H.W. Fowler (1858¨C1933). The
King¡¯s English, 2nd ed. 1908.
Chapter I. Vocabulary
FALSE, UGLY, OR NEEDLESS
- AS a natural link between this
section and the last, the practice of taking French words and
spelling them as English may stand first. With French words that
fill a definite blank in English, the time comes when that should be
done if it can. With some words it cannot; no one has yet seen his
way to giving ennui an English look. With dishabille,
on the other hand, which appears in the dictionary with spellings to
suit all tastes, 1
many attempts have been made. This word, however, well illustrates
the importance of one principle that should be observed in borrowing
from French. Unless the need is a very crying one, no word should be
taken that offers serious difficulties of pronunciation. In d¨¦shabill¨¦
are at least two problems (h, and ll) of which an
Englishman fights shy. The consequence is that, though its English
history dates back some centuries, it is very seldom heard in
conversation; no word not used in conversation becomes a true
native; and dishabille is therefore being gradually ousted by
n¨¦glig¨¦, which can be pronounced without fear. As dishabille
is really quite cut off from d¨¦shabill¨¦, it is a pity it
was not further deprived of its final -e; that would have
encouraged us to call it dish-abil, and it might have made
good its footing.
Naïvet¨¦ is another word for which there is a clear use;
and though the Englishman can pronounce it without difficulty if he
chooses, he generally does prefer doing without it altogether to
attempting a precision that strikes him as either undignified or
pretentious. It is therefore to be wished that it might be
disencumbered of its diaeresis, its accent, and its italics. It is
true that the first sight of naivety is an unpleasant shock; but we
ought to be glad that the thing has begun to be done, and in
speaking sacrifice our pride of knowledge and call it navity.
The case of banality is very different. In one sense it has a
stronger claim than naivety, its adjective banal being
much older in English than naïve; but the old use of banal
is as a legal term connected with feudalism. That use is dead, and
its second life is an independent one; it is now a mere borrowing
from French. Whether we are to accept it or not should be decided by
whether we want it; and with common, commonplace, trite, trivial,
mean, vulgar, all provided with nouns, which again can be eked
out with truism and platitude, a shift can surely be
made without it. It is one of those foreign feathers, like intimism,
intimity, femininity, distinction and distinguished (the
last pair now banalities if anything was ever banal; so do extremes
meet), in which writers of literary criticism love to parade, and
which ordinary persons should do their best to pluck from them,
protesting when there is a chance, and at all times refusing the
compliment of imitation. But perhaps the word that the critics would
most of all delight their readers by forgetting is meticulous.
Before adding an example or two, we draw attention to the danger of
accidentally assimilating a good English word to a French one. Amende
is good French; amends is good English; but amend
(noun) is neither:
Triviality and over-childishness and naivety.¡ªH. Sweet.
Agrippa himself was primarily a paradox-monger. Many of his
successors were in dead earnest, and their repetition of his
ingenuities becomes banal in the extreme. Bercher himself
can by no means be acquitted of this charge of banality.¡ªTimes.
It is significant that the only authorities for banality in
the Oxford Dictionary are Sala, Saintsbury, Dowden, and
Browning; but the volume is dated 1888; and though the word is still
used in the same overpowering proportion by literary critics as
opposed to other writers, its total use has multiplied a hundredfold
since then. Our hope is that the critics may before long feel that
it is as banal to talk about banality as it is now felt by most
wellbred people to be vulgar to talk about vulgarity.
His style, which is pleasant and diffuse without being distinguished,
is more suited to the farm and the simple country life than to the
complexities of the human character.¡ªTimes.
His character and that of his wife are sketched with a certain distinction.¡ªTimes.
And set to look back over the whole is to feel that in one case
only has she really achieved that perfection of intimism
which is her proper goal.¡ªTimes.
The reference to the English nonconformists was a graceful amend
to them for being so passionate an Oxonian and
And in her presentation of the mode of life of the respectable
middle classes, the most meticulous critic will not easily
catch her tripping.¡ªTimes.
- Formations involving grammatical blunders. Of these the
possibilities are of course infinite; we must assume that our
readers know the ordinary rules of grammar, and merely, not to pass
over the point altogether, give one or two typical and not too trite
My landlady entered bearing what she called 'her best lamp' alit.¡ªCorelli.
