“Grammar, or thedoctrine of language, treats of the laws of speech, and, in the first place, of theWord, as its fundamental constituent, with respect to itsmatterand itsform, inprosody, or the doctrine of sounds, andmorphology, or the doctrine of forms, and then of thecombinationof words in speech, insyntax, or the doctrine of the joining of words and sentences” (vol. i. p. 12).
“Grammar, or thedoctrine of language, treats of the laws of speech, and, in the first place, of theWord, as its fundamental constituent, with respect to itsmatterand itsform, inprosody, or the doctrine of sounds, andmorphology, or the doctrine of forms, and then of thecombinationof words in speech, insyntax, or the doctrine of the joining of words and sentences” (vol. i. p. 12).
Syntax, which is a part of grammar, is sometimes confused with grammar itself. It is that part of grammar which treats of the sentence and of its construction, and embraces, among other features, the doctrine of the collocation of words in sentences in connected speech, treating of their arrangement and relative positions, as required by grammatical connection, euphony, and clearness and energy of expression.
The “New English Dictionary,” edited at Oxford University by Dr. J. A. H. Murray, treating this subject says:
“The old-fashioned definition of grammar as ‘The art of speaking and writing a language correctly’ is from the modern point of view in one respect too narrow, because it applied only to a portion of this branch of study; in another respect it is too wide, and was so even from the older point of view,because many questions of ‘correctness’ in language are recognized as outside the province of grammar:e. g., the use of a word in a wrong sense, or a bad pronunciation or spelling, would not have been called a grammatical mistake. Until anot very distant date, grammar was divided by English writers into Orthography, Etymology, Syntax, and Prosody, to which Orthoepy was added by some others. The division now usual is that into Phonology, treating of the sounds now used in the language, Accidence, of the inflexional forms or equivalent combinations, and Syntax, of the structure of sentences.”
“The old-fashioned definition of grammar as ‘The art of speaking and writing a language correctly’ is from the modern point of view in one respect too narrow, because it applied only to a portion of this branch of study; in another respect it is too wide, and was so even from the older point of view,because many questions of ‘correctness’ in language are recognized as outside the province of grammar:e. g., the use of a word in a wrong sense, or a bad pronunciation or spelling, would not have been called a grammatical mistake. Until anot very distant date, grammar was divided by English writers into Orthography, Etymology, Syntax, and Prosody, to which Orthoepy was added by some others. The division now usual is that into Phonology, treating of the sounds now used in the language, Accidence, of the inflexional forms or equivalent combinations, and Syntax, of the structure of sentences.”
In defining grammar, Lindley Murray wrote “English grammar is the art of speaking and writing the English language with propriety.” Following the style of theStandard Dictionary, Dr. Murray gives one of the meanings of grammar as follows; “Speech or writing judged as good or bad according as it conforms to or violates grammatical rules; also speech or writing that is correct according to those rules.”
If grammar can not be good or bad, as contended by theNew York Herald’seditor, then it can not be true or false. Yet Dryden wrote, “And I doubt the word ‘they’ isfalse grammar” (Almanzor, II. Def. Epilogue); and Macaulay writing of Frederick the Great, said: “He had German enough to scold his servants, but hisgrammar and pronunciation are extremely bad” (Essays; Frederick the Great). Again, elsewhere, “The letter may still be read, with all the originalbad grammarand bad spelling” (History of England, IV., xviii., 245). Both phrases are permissible. CompareBAD.
grammatical error: A common locution, but “an error in grammar,” is to be preferred as avoidingwhat is sometimes considered a violation of grammatical precision.
grant. CompareACCORD.
grass, go to: A vulgar imperative meaning “get away” or “clear out!”
grass widow: A common term of disparagement applied to a woman abandoned by or separated from her husband: a term which is not used by persons of refinement and one that, if used at all, should be applied only with great care.
grass widower: A term used to denote a husband who lives apart from his wife or one from whom the wife is temporarily absent.
gratitude,thankfulness: Gratitude, from the Latingratitudo, fromgratus, kind, is a sense of appreciation of favors received, as indicated by actions. It is the actual feeling, of whichthankfulness, or the fulness of thanks, is the mere outward expression. It is therefore quite possible, and indeed often the case, for a person who at one time isfull of thanksto show subsequently a want of gratitude.
great. CompareBIG.
groomshould not be used for “bridegroom.”
