"A little learning is a dangerous thing."
"A little learning is a dangerous thing."
This line expresses a deep truth, and is as simply expressed as any proverb, but it is merely a quotation from Pope. Again,
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread"
"Fools rush in where angels fear to tread"
is true enough, and well enough expressed to bear frequent quotation, but it is not a "fragment of elder wisdom." It is merely Pope's excellent way of saying that foolish people will interfere in delicate matters in which wise people would never think of meddling. Here, again, the language is not particularly simple as in proverbs, and this will help us to remember that quotations are not proverbs. There is, however, a quotation from a poem by Patrick A. Chalmers, a present-day poet, which has become as common as a proverb:—
"What's lost upon the roundaboutsWe pulls up on the swings."
"What's lost upon the roundaboutsWe pulls up on the swings."
The fact that this is expressed simply and even ungrammatically does not, of course, turn it into a proverb.
Though many of the proverbs which are repeated in nearly all the languages of the world are without date, we know the times when a few of them were first quoted. In Greek writings we alreadyfind the half-true proverb, "Rolling stones gather no moss;" and, "There's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip," which warned the Greeks, as it still warns us, of the uncertainty of human things. We can never be sure of anything until it has actually happened. In Latin writings we find almost the same idea expressed in the familiar proverb, "A bird in hand is worth two in the bush"—a fact which no one will deny.
St. Jerome, who translated the Bible from Greek into Latin in the fourth century and wrote many wise books besides, quotes two proverbs which we know well: "It is not wise to look a gift horse in the mouth," and, "Liars must have good memories." The first again deals, like so many of the early proverbs, with the knowledge of animals. A person who knows about horses can tell from the state of their mouths much about their age, health, and general value. But, the proverb warns us, it is neither gracious nor wise to examine too closely what is given to us freely. It may not be quite to our liking, but after all it is a present.
The proverb, "Liars must have good memories," means, of course, that people who tell lies are liable to forget just what tale they have told on any particular occasion, and may easily contradict themselves, and so show that they have been untruthful. It is necessary, then, for such a person, unless he wishes to be found out, to remember exactly what lies he has told.
Many proverbs have remained in the English language, not so much for the wisdom they contain as for the way in which they express it. Some are in the form of a rhyme—as, "Birds of a feather flock together," and "East and west, home is best." These are always favourites.
Others catch the ear because of their alliteration; that is to say, two or three of their words begin with the same letter. Examples of this are: "Look before you leap." The proverb "A stitch in time saves nine" has something of both these attractions, though it is not exactly a rhyme. Other examples of alliteration in proverbs are: "Delays are dangerous," "Speech is silvern, silence is golden."
A few proverbs are witty as well as wise, and these are, perhaps, the best of all, since they do not, as a rule, exasperate the people to whom they are quoted, as many proverbs are apt to do. Usually these witty proverbs are metaphors.
Every child has some idea of what is meant by "slang," because most schoolboys and schoolgirls have been corrected for using it. By slang we mean words and expressions which are not the ordinary words for the ideas which they express, but which are invented as new names or phrases for these ideas, and are at first known and used only by a few people who use them just among themselves. There are all kinds of slang—slang used by schoolboys and schoolgirls in general, slang used by the pupils of each special school, slang used by soldiers, a different slang used by their officers, and even slang used by members of Parliament.
The chief value of slang to the people who use it is that at first, at any rate, it is only understood by the inventors and their friends. The slang of any public school is continually changing, because as soon as the expressions become known and used by other people the inventors begin to invent once more, and get a new set of slang terms. Sometimes a slang word will be used for years by oneclass of people without becoming common because it describes something of which ordinary people have no experience, and therefore do not mention.
The making of slang is really the making of language. Early men must have invented new words just as the slang-makers do to-day. The difference is that there are already words to describe the things which the slang words describe. It may seem curious, then, that people should trouble to find new words. The reason they do so is often that they want to be different from other people, and sometimes because the slang word is much more expressive than the ordinary word.
This is one reason that the slang of a small number of people spreads and becomes general. Sometimes the slang word is so much better in this way than the old word that it becomes more generally used than it, and finds its way into the ordinary dictionaries. When this happens it is no longer slang.
But, as a rule, slang is ugly or meaningless, and it is very often vulgar. However common its use may become, the best judges will not use such expressions, and they remain mere slang.
A writer on the subject of slang has given us two good examples of meaningless and expressive slang. The people who first called marmalade "swish" could have no reason for inventing the new name except to seem odd and different from other people.Swishis certainly not a more expressive or descriptive word thanmarmalade. The one means nothing, while the other has an interesting history coming to us through the French from two old Greek words meaning "apple" and "honey."
The expressive word which this writer quotes isswag, a slang word for "stolen goods." There is no doubt thatswagis a much more expressive word than any of the ordinary words used to describe the same thing. One gets a much more vivid picture from the sentence, "The thieves got off with theswag," than he would had the wordprizeor evenplunderorbootybeen used. Yet there is no sign that the wordswagwill become good English. Expressive as it is, there is a vulgar flavour about it which would make people who are at all fastidious in their language very unwilling to use it.
Yet many words and phrases which must have seemed equally vulgar when first used have come to be accepted as good English. And in fact much of our language, and especially metaphorical words and phrases, were once slang. It will be interesting to examine some examples of old slang which have now become good English.
One common form of slang is the use of expressions connected with sport as metaphors in speaking of other things. Thus it is slang to say that we were "in at the death" when we mean that we stayed to the end of a meeting or performance. This is, of course, a metaphor from hunting. People who follow the hounds until the fox is caught and killed are "in at the death." Another such expression isto "toe the mark." We say a person is made to "toe the line" or "toe the mark" when he or she is subjected to discipline; but it is a slang phrase, and only good English in its literal meaning of standing with the toes touching a line in starting a race, etc., so that all may have an equal chance.
We say a person has "hit below the belt" if we think he has done or said something unfair in an argument or quarrel. This is a real slang phrase, and is only good English in the literal sense in which it is used in boxing, where it is against the rules to "hit below the belt." The term "up to you," by which is expressed in a slang way that the person so addressed is expected to do something, is a slang expression borrowed from cards.
