Sheeny: An offensive appellative for a Jew used only by the illiterate and vulgar.
shire: As this word meanscounty, do not say “county” when speaking of any “shire.” “Oxfordshire” and “the county of Oxford,” are correct, but not “the county of Oxfordshire.”
shoal: In general this word is applied to an assemblage, a multitude or a throng, but, specificallyit designates a number of fish that move together; as, “ashoalof porpoises.” CompareSCHOOL.
should seem,would seem: Terms used chiefly to soften requests, orders or directions. The use ofshouldin such a remark as “Itshould seemso”—implying that something suggested was correct—dates from pre-Elizabethan time. Herewouldshould be substituted forshould.
should,would: These words follow in the main the usage ofshallandwill, but with certain modifications required by their common use in dependent sentences. In general, in indirect quotation,shouldis to be used after a historical tense where the speaker quoted employedshall, andwouldwhere the speaker quotedwill. Thus:
{Direct quotation: “He said to me,’Youshallgo.’”{Indirect „“He said that Ishouldgo.”{Direct „“He said to me, ‘Willyou go?’”{Indirect „“He asked me if Iwouldgo.”
The mixture of direct and indirect is always wrong; avoid, “He asked mewouldI go.”
shut up: A coarse expression often too commonly used instead of “keep quiet.” CompareFORGET IT.
sidewaysshould not be used forsidewise.
siege,seige: Discriminate carefully between these words. Asiegeis an investment as of a city by military forces; as, “thesiegeof Paris”; aseigeis a flockof birds; as, “aseigeof cranes.” Note especially the orthography of these words.
sieve,seive: Homophones of widely different meaning. Asieveis a utensil for sifting; aseiveis a rush or rush-wick.
sight: As a colloquialism meaning a very great quantity, number, or amount; as, “asightof people,” the noun is to be avoided, as in the still more objectionable expression, “powerfulsight,” in which the adjective is altogether misapplied.
similar. CompareSAME.
sin. CompareCRIME.
since,ago:Sinceis used generally to imply time only recently lapsed;ago, to imply time long past. “How longsincedid he call?” “Nelson fought Trafalgar a centuryago.”
siree;sirree Bob: Vulgar and silly intensives of affirmation.
site. CompareCITE.
skidoo: Recent slang for “get out” which is to be preferred.
skin, to: A vulgarism for “to deprive by extortion or trickery; get the better of,” either of which is preferable.
skunk: As applied to a person of mean disposition or of objectionable character the term is to be condemned as unsuited to polite society no matter how fittingly it may apply to the individual designated by it.
slob: A vulgar equivalent for “a careless, negligent and incompetent person,” and as such one to be avoided.
so. CompareSUCH.
soap: A vulgar euphemism for “wealth”; used usually interrogatively as, “How’s he off for soap?” A vulgarism for “How rich is he?” which is to be preferred.
so far as. CompareAS FAR AS.
sojourn: This term formerly obsolete has recently been revived as meaning to “have a residence, definite though temporary, in some place that is not one’s home.”Sojournis better thanstop, which may imply merely cessation of motion and does not express even temporary residence; more specific thanstay, which may apply to a delay of an hour between trains or the passing of a night.
some: This word should never be used for “somewhat.” In such sense,someis dialectal and provincial. Do not say “He has grownsome” but “grownsomewhat,” that is “insomedegree” or “tosomeextent.” “Is he better?” “Yes,some:” avoid such a locution.
someone else,somebody else. See underELSE.
some place. CompareANY PLACE.
somewhat. CompareKIND OFandLIKE.
soppy: A vulgarism for “emotional”: expressive but inelegant.
sorry,grieved: Distinguish between these words in their use. If we aresorry, it is for a matter concerning ourselves; but when we aregrieved, another is in some way connected with the case.
sort of. CompareKIND OF.
sparrow grasssometimes abbreviatedgrassare common corruptions in domestic use forasparagus. There is no excuse but lack of education or lack of intelligence and courage to use the right word when the majority prefer the wrong for this vulgar provincialism.
speciality,specialty: These words should not be confounded. The distinction between them is clearly illustrated by the editor of theStandard Dictionaryas follows: “Specialityis the state or quality of being special;specialtyis an employment to which one is specially devoted, an article in which one specially deals, or the like.”
spectator. CompareAUDIENCE.
spellshould not be used for “period of time.” Do not say “I shall stay a spell” if you mean you will “remaina little while,” the latter is to be preferred.
splendid: Often used indiscriminately and inanely especially by women; as in the expression “perfectlysplendid,” to express very great excellence.Splendidmeans imposing; as, “asplendidwoman”; shedding brilliant light or shining brightly; as, “asplendidsun”; “asplendiddiamond.” A heroic deed may be calledsplendidbut a good story hardly so.
