OUR MOTHER TONGUE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 22961, 12 February 1938, Page 4 (Supplement)

OUR MOTHER TONGUE

Random Notes and Little Problems

By PROFESSOR ARNOLD WALL

I AM asked to "give my verdict" on the grammatical use of "shall" and "will." Obviously this would be impossible in the space at my command, but I may at any rate answer the specific question which my correspondent asks: Why the words "I will" are used in the marriage service instead of "I shall."

According to the simple old rule "shall" in the first person represents the future event simply as a future event, but "will" is used in the first person when the speaker wishes to represent the future event as determined by his own present will. In other words "I shall" usually means "I am going to," but "I will ' means "I am determined" or "I am willing to." If, then, the bride should answer the important question in the words "I shall," she would not imply any more than she does when she says "I shall go to town to-day." Something more than that is required of her at that solemn moment. "To Make It Go" Another correspondent asks whether it is permissible to omit . "to" after the verb "to enable" as in "to enable you effect" for "enable you to effect." Certainly not; such a Construction is not idiomatic English. After the verb "to help" the omission is very common, especially iii American, and may be seen in English writers of repute, yet it is unauthorised. After the verb "to make," as am "to make it go," "to" is, however, normally omitted, and its inclusion is archaic. But "enable" cannot be used in this way. "Assume," "interlude," etc. The pronunciation of the words of this large group, in which a long u of French or Latin origin is preceded by s or 1, has already been discussed in these notes, but 1 return to them at the request of a correspondent who would like to knoAV "how far the substitution of oo for ew has gone in this country." This observer thinks that 90 per cent of us say oo in these words, and 1 should agree that it is so. It may be observed that languages, while continually changing, do not change as a whole, but, as a plant is seen to grow only at certaiu points, so at any given period it will be found that only certain sounds, or groups of Bounds, tend to change.

In our time the group under discussion is in this state, as is well illustrated by the divergence of opinion among the expert authorities concerning them. In all of them the ew sound is traditional, and we find little tendency to use the oo in the eighteenth century, though those beginning with d and t, such as "duke" and "tune," were vulgarly pronounced with the oo as they now are by Americans. Now we find that the u in "absolute," for example, is oo according to Fowler, both oo and ew in the Oxford Dictionary, oo a-s recorded by Daniel Jones in the educated speech, and oo" (by inference) according to the 8.8.C., which recommends "rezolooshon," not "rezzolewshon."

The fact becomes apparent that, as my friend observes, the majority of speakers, both here and at home, are discarding the traditional ew and using 00. What should the plain man do under these circumstances? If he says oo he may be corrected by the knowalls and the reciters, and if he says ew he runs the risk of seeming "superior" and wanting to put others right.' "With The Angels"

In my opinion the wisest thing to do is to go with the majority, deciding in your mind that the change will inevitably come and that it is best to recognise it, as the above-mentioned authorities have clone. It is, of course, very nice to feel that you are on the side of the angels, but if you choose the other side anci are taken to task you can put up a very good defence by giving the verdict of those experts. I may add that in many words of the group the choice is not merely between oo and ew. "Assume,'' for instance, is "assewm," "nssboni," "ashewn," and "ashoom," of which series the first is undoubtedly "the best" and is recommended by all authorities. This last fact shows that the victory of oo is far less striking after s than after 1, and that in the s group ew may ultimately prevail. Basil. One who bears this christian name, tells me that his parents and relatives all call him "Bassel," but his friends and acquaintances sn.v "BaziT' or "Baz." This is odd, because the only correct pronounciation is that with the z, which is the normal sound of s in that position. This is shown by the pronunciation of such words as "rising," "Basingstoke," etc., though there are, of course, exceptions such as "basin."