101. CANON THE SEVENTH. When etymology plainly points to a signification different from that which the word commonly bears, propriety and simplicity both require the dismission of every such word.

Illus. The word plainly is used in this canon, because no regard should be had to the etymology, when it is from an ancient or foreign language, or from obsolete roots in our own language, or when it is obscure or doubtful. The case is different when the roots either are, or strongly appear to be, English, and, in present use, clearly suggest another meaning.

Example 1. Beholden implies "obliged," or "indebted." As the passive participle of the verb to behold, which it is analogically, it conveys a sense totally different. Not that we consider the term as equivocal; for in the last acceptation, it hath long since been disused, having been supplanted by beheld.

Corol. Every word, therefore, whose formation is as analogical as this, has, at least, the appearance of impropriety, when used in a sense that seems naturally foreign to its radical signification.

Example 2. The verb to unloose should analogically signify" to tie," in like manner as to untie signifies "to loose."

Corol. All considerations of analogy, propriety and perspicuity, unite in persuading us to repudiate the preposterous application of every term which includes the impropriety of conveying a sense the reverse of that which its etymology naturally suggests.

102. CANON THE EIGHTH. When any words become obsolete, or, at least, are never used, except as constituting parts of particular phrases, it is better to dispense with their service entirely, and give up the phrases.

Illus. First, because the disuse, in ordinary cases, renders the term somewhat indefinite, and occasions a degree of obscurity; secondly, because the introduction of words, which never appear but with the same attendants, gives an air of vulgarity and cant, to a style which might otherwise be wholly unexceptionable.

Example. Dint of argument, for "strength of argument;"-not c whit better, for "no better;"—pro and con, for "on both sides;"with many similar phrases, will never be used by those who observe the eighth canon.

103. CANON THE NINTH. All those phrases which, when analysed grammatically, include a solecism, (Art. 111.) and all those to which use hath affixed a particular sense, but which, when explained by the general and established rules

English word; the last presents a dissonant recurrence of the same letter, to a degree unexampled with us, though the mixture of long and short syllables prevents that difficulty of utterance, pointed out in the example of Criterion third. The first Latin word hisses in pronunciation like an adder roused from its slumbers; the second is as rough as any of those in the example of Criterion first. And the two Italian words, from the most musical of all languages, sound harsh and jarring even to us who are accustomed to a dialect boisterous like our weather.

of language, are susceptible either of a different sense, no sense, ought to be discarded altogether.

or of

· Illus. We shall distinguish this phraseology by the epithet idiomatical; and since it is the offspring partly of ignorance, and partly of affectation, it divides itself into several examples.

First, that which includes a solecism, is the phrase," I had rather do such a thing," for, "I would rather do it." This expression is irregular, because the auxiliary had joined to the infinitive active do, is a gross violation of the rules of conjugation; and it is unnecessary, because we can supply its place by a phrase purely English. Good use cannot therefore protect it from being branded with the name of a blunder.

Secondly. Phrases, which, when explained grammatically, lead to a different sense from what the words in conjugation commonly bear; as," he sings a good song," for " he sings well." A good song may be ill sung, and therefore the plain meaning of the words, as they stand connected, is very different. So also, "he plays a good fiddle," for "he plays well on the fiddle," involves a solecism.

A fourth impropriety is, a river's emptying itself. But to empty, is "to exhaust," or "to evacuate." Now passing the word river, as a metonymy for channel, is this ever "evacuated or exhausted?" when it is, it ceases to be a channel, and becomes a hollow or valley. A river falls into the sea, and a ship "falls down the river," as the motion is no other that a fall down a real, though gentle, declivity.

The fifth sort are those vile but common phrases, which can scarcely be considered as conveying any sense; as, currying favour, dancing attendance.

Sixth. The idiomatical use that is sometimes made of certain verbs, renders their application reprehensible; as," he stands upon security," for " he insists;"-and take for "understand;" as, "you take me," and "I take it;"-and hold for " continue;" as, " he does not hold long in one mind.'

Seventh. The worst are those, in which the words, when construed, are not susceptible of any meaning; as, "there were seven ladies in the company, every one prettier than another;" which means, that they were all very pretty. But one prettier, implies that there is another less pretty. Now where every one is prettier, there can be none less, and consequently none more pretty.

Corol. Ambitiously to display nonsensical phrases of this sort, under the ridiculous notion of a familiar and easy manner, is not to set off the riches of a language, but to expose its rags. As such idioms, therefore, err alike against purity, simplicity, perspicuity, and elegance, they are entitled to no quarter from those who may deem the foregoing canons of any weight in the art of composition.

Scholium. The first five of these canons are intended to suggest the principles by which our choice ought to be directed in cases wherein use itself is wavering; and the four last, to point out those further improvements of construction, which verbal criticism, without exceeding her legal powers, may assist in producing. There is a danger, however, lest our improvements this way be carried too far, and our mother tongue, by being too much impaired, be impoverished, and so more injured in copiousness and nerves, than all our refinement will ever be able to compensate. For this reason there ought, in support

of every sentence of proscription, to be an evident plea from the principles of perspicuity, elegance and harmony.

104. The foregoing reasoning furnishes a TENTH CANON. Whatever be the opinion of some grammarians, the want of etymology cannot be reckoned a sufficient ground for the suppression of a significant term, which hath come into good

use.

Obs. It were as unreasonable to reject, on this account, the assistance of an expressive word, that opportunely offers its service, when perhaps no other word would so exactly answer our purpose, as to refuse, in common life, the needful aid of a proper person, because he could give no account of his family or pedigree.