grouchy: A slang term for sulky or disgruntled.
growsometimes used forbecomeis gaining the sanction of usage; as, “togrowsmaller.” In this sensegrowhas been used by such masters of English as Steele, Gray, Johnson, and Macaulay.
guess,suppose,think,conjecture: Words sometimes used incorrectly. Weguesswhen we are content to hazard an opinion based on data which are admittedly insufficient, but wesupposewhen we have good ground for assuming a thing to be true. When wethink, we give thought to a matter on which we yet admit the thought has been insufficient to furnish us with exact or certain knowledge.Thinkingis allied toconjecturing, in which, though holding a pronounced opinion, this falls short of absoluteconviction. Weguessthe outcome of an event, butsupposethat an event which has happened may result in good. Wethinkthat a certain medicine may effect a cure, but if we have tried it successfully before for a similar complaint,conjecturethat it will, although not being absolutely sure that the conditions are precisely the same we are notconvincedand do notknow.
gums. CompareRUBBERS.
habit,custom,usage: Discriminate carefully between these words. In strict usagehabitpertains exclusively to the individual;customto a race or nation of people, as, thecustomsof the Jews.Usagerefers particularly to habitual practise or something permitted by it or done in accordance with it.
had better,would better: Although according to grammatical rulehad betteris incorrect, it hasbeen used by writers of correct English and it may be found repeatedly in the English Classics. Therefore, it is generally considered good usage and preferable towould betterwhich, though correct, is seldom heard and usually considered pedantic.
had,have: In such a phrase as “Had I haveheard of it,” the verbhaveis redundant, forhadhere is used elliptically forif I had, and carries the contingency to the past. Care should be taken to avoid such locutions as the example given which is one of a class that stamps those who make use of them as grossly ignorant.
had ought: The use of any part of the verbhavewithoughtis a vulgarism. Not “Ihad oughtto have written,” but simply “Ioughtto have written”; not “Hehadn’t oughtto have done it,” but “Heought notto have done it.”
had rather,had better: Forms disputed by certain critics, from the days of Samuel Johnson, the critics insisting upon the substitution ofwouldorshould, as the case may demand, forhad; buthad ratherandhad betterare thoroughly established English idioms having the almost universal popular and literary sanction of centuries. “Iwould rathernot go” is undoubtedly correct when the purpose is to emphasize the element of choice or will in the matter; but in all ordinary cases “Ihad rathernot go” has themerit of being idiomatic and easily and universally understood.
Ihad ratherbe a doorkeeper in the house of my God than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.Ps.lxxxiv. 10.
Ihad ratherbe a doorkeeper in the house of my God than to dwell in the tents of wickedness.Ps.lxxxiv. 10.
If for “Youhad betterstay at home,” we substitute “Youshould betterstay at home,” an entirely different meaning is expressed, the idea of expediency giving place to that of obligation.—Standard Dictionary.
“Would rathermay always be substituted forhad rather.Might ratherwould not have the same meaning.Wouldandshoulddo not go well withbetter. In one instancecanis admissible. ‘I can better afford,’ becausecanis especially associated withafford. We may saymight better, but it has neither the sanction, the idiomatic force, nor the precise meaning ofhad better.”—Samuel Ramsey,Eng. Lang. and Gram.pt. ii. ch. 6, p. 413.
hail,hale:Hailis pronounced ashale(robust; sound) but should be distinguished therefrom, although for that word there is an alternative spellinghail, which, however, is rarely used.Haleis from Icelandishheill, sound;hailis from the Anglo-Saxon,haegel, frozen rain.
hain’t: A common vulgarism forhave not,haven’t, and made worse, if possible, by being used also forhas notorhasn’t; as “Ihain’t,” “Hehain’t,” etc. “Ihaven’t,” “Hehasn’t,” are permissible, “haven’tI?” “hasn’the?” are acceptable in conversation. But when the subject precedes in the first person singular and the plural, it is preferable to abbreviate the verb; as, “I’ve not” “you’ve not,” etc.
half: Inasmuch as in equivalent terms of the whole there can not be a singlehalfbut must be twohalves, one should speak of dividing (the whole) into two or into halves rather than of cutting (it) inhalf.
half-cock, to go off at: A colloquial phrase denoting “to speak before one is ready”; not used by persons accustomed to refined diction.
