godlily; scarcity, rather than scarceness; most proper, rather than properest; more delightful, rather than 1 Need and dare are often conditional; as, he need (dare) not try, whatever should occur, meaning, he would be under no necessity (he would not have the courage) to try, whatever should occur. 2 In Memoriam, xxx.;— "Then echo-like our voices rang; We sung, tho' every eye was dim, "Once more we sang." 3 But the 's should be written, for clearness' sake, whenever Euphony allows. Chambers' is not so clear either to the eye or to the ear as Chambers's; and, in not a few such cases, the double s is not intolerably harsh. |