Illus. Though what is called cant, is generally, not necessarily, not always without etymology, it is not the defect, but the baseness of the use, which fixeth on it that disgraceful appellation. No absolute monarch hath it more in his power to ennoble a person of obscure birth, than it is in the power of good use to exalt words of low or dubious extraction.

Examples. Fib, banter, fop, fudge, have arisen from hovels no one knows how; and flimsy, from the cant of a workshop.

Corol. It is never from attention to etymology, which would frequently mislead us, but from custom, the only infallible guide in this matter, that the meanings of words in present use must be learned. (Art. 76. and 77.)

105. What has now been said on this topic, relates only to such words as bear no distinguishable traces of the baseness of their source; the case is quite different in regard to those terms, which may be said to proclaim their vile and despicable origin; and that either by associating disagreeable and unsuitable ideas, or by betraying some frivolous humour in their formation.

Examples. Bellytimber, thoroughstitch, and dumbfound, are of the former; and transmogrify, bamboozle, helterskelter, are of the latter class. Yet most of these words are to be found in " WALKER's Critical Pronouncing Dictionary.”

Obs. These may find a place in burlesque, but ought never to show themselves in any serious performance. A person of no birth, as the phrase is, may be raised to the rank of nobility, and, which is more, may become it; but nothing can add dignity to that man, or fit him for the company of gentlemen, who bears indelible marks of the clown in his look, gait, and whole behaviour.

CHAPTER IV.

OF GRAMMATICAL PURITY.

106. PURE ENGLISH composition implies three things: (Art. 87.)

First, that the words be English. (Art. 82.)

Secondly, that their construction, under which, in our tongue, arrangement also is comprehended, be in the English idiom. (General Principles, p. 55.)

Thirdly, that the words and phrases be employed to express the precise meaning, which custom hath affixed to them. (Art. 76.)

Obs. In the foregoing definition, we have substituted the phrase, "pure English," for grammatical purity; and this we have done for two especial reasons: 1st. Because it is the language in which we write; and 2dly. Because the language of Britain is capable of that grammatical purity, and those higher qualities of elocution, and oratorical excellence, which give grace and energy to discourse.

107. Since purity implies three things, it may be violated in three different ways:

First, the words may not be English.

This fault is denominated a barbarism.

Secondly, the construction of the sentence may not be in the English idiom.

This fault has gotten the name of solecism.

Thirdly, the words and phrases may not be employed to express the precise meaning, which custom hath affixed to them.

This fault is termed an impropriety.*

108. The reproach of BARBARISM may be incurred in three different ways:—

1st. By the use of words entirely obsolete :

2dly. By the use of words entirely new; or

3dly. By new formations and compositions, from simple and primitive words in present use.

Illus. 1. By the use of obsolete words. Obsolete words are not now English, though they might have been so in the days of our forefathers. We cannot therefore introduce them. Foreign phrases have as much

*This distribution is agreeable to Quintilian, Instit. lib. i. cap. 5. quæ barbara, quæ impropria, quæ contra legem loquendi composita."

"Deprehendat

clarm to be introduced, as those antiquated words, without risking the charge of affectation. Thus, Thomson, in his "Castle of Indolence," has dragged from their obscurity many words which were almost wholly unknown, except in Spenser's" Fairie Queene."

Examples. Anon, behest, fantasy, cleped, erst, uneath, whilom, tribulation, erewhile, whenas, per adventure, selfsame, offend more or less against Article 86 and its illustration.

2. Poets claim exemption from this rule of never using any words but those which are English, particularly on account of the peculiar inconveniences to which the laws of versification subject them. (Illus. 2. Art. 86.)

3. Besides, in treating some topics, passages of ancient story, for instance, there may sometimes be found a suitableness in the introduction of old words.

4. In certain kinds of style, when used sparingly and with judgment, they serve to add the venerable air of antiquity to the narrative. 5. In burlesque also they often produce a good effect. But purity requires that those words only shall be employed which are of classical authority; and they who are ambitious to speak and write with elegance, will select as their guides, in conversation and oratory, speakers of the best elocution, and authors of the most correct taste, solid matter, and refined manner, will form their patterns in writing. Classical authority, the standard by which our practice must be regulated, is none other than the example of such speakers and writers. (Art. 80. Illus.)

109. The use of new words inundates a language with a numerous tribe of barbarisms. A licentious affectation of novelty, rather than any necessity to avoid circumlocutions, overwhelms our language with foreign words. (Art. 85.)

Examples. Numerosity, cognition, irrefragability, effluxion, are from the Latin, and convey no new meanings, which had not been pre-occupied by other words of established reputation. And among our French imports we have dernier resort, beaux arts, belles lettres, and a legion besides, which some of our own writers, otherwise respectable, have fancied so many gems, capable of adding a wonderful lustre to their works.

Obs. 1. But this is a false brilliancy, which dazzles only those who forget that the Greeks branded a foreign term, in any of their writers, with the odious name of barbarism. Besides, the rules of pronunciation and orthography in French, are so different from those which obtain in English, that the far greater part of the French words yearly introduced, constitute so many anomalies with us, which, by loading the granimatical rules with exceptions, greatly corrupt the simplicity and regularity of our tongue.*

Corol. Two considerations ought to weigh with writers, and hinder them from wantonly admitting into their performances such extraneous productions. One is, if these foreigners be allowed to settle amongst us, they will infallibly supplant the old inhabitants. Whatever ground is given to the one, is so much taken away from the other. No writer, therefore, ought to foment an humour of innovation which

* See "Principles of English Pronunciation," prefacing "Walker's Dictionary."