handful: This word has for a pluralhandfuls. “Twohandfulsof flour” means a handful taken twice, whereashands fullmeans both hands full. This last term is often erroneously writtenhandsful.
handy: Properly said of articles on which one may lay the hand, or possibly of persons, as attendants, ready at hand for service. Applied to neighborhood, “near,” “near by,” “close at hand,” or the like are to be preferred.
hang: This verb has for its perfect tense and past participle two forms,hangedandhung; but in the sense of execution (sus per col), the former term is alone correctly used, whereas in other senses the latter is applied. Thus, one may say, “A hat ishungon a peg, but a murderer ishangedon the gallows,” andnotthat the hat is hangednorthat the murderer is hung.
hanger on: A colloquialism for “a dependent or parasite:” the term is inelegant and therefore undesirable.
hangs on: As a substitute for “remains,” the expression finds no favor.
happen. CompareTRANSPIRE.
happen in, to: A colloquialism often met in rural districts and used for “to make a chance social call,” or “to drop in casually” as one passes by.
happiness. ComparePLEASURE.
hard case: An American colloquialism for a person of pronounced or curious type.
hardly. CompareSCARCELY.
hardy. CompareRUGGED.
hasten,hurry: Although both words imply a celerity of action, the former presupposes consideration and is not opposed to good order, whereas the latter is indicative of perturbation and a measure of irregularity. Therefore these terms are not synonymous. Phelps in his “English Style in Public Discourse,” says “the first does not imply confusion; the second does.” Lexicographers do not restrict the meaning ofhurryto “to confuse by undue haste or suddenness,” but define it as “to cause to be done rapidly or more rapidly; accelerate.” Youhastento congratulate buthurryto catch a train.
have: On the use of this word theStandard Dictionarysays; Used in the past tense followinganother past tense, a use often indiscriminately condemned, though sometimes proper and necessary. (1)Improper construction.Where what was “meant,” “intended,” or the like was, at the time when intended, some act (as of going, writing, or speaking)futurein its purpose and notpast, and therefore not to be expressed by apast tense; as, “He meantto have gone” for “He meantto go”; “I meantto have writtento you, but forgot it,” for “I meantto write,” etc.; “I had intendedto have spokento him about it,” for “I had intendedto speak,” etc.; “I should liketo have gone” for “I should have likedto go.” The infinitive withtoexpresses the relation of an act as so conceived, so that both analogy and prevalent usage require “meant to go” instead of “meant to have gone.” Such construction, although occasional instances of it still occur in works of authors of the highest literary reputation, and still often heard in conversation, is now generally regarded as ungrammatical.
(2)Proper construction.The doubling of the past tenses in connection with the use ofhavewith a past participle isproper and necessarywhen the completion of the future act was intended before the occurrence of something else mentioned or thought of. Attention to this qualification, which has been overlooked in the criticism of tense-formation and connection, is especially important and imperative. If one says,“I meantto have visitedParis andto have returnedto London before my fatherarrivedfrom America,” the past infinitive in the dependent clause is necessary for the expression of the completion of the acts purposed. “I meantto visitParis andto returnto London before my fatherarrivedfrom America,” may convey suggestively the thought intended, but does not express it.
have seen,seen,saw: In combining words that denote time always observe the order and fitness of time. Do not say “Ihave seenhim last month”; say, rather, “Isawhimlast month.” Nor say, “Iseenhimthis week”—a common error in grammar among the careless; say, rather, “Ihave seenhimthis week,” a form that should be used also, instead of “Isawhimthis week.”
he,she,her,him, etc.: Pronouns often used incorrectly; inexcusable errors in the educated, which are illustrated by such expressions as “If I werehim(orher), I would,” etc. It should be “If I werehe(orshe), I would,” etc.
healthful,healthy: Discriminate carefully between these words. Ahealthfulthing is one efficacious in promoting or causing health;healthydenotes condition or characteristics; as “ahealthychild”; “ahealthfulclimate.”
heap: A word sometimes used to designate a “large number.” Aheapis “a collection of thingspiled up so as to form an elevation”; any other application of the word is colloquial.
hearty: As applied to the appetite is so common at this day that it seems perhaps hypercritical to object to it; and the dictionaries of course give the sense, for it is the lexicographer’s duty to record the language as it existsnotas it ought to exist. That isheartywhich proceeds from the heart; to extend the sentiment to the appetite, or to a meal, or to its eater, as is done by common usage, seems taking a liberty with the word, and applying a fine and expressive term to a comparatively unworthy object.
heir: Pronounce without aspirating theh. Distinguish betweenheir apparentandheir presumptive. The former is “one who must by course of law become theheirif he survive his ancestor”; the latter, “one whose present legal expectation of becoming heir may be defeated by the birth of a person in near degree of relationship.” Thus, a man may to-day beheir presumptiveto his bachelor brother who by marriage may in a year’s time become the father of a son, who will then becomeheir apparent; and by this circumstance the claims of the formerheir presumptiveare quashed.