splitorcleft infinitive: A form of expression in which the sign of the infinitive “to” and its verb are separated by some intervening word, usually an adverb, as in the phrase, “to quickly return”: severely condemned by purists.
spondulix: Vulgarism for “money,” now passing out of use.
spoonfuls,spoons full: These words have distinctive meanings.Spoonfulsmeansone spoonfilled repeatedly;spoons fullmeansseveral spoonsfilled once. Compare-FUL.
spout, up the: A vulgarism for “with the pawnbroker,” or “out of sight.”
spree, to go on a: Formerly this phrase designated indulgence in boisterous frolic and excess of drink: latterly the term has been used to denote “going on an outing for the day.”
square, on the: A colloquialism for “with fair intention or with reputation for fair dealing; honest.”
stake,steak: Exercise care in the use of these homophones. Astakeis astickor post, as of wood; asteakis a slice of meat. Note the difference in spelling.
standpointshould not be used for “point of view.”
stationary,stationery: Exercise care in the use of these words.Stationaryis remaining in one place orposition;stationery, writing-materials in general. These words are pronounced alike.
statue,statute: These words are sometimes confounded; astatueis a plastic representation of a human or animal figure as in marble or bronze. Astatuteis a properly authenticated legislative enactment, especially one passed by a body of representatives.
stayandstop:Stayis sometimes used incorrectly forstop; do not say “I shallstayin Paris on my way to Berlin,” but “I shallstopin Paris” etc. Do not say “How long will youstopthere?” but “How long will youstay?” etc. CompareSOJOURNandSTOP.
step. SeeSTOP.
stiffis used for a “corpse” only by the very lowest type of humanity.
stile,style: Exercise care in spelling these words. Astileis a step or series of steps on each side of a fence or wall, to aid in surmounting it;styleis fashion.
stimulant,stimulus: The first of these words denotes that which stimulates the system, as coffee does the action of the heart. Astimulusis that which impels or urges on; as, “astimulusto hard work is offered by the pecuniary reward it yields.”
stinker: A coarse term applied to an undesirable acquaintance only by the vulgar. It is a term that unfortunately has some vogue in commercial life.
stop: The word is frequently misused, both forstepandstay. “Stopin next time you pass” or “stopoffon your way down by car” are colloquial but objectionable expressions. The latter clearly means “step offand call in” and would be met by a simple “call in.”Stopimplies finality, and should therefore never be used in the sense of a temporarystay. The true meaning of the wordstopwas well understood by the man who did not invite his professed friend to visit him: “If you come at any time within ten miles of my house, juststop.”—Mathews,Words, Their Use and Abuse, ch. xiv. p. 359.
straight,strait: Exercise care in spelling these words. That which isstraightlies evenly between any two of its points or passes from one point to another by direct course; not curved. Astraitis a narrow channel connecting two seas. In the plural,straitdenotes a difficult or restricted condition; distress or perplexity.
street: According to law, land includes all above and all below. Thus a house on the land or a gold mine beneath is covered by the word land, and its possessor is entitled to both one and the other. In the same way astreetincludes the houses there built; and it is therefore not strictly correct to speak of a certain house as beingona certain street: it isinthe street and is part of it. CompareON.
stricken: As a past participle ofstrike, archaic in England, except when there is an implication in it of misfortune; as, “He wasstrickenwith paralysis.” In the United Statesstricken, in general application,is not so distinctly archaic, and its use in reference to the erasure of words is very frequent; as, “It is ordered that the words objected to bestrickenout.” In the best literary usage of both countriesstruckis preferred tostrickenwhen no implication of misfortune is conveyed in it.Strickenis the appropriate participial adjective; as, “astrickenman”; “astrickendeer.”—Standard Dictionary.
string, to get on a: A harmless but inelegant equivalent for “to hoax,” which is to be preferred.
subtile,subtle: “Subtileandsubtlehave been constantly used as interchangeable by good writers but there seems to be a present tendency to distinguish them by makingsubtilean attribute of things andsubtlea characteristic of mind.” A penetrating perfume is described assubtile, whereas a wily sage’s predominating characteristic issubtlety.
succeedshouldnotbe used now in the archaic sense of “to make successful, promote”; as, “tosucceedan enterprise.”
succeed himself: An absurd phrase. A person who takes the place of a predecessorsucceedshim; one who has occupied a public office for a term prescribed by law and is reelected to that officesucceedshis own previous term of office butnothimself.
such: This word is often erroneously used for “so.” Do not say “I never sawsucha high building”; say, rather, “...sohigh, a building.”
such another. CompareANOTHER SUCH.
suckerfor “sponger” or “parasite” is slang of the lowest type and should be avoided by all persons of refinement.
summons: Yousummona person to court upon asummons. There is properly no such verb assummons, the colloquial use of the term being altogether unjustifiable.
superior. CompareINFERIOR.