Even from these few examples we can see that there are various degrees in slang. A person who would be content to use the expression "toe the line" might easily think it rather coarse to accuse an opponent of "hitting below the belt." There comes a time when some slang almost ceases to be slang, and though good writers will not use it in writing, quite serious people will use it in merely speaking. It has passed out of the stage of mere slang to become a "colloquialism."
The phrases we have quoted from present-day sport when used in a general sense are still for the most part slang; but many phrases taken from old sports and games, and which must have been slangin their time, are now quite good English and even dignified style. We speak of "wrestling with a difficulty" or "parrying a thrust" (a metaphor taken, of course, from fencing), of "winning the palm," and so on, all of which are not only picturesque but quite dignified English.
A very common form of slang is what are called "clipped" words. Such words aregovfor "governor,"bikefor "bicycle,"flufor "influenza,"indifor "indigestion,"recfor "recreation,"loonyfor "lunatic,"pubfor "public house,"examfor "examination,"mathsfor "mathematics." All of these words are real slang, and most of them are quite vulgar. There is no sign that any of them will become good English. The most likely to survive in ordinary speech is perhapsexam.
Yet we have numbers of short words which have now become the ordinary names for certain articles, and yet which are only short forms of the original names of those articles. The first man who saidbusfor "omnibus" must have seemed quite an adventurer. He probably struck those who heard him as a little vulgar; but hardly any one now uses the wordomnibus(which is in itself an interesting word, being the Latin word meaning "for all"), except, perhaps, the omnibus companies in their posters. Again, very few people use the full phrase "Zoological Gardens" now. Children are taken to theZoo.Cyclefor "bicycle" is quite dignified and proper, thoughbikeis certainly vulgar. In thehurry of life to-day people more frequentlyphonethan "telephone" to each other, and we can send a wire instead of a "telegram" without any risk of vulgarity. The wordcabreplaced the more magnificent "cabriolet," and then with the progress of invention we got the "taxicab." It is now the turn ofcabto be dropped, and when we are in haste we hail ataxi. No one nowadays, except the people who sell them, speaks of "pianofortes." They have all becomepianosin ordinary speech.
The way in which good English becomes slang is well illustrated by an essay of the great English writer Dean Swift, in the famous paper called "The Tatler," in 1710. He, as a fastidious user of English, was much vexed by what he called the "continual corruption of the English tongue." He objected especially to the clipping of words—the use of the first syllable of a word instead of the whole word. "We cram one syllable and cut off the rest," he said, "as the owl fattened her mice after she had cut off their legs to prevent their running away." One word the Dean seemed especially to hate—mob, which, indeed, was richer by one letter in his day, for he sometimes wrote itmobb.Mobis, of course, quite good English now to describe a disorderly crowd of people, and we should think it very curious if any one used the full expression for which it stands.Mobis short for the Latin phrasemobile vulgus, which means "excitable crowd."
Other words to which Swift objected, thoughmost of them are not the words of one syllable with which he declared we were "overloaded," and which he considered the "disgrace of our language," werebanter,sham,bamboozle,bubble,bully,cutting,shuffling, andpalming. We may notice that some of these words, such asbanterandsham, are now quite good English, and most of the others have at least passed from the stage of slang into that of colloquialism.
The wordbamboozleis still almost slang, though perhaps more common than it was two hundred years ago, when Swift attacked it. Even now we do not know where it came from. There was a slang word used at the time but now forgotten—bam, which meant a trick or practical joke; and some scholars have thought thatbamboozle(which, of course, means "to deceive") came from this. On the other hand, it may have been the other way about, and that the shorter word came from the longer. The wordbamboozleshows us how hard it is for meaningless slang to become good English even after a struggle of two hundred years.
We have seen how many slang words in English have become good English, so that people use with propriety expressions that would have seemed improper or vulgar fifty or ten or even five years ago. Other interesting words are some which are perfectly good English as now used, but which have been borrowed from other languages, and in those languages are or were mere slang. The wordbizarre, which we borrowed from the French, and which means "curious," in a fantastic or half-savage way, is a perfectly dignified word in English; but it must have been a slang word at one time in French. It meant long ago in French "soldierly," and literally "bearded"—that is, if it came from the Spanish wordbizarra, "beard."
Another word which we use in English has a much less dignified use in French. We can speak of thecalibreof a person, meaning the quality of his character or intellect; but in French the wordcalibreis only in ordinary speech applied to things. To speak of a "person of a certain calibre" in French is very bad slang indeed.
Again, the wordfiasco, which we borrowed from the Italian, and which means the complete failure of something from which we had hoped much, was at first slang in Italian. It was applied especially to the failure of a play in a theatre. To break down wasfar fiasco, which literally means "make a bottle." The phrase does not seem to have any very clear meaning, but at any rate it is far removed from the dignified wordfiascoas used in English.
The wordsackas used in describing the sack of a town in war is a picturesque and even poetic word; but as it comes from the Frenchsac, meaning "pack" or "plunder," it is really a kind of slang.
On the other hand, words which belong to quite good and ordinary speech in their own languages often become slang when adopted into another. Aslang word much used in America and sometimes in England (for American expressions are constantly finding their way into the English language) isvamoose, which means "depart."Vamoosecomes from a quite ordinary Mexican word,vamos, which is Spanish for "let us go."
It is very interesting to find that many of our most respectable words borrowed from Latin have a slang origin. Sometimes these words were slang in Latin itself; sometimes they were used as slang only after they passed into English. The French wordtête, which means "head," comes from the Latintesta, "a pot." (We have seen that this is the word from which we get our wordtest.) Some Romans, instead of usingcaput, the real Latin word for "head," would sometimes in slang fashion speak of some one'stesta, or "pot," and from this slang word the French got their regular word for head.
The wordinsultcomes from the Latininsultarc, which meant at first "to spring or leap at," and afterwards came to have the same meaning as it has with us. The persons who first used this expression in the second sense were really using slang, picturing a person who said something unpleasant to them as "jumping at them."
We have the same kind of slang in the expression "to jump down one's throat," when we mean "to complain violently of some one's behaviour." The wordeffrontery, which comes to us from the Frencheffronterie, is really the same expression as thevulgar termsfaceandcheek, meaning "impudence." For the word comes from the Latinfrons, "the forehead."