TheStandard Dictionarysays: “Heiris often colloquially applied to one who receives or is to receive a property by will. In legal terminology such a person is adeviseeor legatee, not anheir.” Asanheirdoes not exist till death either by will or operation of law, it is only by impropriety of speech that one talks of the heirs of the living.
helphas the meaning of “assist”; it has also the somewhat opposed meaning of “prevent, hinder, or refrain from.” This veiled negative makes the correct application of the word difficult. Take, for example, the sentence “Make no more noise than you canhelp.” I can nothelpdoing a thing is I can not refrain from doing it: that is, I can notnotdo it, which means I must do it. The correct form of the sentence just given is shown by filling in the ellipsis, whence it appears thatnotshould also be supplied: “Make no more noise than (such as) you can (not)help(making).”Helpincludesaid, butaidmay fall short of the meaning ofhelp.
hence,thence,whence: As in meaning these words embracefromit is pleonastic to precede them by the word thus implied. Do not say, “go from hence,” “from thence he went to Rome,” “from whence did you come.”Fromis redundant in all these sentences.
hen-party: A vulgar term for a social gathering of ladies. CompareSTAG-PARTY.
herd: A term sometimes applied indiscriminately to persons as well as beasts.Herdis correctly used to designate, “a number of animals feeding or herding together;” when applied to persons thetrue designation is “a disorderly rabble,” or “the lower classes,” as the vulgarherd.
him and me: It is a vulgar error to use the objective for the nominative. One should not say, “Him and me are going to Bermuda,” say, rather, “He and I (or preferably ‘we’) are going to Bermuda.” Do not say, “Betweenyou and I,” but say, “Betweenyou and me,” or “Betweenus.”
hire. CompareLEASE.
holocaust: A term sometimes misused owing to a lexicographical error which attributes to the word the meaning of “any great disaster.” According to this the Johnstown Flood, the Galveston storm, and the fire in the Paris bazaar all were holocausts, but this is erroneous.Holocaustis derived from the Greekholos, entire, whole, andkaustos, burnt, and its principal meaning is “a sacrificial offering burnt whole or entirely consumed.” Figuratively, the term may be applied to destruction by fire, as the burning of the steamer “General Slocum” in the East River, New York, or the great fire in Baltimore, but not to loss as by shipwreck or collision unless attended by fire.
holy: The word means not only “morally excellent” but also “set apart for the service of God”; and therefore the criticism that “to keepholythe Sabbath day” is a meaningless injunction as everyday should be keptholy, is without merit. The word is derived from the Anglo Saxon and means “whole”; and the divine direction as to the Sabbath is, therefore, simply that the day be observed in its integrity.
holy mackerel: An inane expression commonly used to denote surprise and one to be avoided by all persons with pretentions to refined diction.
hoodoo: A colloquialism designating any person regarded as bringing ill luck, as a “Jonah,” on shipboard, in allusion to the Bible story of the prophet Jonah.
horde: This word means “a gathered multitude of human beings; a troop, gang, or crew; as thehordesof Cambyses.” It is never correctly applied to things. Do not speak of ahordeof rubbish.
horse sense: A colloquial phrase designating “rough common sense” used by W. D. Howells in “Hazard of New Fortunes,” vol. i. p. 4.
how?should never be used for “What did you say?” Nor in making arequestfor the repetition of any statement not heard clearly or not readily understood. Condemned by Oliver Wendell Holmes in “A Rhymed Lesson,” st. 43.
“Do put your accents in the proper spot;Don’t—let me beg you—don’t say “How?” for “What?”
“Do put your accents in the proper spot;Don’t—let me beg you—don’t say “How?” for “What?”
“Do put your accents in the proper spot;Don’t—let me beg you—don’t say “How?” for “What?”
