_Guessing and Reckoning_. Right merry have the people of England made
themselves at the expense of us their younger brethren of this side of
the Atlantic, for the manner in which we are wont to use the verbs, to
guess and to reckon. But they have unjustly chided us therefor, since
it would not be difficult to find in many of the British Classics of
more than a century's standing, instances of the use of these words
precisely in the American manner. In the perusal of Locke's Essay on
Education a short time since, I noticed the word guess made use of
three times in _our_ way. In section 28 he says, "Once in four and
twenty hours is enough, and no body, _I guess_, will think it too
much;" again, in section 167, "But yet, _I guess_, this is not to be
done with children whilst very young, nor at their entrance upon any
sort of knowledge;" and again, in section 174, "And he whose design it
is to excel in English poetry, would not, _I guess_, think the way to
it was to make his first essay in Latin verses."
Was John Locke a Yankee? Or have the people of the United States
preserved one of the meanings of the verb _to guess_ which has become
obsolete in England?
In several passages of the English version of the New Testament the
word _reckon_ is used as the people in many parts of the United States
are in the habit of using it. In the Epistle to the Romans, chapter 8,
verse 18, is an instance, "For _I reckon_ that the sufferings of this
present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall
be revealed to us."
"_Take and tell_." "If you do so I will _take and tell_ father," such
is the constant language of children. What will they take? Is the
expression a contraction of some obsolete phrase? Who can tell me if
it is to be met with in print?
_Had have_. I have for some time noticed this corruption in
conversation. It has lately crept into print. Here are instances of
it, "Had I have gone, I should not have met her," "If I had have been
at the sale I would not have bought it at that price." I have a
suspicion that a rapid pronunciation of "would have," "should have,"
and "could have," has given rise to this. "I'd have gone," "I'd have
come," and similar phrases have probably introduced it, the
contraction answering as well for _had_ as _would_, _could_, and
_should_. It is very awkward and incorrect.
_Fully equal_. This is a tautologous expression in constant use. "This
work is _fully equal_ to its predecessor." The writer means to say
that the last work is equal to the first; but what is the use of the
_fully_, unless there can be an equality which is _not full_ and
perfect?
_Eventuate_. The editor of Coleridge's Table Talk, very justly
denounces this Americanism. He says it is to be met with in Washington
Irving's Tour to the Prairies. If so, so much the worse for the book.
It is a barbarism, "I pray you avoid it." We do not need the word, so
that it cannot be sneaked in, under the plea of necessity. The English
verb, _to result_, means all, I presume, that the fathers of
_eventuate_ design that it shall mean. If we may coin _eventuate_ from
event, why not _processiate_ from process, _contemptiate_ from
contempt, _excessiate_ from excess, and a hundred more, all as useful
and elegant as _eventuate_?
_Directly_. Many of the English writers of the present day, use this
word in a manner inelegant and unsanctioned, I am convinced, by any
standard author. They appear to think that it has the same meaning as
the phrase "as soon as." For instance: "The troops were dismissed
_directly_ the general had reviewed them." "The House of Lords
adjourned _directly_ this important bill had passed." I am happy to
find that the writers in this country have not fallen into it.
_Mutual_. When persons speak of an individual's being _a mutual
friend_ of two others, who perhaps may not know each other, they
attach a meaning to the word mutual which does not belong to it. A and
B may be mutual friends, but how C can be the mutual friend of A and B
it is difficult to comprehend. Where is the mutuality in this case? We
should say, C is the _common_ friend of A and B. Several of the
associations for interment which have lately been instituted, have
seized upon the word _mutual_ and used it very absurdly. They style
themselves "Mutual Burial Societies." How can two individuals _bury
each other_? and yet this is implied by the term "_mutual_."
Is not the familiar phrase, "now-a-days," a corruption of "in our
days?"
"_If I am not mistaken_." This is evidently wrong. If what I say to
another is misunderstood, I am _mistaken_, but if I misunderstand what
is said to me, I am _mistaking_, and so we should speak and write.
_Degrees of perfection_. "The army," says president Monroe, in one of
his messages, "has arrived at _a high degree of perfection_." There
can be no degrees of perfection. Any thing which is _perfect_ cannot
become _more_ {389} _perfect_, and any thing which falls short of
perfection is in _a degree of imperfection_.
"_Is being built_." This form of expression has met with many and
zealous advocates. It is an error almost exclusively confined to
print. In conversation we would say, "the house is _getting_ built,"
and no one would be in doubt as to our meaning. _Being built_ is the
past or perfect participle, which according to Lindley Murray,
signifies action perfected or finished. How then can prefixing the
word _is_ or _are_, words in the present tense, before it, convert
this meaning into another signifying the continuation of the building
at this moment? We say, "the house _being built_ the family moved in,"
and imply absolute completion by the phrase _being built_, as people
are not in the habit of moving into unfinished houses. To say that the
house is being built, is no more than saying that the house is built,
and by this we understand that the building is completely finished,
not that the work is still going on.
I do not know that any of Shakspeare's hundred and one commentators
has noticed the pun in Hamlet's address to his father's ghost, "Thou
comest to me in such a _questionable_ shape, that I will _speak_ to
thee." Perhaps the great bard meant to exhibit the coolness of his
hero by placing a jest in his mouth. Hamlet immediately after proceeds
to _question_ the spirit.
_Editorial_.