This seems to be formed as a past participle from to alight,
in the sense of to kindle. It will surprise most people to learn
that there is, or was, such a verb; not only was there, but the form
that should have been used in our sentence, alight, is
probably by origin the participle of it. The Oxford Dictionary,
however, after saying this, observes that it has now been
assimilated to words like afire, formed from the preposition a-
and a noun. Whether those two facts are true or not, it is quite
certain that there is no such word as alit in the sense of
lighted or lit, and that the use of it in our days is a grammatical blunder.
But every year pleaded stronger and stronger for the
Earl's conception.¡ªJ. R. Green.
Comparative adverbs of this type must be formed only from those
positive adverbs which do not use -ly, as hard, fast.
We talk of going strong, and we may therefore talk of going
stronger; but outside slang we have to choose between stronglier¡ªpoetical,
exalted, or affected¡ªand more strongly.
The silence that underlaid the even voice of the breakers
along the sea front.¡ªKipling.
Lie and lay have cost us all some perplexity in
childhood. The distinction is more difficult in the compounds with over
and under, because in them -lie is transitive as well
as -lay, but in a different sense. Any one who is not sure
that he is sound on the point by instinct must take the trouble to
resolve them into lie over or lay over, &c., which
at once clears up the doubt. A mistake with the simple verb is
surprising when made, as in the following, by a writer on grammar:
I met a lad who took a paper from a package that he carried and
thrust it into my unwilling hand. I suspected him of having laid
in wait for the purpose.¡ªR. G. White.
A confusion, perhaps, between lay wait and lie in wait.
I am not sure that yours and my efforts would suffice
separately; but yours and mine together cannot possibly fail.
The first yours is quite wrong; it should be your.
This mistake is common. The absolute possessives, ours and yours,
hers, mine and thine, (with which the poetic or
euphonic use of the last two before vowels has nothing to do) are to
be used only as pronouns or as predicative adjectives, not as
attributes to an expressed and following noun. That they were used
by old writers as in our example is irrelevant. The correct modern
usage has now established itself. We add three sentences from Burke.
The relation between no and none is the same as that
between your and yours. In the first sentence, modern
usage would write (as the correct no or but a few is
uncomfortable) either few or no, or few if any, or no
rays or but a few. For the second we might possibly tolerate to
their as well as to your own; or we might write to their
crown as well as to your own. The third is quite tolerable as it
is; but any one who does not like the sound can write and their
ancestors and ours. It must always be remembered in this as in
other constructions, that the choice is not between a well-sounding
blunder and an ill-sounding correctness, but between an ill and a
well sounding correctness. The blunder should be ruled out, and if
the first form of the correct construction that presents itself does
not sound well, another way of putting it must be looked for;
patience will always find it. The flexibility gained by habitual
selection of this kind, which a little cultivation will make easy
and instinctive, is one of the most essential elements in a good
style. For a more important illustration of the same principle, the
remarks on the gerund in the Syntax chapter (p. 120) may be referred
Black bodies, reflecting none or but a few rays¡ªBurke.
You altered the succession to theirs, as well as to your
They and we, and their and our ancestors, have been happy
under that system.¡ªBurke.
- Formations violating analogy.
And then it is its panache, its careless a-moral
But she is perfectly natural, and while perfectly amoral,
no more immoral than a bird or a kitten.¡ªTimes.
A- (not) is Greek; moral is Latin. It is at least
desirable that in making new words the two languages should not be
mixed. The intricate needs of science may perhaps be allowed to
override a literary principle of this sort; and accordingly the Oxford
Dictionary recognizes that a- is compounded with Latin
words in scientific and technical terms, as a-sexual; but
purely literary workers may be expected to abstain. The obvious
excuse for this formation is that the Latin negative prefix is
already taken up in immoral, which means contrary to
morality, while a word is wanted to mean unconcerned with morality.
But with non freely prefixed to adjectives in English (though
not in Latin), there can be no objection to non-moral. The
second of our instances is a few weeks later than the first, and the
hyphen has disappeared; so quickly has The Times convinced
itself that amoral is a regular English word.
There was no social or economic jealousy between them, no racial
Concessions which, besides damaging Hungary by raising racial
and language questions of all kinds, would...¡ªTimes.
The action of foreign countries as to their coastal
Her riverine trade.¡ªWestminster Gazette.