“Do put your accents in the proper spot;
Don’t—let me beg you—don’t say “How?” for “What?”
howis an adverb, but it is sometimes most inelegantly used as an interjection and very improperly used as a conjunction, which it is not. Onthis subject theStandard Dictionarysays, “How, as an adverb, may be used as an interrogative or a relative in any of its senses. In old or vulgar usage it is sometimes nearly equivalent to the conjunctionthat: either (1) alone, as, he told mehowhe had been left an orphan; or (2) in the phraseshow thatandas how; as, he toldhow thathe saw it all; he told meas howI angered him.”
however: As an adverbhoweverhas proper and elegant use as, “Howeverwise one may be, there are limits to one’s knowledge.” But its use forhowandeveras, “Howevercould he do it?” should be avoided as a vulgarism; while its employment in the sense of “at any rate; at all,” as in the example, “He tried to keep me, but I’m going,however,” is provincial and archaic.
As a conjunction it should not be used indiscriminately, as it often is used, forbutornotwithstanding. Not “He was sick; not,however, so seriously as he thought,” but “He was sick,butnot so seriously,” etc.; since the relation is sharply adversitive. “And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning.Notwithstanding(notbut) they harkened not unto Moses”; since the preceding thought is represented as no impediment to the succeeding one. “I have not seen her since our quarrel;however(notbut, ornotwithstanding), I expect to be recalled every hour”; since the relation is one of concession and simpletransition,howeverdenoting that “in whatever manner or degree what precedes is valid, what follows nevertheless stands firm.”—Standard Dictionary.
hungshould never be used forhanged. Beef ishung; a murderer ishanged. CompareHANG.
hunk, to get: A vulgar phrase for “to get even” or “to retaliate upon.”
hunkyorhunky-dory: Slang terms that should not be used for “all right”; “safe”; or “done satisfactorily.”
hurry. CompareHASTEN.
I,and me: “They had come to seemy sister and I” is a common error. In this sentence “they” stands in the nominative case, and “my sisterand I,” being the objects of the action of the nominative “they,” should be noun and pronoun in the objective case. To be correct the clause should read “my sisterand me.” “They have come to seemysisterand me.”
ice-cream,ice-water: Common English idioms sometimes condemned as incorrect. TheStandard Dictionaryrecording usage recognizes the formsice-creamandice-wateras correct. Inasmuch asicedmeans “made cold with ice; asiced milkoriced tea,” it would seem that by analogy the correct phrases should beiced cream,iced water, for one would notthink of asking forice teaorice milk, but these idioms are so firmly established that it is doubtful if they will ever be changed.
idea. CompareOPINION.
ie,ei: The rule governing the use of these letters in spelling is commonly expressed “I before E except after C.” Therefore, rememberbelieveis correct, not “beleive”;receiveand not “recieve”;brief, and not “breif”;reprieve, not “repreive”;retrieve, not “retreive.”
if,or: Do not say “seldomorever,” say, rather, “seldomifever,” or “seldomornever.”
if,whether: Sometimesifis incorrectly used forwhether. It is used correctly when supposition or condition is implied;whether, chiefly when an alternative is suggested or presented. “If he sends the money I shall then decidewhetheror not I will go.”
ill: TheStandard Dictionarysays: The use ofillandsickdiffers in the two great English-speaking countries.Illis used in both lands alike, but the preferred sense ofsickin England is that of “sick at the stomach, nauseated,” while in the United States the two words are freely interchangeable. Still Tennyson and other good writers freely usesickin the sense ofill. The tendency of modern usage is to remandillandwell(referring to condition of health) to the predicate. We say “A person whoisill,” rather than “Anillperson”; “I amwell,” but not “I am in awellstate of health.”Illin the abstract sense ofbadorwickedis obsolescent, or rather practically obsolete except in poetic or local use. CompareILLY.
illusion. CompareDELUSION.
illy: This word should never be used forillsince ill is both an adverb and an adjective. Say, “He behavedill”; not “he behavedilly.” Illy is now obsolescent.
immerge. CompareEMERGE.
immigrant. CompareEMIGRANT.
imminent. CompareEMINENT.
immunityandimpunityare sometimes confounded. They are both from the Latin, the former being produced byin, not, +munus, service, and the latter byin+pœna, punishment. Freedom from any burden, or exemption from evil, duty or penalty has perhaps not unnaturally, been associated with freedom from punishment. A boy may insult his brother withimpunitybut can not expect to enjoy a likeimmunityfrom strangers.
impending. CompareEMINENT.
imperative,imperious: Discriminate carefully between these words. That which isimperativemay be either mandatory or authoritative; while that which isimperiousmay be domineering or overbearing.
implicate. CompareINVOLVE.
inaugurate: Phelps declares that this word in the sense of “introduce” is improper and restricts its meaning to “investiture in office.” But lexicographers disregard this distinction and declare thatinauguratemay be correctly used to mean also “to set in operation; to initiate; to originate; as toinauguratereforms.”
