THE QUEEN'S ENGLISH.

Southland Times, Issue 2019, 18 November 1874, Page 2

THE QUEEN'S ENGLISH.

(TO THE EDITOR 01 THE T1M83.) Sib, — I observe that a correspondent signing himself Scrutator takes part in the discussion as to the correctness or otherwise of the phrase " Observe Silence," and also as to the grammatical propriety of the " Rules of the Grammar School j" and I propose to analyse his arguments on each subject. I pass over Scrutator's allusions to my " insolence," my " arrogance," my " pretensions," my "lion's skin and ass's ears, " my " thrusting myself on the notice of the public," and other refinements of controversy, as being flowers of diction which a cort tin clas* of minds are apt to substitute for argument, but which ac in reality simply irrelevant, and calculate i to hide from view the real question at issue. I overlook them, for we know " when arguments are weak, the language must be strong." Having carefully read Scrutator's letter, I frid some difficulty in arriving at his own view 3on the first question at issue, viz. — " The Rules of the G-rammar School, is thoir composition creditable or otherwise ?" Scrutator's arguments (!) on this subject may be summed up as follow :— "1. Philologo3 pointed out errors in the ' Rules' ; " 2. But Philologos commits errors himself ; ergo, the Rules must be correct." Surely a more i logical proposition can hardly bo imagine 1. If a tradesman makes me a chest of drawers, and do the work in a alovenlv manner, would it be a sensible repljj if in answer to m? complaint. h» told me that I was not a good carpenter myself. The fallacy of such a line of argument was aptly shown by Dr Johnson's parody on the lino " Who rules o'er freemen should himself bo free," to which he rejoined, " Who drives fat oxen must himself be fat." This is simply the gist of the greater part of Scrutator's letter. Then he tells us " The ' Rules' emanated from an institution that has turned out" good scholars. Doei Scrutat or mean by this that the defective grammatical construction of these rules contributed to the good scholarship of the pupils ? May I not rather infer that they attained their proficiency in spite of the great drawback of having censtantly before their eyas such a Tery bad example. Scrutator admits that the rules " are not by any means faultless," but as they were used at a school which turned out good scholars, we are to presume that any other school using the same rules will also turn out good scholar*. I submit that if Scrutator's remarks mean anything at all, they mean simply that. As this exhausts his arguments on the " Grammar School Rules" question, I now turn to the other subject, the phrase " observe silence," which I support as being appropriately used, exception having been previously taken to it in a local paper. Scrutator says that I " establish the point," so I infer that he and I are of the same opinion in this matter; but he adds that it '• stood in little need of such erudita confirmation." In my former letter I intimated that nothing less than the high classical attainments of the gentleman who mooted the question induced me to defend the phrase against his onslaught. Had Scrutator signed Dr M'Clure'a letter I would have passed it by in silence, as it would not have the victories of a known scholar to give it weight and increase its power for go3d or evil. "Sour correspondent informs us that "Smith's Classical Dictionary" contains all the quotations I used to explain the meaning of the verb "observare." I have not seen this work for some years, but I think Scrutator is mistaken. My recollection of the book is that it is a compendium of the manners and customs of the Greeks and "Romans, and does not treat of philological distinctions. It J9 possible Scrutator meant " Smith's Latin-English Dictionary," which I have not got, but which, if a good one, should certainly contain these or parallel passages ; for without quoting the usage of recognised authors^ it is impossible to accurately define the varied meanings of any word. For my own part, I use Beard's Dictionary, and in that, as in any other good one, these quotations may be found. But how does this affect the question ? I quote certain authors to show that " observe si'.ence" is a correct phrase. Sorutator says, " Oh, but you got that from a dictionary •'* Does he mean to imply that my argument is unsound if I obtained it from a dictionary ? Surely his logic is again at fault. Towards the conclusion of his letter Scrutator alludes to a quotation I used, and mistranslates it. He says I likenad myself to an eagle who could find no nobler game than flies. This happeus to bo r,he very reverse of what I did say, and I am surprised so simple a Latin sentence should have puzzled him so much. I expressed very clearly that I had found nobler game, and that had I not done so, I would have been silent, foe " The eagle does not prey upon flies." In conclusion. It me tell Scrutator that his letter is a retort rather than a reply, and that it is but a weak one, I hope by this time he is convinced. The benefit of the discussions to which newspaper columns are always so courteously and freely open, is not in any way advanced by flippant retort, but by solid argument much good may bj done. As to Scrutator's criticism of the composition of my letter, it would never do to notice it ; for if I retorted upoa him, and criticised his composition, and he retdlated and criticised the composition of my retort, and so on, the original matter of discussion would be lost sight of altogether. 1 am not in re3cipt of a salary for teaohing grammar to the youth of Invercargitl, nor in any way amenable t» criticism. So whether my orthography is defective, or my ayntas is weak, has nothing to do with the subject-mitter of my letters. Whatever arguments I have brought forward I have supported by reference to authorities far higher than Scrutator's, or those of Scrutator's and your own obedient servant, PJKLOLO&OS.