The fastidiousness that objects to well-established words because their appearance "proclaims their vile and despicable origin," or to well-understood phrases because they "contain some word that is never used except as a part of the phrase," or to idiomatic expressions because, “when analyzed grammatically, they include a solecism," the fastidiousness, in short, that would sacrifice to the proprieties of language expressions that give life to our daily speech and vigor to the best writing, indicates "an atrophy of mind" akin to that of which Landor speaks. 1 Pell-mell, topsy-turvy, helter-skelter, hurly-burly, hocuspocus, hodge-podge, harum-scarum, namby-pamby, willynilly, shilly-shally, higgledy-piggledy, dilly-dally, hurryscurry, carry their meaning instantaneously to every mind. Examples of their effective use may be found in the very best authors: "Then what a hurly-burly! what a crowding! what a glare of a thousand flambeaux in the square!" 2 "This shifting of persons could not be done without the hocuspocus of abstraction." 8 "And then draw close together and read the motto (that old namby-pamby motto, so stale and so new !) "" 4 "And then there were apple pies, and peach pies, and pumpkin pies; besides slices of ham and smoked beef; and moreover delectable dishes of preserved plums, and peaches, and pears, and quinces; not to mention broiled shad and roasted chickens; together with bowls of milk and cream, all mingled higgledy-piggledy, pretty much as I have enumerated them, with the motherly tea-pot sending up its clouds of vapor from the midst - Heaven bless the mark! "5 1 George Campbell: The Philosophy of Rhetoric, book ii. chap. ii. • Burke: Letters on a Regicide Peace, letter iv. Ibid., letter i. Thackeray: The Virginians, chap. lx. 5 Irving: "On the sea and at the Hogue, sixteen hundred ninety-two, And the thirty-first of May, helter-skelter through the blue, Like a crowd of frightened porpoises a shoal of sharks pursue, "Go to Paris; rank on rank Search the heroes flung pell-mell You shall look long enough ere you come to Hervé Riel."1 The italicized words in "by dint of," "as lief," "to and fro," "not a whit," "kith and kin," "hue and cry,” “spick and span new," "tit for tat," are, by themselves, obsolete in the sense they bear in the phrases quoted; but the phrases are universally understood, and there is no more reason for challenging the words that compose them than there is for challenging a syllable in a word. Idioms. A similar remark may be made about idioms,-modes of expression peculiar to the language, or to the group of languages, in which they occur. Idiomatic expressions, though composed of words difficult to "parse," may be older than parsing and still in good repute. Such expressions give life to style. On this ground, had rather and had better2 are quite as good English as would rather and might better: “I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness." 8 “I had rather be a dog, and bay the moon, Than such a Roman." 1 Robert Browning: Hervé Riel. 2 For a discussion of these locutions, see an exhaustive article (by Fitzedward Hall) in “The American Journal of Philology,” vol. ii. no. 7, pp. 281-322. "If you do not speak in that manner, you had much better not speak at all.” "A reader who wants an amusing account of the United States had better go to Mrs. Trollope, coarse and malignant as she is. A reader who wants information about American politics, manners, and literature had better go even to so poor a creature as Buckingham." Another familiar idiom is shown in the expression, *Please hand me that book," for "May it please you to," etc. The more formal expression still survives in "May it please your Honor." The perfect and pluperfect tenses of the verb be are used idiomatically with to and a substantive or an infinitive of purpose. For example: "Have you been to the theatre?" "He had been to see Irving that night." Other idiomatic expressions are, many a, as in "Full many a flower is born to blush unseen," never so good, would God, whether or no, either at the end of a negative sentence, as in "I can't go, either." Still another idiom, which is objected to in England, it is said, but which is universal in the United States, consists in the use of do, and especially of do not, with have, in such expressions as "America does not have a monopoly of bad English," "He did not have much appetite." Some idioms are relics of what was once ordinary usage. The origin of others has not yet been discovered, but the more the language is studied, the more light is shed upon the history of expressions which do not now carry their meaning on the face of them, as they once 1 Lord Chesterfield: Letter to his son, July 9, O. S., 1750. 2 Macaulay; in Trevelyan's "Life and Letters of Macaulay,” vol. ii. chap. ix. • See "The Saturday Review," Dec. 1, 1888, p. 641. did. Dance attendance, scrape acquaintance, curry favor, however difficult to understand word by word, are easy to understand as phrases. As phrases, they are facts in language: "Welcome, my lord: dance attendance here; I think the duke will not be spoke withal." 1 "Politicians who, in 1807, sought to curry favour with George the Third by degrading Caroline of Brunswick, were not ashamed, in 1820, to curry favour with George the Fourth by persecuting of good Eng In the use of language there is only one sound principle of judgment. If to be understood is, as it should be, a writer's first object, his language must be such The true test as his readers understand, and understand as lish he understands it. If he is so fond of antiquity as to prefer a word that has not been in use since the twelfth or the seventeenth century to one only fifty or twenty years old but in good repute to-day, he is in danger of being shelved with his adopted contemporaries; if he is so greedy of novelty as to snatch at the words of a season, few of which survive the occasion that gives them birth, his work is likely to be as short-lived as they. lf, being a scholar, he uses Latinisms or Gallicisms known only to scholars like himself; if, being a lawyer or a physician, he uses legal or medical jargon; or if, living in Yorkshire or in Arkansas, he writes in the dialect of Yorkshire or in that of Arkansas, he will be understood by those who belong to his class or to his section of country, but he may be unintelligible, as well as distasteful, to the general public. By avoiding pedantry and vulgarity alike, a writer, while commending himself 1 Shakspere: Richard III., act iii. scene vii. X to the best class of readers, loses nothing in the estima tion of any other class; for those who do not themselves speak or write pure English understand it when spoken or written by others. The reasons, in short, which prevent an English author from publishing a treatise in Greek, Celtic, or French, or in a dialect peculiar to a place or to a class, prohibit him from employing an English expression that is not favored by the great body of cultivated men in English-speaking countries, an expression not sanctioned by GOOD USE,— that is, by Present, National, and Reputable use: present, as opposed to obsolete or ephemeral; national, as opposed to local, professional, or foreign; reputable, as opposed to vulgar or affected. Present use. PRESENT USE is determined neither by authors who wrote so long ago that their diction has become antiquated, nor by those whose reputation as good writers is not firmly established. Not even the authority of Shakspere, of Milton, or of Johnson, though supported by the uniform practice of his contemporaries, justifies an expression that has been long disused; nor does the adoption by many newspapers of a new word, or of an old word in a new sense, make it a part of the language. In both cases, time is the court of last resort; and the decisions of this court are made known through writers of national reputation. The exact boundaries of present use cannot, however, be fixed with precision. Dr. Campbell, writing in the middle of the last century, held that a word which had not appeared in any book written since 1688, or which was to be found in the works of living authors only, should not be deemed in present use; but in these days of change words go and come more rapidly. Old names |