“Indeed!” “Is that so?” Discriminate carefully between these terms. “Indeed” expresses surprise. “Is that so?” like “you don’t say?” implies disbelief and calls for the reiteration of the statement made. As these interrogations are used chiefly to discredit or disconcert the speaker they may be characterized as specimens of “refined” rudeness.
indentation,indention: Anindentationis a notch in an edge or border; it is also a dent; andindentionis a setting of type in such manner as to leave a blank space on the left side of a margin of type-matter as at the beginning of a paragraph.
The printers’indentionis not (as it is often said to be) a shortened form ofindentation, but an original word fromdent(dint), “a denting in, a depression,” and hence is the proper word, rather thanindentation, to express the idea.
indices: A plural form ofindex, generally and more properly reserved for use in science and mathematics. In other cases the pluralindexesshould be used.
indict,indite: Although the pronunciation of these words is identical their meanings, in modern practise, differ materially. Both words are from the Latinin+dico, say. The first means to prefer an indictment (or formal written charge of crime) against. The second means “to put into words in writing” but it does not carry with it, the legal signification of the preceding.
induction. CompareDEDUCTION.
inferior: In constant and approved use in such expressions as “aninferiorman,” “goods of aninferiorsort”; corresponding to such expressions as “asuperiorman,” “materials ofsuperiorquality”—all of which may be regarded as elliptical forms of speech. In reply to Dean Alford’s challenge of this usage (Queen’s English¶ 214, p. 82), it is enough to say that life would be too short to admit of all such ellipses, being supplied, even if such supply would not make speech too prolix for common use.
inform. ComparePOST.
ingenious,ingenuous: Words sometimes used erroneously.Ingeniouscharacterizes persons possessed of cleverness or ability; ready, skilful, prompt, or apt to contrive.Ingenuousmeans free from guile; candid; open; frank.
in,into: Discriminate carefully between these words.Indenotes position, state, etc.;into, tendency, direction, destination, etc.
inkslinger: A vulgar term for a journalist, writer, or literary worker, and as such one to be avoided.
innumerablemeans “that cannot be numbered.” Therefore, avoid such a locution as “aninnumerablenumber,” as absurd.
in our midst: An undesirable and ambiguous phrase for “among us” due to the misinterpretation of “in the midst of us,” “in the midst of them” (Matt.xviii, 20) but with some literary authority for its use.
in so far as: In this phrase the wordinis redundant and meaningless. Do not say, “In so far asI dared, I spoke the truth.” Omit thein.
in spite of: A phrase which some persons declare not synonymous withnotwithstanding, yet theStandard Dictionaryauthorizes its use and says, “formerly in contempt of; now, notwithstanding: used somewhat emphatically.”
intend,mean: The use ofintendformean, as in explanatory sentences, is not commonly approved although it has the sanction of literary usage, and is considered correct by lexicographers who in defining the words treat them as interchangeable. When explaining anything that has been said it is preferable to say, “By this Imean,” rather than “By this Iintend.” Do not say “Do youmeanto come?” when you wish to know whether or not the person you addressintendsto come. CompareCONTEMPLATE.
in the street,on the street: Distinctions between these phrases are invariably wiredrawn. Both forms are permissible; the writer’s preference, which may be modified according to circumstances, is for the first. “His home isinEighty-seventh street” is preferable to “onEighty-seventh street.” One should not say “his home isonBermuda,” but “inBermuda.” “He livesatHamilton,inQueen street.” CompareON.
invest: Properly used only of considerable transactions, and always with a suggestion of permanent proprietary right. One does notinvest(except in a humorous sense) in a postage-stamp.
invite: Used in the sense of “invitation” this term, a colloquialism formerly in wide use, is condemned as illiterate and bordering on vulgarity.
involveis to be distinguished fromimplicate. The latter has a suggestion of wrong-doing or crime, whereas the former contains no such implication.
irritate. CompareAGGRAVATE.
irruption. CompareERUPTION.