An example of a word which was quite good English, and then came to be used as slang in a special sense, and then in this same special sense became good English again, isgrit. The word used to mean in English merely "sand" or "gravel," and it came to mean especially the texture or grain of stones used for grinding. Then in American slang it came to be used to mean all that we mean now when we say a person has "grit"—namely, courage, and strength, and firmness. This use of the word seemed so good that it rapidly became good English; but the American slang-makers soon found another word to replace it, and now talk of people having "sand," which is not by any means so expressive, and will probably never pass out of the realm of slang.
An example of a word which was at first used as slang not many years ago, and is now, if not the most elegant English, at least a quite respectable word for newspaper use, ismaffick. This word means to make a noisy show of joy over news of a victory. It dates from the relief of Mafeking by the British in 1900. When news of its relief came people at home seemed to go mad with joy. They rushed into the streets shouting and cheering, and there was a great deal of noise and confusion. It was noticed over and over again that there was no"mafficking" over successes in the Great War. People felt it too seriously to make a great noise about it.
A slang word which has become common in England during the Great War issträfe. This is the German word for "punish," and became quite familiar to English people through the hope and prayer to which the Germans were always giving expression that God would "sträfe" England. The soldiers caught hold of the word, and it was very much used in a humorous way both at home and abroad. But it is not at all likely to become a regular English word, and perhaps will not even remain as slang after the war.
Besides the fact that slang often becomes good English, we have to notice that good English often becomes slang. One of the most common forms of slang is to use words, and especially adjectives, which mean a great deal in themselves to describe quite small and ordinary things. To speak of a "splendid" or "magnificent" breakfast, for instance, is to use words out of proportion to the subject, though of course they are excellent words in themselves; but this is a mild form of slang.
There are many people now who fill their conversation with superlatives, although they speak of the most commonplace things. A theatrical performance will be "perfectly heavenly," an actress "perfectly divine." Apart from the fact that nothing and no one merely human can be "divine,"divinity itself is perfection, and it is therefore not only unnecessary but actually incorrect to add "perfectly." A scene or landscape may very properly be described as "enchanting," but when the adjective is applied too easily it is a case of good English becoming slang.
Then, besides the use of superlative adjectives to describe things which do not deserve such descriptions, there is a crowd of rarer words used in a special sense to praise things.
Every one knows what a "stunning blow" is, but few people can ever have been stunned by the beauty of another's clothes. Yet the expression "stunning hat" or "stunning tie" is quite common. Expressions like a "ripping time" are even more objectionable, because they are even more meaningless.
Then, besides the slang use of terms of praise, there are also many superlatives expressing disgust which the slangmongers use instead of ordinary mild expressions of displeasure. To such people it is not simply "annoying" to have to wait for a lift on the underground railways; for them it is "perfectly sickening."
Horrid, a word which means so much if used properly, is applied to all sorts of slightly unpleasant things and people. When one thinks of the literal Latin meaning of this word ("so dreadful as to cause us to shudder"), the foolishness of using it so lightly is plain. People frequently now declarethat they have a "shocking cold"—a description which, again, is too violent for the subject.
Another form of slang is to combine a word which generally expresses unpleasant with one which expresses pleasant ideas. So we get such expressions as "awfully nice" and "frightfully pleased," which are actually contradictions in terms.
This kind of slang is the worst kind of all. It soon loses any spice of novelty. It is not really expressive, like some of the quaint terms of school or university slang, and it does a great deal of harm by tending to spoil the full force of some of our best and finest words. It is very difficult to avoid the use of slang if one is constantly hearing it, but, at any rate, any one who feels the beauty of language must soon be disgusted by this particular kind of slang.
We have seen in the chapter on "slang" how people are continually using old words in new ways, and how, through this, slang often becomes good English and good English becomes slang. The same thing has been going on all through the history of language. Other words besides those used as slang have been constantly getting new uses. Many English words to-day have quite different meanings from those which they had in the Middle Ages; some even have exactly opposite meanings to their original sense. Sometimes words keep both the old meaning and the new.
In this matter the English language is very different from the German. The English language has many words which the Germans have too, but their meanings are different. The Germans have kept the original meanings which these words had hundreds of years ago; but the thousands of words which have come down to us from the English language of a thousand years ago have nearly all changed their meanings.
We have two of these old words which have now each two exactly opposite meanings. The wordfastmeans sometimes "immovable," and sometimes it means the exact opposite—"moving rapidly." We say a key is "fast" in a lock when we cannot get it out, and we say a person runs "fast" when we mean that he runs quickly. The first meaning of steadiness is the original meaning; then the word came to be used to mean "moving steadily." A person who ran on, keeping up a steady movement, was said to run fast, and then it was easy to use the word for rapidity as well as steadiness in motion or position. This is how the wordfastcame to have two opposite meanings.
Another word,fine, has the same sort of history. We speak of a "fine needle" when we mean that it is thin, and a "fine baby" when we mean that it is fat. The first meaning is nearer to the original, which was "well finished off." Often a thing which had a great deal of "fine" workmanship spent on it would be delicate and "fine" in the first sense, and so the word came to have this meaning. On the other hand, the thing finished off in this way would generally be beautiful. People came to think of "fine" things as things to be admired, and as they like their babies to be fat, a fat baby will generally be considered a fine baby. It was in this kind of way that "fine" came to have its second meaning of "large."
The common adjectivesgladandsadhad quitedifferent meanings in Old English from those they have now. In Old English glad meant "shining," or "bright," but in a very short time it came to mean "cheerful." Now it means something rather different from this, for though we may speak of a "glad heart" or "glad spirit," such expressions are chiefly used in poetry. Generally in ordinary speech when we say that we are "glad" we mean that we are pleased about some special thing, as "glad that you have come."
Sadin Old English meant to have as much as one wanted of anything. Then it came to mean "calm" and "serious," perhaps from the idea that people who have all they want are in a mood to settle down and attend to things seriously. Already in Shakespeare's writings we find the word with its present meaning of "sorrowful." It has quite lost its earlier meaning, but has several special new meanings besides the general one of "sorrowful." A "sad tint," or colour, is one which is dull. "Sad bread" in the north of England is "heavy" bread which has not risen properly. Again, we describe as "sad" some people who are not at all sorrowful. We say a person is a "sad" liar when we mean that he is a hopeless liar.