sure: Often misused for “surely” in the sense of “certainly.” Do not say “SureI’m going”; say, rather, “I’msurelygoing.”
surprise. CompareASTONISH.
sympathize with,sympathy for: The verbsympathizetakes onlywith; the nounsympathyin its secondary sense of “commiseration,” is often properly followed byfor. We have sympathywithone’s aspirations,forhis distress; the sound man has sympathyforthe wounded; the wounded man has sympathywithhis fellow sufferers.
sympathy. ComparePITY.
take: Often incorrectly used forhave, especially in extending hospitality, in such a sentence as “What will youtake?”
take onforgrieve,scold, etc., likecarry onfor behave sportively may both be tolerated as colloquialisms that are popular because of their irrationality, or because they require no discrimination in statement.
takes the cake. SeeCAKE.
take up school: An objectionable local Americanism forbegin school: used also intransitively; as, “Schooltook upat 9 o’clock”: avoid this.
talentshould not be used for “talents” or “ability.”
talented: Inasmuch as adjectives of the participial form are justified by strict grammarians only if derived from an existing verb, this word has been caviled at by Coleridge (who denounced it as “that vile and barbarous vocable”) and many literary pedants. Burke, Hazlitt, Lamb, De Quincey, Macaulay and Newman have however, spoken of “atalentedman”; and in the face of this array of learning and authority we can raise but a modest protest in favor of the contention of the grammarians. Such formations are, however, not to be indiscriminately recommended.
talk, back. CompareBACK TALK.
tastyin the sense oftastefulis without authority and is considered an illiterate use. A person or his work may betasteful, but his food, however savory, can be no more thantasty.
team: Strictly ateamconsists of two or more beasts of burden harnessed together, but in the United States the word is extended to cover “team and accessories,” the latter being the harness or equipment, together with the vehicle to which the animals are attached.
tell on: A common expression with children used in the sense of “to inform against a person,” is derived from Biblical use (ISam.xxvii. 11). The phrase lost to literary English has now no equivalent.
temper,anger,wrath: Words in the use of which discrimination should be used.Temperis disposition or constitution of the mind, especially in relation to the affections or the passions;angeris violence or vindicated passion aroused by real or imaginary insult or injury. One may have an irritabletemperwithout being necessarily angry.Wrathis deep, determined, and lasting anger, usually accompanied by outward expression of displeasure.Angermay be only inward feeling without the outward expression of passion.
tendershould not be used for “give.” Youtendera payment;givea reception.
testimony. CompareEVIDENCE.
thanas a conjunction should be used only in the case of direct comparison; as, “I esteem this morethanthat.” When the comparison is merely implied, or covered by the verb, as by the verbprefer,thanshould not be used. SeePREFER.
thankshas been condemned as an undignified colloquialism bordering on incivility; but what serious objection is there to this pithy acknowledgment ofobligation or gratitude? It has been said that Shakespeare made use of the expression no fewer than fifty-five times, and that the Bible four times contains the utterance “thanks be to God,” Shakespeare’s use of the word with “much” as an adjective is indeed most forcible—“for this reliefmuch thanks.”
than meshould never be used forthan I. Say, “He is taller than I”; not “He is tallerthan me.”
than whom: A phrase objected to by some grammatical critics, in such locutions as “Cromwell,than whomno man was better skilled in artifice”; but shown to be “a quite classic expression.” Formerlythanwas often but not always used as a preposition, andthan whomis probably a survival of such usage. “Than whom” is generally accepted as permissible—probably because the sentence where it occurs can not be mended without reconstruction, and it has abundant literary authority.
that: In construing this word, it must be recollected that it is not only a conjunction but also a pronoun, both demonstrative and relative. The peculiarity of the word is such that it can be used more times in succession than any other word in the English language. Exception having been taken to a certain “that” found in a school-boy’s exercise, it was shown that thatthatthat that boy used was right. Dean Alford constructed a sentence on these lines which contained no fewer than ninethatsin succession.
Thatused adverbially is wholly inexcusable. “He wasthatsick” could only be tolerated if an ellipsis such as “he was (to)that(degree) sick,” could be supposed, but this is more than can be done; and the expression is therefore regarded as an unpardonable vulgarism. CompareAS, THAT(p. 22).
that there: An illiterate expression commonly used with the mistaken idea that the use of “there” adds emphasis to what follows, as, “That thereman.” Say, rather, “That man there” or simply, and preferably “That man.”
that,who: Discriminate carefully between these words.Thatimplies restriction;whogenerally denotes coordination. As an illustration of this distinction, Alfred Ayres says (“The Verbalist,” p. 202), “‘I met the boatmanwhotook me across the ferry.’ Ifwhois the proper word here, the meaning is ‘I met the boatman, and he took me across the ferry,’ it being supposed that the boatman is known and definite. But if there be several boatmen, and I wish to indicate one in particular, by the circumstance that he had taken me across the ferry, I should usethat.”Thatought, therefore, to be preferred towhoorwhichwhenever an antecedent not otherwise limited is to be restricted by the relative clause.
