Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, APRIL 20th., 1935. SPEECH AND JARGON.

Greymouth Evening Star, 20 April 1935, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. AND BRUNNERTON ADVOCATE. SATURDAY, APRIL 20th., 1935. SPEECH AND JARGON.

REBATES constitute a promin-

ent feature in the programme of the Catholic Clubs’ congress, to be held in Greymouth during this week-end, —a cordial community welcome will be given to all the visitors, —and interesting speeches should be heard. The preservation of the purity of the English language is occupying the minds of many in this and other Empire countries, particularly in England, where, protests are being made

against the use of what are termed Americanisms. These protestants are not having it all their own way, some declaring that racy U.S.A, expressions are to be pre f'erred to English popular sayings. Both sides overlook that what is slang !o one generation becomes al-1 most purist to the next, and vice' versa. A high legal Court, recent-'

ly. accepted O.K. as “correct”] language, and that precedent will be as a bulwark for those departing from the orthodox. It is difficult to define what is correct English and what is not. ho is to decide ? Professorial and other authorities differ, and, in any case, their acceptance, or refusal.

of any form would not influence greatly common usage. Appeals arc made “to save our children” from J

using Anmrieanisms; familiar to them through their attendance at cinemas, but most adults, meanwhile. remain ealm, — and emulate the juvenile example, oh opportune occasion. Moreover, ample evidence is forthcoming that what is said to be modern American talk, is often old English. For instance ‘‘sez yon.” is found as “says you.” in various literary classics, “offending” authors including Dickens and R. L. Stevenson. In some rural distriels of England, “says you” has been commonplace for centuries. Investigation discovers similar long pedigrees for other Americanisms of to-day. It is not unjustly claimed that the U.S.A, terms so often criticised are really good English, direct, simple, and free from affectation. Misunderstandings arise, as is demonstrated, by the story of the English professor who, when lecturing in an American university, remarked: “Two words I dislike in America arc ‘swell’ and ‘lousy.’ ” “That’s O.K. Prof.,” one of the students replied, “but you might tell us what the words are!”

Englisli purists are not alone in condemning what they call jargon. Some Americans assert that it is unfair to think that educated people in the U.S.A, use such terms. Mrs. Nicholas Murray Butler, wife of a leading American professorpublicist, recently wrote: —Permit me to say that if we Americans

took some of your costermonger idioms for an equivalent of most of the slang quoted as American, there would be some similarity between the cases. We are as careful of our language as you are, if we belong to the same class. Educated people arc probably very much alike all over the world, but for these specimens of American savagery I think you are indebted to the humorous young reporters who, to use a purely English (and not very pretty) expression, are “pulling your leg.” What, indeed, has been m.v horror to hear “0.K.” used in an English drawing-room, and, worse still, to find it in the Oxford Dictionary! Pray do defend your innocent .'children against this atrocious language—or; send them to America to learn better!

If Greymouth’s visiting debaters are stuck for a subject (if this expression is permissible) they might do worse than discuss the pros, anc cons, of what is and what is not real English. The question is longstanding and the answer is not yet. It cannot be honestly denied that slang has enriched the English vocabulary, if many expressions soon lose their popularity. Nor is the use of “new” words the only matter for argument. The pronunciation. o£ generally accepted

terms is not agreed, even among

purists. The 8.8. C. and similar dictionary decisions arc refuted by some authorities. English is agreed to be the most expressive language in the world, and there does not seem to be any real objection to the introduction, or re-admission of terms, whichever English-speak-ing country is responsible, which pithily declare meaning. Speech is ever changing, and it is essential that live words should replace those decaying, or dead, if the English language is to retain its jvide utility and strength.