The wordtide, which we now apply to the regular rise and fall of the sea, used to mean in Old English "time;" and it still keeps this meaning in the wordsChristmastide,Whitsuntide, etc.
One common way in which words change is ingoing from a general to a more special meaning. Thus in Old English the wordchestmeant "box" in general, but has come now to be used as the name of a special kind of box only, and also as the name of a part of the body. The first person who used the word in this sense must have thought of the "chest" as a box containing the lungs and the heart.
Glassis, of course, the name of the substance out of which we make our windows and some of our drinking vessels, etc., and this was at one time its only use; but we now use the nameglassfor several special articles—for example, a drinking-vessel, a telescope, a barometer, a mirror (or "looking-glass"), and so on.Copperis another word the meaning of which has become specialized in this way as time has gone on. From being merely the name of a metal it has come to be used for a copper coin and for a large cauldron especially used in laundry work. Another example of a rather different kind of this "specialization" which changes the meaning of words is the wordcongregation.Congregationused to mean "any gathering together of people in one place," and we still use the wordcongregatein this sense. Thus we might say "the people congregated in Trafalgar Square," but we should never think of speaking of a crowd listening to a lecturer there as a "congregation." The word has now come to mean an assembly for religious worship in a chapel or church.
Some words have changed their meaning in just the opposite way. From having one special meaning they have come by degrees to have a much more general sense. The wordbureau, which came into English from the French, meant at first merely a "desk" in both languages. It still has this meaning in both languages, but a wider meaning as well. It can now be used to describe an office (a place associated with the idea of desks). Thus we have "employment bureau," and can get English money for foreign at a "bureau de change." From this use of the word we have the wordbureaucracy, by which we describe a government which is carried on by a great number of officials.
A better example of how a word containing one special idea can extend its meaning is the wordbend. This word originally meant to pull the string of a bow in order to let fly an arrow. The expression "bend a bow" was used, and as the result of pulling the string was to curve the wooden part of the arrow, people came in time to think that "bending the bow" was this making the wood to curve. From this came our general use of "bend" to mean forcing a thing which is straight into a curve or angle. We have, of course, also the metaphorical use of the word, as when we speak of bending our will to another's.
Another word which has had a similar history iscarry. When this word was first borrowed from Old French it meant to move something from placeto place in a cart or other wheeled vehicle. The general word for our moderncarrywasbear, which we still use, but chiefly in poetry. In timecarrycame to have its modern general sense of lifting a thing from one place and removing it to another. A well-known writer on the history of the English language has suggested that this came about first through people using the word in this sense half in fun, just as the wordcartis now sometimes used. A person may say (a little vulgarly), "Do you expect me to cart all these things to another room?" instead of using the ordinary word carry. If history were to repeat itself in this case,cartmight in time become the generally used word, andcarryin its turn be relegated to the realm of poetry.
Words often come to have several meanings through being used to describe things which are connected in some way with the things for which they were originally used. The wordhouseoriginally had one meaning, which it still keeps, but to which several others have been added. It was a building merely, but came in time to be used to mean the building and the people living in it. Thus we say one person "disturbs the whole house." From this sense it got the meaning of a royal family, and we speak of the House of York, Lancaster, Tudor, or Stuart. We also use the word in a large sense when we speak of the "House of Lords" and the "House of Commons," by which we hardly ever mean the actual buildings known generally asthe "Houses of Parliament," but the members of the two Houses. The wordworldhas had almost the opposite history to the wordhouse. World originally applied only to persons and not to any place. It meant a "generation of men," and then came to mean men and the earth they live on, and then the earth itself; until it has a quite general sense, as when we speak of "other worlds than ours."
Many words which are used at present to describe bad or disagreeable things were used quite differently originally. The wordvillainis, perhaps, the most expressive we can use to show our opinion of the depths of a person's wickedness. Yet in the Middle Ages a villain, or "villein," was merely a serf or labourer bound to work on the land of a particular lord. The word in Saxon times would have beenchurl. As time went on both these words became terms of contempt. The lords in the Middle Ages were certainly often more wicked than the serfs, as we see in the stories of the days of Robin Hood; but by degrees the people of the higher classes began to use the wordvillainmore and more contemptuously. Many of them imagined that only people of their own class were capable of high thoughts and noble conduct. Gradually "villainy" came to mean all that was low and vulgar, and by degrees it came to have the meaning it has now of "sheer wickedness." At the end of the Middle Ages there were practically no longer anyserfs in England; but the wordvillainhas remained in this new sense, and gives us a complete story of the misunderstanding and dislike which must have existed between "noble" and "simple" to cause such a change in the meaning of the word.
The wordchurlhas a somewhat similar history. We say now that a sulky, ungracious person is a "mere churl," or behaves in a "churlish" manner, never thinking of the original meaning of the word. Here, again, is a little story of injustice. The present use of the word comes from the supposition that only the mere labourer could behave in a sulky or bad-tempered way.
Knaveis another of those words which originally described persons of poor condition and have now come to mean a wicked or deceitful person. A knave, as we now understand the word, means a person who cheats in a particularly mean way, but formerly the word meant merely "boy." It then came to mean "servant," just as the wordgarçon("boy") is used for all waiters in French restaurants. Another word which now means, as a rule, some one unutterably wicked, iswretch, though it is also used rather contemptuously to describe some one who is not wicked but unutterably miserable. Yet in Old English this word merely meant an "exile." An exile was a person to be pitied, and also sometimes a person who had done something wrong, and we get both these ideas in the modern uses of the word. The wordblackguard, which now means a"scoundrel," was also once a word for "scullion;" but it does not go back as far as "knave" and "villain," being found chiefly in writings of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
Another word in which the "villeins" and "knaves" and "churls" seem to have their revenge on the "upper classes" issurly. This word used to be speltsirly, and meant behaving as a "sire," or gentleman, behaves. Originally this meant "haughty" or "arrogant," but by degrees came to have the idea of sulkiness and ungraciousness, much likechurlish.
Several adjectives which are now used as terms of blame were not only harmless descriptions originally, but were actually terms of praise. No one likes to be called "cunning," "sly," or "crafty" to-day; but these were all complimentary adjectives once. Acunningman was one who knew his work well, aslyperson was wise and skilful, and acraftyperson was one who could work well at his trade or "craft." Two words which we use to-day with a better sense than any of these, and yet which have a slightly uncomplimentary sense, areknowingandartful. It is surely good to "know" things, and to be full of art; but both words have already an idea of slyness, and may in time come to have quite as unpleasant a meaning as these three which have the same literal meaning.