It has been already stated that -al is mainly confined to
unmistakable Latin stems. There is whimsical; and there may
be others that break the rule, though the Oxford Dictionary (-al
suffix, -ical suffix, -ial suffix) gives no exceptions. The ugly
words racial and coastal themselves might well be
avoided except in the rare cases where race and coast
used adjectivally will not do the work (they would in the present
instances); and they should not be made precedents for new
formations. If language is better than linguistic,
much more race than racial; similarly, river
What she was pleased to term their superior intelligence, and more
real and reliable probity.¡ªC. Brontë (Villette,
It is absurd at this time of day to make a fuss about the word. It
is with us and will remain with us, whatever pedants and purists may
say. In such cases obsta principiis is the only hope; reliable
might once have been suppressed, perhaps; it cannot now. But it is
so fought over, even to-day, that a short discussion of it may be
looked for. The objection to it is obvious: you do not rely a thing;
therefore the thing cannot be reliable; it should be rely-on-able
(like come-at-able). Some of the analogies pleaded for it are
perhaps irrelevant¡ªas laughable, available. For these may
be formed from the nouns laugh, avail, since -able is
not only gerundival (capable of being laughed at), but also
adjectival (connected with a laugh); this has certainly happened
with seasonable; but that will not help reliable,
which by analogy should be relianceable. It is more to the
point to remark that with reliable must go dispensable
(with indispensable) and dependable, both quite old
words, and disposable (in its commoner sense); no one, as far
as we know, objects to these and others like them; reliable
is made into a scapegoat. The word itself, moreover, besides its
wide popularity, is now of respectable antiquity, dating at least
from Coleridge. It may be added that it is probably to the campaign
against it that we owe such passive monstrosities as 'ready to be
availed of' for available, which is, as we said, possibly not
open to the same objection as reliable.
I have heretofore designated the misuse of certain words as Briticisms.¡ªR.
Britannic, Britannicism; British, Britishism. Britic?
- Needless, though correct formations.
The sordor and filths of nature, the sun shall dry
As candeo candor, ardeo ardor, so¡ªwe are to understand¡ªsordeo
sordor. The Romans, however, never felt that they needed the
word; and it is a roundabout method first to present them with a new
word and then to borrow it from them; for it will be observed that
we have no living suffix -or in English, nor, if we had,
anything nearer than sordid to attach it to. Perhaps Emerson
thought sordor was a Latin word.
Merely nodding his head as an enjoinder to be
As rejoin rejoinder, so enjoin enjoinder. The word is
not given in the Oxford Dictionary, from which it seems
likely that Dickens invented it, consciously or unconsciously. The
only objection to such a word is that its having had to wait so
long, in spite of its obviousness, before being made is a strong
argument against the necessity of it. We may regret that injunction
holds the field, having a much less English appearance; but it does;
and in language the old-established that can still do the work is
not to be turned out for the new-fangled that might do it a shade
better, but must first get itself known and accepted.
Oppositely, the badness of a walk that is shuffling, and an
utterance that is indistinct is alleged.¡ªSpencer.
This, on the other hand, is an archaism, now obsolete. Why it should
not have lived is a mystery; but it has not; and to write it is to
give one's sentence the air of an old curiosity shop.
Again, as if to intensate the influences that are not of
race, what we think of when we talk of English traits really
narrows itself to a small district.¡ªEmerson.
A favourite with those allied experimenters in words, Emerson and
Carlyle. A word meaning to make intense is necessary; and
there are plenty of parallels for this particular form. But
Coleridge had already made intensify, introducing it with an
elaborate apology in which he confessed that it sounded uncouth. It
is uncouth no longer; if it had never existed, perhaps intensate
would now have been so no longer, uncouthness being, both
etymologically and otherwise, a matter of strangeness as against
familiarity. It is better to form words only where there is a clear
demand for them.
- Long and short rivals. The following examples illustrate a
foolish tendency. From the adjective perfect we form the verb
to perfect, and from that again the noun perfection;
to take a further step forward to a verb to perfection
instead of returning to the verb to perfect is a superfluity
of naughtiness. From the noun sense we make the adjective sensible;
it is generally quite needless to go forward to sensibleness
instead of back to our original noun sense. To quieten
is often used by hasty writers who have not time to remember that quiet
is a verb. With ex tempore ready to serve either as adverb or
as adjective, why make extemporaneous or extemporaneously?
As to contumacity, the writer was probably unaware that contumacy
existed. Contumacity might be formed from contumax,
like audacity from audax. The Romans had only the
short forms audacia, contumacia, which should have given us audacy
as well as contumacy; but because our ancestors burdened
themselves with an extra syllable in one we need not therefore do so
in the other.
