THE JEWELLER’S WINDOW

Press, Volume C, Issue 29674, 18 November 1961, Page 8

THE JEWELLER’S WINDOW

written for "The Preu" by ARNOLD WALL) PROFESSOR Arnold Wall, in the present series of articles, discusses the origin of many, familiar expressions and phrases, but it will have been noted that the subject matter extends beyond those limits. He wishes to make it clear that he cannot undertake to reply personally to readers who may comment on any of them. This article is the sixteenth of the series.

Fiend And Friend Not very many people, I suppose, ever see in this pair something of a puzzle; yet a puzzle there is. Why is the vowel long in efiend” but short in "friend” as they look exactly alike? They do not only look alike, they are born twins. Both are originally present participles of old verbs, one meant "loving,” the other "hating.” The question is when and why did they part company in respect of that vowel sound. As to when I can be certain of one point only: that is that they were pronounced alike until some time in the eighteenth century. The Expert Orthographist (1704) still gives “friend” the long sound, but I can’t find that any later authority does so. And as to why I confess that I am not sure. All the other words of similar form have the long sound —“chief,” “brief,” "field,” “niece,” ’’yield.” and so on. "Friend” in this respect stands alone and it is still “freend” in the Scottish form of English. The only reason I can suggest for this anomaly is that the shortening took place first in the derivatives "fnendly” and “friendship,” according to, a fairly reular law just as we have “holy” and “child” and “children”; “coal” and “collier”; where the addition of a syllable causes the shortening of the first vowel. When the vowel was shortened in those derivatives it was adopted in the parent word also—or so I dare to suppose. Has anybody any better answer than this?

“Mr Kemble’s Head Aitehes” So cried the rude people in the pit to tease the great actor. When he played in “The Tempest” and had to speak the line, “Fill all thy bones with aches, make thee roar,” he pronounced "aches” as “aitehes” in order to maintain the metre and this amused the crowd. He was not quite right—he should have said "atches,” not "aitehes.” We had formerly a verb, “to ake,” generally so spelt, and a noun “ach” pronounced “atch." These two were a regular pair like “bake” and “batch,” “make” and “match,” "wake” and "watch,” verb and noun. "Atch” disappeared and “ake" had to serve as both verb and noun. The proper spelling, of course, should be "ake," not “ache”; and “ake" it was until the middle of the eighteenth century. The person responsible for the bad spelling “ache” was Dr. Johnson, who mistakenly supposed it to be a word of Greek origin and so spelt it. It is, alas, often too late to mend.

Ordinals The first three ordinal numbers have all acquired senses beyond their prosy function. "First” comes to mean “best.” “second” becomes a verb, to support a proposal, and “third,” much disguised, makes the "ridings." originally “thridings” or third parts of Yorkshire. And Jane Austen, in one of her juvenile satirical novels, writes in a light-hearted playful spirit of a proposal seconded by someone and “thirded” by someone else. What a delightful verb! Chairwoman Jane Austen, of immortal memory, in her juvenile satirical “Lesley Castle,” tells how, in order to get rid of surplus food the servants were directed to eat as much as possible and even to call in the aid of “two chairwomen." This sounds very odd to us because “chairwoman,” though not recommended, is or has been actually used for a presiding person who is a woman. (Both Webster and Oxford recognise this.)

But “chairwoman" is really the old and correct form of our "charwoman.” The form was changed about the middle of the nineteenth century. This “chair” is our "chore," which was the old word for a job, a “turn” of work from the Old English “cierr," time or occasion, which is from a verb “cierran,” to turn. “Chore” became obsolete in England except in dialects, but went with the migrants to America and then returned to England pretty recently as an Americanism. Needless to say that the modern chairwoman has no affinity with “chore” and must not be asked to aid in the consumption of superfluous provender. I may add that "chore” also appears as “chare” as a name for side streets in some English towns.

Needier Or Nither ? Two questions arise. Which ought you to say? As yet both are current, England and New Zealand generally prefer “nither,” Australia “neether.” The point has long been argued both ways and about 250 years ago a discussion of it was recorded between an Englishman and a Scot; as they could not agree they asked an Irishman whether it was "neither” or “hither.” “Gentlemen,” said the Irishman, “it is nayther.” So there was a third candidate in those days. Then, how about the spelling? Well, here we are in a quandary. As I have written “nither” it does not express what I want to say: it looks as if it would rhyme with “wither.” And there are two alternative ways, both clumsy and ugly, "neyether,” based on “eye” and “nighther" based on “nigh” or “high.” That's the sort of mess in which our spelling sometimes lands us. Short of phonetie spelling or the use of the mark of length over the “i” there is no other way open to us.