that’s him; No, “that’she”—this is correct.
the: Before titles of honor, such as Reverend, Honorable, the definite article (though now frequentlyomitted) should be used. As the title is specific and personal, this is the more necessary.
the infinitive: The particletois an inherent and component part of the infinitive, and is strictly inseparable therefrom, in precisely the same way that the prefixed syllable which assists to form a compound word (asinconstant) is a necessary part of the compound. But thistobelongs to the present infinitive only, and properly finds no place in such expressions as “He was fool enoughto have riskedhis good name.” Despite the hundreds of uses of this method of expression, it is a blunder: the sentence should read “fool enoughto risk.” It is, too, on the ground of inseparability that theSPLIT INFINITIVE(which see) is so reprehensible. “To dance gracefully” should not be transposed into “to gracefully dance.”
them: The use of this word as a demonstrative adjective for a pronoun is wholly unpermissible. A common error due to a desire to designate particularly the article required. Do not say “Give methemthings”; say, rather, “...thosethings.” However, of things previously mentioned one may say “Givethemto me.”
then: The use of this word as an adjective, as in the phrase “thethenBishop of York,” has been questioned; but the usage is expressive and convenient, and is supported by good literary authority.
thence,whence: As these words mean “from there,” “from where,” they should not be preceded by the wordfromas is often erroneously done.
these is,them are: Ungrammatical phrases used by the illiterate for “this is”; “those are.” The pronouns should both agree in number with the verb they govern.
these kind,those sort,etc.: Such expressions, though common, are now usually considered altogether wrong. Nouns in the singular require demonstrative adjectives also in the singular. Butthismay be used instead ofthesein collective expressions, such as “this ten years.” Yet Shakespeare has many instances of this use. Thus, in “Twelfth Night” (act i, sc. 5) he writes “thesekind of fools,” and in “King Lear” (act ii, sc. 2) a precisely similar expression, “thesekind of knaves.” In “Othello” (act iii, sc. 3) he has, “theseare a kind of men.”
think, don’t. SeeDON’T BELIEVE.
this or that much: Not elegant perhaps, but still correct or at least passable. A careful speaker would prefer to say “this much,” becausemuchbeing an adjective of quality requires, for its elucidation, not a pronoun but an adverb. It is true that in the expression “this” or “that much,” the word “much” could generally, if not always, be omitted without affecting the correctness of the sentence wherein it is used; still the sense would not be precisely the same.“ThismuchI know” denotes a limitation in the extent of knowledge which is not restricted by “this I know.”
threatening. CompareEMINENT.
three first, the: Incorrect for thefirst three: one may, however, correctly use three first if referring to a race, or the like, in which three of the competitors run a dead heat. CompareTWO FIRST.
through: An undesirable colloquialism for “at an end”; “finished”; generally applied to speakers who have completed an address, or to diners who have finished a meal. Both applications are marks of ill-breeding and border on vulgarity.
tickled to death: An absurd phrase used to express “greatly pleased.”
till: In some parts of the United States oddly misused forby; as, “I’ll be there till [by] ten o’clock.”
time: Avoid such an incongruity as “Heaps oftime.” “Plenty oftime,” or “timeenough” are to be preferred.
timely. CompareSEASONABLE.
tinker’s dam: A colloquialism for something worthless, used usually in the phrase “Not worth a tinker’s dam.” Avoided in polite society.
tiny little: The use of words as mere intensives should be avoided, for by judicious selection a single word can probably be found which is capable of conveying the precise sense desired. To speak of a “tinylittlewatch” or “agreat bighouse,” indicates a deplorable poverty of vocabulary. It is true that Shakespeare spoke of “themost unkindestcut of all”; but he made use of intensives only when the unusual circumstances of the case required them.
tired, to make one: A colloquialism for “to weary,” or “reduce the patience of” as by absurd stories or silly conversation: a commonplace expression good to avoid.
to: Beware of using the prepositiontowhenatis intended. A common error of this sort is instanced by “He wastoschool this morning.” Possibly the error is made rather in the verb than the preposition, though the influencing cause of error in the uneducated does not always admit of certainty. We suggest, therefore, that the verb “to be” is used unintentionally for “to go,” and that the sentence is perhaps intended to read “hewent toschool this morning.” CompareAND;FOR.
togged out or up: An undesirable and vulgar expression for “well-dressed” or “attired in clothes that may attract attention.”
to-morrow: This word is often used with different tenses, the question being raised as to whether it should be “to-morrowisChristmas day” or “to-morrowwill beChristmas day.” Both forms are correct. But, generally, in using this word, the supposition is that to-morrow has not arrived at the time ofspeaking, and, therefore, “to-morrowwill beChristmas day” is preferred. Longfellow (Keramos, line 331) says: “To-morrowwill beanother day.” But the other form also has the sanction of usage, as the following quotations will show:
“To-morrow, what delightisin to-morrow!”—T. B. Read,The New Pastoral, bk. vi. l. 163.“To-morrowisa satire on to-day.”—Young,The Old Man’s Relapse, l. 6.