The inner, religiously moral perfectioning of
She liked the quality of mind which may be broadly called sensibleness.¡ªTimes.
Broadly, or lengthily?
M. Delcass¨¦, speaking extemporaneously but with notes,
And now, Mdlle St. Pierre's affected interference provoked contumacity.¡ªC.
It is often a very easy thing to act prudentially, but
alas! too often only after we have toiled to our prudence through
a forest of delusions.¡ªDe Quincey.
Prudent gives prudence, and prudence prudential;
the latter has its use: prudential considerations are those in which
prudence is allowed to outweigh other motives; they may be prudent
without being prudential, and vice versa. But before using prudentially
we should be quite sure that we mean something different from prudently.
So again partially, which should be reserved as far as
possible for the meaning with partiality, is now commonly
used for partly: 3
The series of administrative reforms planned by the Convention had
been partially carried into effect before the meeting of
Parliament in 1654; but the work was pushed on.¡ªJ. R. Green.
That the gravity of the situation is partially appreciated
by the bureaucracy may be inferred from...¡ªTimes.
Excepting, instead of except, is to be condemned when
there is no need for it. We say not excepting, or not even
excepting, or without excepting; but where the exception
is allowed, not rejected, the short form is the right one, as a
comparison of the following examples will show:
Of all societies ... not even excepting the Roman Republic,
England has been the most emphatically ... political.¡ªMorley.
The Minister was obliged to present the Budget before May each
year, excepting in the event of the Cortes having been
The sojourn of belligerent ships in French waters has never been
limited excepting by certain clearly defined rules.¡ªTimes.
Excepting the English, French, and Austrian journalists
present, no one had been admitted.¡ªTimes.
Innumerable other needless lengthenings might be produced, from
which we choose only preventative for preventive, and to
experimentalize for to experiment.
On the other hand, when usage has differentiated a long and a short
form either of which might originally have served, the distinction
must be kept. Immovable and irremovable judges are
different things; the shorter word has been wrongly chosen in:
By suspending conscription and restoring the immovability
of the Judges.¡ªTimes.
- Merely ugly formations.
The termination -cracy is now so freely applied that it is
too late to complain of this except on the ground of ugliness. It
may be pointed out, however, that the very special ugliness of bureaucracy
is due to the way its mongrel origin is flaunted in our faces by the
telltale syllable -eau-; it is to be hoped that formations
similar in this respect may be avoided.
An ordinary reader, if asked what was the main impression given by
the Short History of the English People, would answer that
it was the impression of picturesqueness and vividity.¡ªBryce.
In sound, there can be no question between vividity with its
fourfold repetition of the same vowel sound, its two dentals to add
to the ugliness of its two v's and the comparatively
We conclude with deprecating the addition of -ly to
participles in -ed. Some people are so alive to the evil
sound of it that they write determinately for determinedly;
that will not do either, because determinate does not mean determined
in the required sense. A periphrasis, or an adjective or Latin
participle with -ly, as resolutely, should be used. Implied
is as good a word as implicit, but impliedly is by no
means so good as implicitly. Several instances are given, for
cumulative effect. Miss Corelli makes a mannerism of this.
Dr. John and his mother were in their finest mood, contending animatedly
with each other the whole way.¡ªC. Brontë.
Where the gate opens, or the gateless path turns aside trustedly.¡ªRuskin.
'That's not a very kind speech,' I said somewhat vexedly.¡ªCorelli.
However, I determinedly smothered all premonitions.¡ªCorelli.
I saw one or two passers-by looking at me so surprisedly
that I came to the conclusion...¡ªCorelli.
I stared bewilderedly up at the stars.¡ªCorelli.
It should be added that to really established adverbs of this form,
as advisedly, assuredly, hurriedly, there is no objection
whatever; but new ones are ugly.
- Note 1
- The Oxford Dictionary has fourteen varieties. [back]
- Note 2
- Alit is due, no doubt, to mere inadvertence or ignorance:
the form litten ('red-litten windows', &c.), for which
the Oxford Dictionary quotes Poe, Lytton, W. Morris, and
Crockett, but no old writer, is sham archaism. [back]
- Note 3
- The use deprecated has perhaps crept in from such phrases as the
sun was partially eclipsed, an adaptation of a partial
eclipse; and to such phrases it should be restricted. 'The case
was partially heard on Oct. 17' is ambiguous; and the second example
in the text is almost so, nearly enough to show that the limitation
is desirable. The rule should be never to write partially
without first considering the claims of partly. [back]