Misused Words.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXIV, Issue 849, 24 August 1933, Page 8

Misused Words.

'JMIAT scholarly diarist, John Evelyn, writing in 1665 to the chairman of a committee appointed by the newly organised Royal Society to consider the improvement of the English tongue, said: — “ I conceive the reason both of additions to and the corruption of the English language, as of most other tongues, has proceeded from the same causes; namely, from victories, plantations, frontiers, staples of commerce, pedantry of schools, affectation of travellers, translations, fancy and style of Court; vernility and mincing of citizens, pulpits, political remonstrances, theatres, shops, etc.” In addition to a “ grammar for the precepts ” he suggested “ leaving out superfluous letters, etc., such as ‘o’ in ‘ woomen,’ ‘people’; ‘u’ in ‘honour’; ‘a’ in ‘ reproach ’; ' ugh ’ in ‘ though.’ etc.” “ And since there is likewise,” he added, “ a manifest rotation and circling of words which go in and out like the mode and fashion, books should be consulted for the reduction of some of the old laid aside words and expressions, had formerly in deliciis; for our language is in some cases sterile and barren by reason of this depopulation, as I may call it; and therefore such places should be new cultivated and enriched either with the former (if significant) or some other. For example we have hardly any words that do so fully express the French clinquant, naivete, ennui, bizarre, consort, faconier, chicaneries, consomme, emotion, defer, effort, chocq, entours, debouche; or the Italian vaghezze, garbato, svelto. etc. Let us therefore (as the Romans did the Greek) make as many of these do homage as are like to prove good citizens.” TOUCHSTONE.