Five Hundred Mistakes of Daily Occurrence in Speaking, p.r.o.nouncing, and Writing the English Language.
by Anonymous.
PREFACE.
This book is offered to the public, not to be cla.s.sed with elaborate or learned works, nor expected, like some of its more pretending companions among the offspring of the press, to run the gauntlet of literary criticism. It was prepared to meet the wants of persons--numbered by _mult.i.tudes_ in even the most intelligent and refined communities--who from deficiency of education, or from carelessness of manner, are in the habit of misusing many of the most common words of the English language, distorting its grammatical forms, destroying its beauty, and corrupting its purity. The most thorough mode that could be adopted to correct such errors, would doubtless be to impart to the ignorant a practical knowledge of the principles of language, as embodied in treatises on grammar; but such a good work, however desirable its results, has, in time past, been too difficult for the promoters of education to complete, and is still too great to give promise of speedy accomplishment. A better expedient, bearing immediate fruits, has been adopted in the present volume, which, while it does not aim to produce a radical reform, cannot fail to render great service to those who need to improve their usual modes of expression, and to be more discriminating in their choice of words.
The more frequent and less excusable mistakes that may be noticed in ordinary conversation or correspondence, are here taken up, one by one--exposed, explained, and corrected. They consist variously of abuses of grammar, misapplications of words and phrases, improprieties of metaphor and comparison, misstatements of meaning, and faults of p.r.o.nunciation. They are grouped miscellaneously, _without cla.s.sification_, not so much because of the difficulty of devising an arrangement that would be systematic and intelligible, as from the evident fact that a division of subjects would render no a.s.sistance to those for whom the book is specially designed; for an appropriate cla.s.sification would necessarily derive its features from the forms of grammar, and with these the readers of this book are supposed to be to a great extent unfamiliar.
The volume is put forth with no flourish of trumpets, and makes no extravagant pretensions; yet the publishers believe it will be regarded as a timely and useful work. If the race of _critics_ should not like it--and while books have their "faults," critics have their "failings"--they are reminded that he who corrects an old error, may render no less service to his brethren, than he who discovers a new truth. If the work shall be the means of saving one sensitive man from a confusion of blushes, in the presence of a company before which he desired to preserve his equanimity, it will not have gone forth without a mission of benefit, which will merit at least one acknowledgment.
INTRODUCTION.
The aim of this book, by correcting a mult.i.tude of common errors in the use of language, is mainly to offer a.s.sistance to such persons as need greater facilities for accurate expression _in ordinary conversation_. It is not designed to suggest topics of talk, nor to give rules or examples pointing out the proper modes of arranging them; but simply to insure persons who often have a good thing to say, from the confusion and mortification of improperly saying it. This chapter of introduction will not, therefore, be expected to present an essay on the general subject of conversation.
It may be remarked, however, by way of admonitory hint to some, that the most prominent error in the conversation of those who commit the most blunders, does not consist in saying too little that amounts to much, but too much that amounts to little; talkativeness is a characteristic more commonly of the ignorant, than of the wise. Shenstone says, "The common fluency of speech in many men, and most women, is owing to a scarcity of matter and a scarcity of words; for whoever is master of a language, and moreover has a mind full of ideas, will be apt, in speaking, to hesitate upon the choice of both; but common speakers have only one set of ideas and one set of words to clothe them in,--and these are always ready at the mouth. Just so, _people can come faster out of a church when it is almost empty, than when a crowd is at the door_!" But although, according to the old proverb, "a still tongue denotes a wise head," the faculty of speech should not be neglected, merely because it may be misused.
Conversation is not a gift bestowed only upon those whom genius favors; on the contrary, many men eminent for their fluency of style in writing, have been noted for habitual taciturnity in their intercourse with society.
Hazlitt remarked, that "authors should be read, not heard!" Charles II. of England, not only the wittiest of monarchs, but one of the liveliest of men, is said to have been so charmed in reading the humor of Butler"s "Hudibras," that he disguised himself as a private gentleman, and was introduced to the author, whom, to his astonishment, he found to be one of the _dullest_ of companions. On the other hand, some of the humblest men with whom one falls into company, possessed of but little variety, and less extent of information, are highly entertaining talkers. The particular topic of remark does not form so essential a part of an interesting conversation, as the words and manner of those who engage in it. Robert Burns, sitting down on one occasion to write a poem, said:
"Which way the subject theme may gang, Let time or chance determine; Perhaps it may turn out a sang,-- Or probably a sermon."