Fellow, a word which has now nearly always a slightly contemptuous sense, had originally the quitegood sense ofpartner. It came from an Old English word which meant the man who marked out his land next to yours. The word still has this good sense infellowship,fellow-feeling, etc., and as used to describe a "fellow" of a college or society. But the more general use is as a less respectful word for man. One man may say of another that he is a "nice fellow" without any disrespect; but the word has no dignity, and people, even though they use it of an equal, would not think of using it to describe a superior, and the more general use is that of blame or contempt, as in the expressions, "a disagreeable fellow" or "a stupid fellow." The wordbullywas at one time a word which showed affection, and meant even "lover." In English now, of course, a bully is a person, especially a boy, who tyrannizes over people weaker than himself; but the Americans still use the word in a good sense when they say "bully for you," meaning "bravo."
We have seen many words whose meanings have become less dignified than their original meaning; but sometimes the opposite happens. Every one now speaks with respect of a "pioneer," whether we mean by that people who are the first to venture into strange lands, or, in a more figurative sense, people who make some new discovery in science or introduce some new way of thinking or acting. Yet "pioneers" were originally merely the soldiers who did the hard work of clearing the way for anadvancing army. They were looked upon as belonging to a lower class than the ordinary soldiers. But this new and at first figurative use of the word, applied first to geographical and then to scientific and moral explorers, has given the word a new dignity.
A group of words which had originally very humble meanings, and have been elevated in an even more accidental way, are the names of the officials of royal courts. The wordstewardoriginally meant, as it still means, a person who manages property for some one else. The steward on a ship is a servant; but the steward of the king's household was no mean person, and was dignified with the title of the "Lord High Steward of England." The royal house of Stuart took its name from the fact that the heads of the family were in earlier times hereditary stewards of the Scottish kings. Somarshal, the name of another high official at court, means "horse boy;"seneschal, "old servant;"constable, "an attendant to horses' stalls," and so on. Some of these words have kept both a dignified and a commoner meaning.Constable, besides being the name of a court official, is also another term for "policeman."
The wordsillymeant in Old English "blessed" or "happy," but of course has wandered far from this meaning. On the other hand, several words which once meant "foolish" have now quite different meanings.Giddyanddizzyboth had this sensein Old English, and so had the wordnice. But later the French wordfol, from which we getfoolish, was introduced into English, and these words soon ceased to be used in this sense. Before this the two wordsdizzyandgiddyhad occasionally been used in the sense in which they are used now, to describe the condition of a person whose head "swims;" this now became their general meaning, thoughgiddyhas gone back again to something of its old meaning in its later use to describe a person's conduct. Agiddyperson is another description for one of frivolous character.
The wordnicehas had a rather more varied history. It had its original meaning of "foolish" from the literal meaning of the Latin wordnescius, "ignorant," from which it was derived. Gradually it came to mean "foolishly particular about small things;" and we still have a similar use of the word, as when we say a person has a "nice taste in wines," or is a "nice observer," or speak of a "nice distinction," by which we mean a subtle distinction not very easily observed. But this is, of course, not the commonest sense in which we use the word. Bynicewe generally mean the opposite ofnasty. A "nice" observer was a good observer, and from this kind of idea the wordnicecame to have the general sense of "good" in some way.Niceis not a particularly dignified word, and is little used by good writers, except in its more special and earlier sense. It is, perhaps, less used in America than inEngland, and it is interesting to notice thatnasty, the word which in English always seems to be the opposite ofnice, is not considered a respectable word in America, where it has kept its earlier meaning of "filthy," or absolutely disgusting in some way.
Again, the worddisgust, by which we express complete loathing for anything, used merely to mean "dislike" or "distaste." In the same way, the wordloathe, by which we mean "to hate" or feel the greatest disgust for, originally meant merely "to dislike." The stronger meaning came from the fact that the word was often used to describe the dislike a sick person feels for food. Every one knows how strong this feeling can be, and it is from this thatloatheandloathsometook the strong meaning they now have. Curiously enough, the adjectiveloathorloth, from the same word, has kept the old mild meaning. When we say we are "loth" to do a thing, we do not mean that we hate doing it, but merely that we feel rather unwilling to do it. In Old English, too, the wordfilthand its derivativefoulwere not quite such strong words asdirtanddirty.
Again, the wordsstenchandstinkin Old English meant merely "smell" or "odour." One could then speak of the "sweet stench" of a flower; but in the later Middle Ages these words came to have their present meaning of "smelling most disagreeably."
We saw how the taking of the wordfolfrom theFrench, meaning "foolish," caused the meaning of several English words which before had this meaning to be changed. The coming in of foreign words has been a very common cause for such changes of meaning. The wordfiendin English has now a quite different meaning from its original meaning in English, when it simply meant "enemy," the opposite to "friend." When the word "enemy" itself was borrowed from the French, the wordfiendcame to be less and less often used in this sense. In timefiendcame to be another word fordevil, the chief enemy of mankind. But in modern times we do not use the word much in this sense. It is most often now applied to persons. It sounds rather milder than calling a person a "devil," but it means exactly the same thing.
The wordstoolcame to have its present special meaning through the coming into English from the French of the wordchair. Before the Norman Conquest any kind of seat for one person was a "stool," even sometimes a royal throne. The worddeeralso had in Old English the meaning of "beast" in general, but the coming in of the wordbeastfrom the French led to its falling into disuse, and by degrees it became the special name of the chief beast of chase.
Again, the Latin wordspiritled to the less frequent use of the wordghost, which was previously the general word forspirit. When spirit came to be generally used,ghostcame to have the specialmeaning which it has for us now—that of the apparition of a dead person.
