OUR MOTHER TONGUE

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 287, 31 August 1935, Page 7

OUR MOTHER TONGUE

(By

Professor Arnold Wall.)

Professor Wall is Interested In the etymology of surnames, doubtful pronunciations and kindred matters, and will be glad to answer queries on sucn subjects to the best of his ability if ■ addressed through the editor of "The Dominion.” Among the words ,as to whose pronunciation a ruling has been asked for, I note the following:— Kerry or Hervey: The old pronunciation was Harvey, but the influence of the spelling has been so strong that this name is now often sounded with the er as in “her,” People who bear the name sometimes pronounce it so themselves. The same thing happens with names like Cowper (Cooper) and Menzies (Mingles). A note on the group of words in -er, clerk, Derby, etc., will follow later.

Charing Cross: Always pronounced by Englishmen with the first syllable as “chair,” but in New Zealand one sometimes hears it with the first syllable as in Charley. This is because we are accustomed here to the sound of long a as in Maori names and words, like “rata,” and partly because in New •Zealand schools Latin is taught with the “Continental” sounds so that words like “mater” are pronounced with the long a as in “father.”

Apparatus: Here again the English pronunciation has always been truly English and the a in the third syllable is sounded as in “rate.” For the reasons above stated the tendency here is to treat the word as Latin and to give that a the Latin sound. As the word retains its Latin form, this is excusable, but it is not correct.

Garage: I regard this word as being in a state of transition. Five different pronunciations are given by authorities, of which the best has the second g as in French —the sound of s in “measure.” This is usual in America. The rival pronunciation is an exact rhyme to “marriage," and this mas ultimately become established when the word is thoroughly naturalised. Scone: The Oxford Dictionary decides in favour of the long sound like “stone”; other authorities prefer tbs short, as in “don.” I agree with Fowler in thinking that the short sound is more frequentlj’ heard, but neither can be said to be wrong. It may be observed .that, though the word seems exceptional when pronounced “scon.” there are other words with that final -e and a short vowel, such common words that the fact is often unnoticed. Examples are “done,” “gone,” “give, 1 ’ and “have,” whose sounds contrast with those of “tone,” “hive” and “save.” All these were formerly long, and “have” still is so in the derivative “behave.” Leigh Hunt noticed in his youth that “have” was pronounced long in the church service; that would be about A.D. 1800.

Ate: AU the best authorities agree that the correct pronunciation is “et,” note “ate” as in “fate,” though many people use the latter. It would take too much space to explain the full history of this most interesting ease. It must suffice to note that the pronunciation with the Jong diphthong is an attempt to follow the spelling; that as late as 1800 the past tense of “eat" was still often written “eat,” as well as "ate”; and that the sound of “eat,” past tense, was parallel to that of “eat" in “threat” and “sweat.” Forehead: In this case, too, the authorities agree in the main, though there is a slight difference of opinion in respect of the second syllable, which may be either i or e. No authority, however, directs us to pronounce the word as “fore” plus “head.” It makes, in fact, a perfect rhyme to “horrid,” and of this there is a classical example —“when she was bad she was horrid.” To pronounce the word as spelt is affectation. Remonstrate: This word must be pronounced with the stress upon the second syllable, not like “demonstrate.”' It is undoubtedly anomalous in this respect, but is too firmly fixed to be unseated now. The explanation of the anomaly, which is really no justification, is that the corresponding noun is “remonstrance,” not “remonstration.” “Demonstrate” has been kept in the straight path (if it ever tended to deviate therefrom.) by the nouns “demonstrator” and “demonstration.” The misdemeanour of/remonstrate” is due to pure chance, and the pronunciation was fixed before 1800. Either and Neither; ...Three pronunciations of this pair are possible. The ei can be sounded as in “height,” “deceit,” or “rein.” Authorities agree that the first of these is correct; the ei has the sound of i in wine. But the sound as a long e (as in ween) is permitted, though it is less correct. Oddiy enough, if we have regard only to historical fact, the sound should rather be ai as in “vain,” which is now heard only provincially. The Old English word has the same sound as “day” and “maid.” Au eighteenth century story tells of two men arguing on this subject, one maintaining the sound as in “wine,” the other as in “ween”; they refer the dispute to a third party, who is Irish, and he says: “Gentlemen, it is nayther.” The eighteenth century authorities recognise only “neether” as correct, and it was during the nineteenth century that the present sound was more or less well established. The same sort of confusion, caused by the varying value of ei, is found in the very popular word “sheik,” or (better) “sheikh,” which is almost universally pronounced “sheek,” though the pronunciation should be “shake.” The authorities have to give both, placing "shake” first, but it is improbable that “shake,” which well represents the Arabic sound, will ever triumph over its vulgar adversary. “To Loan”

More than one correspondent lias asked for a ruling on the verb “to ioaii.” Much a» I personally duslike it. the word-cannot justly be condemned. It is one of those rare words which •were in English long ago. died out in the Mother Country, but survived in America, and then were re-introduced into English. Even if the few thirteenth century examples are really preferable to “lend,” it still has a* very respectable antiquity, nearly 400 years, ft seems to have gone out of use in England about 1650, by which date the early American colonies were established, and it returned about 50 years ago, though it is not recorded from any firstclass writer and is still regarded as an Americanism. The word is, of course, unnecessary, as it means neither more nor less than “lend,” lint that alone will not euflice to damn it. There is every excuse for those who eschew and even loathe it, for it “feels” exactly like one of those wanton conversions of nouns into verbs which are so frequent and so irritating; a correspondent has even collected a verb "to hero”—parallel with “to feature” and “to star,” but in the cinemeso language anything is possible.

Radio Programmes on Page 24.-