OUR MOTHER TONGUE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22344, 15 February 1936, Page 1 (Supplement)

OUR MOTHER TONGUE

BY PROFESSOR ARNOLD WALL

RANDOM NOTES—XVIII*

Verbs in -ise or -ize. In the great majority of these verbs the termination is Greek in origin and in these the z is etymologically correct, but we have a fairly large group in which the s is compulsory, including, for example, chastise, promise, surprise. In the main body we have a typical conflict between the proprieties and the conveniences. We have followed French example in substituting s for z in many cases, and certain weighty authorities stick to the z, including several standard dictionaries, the Times and the two old universities. In spite Qf the example set by these august printers, tho tendency is now to use the 8 and nobody can bo blamed for doing this. Printers, as a body, have almost unlimited power in such cases, and it seems to me most probable that in tho long run s will win. Nevertheless, a very strong case can be made out for z. Both tradition and etymological science are on his side, and there is a further consideration which I have never seen mentioned. The fact is that z, skulking in his lair at the dark end of our alphabet, does not pull his weight, and we have made him a loafer, a mere understudy, called in now and again for some trifling job while his colleague s has to do all the hard work, standing as he does for four different sounds: s, z, sh (in "sure") and zh (in " measure "). 1 suppose New Zealanders especially notice the comparative rarity of z, as I do, because, as we glance at the printed page, this striking personality leaps out at us and we think, " New Zealand?" and are disappointed to find only " Zoo " or " Zanzibar." Now here was a chance to make this lazy fellow " justify his inclusion " and we are letting it slip.

Go to the esß, thou sluptgnrd, Consider lier ways and be wise, Give a hand with her burden, thou laggard, And at least try to take over -ize 1 Inexcusable

" May " for " might." A correspondent avers that " may " is sometimes used for " might," especially in the " sporting press," as, for example, a horse " may " have won a certain race but for some accident. I confess that I have never seen or heard of such an abuse; if it really happens, which I find it hard to believe, it is, of course, inexcusable. Tho same correspondent lias actually received a letter in which " could of been " is written, by a " well "-educated young man, too, for " could have." In speech there is little if any difference between "have," if thus unstressed, and "of"; when the " of," replacing " have," is sounded with the o, the effeqt is dreadful; it appears to bq very common in America. But when the " of " is written —well, words fail me! Yet I do not think it would be fair to blame the schools.

The same inquirer asks for a comment on the spellings " gases" and " buses," instead of the more logical " gasses" and busses." Of course, if we are to be • consistent, we should double the s in these plurals. As Fowler observes, " buses " would not have been established had it not stood for " omnibuses," for we are not obliged to double the s when the final syllable is unstressed. For " gases " there is no excuse. It seems tb be a kind of instinctive and belated protest against the " doubling '' device rather than an effect of laziness, and it is made still more conspicuously absurd by our use of the verbal forms " gassed," " gassing " and " bussing." The device is really illogical and rather ridiculous, but it grew up naturally, long ago, as a result of certain sound-laws which 1 have not space to deal with here. A Belated Complaint " To set eyes on." A correspondent asks what I have to' say of this idiom, which he regards as " objectionable, inelegant " and " very crude and clumsy," and he complains that " most novelists use it now." My correspondent is a little late in the day with his complaint, for the idiom is approximately six hundred years old, being recorded fifty years before Chaucer, who also used it. It is quite natural, if a little colloquial. J suppose most of us have these instinctive and often unreasonable dislikes of certain words, phrases and pronunciations. As Shylock says, " Some men there are love not a gaping pig, some that are mad if they behold a cat," and goes on to say that " there is no firm reason to be rendered why ho cannot abide a gaping pig, and he a harmless necessary cat.'" And certainly I can render no firm reason why anyone should object to "set eyes on him" ; objection not sustained.

" Different from, or to." The objection to " different to," according to Fowler, is a mere piece of pedantry. The usage is very old and occurs in excellent writers. I heartily agree. " Compare with, or to." This depends on the exact sense in which " compare " is used. If it is " to suggest or state a similarity " we use, "to " after it; if it is "to examine a supposed similarity, and set out its details, etc.," we use " with." Thus " to compare Jane Austen to Shakespeare " is to suggest a certain similarity between the two artists; "to compare Jane Austen with Shakespeare " is to examine, explain, or illustrate this similarity. " Intrigued '* "To intrigue." The good hater dislikes this, too, but it cannot be condemned offhand. Like " to function," dealt with in a previous note, it represents a good French verb, "intriguer," to puzzle. It can "justify its inclusion," and if we do not like it wo shall not use it, and when others use it wo must bear it as best we may. " Against you have allowed for this. . ." A correspondent asks for a ruling on this idiom. In its proper place it is, I think, unimpeachable. It is old-fashioned and not recorded in print for a long time, but it is in Shakespeare. " against that season comes," and is a legitimate extension of the use of " against " in " against my arrival," " against a rainy day," etc. "Orientate." lam asked to explain the exact meaning of this word and " orientation.' 1 This verb, which is also used in tho form " orient," originally means " to place (a building) so as to face east," and in its figurative use, to which my correspondent refers, " to bring into clearly understood relations," " determine how one stands," " find one's hearings." It corresponds exactly to the French verb "s'orienter."' Personally I prefer the older " orient" to the more pretentious " orientate.'' " Sanctions." An explanation of this term is asked for, as its use in international politics seems so different from tho moro familiar meanings, " sanctioned by tho Church," etc. It is originally a legal term, meaning "law" or "decree"; then "penalty or reward for disobedience or obedience to a law"; and in ethics, " consideration operating to enforce obedience to any rule of conduct." These are sufficient to explain the term as used in the proceedings of the League of Nations. I need only add that the Latin word '' sanctio" means "an establishing or decreeing as inviolable under penalty of a curse," and that this " sanctification " is much older than Christianity.,