SPOKEN ENGLISH

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 76, 31 March 1934, Page 16

SPOKEN ENGLISH

; A PARENT'S TROUBLES

"DA'HNCINC" AND "CARSELL"

(By "Ajax.")

"Fiat Lux," who lias for some time been studying this column "with varying -degrees of interest," and found that when Queen Elizabeth was the subject the variation was in the right direction',, concludes, not too logically, that-"out of sheor good nature" I may be 'able to help him in helping his children in, the correct use of English. The; spirit is certainly willing, but advising on the pronunciation of ono of the trickiest of languages is a much more difficult task than stringing together a few quotations from tho most quotable of Queens, and I-fully appreciate' tho responsibility. When God (aid "Let there be light," there was light, but when my correspondent says "Fiat lux" and asks mo to supply it, tho re^ suit may be less satisfactory. * . • * I have three children at school, eager seekers after knowledge, says "Fiat Lux," and I must confess that the general pronunciation of some words nowadays, from radio announcers up—or down—wards, leaves me with a feeling of insecurity.' F'rinstance, should the words below be sounded with the "a" as "ah"; if so, why? • Castle (carsell), dance (darnce), chance, sample, lancers, grant, glance, branch, answer, example. Yers (pardon, years) ago when I went to school, before the war that ended; war—you know the- one I mean— my father used -to wax sarcastic on the Scotch\ pronunciation '. our teacher 'imparted to us, such as "fut", for "foot," but even then there'were definite rules for grammar—how I hated them"! »:■■.. ■*■■, » Before proceeding with, my correspondent's main point I pause to ask —ahsk, by the -\yay, not assk, and surely the first of those pronunciations both sounds and looks tho more- intelligent! whether his father always waxed sarcastic on the Scotch pronunciation, or whether ho was not sometimes sareahstic instead? The point has occurred to me because just before transcribing tho paragraph, above setoourtr the word "clastic" had caught by eye in the BJ}.C. "Becommendations to Announcers," published >in 1928. The ruling there is that the word shouldbe pronounced" class—not olaas." I have a; hazy recollection that in the mid-Victorian days when clastic-side bobts were fashionable, the broad "a" was not uncommon. But I am surprised that in the second edition of the "Concise Oxford" (1929) H. W. Fowler admits Velahstic" as an alternative pronunciation. In "sarcastic," however, he makes the second "a" as short without any option. * «- « Regarding tho pronunciation of "castle," "dance," "branch," etc., as "cahstle," "dahnce," "brahnch," etc., to which "Fiat Lux" so strongly objects, I can offer him my sympathy but nothing more. ' I can. sympathise because the impression of "sheer affectation" which the broad "a" in these words makes upon.;him is exactly the impression that the'short "a" used to make upon mo in the days when it was much commoner than it-is .now. To the intolerance of schoolboys there -Was something mincing and effeminato -in the -weakened «'a" in - these ■ words, though, if custom had decided the- other way, we should have doubtless found some equally good Teason for objecting to any nonconformity. * * « But whether the pronunciation of "dance" as "dahnce" is or is not ugly or otherwise objectionable, cus: torn and the authorities who are its spokesmen have decided in its favour, and •as Johnson says, "there's an end onH." I must admit, that the Oxford Dictionary, tho Shorter Oxford, and tho Concise Oxford, which arc, I suppose, the three highest authorities, arc- not so clear in expressing their meaning fes I.have always found them to be on other points. What is the use of the "Big Oxford's" telling mo that the-"a" in "dance" is to be pronounced as it is in "pass" and "chant," when, so far as I can discover, it does'not fix the force of "a" in either of those words, and therefore leaves tho matter in a vicious circle ? In the "Concise Oxford" tho only clue to tho pronunciation of the two consecutive words "channel" and "chant" is that tho initial sound in each of them is "tsh—," from which tno natural inferenco is that whatever the pronunciation of tho "a" in cither,.'of thorn may be, it is the same in'both. ' On tho other hand, tho "Concise Oxford," by leaving "pass" and "passable" without ' a mark, while marking the first "a" in "passage" as short, plainly indicates that the "a" in."p.ass,"like the first "a" in "passable," is long. , .*. ■ : * * But as the " arguinentuni a silcntio" does not provide a satisfactory foothold in a matter of importance, I was glad to find direct support in a work of authority. - Professor Henry C. Wyld's Universal Dictionary (1032) is a book of which my opinion improves with every consultation, but I had not consulted tho copy in the Public Library often enough to induce mo to buy one before the new exchange rate added 15s 9d to tho price, and now" it must wait. Professor Wyld marks the pronunciation of "dance" as "dahns," and so with the others -in my correspondent's list;' "and I was particularly pleased to find that "stance," which was tho only word of the kind that I could think of with a short "a "'was' so marked by him. Why should stance" be an exception to the general rule? The only reason I can suggest is that its present vogue is so recent that what appears to be a normal tendency of tho language has not had time to affect it. To disyllables such as "finance" and "romance" differont -considerations may apply. '■■ ■'■-■: : ' '*'" - *.; ' • ■ ■: pleasing discovery which I have made since consulting the "Universal" is that on this point the Pocket Oxford" eaters more successfully for the needs of the plain man in a hurry than the larger Oxford Dictionaries. It marks the "a" of "channel "and "stanco" as short, and indicates the broad "a" of "chant," "dance," etc., by an . "— a h—" in brackets immediately after tho word. How was it that after adopting this very convenient method in the "Pocket Oxford" in 1924 H. W. Fowler reverted in the second editipn of tho -".Concise Oxford" in 1929 to the less satisfactory practico of the first? ■ * .* *. I may add that this wonderful little book, tho , "P.0.D.," which, except for the omission of derivations, , is a far better book than more than I 90 per cent, of the larger dictionaries, contains 1016 pages, costs 3s 6d in London, was sold for 4s 6d in New Zealand

before Iho exchange rate rose, and cannot even now have reached a ruinous figure! -Also that tho much smaller (5 x '3|in) and equally wonderful Little Oxford Dictionary, more affectionately knowa as the "Buby Oxford," marks tho pronunciations in tho same way and- that the published price of its 626 pages is 2s!