A great many words have changed their meaning even since the time of Shakespeare through being transferred from the subject of the feeling they describe to the object, or from the object to the subject. Thus one example of this is the wordgrievous. We speak now of a "grievous wrong," or a "grievous sin," or a "grievous mistake," and all these phrases suggest a certain sorrow in ourselves for the fact described. But this was not the case in the time of Queen Elizabeth, when it was decreed that a "sturdy beggar," a man who could work but begged instead, should be "grievously whipped." In this casegrievouslymerely meant "severely." On the other hand, the wordpitiful, which used to mean "compassionate," is no longer applied to what we feel at seeing a sad thing, but to the sadness of the thing itself. We do not now say a person is pitiful when he feels sorry for some one, but we speak of a "pitiful sight" or a "pitiful plight."
The wordpityitself is used still in both ways, subjectively and objectively. A person can feel "pity," and there is "pity" in the thing for which we feel sorry. This is the sense in which it is used in such expressions as "Oh, the pity of it!"
The wordhatefulonce meant "full of hate," but came to be used for the thing inspiring hate instead of for the people feeling it. So,painfulused tomean "painstaking," but of course has no longer this meaning.
One very common way in which words have changed their meanings is through the name of one thing being given to another which resembles it. The wordpencomes from the Latinpenna, "a feather;" and as in olden days the ordinary pens were "quills" of birds, the name was very good. We still keep it, of course, for the steel pens and gold pens of to-day, which we thus literally speak of as feathers.Pencilis a word with a somewhat similar history. It comes from the Latinpenicillus, which itself came frompeniculus, or "little tail," a kind of cleaning instrument which the Romans used as we use brushes.Pencilwas originally the name of a very fine painter's brush, and from this it became the name of an instrument made of lead which was used for making marks. Then it was passed on to various kinds of pencils, including what we know as a lead-pencil, in which, as a writer on words has pointed out, there is really neither lead nor pencil.
The wordhandkerchiefis also an interesting word. The wordkerchiefcame from the Frenchcouvre-chef, "a covering for the head." Another similar word is one which the Normans brought into England,curfew, which means "cover fire." When the curfew bell rang the people were obliged to extinguish all lights and fires. The "kerchief" was originally a covering for the head. Then the fashion arose of carrying a square of similar material in thehand, and so we gethandkerchief, and laterpocket-handkerchief, which, if we analyse it, is rather a clumsy word, "pocket-hand-cover-head." The reason it is so is that the people who addedpocketandhandknew nothing of the real meaning ofkerchief.
There are several words which used to mean "at the present time" which have now come to mean "at a future time." This can only have come about through the people who used them not keeping their promises, but putting off doing things until later. The wordsoonin Old English meant "immediately," so that when a person said that he would do a thing soon he meant that he would do it "instantly." The trouble was that often he didnot, and so often did this happen that the meaning of the word changed, andsooncame to have its present meaning of "in a short time." The same thing happened with the wordspresentlyanddirectly, and the phraseby-and-by, all of which used to mean "instantly."Presentlyanddirectlyseem to promise things in a shorter time thansoon, butby-and-byis a very uncertain phrase indeed. It is perhaps because Scotch people are superior to the English in the matter of doing things to time that with thempresentlystill really means "instantly."
In all the examples we have seen of changes in the meaning of words it is fairly easy to see how the changes have come about. But there are some words which have changed so much in meaning that their present sense seems to have no connection with their earlier meaning. The wordtreacleis a splendid example of this. It comes from a Greek word meaning "having to do with a wild beast," and this seems to have no connection whatever with our present use of the wordtreacleas another word forsyrup of sugar. The steps by which this word came to change its meaning so enormously were these. From the general meaning of "having to do with a wild beast," it came to mean "remedy for the bite of a wild beast." As remedies for wounds and bites were, in the old days, generally thick syrups, the word came in time to mean merely "syrup," and lastly the sweet syrup which we now know as "treacle."
Another word which has changed immensely in its meaning ispremises. By the wordpremiseswe generally mean a house or shop and the land just round it. But the real meaning of the wordpremisesis the "things already mentioned." It came to have its present sense from the frequent use of the word in documents drawn up by lawyers. In these, which very frequently dealt with business relating to houses, the "things before mentioned" meant the "house, etc.," and in time people came to think that this was the actual meaning ofpremises, and so we get the present use of the word.
The wordhumouris one which has changed its meaning very much in the course of its history. It comes to us from the Latin wordhumor, which means a "fluid" or "liquid." By "humour" wenow mean either "temper," as when we speak of being in a "good" or "bad" humour, or that quality in a person which makes him very quick to find "fun" in things. And from the first meaning of "temper" we have the verb "to humour," by which we mean to give in to or indulge a person's whims. But in the Middle Ages "humour" was a word used by writers on philosophy to describe the four liquids which they believed (like the Greek philosophers) that the human body contained. These four "humours" were blood, phlegm, yellow bile (or choler), and black bile (or melancholy). According to the balance of these humours a man's character showed itself. From this belief we get the adjectives—which we still use without any thought of their origin—sanguine("hopeful"),phlegmatic("indifferent and not easily excited"),choleric("easily roused to anger"), andmelancholy("inclined to sadness"). A person had these various temperaments according as the amount of blood, phlegm, yellow or black bile was uppermost in his composition. From the idea that having too much of any of the "humours" would make a person diseased or odd in character, we got the use of the wordhumoursto describe odd and queer things; and from this it came to have its modern meaning, which takes us very far from the original Latin.
It was from this same curious idea of the formation of the human body that we get two differentuses of the wordtemper.Temperwas originally the word used to describe the right mixture of the four "humours." From this we got the wordsgood-temperedandbad-tempered. Perhaps because it is natural to notice more when people are bad-tempered rather than good, not more than a hundred years ago the wordtempercame to mean in one use "bad temper." For this is what we mean when we say we "give way to temper." But we have the original sense of "good temper" in the expression to "keep one's temper." So here we have the same word meaning two opposite things.
Several words which used to have a meaning connected with religion have now come to have a more general meaning which seems very different from the original. A word of this sort in English isorder, which came through the French wordordre, from the Latinordo. Though the Latin word had the meaning which we now give to the wordorder, in the English of the thirteenth century it had only the special meaning (which it still keeps as one of its meanings) of an "order" or "society" of monks. In the fourteenth century it began to have the meaning of "fixed arrangement," but the adjectiveorderlyand the nounorderlinessdid not come into use until the sixteenth century. The wordregularhas a similar history. Coming from the Latinregula, "a rule," its modern general meaning in English of "according to rule" seems very natural; but the word which began to be used inEnglish in the fourteenth century did not take the modern meaning until the end of the sixteenth century. Before this, it too was used as a word to describe monastic orders. The "regular" clergy were priests who were also monks, while the "secular" clergy were priests but not monks. The wordsregularity,regulation, andregulatedid not come into use until the seventeenth century.