“To-morrow, what delightisin to-morrow!”—T. B. Read,The New Pastoral, bk. vi. l. 163.
“To-morrowisa satire on to-day.”—Young,The Old Man’s Relapse, l. 6.
The Bible affords numerous instances of this use of “is.” Ex. xvi. 23: “The Lord hath said, to-morrowisthe rest of the holy Sabbath unto the Lord”; xxxii. 5: “And Aaron made proclamation and said, to-morrowisa feast to the Lord”; I Sam. xx. 5: “Behold to-morrowisthe new moon”; Matt. vi. 30: “If God so clothe the grass of the field, which to-dayis, and to-morrowiscast into the oven.”
Most people would say “YesterdaywasFriday.” If the thought is fixed upon the name of the day, it is better to useis, if upon the time future it is better to usewill be.
toney: A vulgarism for “fancy” or “stylish,” either of which is a preferable term.
touch, to: A slang term for “to borrow” not used by persons careful of their diction. Do not say “I touched him for a ten-spot”; say rather, “I borrowed ten dollars from him.”
transpireis condemned by the best writers in the sense ofhappen. “The verbtranspireformerly conveyed very expressively its correct meaning, viz., to become known through unnoticed channels—to exhale, as it were, into publicity through invisible pores, like a vapor or gas disengaging itself. But of late, a practise has commenced of employing the word ... as a mere synonym toto happen.... This vile specimen of bad English is already seen in the dispatches of noblemen and viceroys.”—Mill,Logic, bk. iv. ch. 5, p. 483.
truth. CompareVERACITY.
try: This word is often erroneously used for “make.” Do not say “Trythe experiment yourself” but “Makethe experiment.” An experiment can only be tried, as a speech (in its literal, that is verbal, sense) can only be spoken.
try and: A common but incorrect locution. Do not say “Try and come to-day,” but, rather, “Try tocome to-day.”
tumble to: Slang for “to understand.” Do not say “Do you tumble to it?” Say, rather, “Do you understand it?”
turn down: Undesirable, though perhaps expressive slang for “reject”; “ignore”; or “dismiss.” In commercial circles, this expression has wide usage but is not the less inelegant and should be avoided. A proposition is quite as fully disposed of when it is“rejected” as when it is “turned down;” besides, “rejected” should be given preference if only by reason of its brevity.
turn up: Used in the sense of to “put in an appearance” this expression has been condemned. The remark of a barrister in a London County Court that a defendant had “not turned up” caused the Judge to exclaim: “Pray do not use such slip-shod expressions.” The barrister apologized. “These are high-pressure days,” he said, “and since your Honor’s days at the bar we have no longer time to indulge in perfect English.”
twenty-three: A slang term used as the equivalent of “fade away” in theatrical and sporting circles: a recent expression the origin of which has been variously explained. CompareFADE AWAY.
two. CompareCOUPLE.
two and two is(orare)four: As an abstract proposition or statement,isis undoubtedly correct; for fouristwo added to two, or twice two; but when two specific things are added to two others, the verb must be in the plural. In the former case we are saying that a certain single and definite resultisattained or total given by the combination of two numbers; in the latter we say that in a given body or number of thingsareso many single or individual things. Twomenand twoareundoubtedly four; that is, four menare(constituted of) two and two. Beyond doubt,twice oneistwo; for it can not be that two (as a single and specific number) are twice one.
two first: Of this expression James Murdock says: “The only argument against the use oftwo first, and in favor of substitutingfirst two, so far as I can recollect, is this: In the nature of things, there can be onlyone firstandone last, in any series of things. But—is it true that there can never be more thanone firstandone last? If it be so, then the adjectivefirstandlastmust always be of thesingularnumber, and can never agree with nouns in the plural. We are told thatthe first yearsof a lawyer’s practise are seldom very lucrative. The poet tells us that hisfirst essayswere severely handled by the critics, but hislast effortshave been well received. Examples like these might be produced without number. They occur everywhere in all our standard writers.... When a numeral adjective and a qualifying epithet both refer to the same noun, thegeneral ruleof the English language is to place the numeral first, then the qualifying epithet, and afterwards the noun. Thus we say, ‘Thetwo wisemen,’ ‘thetwo tallmen’; and not ‘thewise twomen’ ‘thetall twomen.’ And the same rule holds insuperlatives. We say ‘thetwo wisestmen,’ ‘thetwo tallestmen’ and not ‘thewisest twomen,’ ‘thetallest twomen.’ Now if this be admitted to be the general rule of the English language, it then follows that we should generally say ‘thetwofirst,’ ‘thetwo last,’ etc., rather than ‘thefirst two,’ ‘thelast two,’ etc. This, I say, shouldgenerallybe the order of the words. Yet there are some cases in which it seems preferable to say, ‘thefirst two,’ ‘thefirst three,’ etc.” CompareFIRST.