In the same manner, the subject of a conversation need not be made a matter of study, or special preparation. Men may talk of things momentous or trivial, and in either strain be alike attractive and agreeable.
But quitting the consideration of the thought, to refer to the mode of its expression, it must be remarked and insisted, that to "murder the king"s English" is hardly less a crime, than to design against one of the king"s subjects. If committed from ignorance, the fault is at least deplorable; but if from carelessness, it is inexcusable. The greatest of sciences is that of language; the greatest of human arts is that of using words. No "cunning hand" of the artificer can contrive a work of mechanism that is to be compared, for a moment, with those wonderful masterpieces of ingenuity, which may be wrought by him who can skilfully mould a beautiful thought into a form that shall preserve, yet radiate its beauty. A mosaic of words may be made more fair, than of inlaid precious stones. The scholar who comes forth from his study, a master of the English language, is a workman who has at his command hardly less than a hundred thousand finely-tempered instruments, with which he may fashion the most cunning device. This is a trade which all should learn, for it is one that every individual is called to practise. The greatest support of virtue in a community is intelligence; intelligence is the outgrowth of knowledge; and the almoner of all knowledge is language. The possession, therefore, of the resources, and a command over the appliances of language, is of the utmost importance to every individual. Words are current coins of the realm, and they who do not have them in their treasury, suffer a more pitiable poverty than others who have not a penny of baser specie in their pocket; and the mult.i.tude of those who have an unfailing supply, but which is of the wrong stamp, are possessed only of counterfeit cash, that will not pa.s.s in circles of respectability. The present work therefore is, in some respects, not unlike the "Detector" issued for the merchants, to indicate the great amount of worthless money that is in general circulation with the good.
It is not to be supposed that all the mistakes of daily occurrence in the use of language, are to be numbered by "five hundred"--possibly not by five thousand; but it is evident that he who is instructed against five hundred of his habitual blunders, and enabled to steer clear of every one of them, has in no slight degree improved his conversation, and thereby increased his importance. As a prefix, or accompaniment, to this catalogue of corrected mistakes, the presentation of a few rules or principles of language, which, strictly observed, might guard against numerous general cla.s.ses of errors, would not be thought misplaced, or undesirable. Some suggestions on points most prominent are accordingly given among these introductory remarks--not in formal statements of grammatical rules, but in examples in which the spirit of such rules is revealed.
Not the least glaring among the many misuses of words and forms of expression in conversation, occur by incorrectly employing the p.r.o.nouns--_who_, _which_, _what_, and _that_. It may be remarked, that _who_ should be applied exclusively to persons. _Which_ usually refers to animals and inanimate objects, except in such an expression as, "Tell me _which_ of the two men was chosen?" _What_, means _that which_: thus, "This is the book _what_ I wanted," should read, "This is the book _that_ (or _which_) I wanted."
Among interrogatives, _who?_ inquires for the name; _which?_ for the individual; _what?_ for the character, or occupation. Thus, "_Who_ built the bridge?" "Mr. Blake." "_Which_ of the Blakes?" "_Charles_ Blake."
"_What_ was he?" "A distinguished civil engineer."
The t.i.tle of a small book for young people, recently published, was--"The Way _that_ Little Children enter Heaven:" the word _that_ is here incorrectly used as a subst.i.tute for _in which_, or _by which_.
When _this_ and _that_, and their plurals, are used in the sense of _latter_ and _former_, _this_ and _these_ signify the _latter_, and _that_ and _those_ the _former_. Thus, in the following couplet from Burns:
"Farewell my friends, farewell my foes, My peace with _these_, my love with _those_."
_these_ refers to "foes," and _those_ to "friends."
In the possessive case of nouns, some instances occur in which a wise choice may be made, but in respect to which usage is divided. Thus, we may say, "They called at _Walton"s the bookseller"s_," or, with equal propriety, as far as custom is concerned, "at _Walton the bookseller"s_."
