THE QUEEN'S ENGLISH.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXII, Issue 9808, 1 May 1895, Page 3

THE QUEEN'S ENGLISH.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Will you kindly allow me space for a few lines in reply to your correspondent, Mr. H. Glasson? Before dealing with the point wfiich he raises in his letter in your issue of this morning, let me settle a preliminary of no small importance. Who is to be judge of the meanings of English Is Mr. Glasson to settle their mennings off-hand, or am I to be allowed an appeal to the works of the standard English lexicographers ? These at any rate are in league neither with me nor with my critics. They take words as they find thorn used in our literature, and classify' and [define their various senses. This they do with an authority that few citizens of this or any other British colony can claim. To their judgment let us appeal. The word " minor," Mr. Glasson says, means " smaller," and we may not say or write "very smaller." But in "Cassell's Encyclopaedic Dictionary" I find the word has, as an adjective, three distinct meanings, two of which are tho following :— " 1. Less, smaller ; used absolutely in opposition to major." "2. Small; of little, or comparatively little, importance; petty; unimportant." That the word is correctly used in the second of the senses defined above may be news to your correspondent, but ib is none the less true. In this sense I have used it, and why should I not? That is the point on which I should like a little light. My answer to my cribic's Arab point, therefore, is that ib is correct to write "very minor,' as to write " very little" or " very petty" or " very important." And his second point is like unto his first. The word "replace" may nob, I am told, be used in the sense of "displace" or "supersede." Why may ib not? Tho dictionary above referred to gives seven leading meanings of the word "replace." Among them occur the two following :—"(1) To fill or take tho place of," and (2) " To supersede, displace;" and an example of each of these uses is quoted. The latter, taken from the late Matthew Arnold's " Literature and Dogma," reads thus: "Withlsrael, Religion replaced Morality." Your correspondent should let small persons like me alone, and bestow his lessons on Matthew Arnold, and the big names of literature. I can see nothing wrong in the last atrocity—"The floor lessons will be shorb." I mean that; I am assuming thab thefloor lesaons will nob take up much time, and the words used state the fact correctly enough. When a writer is charged with the crime of writing bad English, his accusers should surely give somo better reason in support of their charge than their mere ipse dixit. Your correspondent deserves credit for supporting his opinions by definite reasons, even if he has made ib all the easier forme to reply to him. One has some little pleasure, too, in doing battlo with a manly and courteous antagonist I never take any notice of anonymous letters; bub I think editors, before inserting them in the columns of influential

newspapers, should satisfy themselves that the letters do not) contain statements that are malicious or untrue. Time tries all, and I shall cheerfully submit to its Tordicb. —I am, etc., D. Pjstkie. Heleusvillo, April 29,1895.