ugly, which signifies the reverse of beautiful or want of comeliness (actual or figurative) is colloquially extended in the United States to uncomeliness of character or personal demeanor; as anuglyfellow; anuglybeast; anger makes himugly. In polite speech this usage is not sanctioned. Say “irritable,” “vicious,” “quarrelsome,” as the disposition inclines or indicates.
un-: For the sake of lucidity the use of a negative prefix with a negative antecedent should be discouraged. Avoid such expressions as “He spoke inno unmistakable terms” which means, of course, “mistakable terms” the direct opposite of the speaker’s intention. “Notanunkempt one among them” means that all were well kempt.
unbeknown: A vulgar provincialism used chiefly in the formunbeknownst.
uncommon: Used foruncommonly: a vulgarism meaning “to an unusual degree or extremely.” Do not say “Her eyes areuncommonbeautiful”; say, rather, “...uncommonlybeautiful.”
unconscionable: When used forunconscionablyis a bad provincialism. Used also by the illiterate instead ofuncommonly; as, “She is anunconscionablehandsome girl”—this is bad English.
under: Much philological nonsense has been written in disapproval of the expression “underhis signature,” for which “over his signature”—that “preposterous conceit,” as Gould aptly terms it—is suggested as a substitute. But it is clear that the expression is elliptical, and means “under sanction or authority of his signature.” “Underoath” is good enough to impress upon an unwilling and prevaricating witness the distinction between perjury and a lie, and that although he does not physically lieunderthe oath.
understandshould not be used as an expletive with interrogatory inflection, as a contraction of “Do you understand?” There is no excuse for this nor for its objectionable iteration. Avoid such absurdities as: “Grammar,understand, is the science that treats of the principles,understand, that govern the correct use of language,” etc.Seeis also misused in the same manner.
unique: As this word implies “being the only one of its kind” it should never be preceded by “very” which implies degree. On this subject theStandard Dictionarysays: “We may sayquite uniqueif we mean absolutely singular or without parallel but we can not properly sayvery unique.”
United States: Under this designation the several states comprising the American Union are known collectively as one great nation. As such the expression is singular and accordingly is correctly followed by a verb in the singular.
universally by all: A common error. Where anything is doneuniversally, it must be doneby all, and these words being redundant should be omitted.
universeshould not be used whereearthis intended. If one desires to say of a certain person that he “thinks he owns theearth,” one should certainly be careful to limit his vast possessions and not extend them to theuniverse. The latter embraces all comprised in space. “No doubt, there is auniverse; but the word means all created things, as a whole; not only our entire solar system, but all the other systems of which the fixed stars are but the centres.”—E. S. Gould,Good English, Misused Words, p. 83.
unless. SeeWITHOUT.
unwell, owing to its common euphemistic application, should not be used for “ill.”
up: In general the wordup, used in such a phrase as “Open up” or “Heopened uphis sermon with a parable” is redundant and should be omitted. CompareOPEN.
up against it: A colloquial expression used as the equivalent of “face to face with” some condition or thing, usually of a discouraging or disastrous character. Though common in commercial circles it is an expression that it is best to avoid.
upon: Often used foronin such phrases as “callupon,” whether meaningvisitorsummonand “speak (or write)upon.” The reasonable tendency now is to use the simpleronwhenever the idea of superposition is not involved.
usage. CompareHABIT.
use: This word is used in all sorts of incorrect and inelegant ways; yet the conjugation of the verb is positive and very simple—use;used;using. There appears to be no difficulty in applying it affirmatively but when used in a negative form one often hears such uncouth expressions as “Youdidn’t useto,” “youhadn’t usedto” instead of “You used not to,” etc. It need scarcely be said that these expressions are vulgarisms of the worst type. “I usedn’t to” is not pretty, but is less formal than “I used not to,” and can not be objected to on grammatical grounds.
usually. CompareCOMMONLY.
utteras a verb should be distinguished fromsay, as articulate expression is differentiated from written. Toutter, save in the legal sense, is to emit audibly. Adjectively the word can be used only in an unfavorable sense for “complete.”Utterdiscord there may be, butnotutter harmony;uttersilence, butnotutter speech.
vain,vein: Words of similar pronunciation whose spelling is sometimes confused by the careless.Veinis the Latinvena, blood-vessel, fromveho, carry, and is therefore totally distinct fromvain, which is from the Latinvanus, empty.