Another word which has now a quite different meaning from its original meaning isclerk. A "clerk" nowadays is a person who is employed in an office to keep accounts, write letters, etc. But a "clerk" in the Middle Ages was what we should now more generally call a "cleric," a man in Holy Orders. As the "clerks" in the Middle Ages were practically the only people who could read and write, it is, perhaps, not unnatural that the name should be now used to describe a class of people whose chief occupation is writing (whether with the hand or a typewriter). People in the Middle Ages would have wondered what could possibly be meant by a word which is common in Scotland for a "woman clerk"—clerkess.
The words which change their meanings in this way tell us the longest, and perhaps the best, stories of all.
We have seen that there are great numbers of words in English which come from the Latin language. Sometimes they have come to us through Old French words borrowed from the Latin, and sometimes from the Latin words directly, or modern French words taken from the Latin. The fact that we have borrowed from the Latin in these two ways has led sometimes to our borrowing twice over from the same word. Different forms going back in this way to the same origin are known as "doublets." The English language is full of them, and they, too, can tell us some interesting stories.
Many of these pairs of words seem to have no relation at all with each other, so much has one or the other, or both, changed in meaning from that of the original word from which they come. A familiar pair of doublets isdaintyanddignity, both of which come from the Latin worddignitas.Dignity, which came into the English language either directly from the Latin or through the modernFrench worddignité, has not wandered at all from the meaning of the Latin word, which had first the idea of "merit" or "value," and then that of honourable position or character which the worddignityhas in English.Daintyhas a quite different meaning; though it, too, came fromdignitas, but through the less dignified way of the Old French worddaintie.
The English wordsdish,dais,desk, anddiscall come from the Latin worddiscus, by which the Romans meant first a round flat plate thrown in certain games (a "quoit"), and secondly a plate or dish. In Old English this word becamedish. In Old French it becamedeis, and from this we have the Englishdais—the raised platform of a throne. In Italian it becamedesco, from which we gotdesk; and the scientific men of modern times, in their need of a word to describe exactly a round, flat object, have gone back as near as possible to the Latin and given usdisc. It is to be noticed that the original idea of the Latin word—"having a flat surface"—is kept in these four descendants of a remote ancestor.
The wordschieftainandcaptainare doublets coming from the Late Latin wordcapitaneus, "chief;" the former through the Old French wordchevetaine, and the latter more directly from the Latin.Frailandfragileare another pair, coming from the Latin wordfragilis, "easily broken;" the one through Old French, and the other through Modern French.
Both these pairs of words have kept fairly closeto the original meaning; butcaitiffandcaptive, another pair of doublets, have quite different meanings from each other. Both come from the Latin wordcaptivus, "captive," the one indirectly and the other directly.Caitiff, which is not a word used now except occasionally in poetry, means a "base, cowardly person;" butcaptivehas, of course, the original meaning of the Latin word.
Another pair of doublets, which are quite different in form and almost opposite to each other in meaning, areguestandhostile. These two words come from the same root word; but this goes further back than Latin, to the language known as the Aryan, from which nearly all the languages of Europe and the chief language of India come.Hostilecomes from the Latinhostis, "an enemy;" buthostisitself comes from the same Aryan word as that from whichguestcomes, and so these two words are doublets in English. They express very different ideas: we are not generally "hostile" or "full of enmity" against a "guest," one who partakes of our hospitality.
Another pair of doublets not from the Latin areshirtandskirt, which are both old Germanic words.Skirtcame later into the language, being from the Scandinavian, whileshirtis an Old English word.
The wordcrossand the many words in English beginning withcruci—such ascrucial,crucifix, andcruciform—the adverbacross, as well as the less common wordcrux, all come from the Latin wordcrux, "a cross." The wordcrossfirst came into the English language with Christianity itself, for the death of our Lord on the cross was, of course, the first story which converts to Christianity were told. It came through the Irish from the Norwegian wordcros, which came direct from the Latin. All the words beginning withcrucicome straight from the Latin.Cruciformandcrucifixrefer to the form of a cross, and so sometimes does the wordcrucial. But, as a rule,crucialis used as the adjective of the wordcrux, which means the "test," or "difficult point," in deciding or doing something. The Romans did not usecruxin this sense; but it is interesting to notice that they did use it in the figurative sense of "trouble" just as we do. This came from the fact that the common form of execution for all subjects of the Roman Empire except Roman citizens was crucifixion.
Two such different words astavernandtabernacle, the one meaning an inn and the other the most sacred part of the sanctuary in a church, are doublets from the Latin wordtabernaculum, "tent." The first comes from the Frenchtaverne, and the second directly from the Latin.
The wordsmintandmoneyboth come from the Latin wordmoneta, which was an adjective attached by the Romans to the name of the goddess Juno. The place where the Romans coined their money was attached to the temple of Juno Moneta, or Juno the Adviser. From this fact the Romansthemselves came to usemonetaas the name for coins, or what we call money. The word passed into French asmonnaie, which is still the French word both formoneyandmint, the place where we coin our money. In German it becamemunze, which has the same meanings. In English it becamemint. But the English language, as we have seen, has a fine gift for borrowing. In time it acquired the French wordmonnaie, which becamemoneyas the name for coins, while it kept the wordmintto describe the place where coins are made.
The wordsbower, formerly the name of a sleeping-place for ladies and now generally meaning a summer-house, andbyre, the place where cows sleep, both come from the Old English wordbur, "a bower." The wordflour(which so late as the eighteenth century Dr. Johnson did not include in his great dictionary) is the same word asflower. Flour is merely the flower of wheat. Again,poesyandposyare really the same word,posybeing derived frompoesy.Posyused to mean a copy of verses presented to some one with a bouquet. Now it stands either for verses, as when we speak of the "posy of a ring," or more commonly a bunch of flowers without any verses.
