WORDS.

Auckland Star, Volume LVIII, Issue 154, 2 July 1927, Page 21

WORDS.

FASCIMATION OF DICTiONARIES STATISTICS AID KEFIXCTXOHS HAIJ-A-MILLION WOBDS. (BY STJ34NER GROTE.)

"It is about mere words that men frequently quarreL It is for the sake o<f words that they most willingly kill and are killed."' —Anatole France. The editor of a modern English dictionary tells us in the interesting preface that the committee of linguists set up for the purpose examined the enormous total of 513,000 words. Of this number 63,000 were rejected as being dead, as of little or no value, or of rare use as to be without the scope of* a dictionary designed for practical and popular purposes. This left 450,000 words to be dealt with in the two huge tomes which comprise the dictionary. A modern encyclopaedia, it was computed, contained the astonishing number of 49 million words. This, it is obvious, refers to the total of words employed, not the number of words defined, as in the case of the dictionary! A Chinese encyclopaedia, published over 500 years ago contained 367 million symbols. Many modern writers, are great admirers of dictionaries. Henry Buckle, the historian, author of the famous History of Civilisation, when a certain dictionary was mentioned, said: "Yes, it is one of the few dictionaries I have read through with pleasure," which seems to imply he was in the habit of perusing dictionaries quite in the ordinary way or reading. Another writer witlt the dictionary habit is Arnold Bennett. He advises that the dictionary should be read daily. A Counsel of Perfection. Now this seems to me rather a. counsel of perfection. lam always interested in dictionaries of all sorts, and what a varied collection there are—dictionaries of word-meanings, of etymology, synonyms, antonyms, of slang, of ancient words, rhyming dictionaries, dictionaries of proverbs, t>f dialect proverbs and word-lore. I like nothing better than to browse among these at the libraries, hut I really do not think I could bring myself to read one through. " However, on' m<»titi«ii|ng this to' Pamela, I am considerably surprised to find the advice greeted with enthusiasm. "What a good idea. How it would increase your vocabulary! Now (reaching for her pet dictionary and nicking over the leaves) yon don't know what hachnre means f "How d'ye spell it?" I inquired warily. "It sounds like some body sneezing, er the middle name, of a Japanese Geisha, or, I have it>—the. cold after?" "& nseana, jp* "Oft, w«JL technical words," I mnrmer. Sfoa are not expected to kno* the meaning of -seehnieai wordsj nnmas -yon axt. one of the so to speak. Let na consider just a, few, a very few, of the worda we findan the iliiljsmiij. And drat, to give it the place of henonx! i-v&iffiii&mM* imat& ia "orderly-—not :< *ms+ mark yon, nor "asetlMdienl," wtimtmn a prim, plodding sound, but "order!*." One known iantinetlvely that a peraon deaeribed an *lwrdexiy" wonld be yery pleasant to live with. >' .'At ; toaafyins;:'T»Mid,"-ai real swashbuckler of a word ia "slash," need frei in directions on a dress-pattern. [iSSah. front —— to says the guide I airfly. Of course, ;at the price of | present-day materials, one would never j reaHy dare to "alaan;" It is unthinkable. But I gaze at it with awe, and— there, I will confess it, I love that word. I hope, the will never depart from it, and descend to the comparatively meek word "cut." A "word that appears: to be falling into 4j*n»e nowndays is Oe good old word rialist." Newspaper writers are aH "preesmeir" or "reporters." But why? Surely journalist "chronicler of doings from day; to daV is a very .fitting, word for a newspaper writer. , A Flonriah—er a WiltIt is astonishing how historians love ti»--word- "ftonrish." They areioattached to it that they; win use it of people who cannot by the widest stretch of imagination be said to have "flourished" at all—rather to -nave Thus writes a historian of that unfortunate pair of lovers, Abelard and Eloise "Abelard and Eloise flourished (note the word) in the I2fii century; they -were two of the most distinguished persons of their age in learning and beauty, but for nothing more famous than their unfortunate passion. After a long course of calamities they retired each to a separate convent. . . ." Delving further into the history of tins unlucky couple we find that Abelard was a teacher .and lecturer in Paris. He became tutor to Eloise, niece .of Canon Fulbert. An affection sprang up between them which greatly incensed Eloise's uncle. And it really is surprising in story and legend what disagreeable, even malevolent people uncles are. - In real life we. do not find them so. Quite the contrary. They are usually very pleasant relatives —not so critical as aunts, and ' really more likely to be indulgent and obliging than any other relative. But the traditional uncle has always been one that a nephew or niece of any common sense would be careful to avoid. He appeared to have had plenty of time, opportunity, and power at his disposal, and to be possessed of such a vindictive nature that he delighted in using these advantages for the express purpose of harrying his unoffending nephews and nieces. ¥ - Eloise'a uncle behaved quite in the traditional manner of uncles. The lovers .were separated, and Abeiard was cruelly ill-treated Eloise afterwards became a nun, and Abelard a monk. TXaw what was there "nourishing" about all that ? Yet. there it was. The historian could not resist the word The word applied to a human being is, to my idea, a veryobnoxious word-: 'It suggests a doll-like automaton,..not anything living. ' We would also gladly dispense with "flapper," a highly objectionable term for a modern young girt. "And another word I wage weir with is "Idds* or "kiddies" for "ckQdTen."' A kid is a. young goat. Children are the offspring of men and; vromeu % and are not kids, so why call them «o ? ia used frequently bjr aenlbes when writing quite serionsry. Tndyjthere a aoinething endearing aJwnt "kiddiea" but I would rigorously W the