valuableis occasionally misused forvalued.Valuableis said correctly only of things that have monetary value or derive worth as from their character or quality. One may havevaluedfriends andvaluableart-treasures, butnotvaluable friends nor valued art-treasures.
venal,venial: Discriminate carefully between these words. One who isvenalis ready to sell his influence or efforts for some consideration from sordid motives; he is mercenary. But one who isvenialhas committed only a slight or trivial fault. A man who has sold his vote for preferment is avenalpolitician; a starving man who has stolen a loaf of bread for his family has been guilty of avenialoffense.
ventilateshould not be used for “expose” or “explain.”
veracity,truth: Do not confound these words.Truthis applied to persons and facts;veracityonly to persons and to statements made by them. One should not speak of theveracityof anything that has occurred. A man of integrity may have a reputationforveracity; if so, there is no doubt that he told thetruthor that the account he gave wastrue.
verbal nouns, especially such as could be replaced by a noun pure and simple, etymologically coordinate, should be preceded by a possessive in sentences of this character: “The cause of Henry (’s) dying was appendicitis.”Dyingis here equivalent todeath; and we should (if we substituted the pronoun) certainly say “the cause ofhisdying” rather than “the cause ofhimdying.”
verse: The chief meaning of this word is a single line of poetry; sometimes it is used as a synonym forstanza. Some grammarians advocate the use ofverseinstead ofstanza, and the familiar character of the word seems to argue in favor of this use.
very: Excepting where a participle is used solely as an adjective, it is now thought to be more grammatical to interpose an adverb between the participle and this word. Thus, “very greatlydissatisfied” is preferred to “very dissatisfied,” whereas “verytired” is accepted as correct. CompareREAL.
vest: In the sense of waistcoat, this word, which is in better usage a synonym forundervest, is not used by precise speakers.
vice. CompareCRIME.
vicinityshould not be used for “neighborhood.”
visit: A term sometimes misused. Do not say “The actor has justvisited, with much abuse, thehead of the critic,” when you mean that he abused him roundly. This is an erroneous application of the word, which is confounded with the Scriptural usage “to send judgment from heaven upon” as punishment.
vocation. CompareAVOCATION.
wa’n’t: A contraction ofwas not, or improperly ofwere not; as, “Hewa’n’t(or theywa’n’t) at home”: a common vulgarism.
wantandneedare not synonymous terms, although both denote a lack.Want, however, refers more properly to a personal conception of shortcoming or shortage, whereasneeddenotes the matter of fact. Thus a delinquent son mayneedcastigation, while he distinctly does notwantit.Want, therefore, signifies a wish to supply what is lacking. But the wordwantis sometimes less strong thanneed, for a covetous manwants(i. e., desires) many things he does notneed(or things for which he has an absolute necessity). “Ineedassistance or I shall drown.” Again, “Iwanta position, but do notneedit, because I can continue as I am without it; but when resources fail I shallneedit.”
want of: An undesirable colloquialism. Do not say “What does hewant ofa yacht?” say, rather.want with, or “What needhas heofa yacht?”
warm: A slang term used for “rich,” formerly in vogue in England.
warm, not so: A vulgar phrase applied to persons and meaning usually “not as important” or “not as accurate” as the person to whom the epithet is applied may think himself to be.
was,is: These terms are sometimes confused, especially in dependent sentences that state unchanging facts. Thenthe present tenseshould be used in the dependent sentence notwithstanding the fact that the principal verb may denote action inthe past. Say, “Hesaidthat spaceis(notwas) infinite”; “Weassertthat lifeiseverlasting.”
watch,observe: These words have a similarity of meaning, butwatchexpresses a scrutiny or close observation which is not implied by the latter. Youobservea preacher’s manner but carefullywatcha thief. When youobserveintently and concentrate your entire thoughts upon the thing observed youwatch. Youobservethe hour of day butwatchthe time lest you lose your train.
wayor’way, as an abbreviation of the adverbaway, as “’wayout West,” is an impropriety of speech. Say, rather, “He has gone (or is in the) West.”
ways, forway: In the sense of “space or distance,” the erroneous formways, forway, is often used colloquially, perhaps originally through confusion with the suffix-ways; as, “The church is a longwaysfrom here,” which should be “The church is a longway,” etc.
weary. CompareTIRED.
weather, under the: In the sense of “somewhat ill,” as though depressed by the weather, this is a colloquialism better avoided.
went: This word should never be used as a participle; say, “Hewent” or “he hasgone” instead of “hehas went.” Never usewentafter any part of the verbhave. Do not say “Ihave wentthere often”; but “Ihave beenthere often.”Wentshould never be used forgo. Some illiterate people say “I shouldhave went” when they mean “I shouldhave gone.”
were her: Often used incorrectly as in the sentence “If I wereher.” Say, rather, “If I wereshe.” Her is the objective case; here the nominativesheshould be used.