The wordsbenchandbankboth come from the same Teutonic word which becamebencin Old English andbancin French.Benchcomes frombenc, butbankhas a more complicated history. From the Frenchbancwe borrowed the word touse in the old expression a "bank of oars." From the Scandinavians, who also had the word, we gotbank, used for the "bank of a river." Meanwhile the Italians had also borrowed the old Germanic word which became with thembancaorbanco, the bench or table of a money-changer. From this the French gotbanque, and this became in Englishbankas we use it in connection with money.
The Latin wordratio, "reckoning," has given three words to the English language. It passed into Old French asresoun, and from this we got the wordreason. Later on the French made a new word direct from the Latin—ration; which, again, passed into English as a convenient name for the allowance of food to a soldier. It has now a more general sense, as when in the Great War people talk of the whole nation being put "on rations." Then again, as every child who is old enough to study mathematics knows, we use the Latin word itself,ratio, as a mathematical term.
Another Latin word which has given three different words to the English language isgentilis. From it we havegentile,gentle, andgenteel. Yet the Latin word had not the same meaning as any of these words.Gentilismeant "belonging to the samegensor 'clan.'" It became later a distinguishing term fromJew. All who were not Jews wereGentiles, and this is still the meaning of the wordgentilein English. It came directly from the Latin. Butgentilisbecamegentilin French; andwe have borrowed twice from this word, gettinggentle, which expresses one idea contained in the French word, though the French word means more than our wordgentle. It has the sense of "very amiable and attractive." The last word of the three,genteel, is rather a vulgar word. It means "like gentlemen and ladies have to do," and only rather ignorant people use the word seriously.
Doublets from Latin words for the most part resemble each other in meaning and form, though, as we have seen, this is not always the case. We could give a long list of examples where both sense and form are similar, but there is only space to mention a few.Poorandpauper(a miserably poor person) both come from the Latinpauper, "poor."Storyandhistoryboth come fromhistoria, a word which had both meanings in Latin.Humanandhumaneare both from the Latinhumanus, "belonging to mankind."Sureandsecureare both from the Latinsecurus, "safe."Nourishmentandnutrimentare both from the Latinnutrimentum.Amiableandamicableare both from the Latinamicabilis, "friendly."
Examples of doublets which are similar in form but not in sense arechantandcant, which both come from the Latincantare, "to sing."Chanthas the original idea, being a form of singing, especially in church; butcanthas wandered far from the original sense, meaning insincere words, especially such as are used by people pretending to be religiousor pious. The wordcantwas first used in describing the chanting or whining of beggars, who were supposed often to be telling lies; and from this it got its present use, which has nothing to do with singing.
Blameandblaspheme, both coming from the Latinblasphemare, itself taken from a Hebrew word, are not, perhaps, quite so different in sense; butblamemeans merely to find fault with a person, whileblasphememeans to speak against God.
Chanceandcadenceboth come from the Latincadere, "to fall," but have very little resemblance in meaning.Chanceis what happens or befalls, andcadenceis movement measured by the fall of the voice in speaking or singing.
But the most interesting doublets of all are those which have neither form nor sense in common. No one would guess that the wordshyenaandsow, the names of two such different animals, are doublets. Both come from the Greek wordsusorhus, "sow." The Saxons, when they first settled in England, had the wordssu, "pig," andsugu, "sow;" and later the wordhyenawas taken from the Latin wordhyaena, itself derived from the Greekhuaina, "sow."
The wordsfurnishandveneer, again, are doublets which do not resemble each other very closely either in sound or in sense. Both come from the Old French wordfurnir, which has becomefournirin Modern French, and means "to furnish." The English wordfurnishwas taken direct from the French, while the wordveneer, which used to bespeltfineer, came into English from a German word also borrowed from the Frenchfurnir.
No one would easily guess that the namenutmeghad anything to do withmusk; but the word comes from the name which Latin writers in the Middle Ages gave to this useful seed—nux muscata, "musky nut."
It seems strange, when we come to think of it, that great English sailors like Admiral Jellicoe and Admiral Beatty are called by a title which is really the same as the name of an Arabian chieftain—Emir.Admiralcomes from the Arab phraseamir al bahr, "emir on the sea."
Just the opposite to doublets which do not resemble each other are many pairs of words which are pronounced alike and sometimes spelled alike. Very often these words come from two different languages, and there are many of them in English through the habit the language has always had of borrowing freely whenever the need of a new word has been felt.
The wordweed, "a wild plant," comes from an Old English word,weod; while "widows' weeds" take their name from the Old English wordwœde, "garment." The wordvice, meaning the opposite ofvirtue, comes through the French from the Latinvitium, "a fault;" while a "vice," the instrument for taking a perfectly tight hold on anything, comes from the Latinvitis, "a vine," through the Frenchvis, "a screw." Yet anothervice, as inviceroy,vice-president, etc., comes from the Latinvice, "in the place of."Angle, meaning the sport of fishermen, comes from an Old English word,angel, "fish-hook;" whileangle, "a corner," comes from the Latin wordangulus, which had the same meaning.
We might imagine that the wordtemple, as the name of a part of the head, was a metaphor describing the head as the temple of the mind, but it has no such romantic meaning.Temple, the name of a place of worship, comes from the Latintemplum, "a temple;" buttemple, the name of a part of the head, is from the Latin wordtempus, which had the same meaning in Latin, and also the earlier meaning of "the fitting time." It has been suggested that in Latintempuscame to mean "the temple," because it is "the fitting place" for a fatal blow, the temple being the most delicate part of the head.
Tattoo, meaning a "drum beat," comes from the Dutchtap-toe, "tap-to," an order for drinking-houses to shut. Buttattoo, describing the cutting away of the skin and dyeing of the flesh so common among sailors, is a word borrowed from the South Sea Islanders.
Soundmeaning "a noise," andsoundmeaning "to find out the depth of," as insounding-rod, are two quite different words. The one comes from the wordson, found both in Old English and French, and the other from the Old English wordssundgyrd,sund line, "a sounding line;" whilesoundmeaning"healthy" or "uninjured," as in the expression "safe and sound," comes from the Old English wordsund, and perhaps from the Latinsanus, "healthy."
The existence of so many pairs of words of this sort, which have the same sound and which yet come from such different origins—origins as far apart as the speech of the people of Holland and that of the South Sea Islanders, as we saw in the wordtattoo—illustrates in a very interesting way the wonderful history of the English language.