The first form, however, is preferable.
The use of the hyphen [-] is frequently disregarded in epistolary correspondence, occasioning not only a blemish but a blunder. Its importance may be seen by comparing the meaning of "_gla.s.s house_" with "_gla.s.s-house_;" the former may mean the Crystal Palace, while the latter is a manufactory of gla.s.s-ware.
Adjectives are often improperly used for adverbs: as, "_extreme_ bad weather," for "_extremely_ bad weather."
It is sometimes difficult to choose between such phrases as "the _first three_," and "the _three first_." To say _first three_ when there is no _second three_ is inelegant, because superfluous; and _three first_ is absurd, because impossible. The most successful pupil in each of two cla.s.ses at school would not improperly be called "the _two first boys_;"
while propriety would require that the first and second boys of the same cla.s.s should be called "the _first two boys_." As a general rule, and easy to be recollected, let _"first" be first_.
The use of _some_ for _about_ is by many writers thought to be awkward: as, "_Some_ fifty years ago," instead of "_About_ Fifty years."
An ambiguity occasionally arises in employing the adjective _no_. Thus, "No money is better than gold," may mean either that gold is the best kind of money, or that gold is not so good as _no money at all_!
After numerals, the words _couple_, _pair_, _dozen_, _score_, _hundred_, _thousand_, and a few others, need not take the plural form: thus, custom first, and finally grammar, have sanctioned such uses as, "three _pair_ of shoes," "nine _dozen_ bushels," "four _couple_ of students;" also, "_forty sail_ of vessels," "seventy _head_ of cattle."
The article (_a_ or _an_) renders an important service in such expressions as, "_A few_ followed their leader throughout the long struggle." To say, "_Few_ followed him," would imply, unlike the former phrase, that he was almost deserted.
"A black and a white horse," suggests the idea of two horses; while "a black and white horse," refers to but one--as if written "a _black-and-white_ horse."
"The red and white dahlias were most admired," properly means the dahlias in which both these colors were blended. "The red and _the_ white dahlias," implies two species.
The grammatical number of a verb should agree with that of its subject, and not of its predicate. Thus, the sentences, "Death _is_ the wages of sin," and "The wages of sin _are_ death," are properly written.
In changing from a past tense to the present, when the same nominative remains, the form of the verb should continue unaltered. Thus, instead of saying "He _was traveling_ and _travels_," say "He _was traveling_ and _is traveling_."
When a verb has both a singular and a plural nominative, separated by _or_, its number agrees with that of the _nearer_: as, "the cup or his _billiards were_ his ruin;" or, "his billiards or the _cup was_ his ruin."
Custom--which, when _crystallized_, becomes grammar--allows expressions like "The linen _tears_," and "The meadow _plows_ well," although they should not be frequently employed, and should be more seldom coined.
A fruitful source of mistakes in language, is in the linking together of two or more inappropriate tenses, or in the misuse of one. Many among the learned and refined commit blunders of these kinds. A few corrected examples of such are here given:
"His text was, that G.o.d _was_ love;" the sentence should be written, "His text was, that G.o.d _is_ love."
"The Lord _hath given_, and the Lord hath taken away;" say, "The Lord _gave_, and the Lord hath taken away."
"They _arrived_ before we left the city:" say, "they _had arrived_."
"All the brothers _have been_ greatly indebted to their father:" say, "_are indebted_."
"This painting _was preserved and exhibited_ for the last century:" say, "_has been_ preserved and exhibited."
"It was the last act he intended _to have performed_." say, "_to perform_."
"He _drinks_ wine at dinner," means that such is his habit; "he _is drinking_ wine at dinner," refers to one particular time and occasion.
Adverbs are often inelegantly used instead of adjectives; as, "the _then_ ministry," for "the ministry of that time."
Of the phrases "_never_ so good," or, "_ever_ so good," as to whether one is preferable to the other, authority is divided. Modern usage inclines to the latter, while ancient preferred the former, as in the Scriptural expression, "charm he _never_ so wisely."
_Yea_ and _nay_ are not equivalent to _yes_ and _no_; the latter are directly affirmative and negative, while the former are variously employed.