wharf: E. S. Gould declares that asdwarveswould be an improper plural for dwarf, so iswharvesfor wharf. However, both forms are now admitted. CompareDOCK.
what: Aswhatis both antecedent and relative the use of the antecedent with this word is wrong. “Allwhathe said was false” should be corrected by the elision of “all.”Whatis used only in reference to things, whereasthatcan be said of persons, animals, and things, and can be substituted for it.
what was,what was not: “What was” and “what wasn’t my surprise” may both be used correctly to express considerable surprise, and with almost the same meaning, the one expression differing from the other but by a shade in sense. “How great was my surprise,” and “What surprise could equal or be greater, than mine,” would about paraphrase the usages. The former sentence implies great surprise, but the possibility (though unreferred to) of a greater; the latter indicates that there could not be any greater surprise.
wheels in the(orhis)head, to have: A slang phrase used as a substitute for “to be eccentric, peculiar, or erratic.”
whence: “Whencecame you” is sufficient and correct. “Fromwhence” is pleonastic, thewhencebeing nothing less than “fromwhere” and thus including thefrom. CompareTHENCE.
where: The prepositionstooratshould never end a sentence beginning withwhere. Such use is vulgar and illiterate. Avoid: “Wherehas he goneto?” “Wherewas Iat?”
whereabouts: This word, plural in form, but singular in construction, always takes a verb, in the singular. “Husband and wife disappeared; their whereaboutsisa mystery.”
wherever: This word, although a combination of two words “where” and “ever” is not spelt “whereever” when written as a solid word. Then it drops the first “e” in “ever” and is correctly “wherever.”
whether: Avoid such a locution as “whether or no,” which is rapidly gaining ground, and say instead the preferable phrase, “whether or not.”Whetherproperly means “which of two.” Therefore, in expressing doubt, make mention merely of the exact thing doubted without using the wordwhetherunless it be to introduce an alternative subject of doubt or a comparison of doubts. Just aseither, which is strictly applicable to two only is wrongly applied to more than two, so iswhether, which is a contraction ofwhich of either.
which. CompareTHAT, WHO.
who: Often improperly used forwhom: a mark of ignorance when so applied. Do not say “Whodo you refer to?” but “Towhomdo you refer?” Not “Whois that for?” nor “Who did you give it to?” but “Forwhomis that?” “Towhomdid you give it?” CompareTHAT, WHO.
whole,whole of: Thewholeorwhole ofshould be used before a plural noun carefully, and then only when the body is referred to collectively. In general the wordentirewould better express the phrase. In such casesallshould never be employed, as this relates to the individual of which the body is composed. Thus, one may say, “Thewholestaff accompanied the general,” or (for emphasis) “Thewhole ofthe staff,” etc., but it would be better to say “Theentirestaff.”
If referring to the individual officers, the sentence should read “Allmembers of the staff accompanied the general.”
whole push, the. SeePUSH.
widow woman: A pleonasm. Do not use the wordwidow, which applies only to a woman, with the wordswomanorlady. It is an error of speech, common in rural districts, against which it is wise to continually guard.
wife. CompareLADY.
wild: A colloquialism for “angry” which is to be preferred.
windbag: A coarse term for a boastful and wordy talker: not used by persons who cultivate a refined diction. “Braggart,” “braggadocia,” are more elegant, yet equally expressive terms.
with,and: A nominative singular is sometimes used with an objective afterwithto form, jointly, the subject of a plural verb; as “The captainwithall his crewweredrowned.” But according to best usage the conjunctionandis substituted for “with”; thus, “The captainandall his crewweredrowned.” Where the objective is separated parenthetically by commas, a verb in the singular is used; as, “Aguinaldo, with all his followers,wascaptured by Gen. Funston.”
without: This, as used for “except” or “unless” is at the present day a vulgarism. “Withoutyou intend business, do not call”; say,unless.
witness. CompareSEE.
woman. CompareLADY.
worse: An adverb sometimes used formore; as, “He disliked teaworsethan coffee”: a vulgarism.
worst kind: Formuchorextremely; as, “I need (or want) a new pen theworst kind”: a vulgarism, besides equivocally suggesting “the worst kind of a pen.”
would better. CompareHAD BETTER.
would say: A hackneyed expression used by many commercial correspondents; inelegant and useless.
would seemshould not be used for “seems.”
wrath. CompareTEMPER.
write you: This expression, for “write to you,” though common, is not grammatically correct. Where an object is expressed the dative “to” may be omitted. “He shippedmecostly fabrics,” for “he shipped costly fabrics tome” is permissible, but “he shippedme” without any objective, or rather other objective ofmewould imply that the person speaking had been shipped. Of the expression “I will write you,” the only justification for it that can be found is in the supposition that the words “a letter” are understood.