Our first task in this volume was the study of words in combination. Our
second was the study of individual words in two of their aspects--first,
as they are seen in isolation, next as they are seen in verbal families.
Now our third task confronts us. It is the study of words as they are
associated, not in actual blood kinship, but in meaning.
Such an association in meaning may involve only two words (pairs) or
larger groups. In this chapter we shall confine ourselves to the study of
pairs.
Of the relationship between pairs there are three types. In the first the
words are hostile to each other. In the second they may easily be confused
with each other. In the third they are parallel with each other. We shall
examine the three types successively.
But we must make an explanation first. Although we shall, in this and the
following chapters, have frequent occasion to give the meanings of
individual words, we shall give them without regard to dictionary methods.
We shall not attempt formal, water-tight, or exhaustive definitions; our
purpose is to convey, in the simplest and most human manner possible,
brief general explanations of what the words stand for.
<Opposites>
Pairs of the first type are made up of words by nature opposite to each
other, or else thought of as opposite because they are so often
contrasted. Here is a familiar, everyday list:
east, west straight, crooked myself, others
large, small pretty, ugly major, minor
laugh, cry walk, ride light, darkness
top, bottom hard, soft friend, enemy
sweet, sour clean, dirty temporal, spiritual
meat, drink merry, sad means, extremes
land, water private, public Jew, Gentile
man, woman noisy, quiet independent, dependent
old, new general, particular sublime, ridiculous
age, youth wholesale, retail give, receive
sick, well savage, civilized pride, humility
brain, brawn wealth, poverty constructive, destructive
soul, body positive, negative
None of these words needs explaining. If you think of one of them, you
will think of its opposite; at least its opposite will be lurking in the
back of your mind. As proof of this fact you have only to glance at the
following list, from which the second member of each pair is omitted:
hot -- black -- boy -- in --
off -- over -- love -- wrong --
strong -- wet -- first -- day --
long -- fast -- good -- hope --
least -- asleep -- buy -- left --
alive -- winter -- war -- succeed --
creditor -- fat -- internal -- wise --
drunk --
Many words of a more difficult kind are thus pitted against each other,
and we learn them, not singly, but in pairs. At least we should. As good
verbal hunters we should be alert to the chance of killing two birds with
one stone.
_Allopath_ and _homeopath_, for example, are difficult
opposites. We know of the existence of the two classes of medical
practitioners; we know that they use different methods; but beyond this
our knowledge is likely to be hazy. Let us set out, then, to _learn_
the two words. The best way is to learn them together. _Allopathy_
means other suffering, _homeopathy_ like suffering. An allopath uses
remedies which create within the patient a condition that squarely
conflicts with the further progress of the disease. A homeopath prescribes
medicines (in small doses) which produce within the patient the same
condition that the disease would produce; he "beats the disease to it," so
to speak--takes the job himself and leaves the disease nothing to do. The
allopath travels around a race-track in the opposite direction from the
disease, and thwarts it through a head-on collision. The homeopath travels
around the race-track in the same direction as the disease, and thwarts it
by pulling at the reins. If we consider the two words together and get
these ideas in mind, we shall have no further trouble with allopaths and
homeopaths--except, perhaps, when they have rendered their services and
presented their bills.
_Objective_ and _subjective_ are also a troublesome pair. A
thing is objective if it is an actual object or being, if it exists in
itself rather than in our surmises. A thing is subjective if it is the
creature of a state of mind, if it has its existence in the thought or
imagination of some person or other. Thus if I meet a bear in the wilds,
that bear is objective; whatever may be the state of my thoughts, _he is
there_--and it would be to my advantage to reckon with this fact. But
if a child who is sent off to bed alone says there is a bear in the room,
the bear is subjective; it is not a living monster that will devour
anybody, but a creature called into the mind of the child through dread.