FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   606   607   608   609   610   611   612   613   614   615   616   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   629   630  
631   632   633   634   635   636   637   638   639   640   641   642   643   644   645   646   647   648   649   650   651   652   653   654   655   >>   >|  
ufficient reason. _Ill_ as an adverb was at first a vulgarism, precisely like the rustic's when he says, 'I was treated _bad_.' May not the reason of this exceptional form be looked for in that tendency to dodge what is hard to pronounce, to which I have already alluded? If the letters were distinctly uttered, as they should be, it would take too much time to say _ill-ly_, _well-ly_, and it is to be observed that we have avoided _smally_[26] and _tally_ in the same way, though we add _ish_ to them without hesitation in _smallish_ and _tallish_. We have, to be sure, _dully_ and _fully_, but for the one we prefer _stupidly_, and the other (though this may have come from eliding the _y_ before _a_s) is giving way to _full_. The uneducated, whose utterance is slower, still make adverbs when they will by adding _like_ to all manner of adjectives. We have had _big_ charged upon us, because we use it where an Englishman would now use _great_. I fully admit that it were better to distinguish between them, allowing to _big_ a certain contemptuous quality; but as for authority, I want none better than that of Jeremy Taylor, who, in his noble sermon 'On the Return of Prayer,' speaks of 'Jesus, whose spirit was meek and gentle up to the greatness of the _biggest_ example.' As for our double negative, I shall waste no time in quoting instances of it, because it was once as universal in English as it still is in the neo-Latin languages, where it does not strike us as vulgar. I am not sure that the loss of it is not to be regretted. But surely I shall admit the vulgarity of slurring or altogether eliding certain terminal consonants? I admit that a clear and sharp-cut enunciation is one of the crowning charms and elegances of speech. Words so uttered are like coins fresh from the mint, compared with the worn and dingy drudges of long service,--I do not mean American coins, for those look less badly the more they lose of their original ugliness. No one is more painfully conscious than I of the contrast between the rifle-crack of an Englishman's _yes_ and _no_, and the wet-fuse drawl of the same monosyllables in the mouths of my countrymen. But I do not find the dropping of final consonants disagreeable in Allan Ramsay or Burns, nor do I believe that our literary ancestors were sensible of that inelegance in the fusing them together of which we are conscious. How many educated men pronounce the _t_ in _chestnut_? how many say _pentise_ fo
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   606   607   608   609   610   611   612   613   614   615   616   617   618   619   620   621   622   623   624   625   626   627   628   629   630  
631   632   633   634   635   636   637   638   639   640   641   642   643   644   645   646   647   648   649   650   651   652   653   654   655   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

eliding

 
consonants
 

conscious

 

Englishman

 
uttered
 

pronounce

 
reason
 

speech

 

crowning

 

charms


elegances

 

compared

 

service

 

adverb

 

drudges

 

enunciation

 

strike

 
vulgar
 

languages

 

universal


English
 

regretted

 
terminal
 
vulgarism
 

American

 

altogether

 

precisely

 

rustic

 
surely
 

vulgarity


slurring

 
literary
 

ancestors

 

disagreeable

 

Ramsay

 

inelegance

 

fusing

 

chestnut

 

pentise

 

ufficient


educated

 

dropping

 

original

 

ugliness

 

painfully

 
instances
 

contrast

 
monosyllables
 

mouths

 

countrymen