I seen him: Vulgar and incorrect; say “I have seenhim” or “Isawhim.”
Is that so?One of a class of vulgar phrases of which other examples are “You don’t say”; “Don’t you know”; “You know”; “Well I never,” commonly used but all of which should be avoided as ill-bred and undesirable locutions.
is,are: The correct use of these words depends in a measure on the intention of the writer or speaker. Therefore, the choice of a singular or plural verb in cases where either form would be proper is often influenced by the writer’s way of looking at the subject. “The purpose and conception of the schemeisto do good.” Now the mistake with this sentence is that either “purpose and conception” represent a single idea (in which case they may, in combination, take a singular verb), or they do not (in which case they require a plural verb), and that in the former case, where the nouns express a similarity of sentiment, one of the words is superfluously used. “Jones and Smithissolvent”: yes, as a firm, though as individuals theyaresolvent.
it: Used sometimes in such manner as to violate the principles of grammatical and rhetorical construction, as when referring to any one of several words or clauses preceding, or perhaps to some idea merely implied or hinted at in what has gone before, as in the following: “A statute inflicting death may, and ought to be, repealed, ifitbe in any degree expedient, withoutitsbeing highly so.” In this sentence “ifitbe” should be replaced by “ifsuch repealbe,” and “its” should be omitted.
In general, personal and relative pronouns with ambiguous reference to preceding words or clausesin the sentence are stumbling-blocks of inexperienced or careless writers.
ivories: A slang term used to designate the keys of a piano; hence, the phrase,tickle the ivories, a coarse way of expressing ability to play the piano.
jag: Formerly a provincialism for “a load of hay”; now a euphemism for “drunk”; but as such a term to be avoided in polite society.
jar: Used in the phrase “Doesn’t (or wouldn’t) it jar you” is an erroneous use of the wordjarin vogue among persons addicted to using the vulgarisms of the street. To jar is “to cause to shake as by a shock or blow; to jolt”;not, to disconcert or discompose.
jawshould not be used as a synonym for “mouth” or “talk.” Such expressions as “Hold your jaw”; “Shut your jaw,” and “What are you jawing about?” have no place in the vocabulary of persons of refinement.
Jew,Hebrew,Israelite: These terms are sometimes incorrectly used as synonyms.Hebrewis the ethnological and linguistic name,Israelitethe national name, andJewthe popular name of the people; as, “The Egyptians oppressed theHebrews”; “David was the typical king of theIsraelites”; “TheJewsrevolted under the Maccabees.” The threenames have their special application to the people in the premonarchical period (Hebrew), in the monarchical period (Israelite), and in the period subsequent to the return from the Babylonian captivity (Jew).
jewels,jewelry: Words, sometimes, but mistakenly, used interchangeably.Jewelsforming the stock in trade of a jeweler are termed collectivelyjewelry; the articles of adornment, as gems and precious stones, worn by a lady are herjewels.
jiggered, to be: A form of minced oath sometimes used as an equivalent for “to be hanged”; as, “I’ll be jiggered if I do”: an inelegant form of oath common among Englishmen.
join issue: Not to be confounded with totake issue. Totake issuemeans “to deny”; tojoin issue, in strict usage, “to admit the right of denial,” but not also “to agree in the truth of the denial.” In the example “In their career father and son meet,join issue, and pursue their nefarious occupation in conjunction,”join issueis improperly used for “agree” or “come to an agreement.” Tojoin issueis properly “to take opposite sides of a case,” etc.
jollier: A slang term used to designate a person who treats another (from whom he expects a favor, or with whom he desires cordial relations) pleasantly and good-humoredly, or in an agreeable way so as to obtain his end. In its English sense ajollieris one given to chaffing and joking at another’s expense.
jolly. CompareNICE.
jolly, to: The occupation of a jollier: slang of widespread usage. CompareJOLLIER.
josh: A vulgarism for “chaff,” “hoax,” or “banter,” which are more refined terms.
journal: From the French, properly meansdaily. Therefore to speak of a “dailyjournal” is absurd. Say, rather, “dailypaper.” Likewise avoid “weeklyjournal,” “monthlyjournal,” “quarterlyjournal” which mean weekly daily, monthly daily, quarterlydaily, and are forms of expression in popular use as examples of violent catachresis. Say, rather, “daily newspaper,” “weekly newspaper,” “monthly” or “quarterly magazine” or “review,” or simply “monthly” or “quarterly.”
jump atorto: To embrace eagerly, as an offer or opportunity. In this sense never “jump to,” but one mayjump tothe floor, as from a chair.
just going to. CompareGOING.
kettle of fish, pretty: A colloquial phrase for “a perplexing state of affairs,” or “a muddle,” both of which are preferable expressions.
key,quay: Exercise care in the use of these words. Akeyis that with which something is opened or disclosed; also, a small low-lying island; aquayis a wharf or landing place where ships discharge passengers or cargo. These words are pronounced alike. CompareDOCK.
kibosh: A slang term for “humbug.”To put the kibosh on, a slang phrase for “to put an end to or stop anything.”
kickis not used instead of “protest” by careful speakers, notwithstanding the fact that George Eliot introduced it into literature (seeSilas Marner, ch. iv. p. 52). The term is slang.
kid: A common vulgarism for “child” and as such one the use of which can not be too severely condemned.
kid on: A vulgarism used in England for “humbug; hoax; or, try to induce one to believe something that is not true:”—no kid,no kidding: Vulgar terms for “without any humbug.” Undesirable locutions.
killing. ComparePERFECTLY.
kinder: Forkind of, pronounced as one word, is merely a low vulgarism. The same remark holds ofsortersimilarly used for “sort of.” SeeKIND OF.
kindness: When used in the plural is sometimes objected to on the ground thatkindnessis an abstract noun. “He wishes to express gratitude for manykindnesses.” Nothing is commoner than the making of abstract nouns into concrete in this way; “affinities”; “charities”; “His tendermerciesare over all His works.” Besides, by “manykindnesses” is meant,not “much kindness,” nor “great kindness,” but “kindness manifested in many forms or shown on many occasions, many acts of kindness.”
kind ofis an American provincialism forsomewhatand has no literary authorization. “I am somewhat tired” should be substituted for “I amkind oftired.” Again, afterkind ofdo not use the indefinite article. “Whatkind ofman” is preferable to “whatkind ofa man.”
kind of,sort of: Indefinite phrases used by some lexicographers to introduce definitions; as “akind ofbird”; “asort ofbox.” If the subject treated be a bird of some species or a box of a specific make it is best usage to describe first what it is and then to follow with the characteristics; as, “a bird of the swallow family,” “a cage-like box,” etc.
king-pinis not a desirable substitute for “chief man” or “person in charge.” As a colloquialism it should be avoided.
kinsman. CompareRELATION.
knife, to: This term should not be used as a substitute for “stab” or “defeat.” Although widely used by politicians in the United States the term has no justification outside of ward politics.
knock, to: Slang for “to harass or find fault with continually;” a similar and more recent word used also in this sense ishammer. Both should be avoided.
lady: The use of this word as “a mere distinction of sex is a sheer vulgarism.” Never say “A man and hislady,” but “a man and hiswife,” or preferably, by name, “Mr. and Mrs. John Smith.” Where woman, as indicative of sex, is intended, saywoman—notladyorfemale. A female is equally female, whether person or beast. In the United States “woman” is preferable; in England “lady” is used chiefly when the term is not preceded by a qualifying adjective. The wordwomanbest expresses the relation of the female sex to the human race. Some ill-informed persons useladyforwomanunder the mistaken idea thatwomanis a derogatory term; such use is downright vulgarity. As one never hearssalesgentlemanbut salesman, thereforesalesladyshould be avoided; say, rather,saleswoman.
lambasteis slang and as such should not be used as a substitute for “flog,” “whip,” or “beat.”
lassitudinousis not a desirable substitute for “languid” or “weary.”
last,latter: The first of these words is not properly used of only two, since it is a superlative; the second, not properly of more than two, since it is a comparative. Notwithstanding the fact that the use oflastforlatterand oflatterforlasthas had wide sanction, the present tendency is toward strict construction.
last two. CompareFIRSTandTWO FIRST.
lay,lie: In discriminating the uses of these words theStandard Dictionarysays:Lay,vt., “to put down,” “to cause to lie down,” is a causal derivative oflie,vi., “to rest.” The principal parts of the two verbs are: