The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Book About Words, by George Frederick Graham This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. Title: A Book About Words Author: George Frederick Graham Release Date: July 25, 2017 [EBook #55200] Language: English Character set encoding: UTF-8 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A BOOK ABOUT WORDS *** Produced by Richard Hulse, John Campbell and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive) TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE Some minor changes are noted at the end of the book. A B O O K A BOUT W O R D S. BY G. F. GRAHAM, AUTHOR OF ‘ENGLISH, OR THE ART OF COMPOSITION,’ ‘ENGLISH SYNONYMES,’ ‘ENGLISH STYLE,’ ‘ENGLISH GRAMMAR PRACTICE,’ ETC. LONDON: LONGMANS, GREEN, AND C O. 1869. PREFACE. The increased attention lately paid to our Language as a subject of Education, has induced the Author to state in the following pages his views on English (and other) Words. These views are the result of a long professional career in tuition, together with the study which such a calling naturally involves. Notwithstanding the rapid strides made of late years in the science of Words, much still remains unknown to the general reader; but if the following remarks be accepted as a small contribution to a more extended knowledge of this interesting subject, the Author will be amply compensated for any trouble it may have cost him to collect them. Kensington: May, 1869. CONTENTS. PAGE Introduction ix CHAPTER I. Origin of Words (Saxon)—Families of Words 1 CHAPTER II. Latin and French Words 23 CHAPTER III. Old and New Words 38 [Pg vii] CHAPTER IV. Degeneracy of Words 63 CHAPTER V. Play upon Words 79 CHAPTER VI. Concrete and Abstract Words 96 CHAPTER VII. Grand Words 101 CHAPTER VIII. The Spelling of Words 107 CHAPTER IX. Flexibility, Variety, Contraction, etc. of Words 122 CHAPTER X. Different Views of the same Idea 141 CHAPTER XI. Compound Words 150 CHAPTER XII. The Pronunciation of Words 156 CHAPTER XIII. Slang Words and Americanisms 169 CHAPTER XIV. General Remarks on Words, etc. 185 CHAPTER XV. General Remarks on Words, etc., continued 202 CHAPTER XVI. Miscellaneous Derivations of Words 215 INTRODUCTION. What is meant by a Language? It is a collection of all the words, phrases, grammatical forms, idioms, &c., which are used by one people. It is the outward expression of the tendencies, turn of mind, and habits of thought of some one nation, and the best criterion of their intellect and feelings. If this explanation be admitted, it will naturally follow that the connection between a people and their language is so close, that the one may be judged of by the other; and that the language is a lasting monument of the nature and character of the people. Every language, then, has its genius; forms of words, idioms, and turns of expression peculiar to itself; by which, independently of other differences, one nation may be distinguished from another. This condition may be produced by various causes; such as soil, climate, conquest, immigration, &c. Out of the old Roman, or Latin, there arose several modern languages of Europe; all known by the generic name—Romance; viz. Italian, French, Provençal, Spanish, and Portuguese. These may be called daughters of ancient Latin; and the natives of all these countries down to the seventh century, both spoke and wrote that language. But when the Scandinavian and Germanic tribes invaded the West of Europe, the Latin was broken up, and was succeeded by Italian, French, Spanish, &c. The Latin now became gradually more and more corrupt, and was, at length, in each of these countries, wholly remodelled. History has been called ‘the study of the law of change;’ i.e. the process by which human affairs are transferred from one condition to another. The history of a language has naturally a close analogy with political history; the chief difference being that the materials of the latter are facts, events, and institutions; whilst the former treats of words, forms, and constructions. Now, in the same way as a nation never stands still, but is continually undergoing a silent—perhaps imperceptible—transformation, so it is with its language. This is proved both by experience and reason. We need hardly [viii] [ix] [x] [xi] say that the English of the present time differ widely from the English of the fourteenth century; and we may be quite sure that the language of this country, two or three centuries hence, will be very different from what it is at present. It would be impossible for a nation either to improve or decay, and for its language at the same time to remain stationary. The one being a reflex of the other, they must stand or fall together. What, then, is this law of change? On what principles is it based? How are we to study or follow out its operations? These questions are exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to answer definitively. But there are circumstances connected with the formation of certain languages which may throw some light on them. It may be received as a principle that, when one nation is overrun or conquered by another, the effect on the language of the conquered depends mainly on the condition of that which is brought in by the conquerors. If the victors be as superior to the vanquished in civilisation and improvement as they have proved themselves in physical power, they will impose their language on the conquered people. If, on the other hand, that of the vanquished be the more cultivated, the reverse will take place; the dialect of the conquerors will be absorbed into that of the conquered. When the Visigoths settled in Spain in the fifth century, their dialect made but little impression on the language afterwards known as Spanish. The Latin element in the Peninsula, though at that time falling into decay, was far more refined and polished than the barbarous dialect then introduced; and it consequently remained, with some slight modifications, the language of the country. The same happened when the Northmen settled in France in the tenth century. It is astonishing how rapidly the language of Rollo and his followers was absorbed into French! This may have been assisted by the intermarriage of the conquerors with the women of the country; but it was produced chiefly by the different conditions of the two languages. On the other hand, when the Normans, under William the Conqueror, invaded England in the eleventh century, a different effect was produced. The Norman French after a time, though not immediately, enriched the English language with many words, but it did not, in the slightest degree, either then or afterwards, affect its grammatical forms or idioms. The cause of this was that the Saxon language was, at that epoch, already fixed, and fit for literary purposes. It was, indeed, much further advanced as a literary language than the invading Norman-French. It therefore resisted this external pressure; and though it afterwards admitted numerous French terms, the English language remains to this day Saxon, and not French, in its tone, character, and grammar. The climate of a country, or the temperament of a people, may also strongly influence the character of the language. Given an indolent and luxurious race, and we must expect that softness and effeminacy will appear in their spoken and written expression. No acute observer can fail to perceive a close connection between the national character of the Italians and the softness and beauty of their harmonious tongue. Again: the simplicity and somewhat homely and rough vigour of the Teutonic race, are clearly shadowed forth in the sounds and forms of the German language. The climate, too, in both cases, may have contributed towards these results. A hot, enervating atmosphere produces languor of mind as well as body; whilst a bracing cold air, though it may assist in producing a phlegmatic temperament, at the same time infuses vigour, energy, and power into those who are subjected to its influence. There are also, no doubt, many hidden causes of gradual changes in language. These are difficult to ascertain; and some of them escape the sagacity of even the most acute observers. Political struggles, foreign wars, domestic habits, literary studies, &c., may all contribute to alter the character of a people, and so far to affect their language. But whatever may be these mysterious laws of change, they must be left to Nature herself, and no one must attempt to interfere with them. There are no more miserable failures recorded in history than the attempt by rulers to interfere with the laws of Nature. We are told (though not on very good authority) that William the Conqueror ordered the Saxons to speak Norman-French. He might as well have ordered his new subjects to walk on their heads—the one was quite as easy as the other. But no writer tells us with what success this decree was executed. Ordericus Vitalis, indeed, states that William endeavoured to learn Saxon, though he does not say how far he succeeded. Now it is not very likely that he should have studied a language which he was, at the same time, bent on exterminating. Indeed, there is an air of extreme improbability about the whole story. In more recent times, it is well known that Joseph II., of Germany, issued an edict that all his subjects, Slavonic, Magyar, or German, should adopt one uniform language—German. But it was soon found impossible to execute this decree, for the people would as soon have parted with their lives as with their language; the whole empire was, therefore, immediately thrown into confusion. Many of the provinces broke out into open rebellion, and it at length became necessary to abandon the project. It is then clear that no one has the power, of his own will or caprice, to add a single word to a language, or to cast one out of it. These changes must be left to Nature, and all we can do is to watch her operations, to observe and record facts. But we may speculate on the origin of words, and may sometimes discover the causes of their birth. We may also inquire into the circumstances of their career, and the laws which regulate their forms, changes, meanings, &c. These inquiries are particularly comprehensive and interesting, because they naturally lead us to some knowledge of what [xii] [xiii] [xiv] [xv] [xvi] words represent, and also because they are closely connected with the study of the human mind both as regards intellect and passion. A B O O K ABOUT W O R D S. CHAPTER I. ORIGIN OF WORDS—FAMILIES OF WORDS. Most Philologists have hitherto held the opinion that, in general, no satisfactory account can be given of the origin of language. They can trace a word from one language to another, and can account for its various forms and changes by laws now generally understood; but they confess their inability to explain what determined the original form of its root. They take that original form for granted, as a sort of intuitive truth which must be admitted as a necessity. They can explain the circumstances of its career; but of its first cause or nature they profess to understand little or nothing. But though this is the general opinion, all linguists admit that in every language certain words, more especially those that convey ideas of sound, are formed on the principle of onomatopœia; i.e. an attempt to make the pronunciation conform to the sound. Such English words as ‘hiss,’ ‘roar,’ ‘bang,’ ‘buzz,’ ‘crash,’ &c., are of this class. One can hardly pronounce these words without, in some sense, performing the acts which they represent. One school of linguists have lately expressed a belief that all words were formed on this principle. A very curious illustration of this view is given in Mr. Wedgwood’s ‘Origin of Language.’ Explaining the interjection Hem, he says, it was originally an attempt to stop some one. We are supposed to be walking behind some person; we wish to stop him, and we exclaim, ‘Hem!’ This is given as the primary meaning of the word. ‘The sound is here an echo to the sense.’ But hem is used in other ways; either as a noun, or a verb; always, however, retaining its original idea of restricting, or keeping back. The hem of a garment is what prevents the thread from ravelling. Again, soldiers are sometimes hemmed in by the enemy; that is, prevented from using their free will to go where they choose. This illustration is intended to prove that the principle of onomatopœia applies not only to words that represent sound, but, by analogy, to other meanings derived from that principle. There is sound implied in the interjection hem; though in the noun and the verb, both derived from that interjection, no idea of sound is conveyed. This connection between sound and sense is certainly a natural principle; and however scornfully it may have been ridiculed by some philosophers, it has undoubtedly produced many very fine passages in the poetry of both ancient and modern times. 1. The chorus of frogs in Aristophanes, where their croaking is represented by words invented for the occasion: Βρεκεκεξ, κοαξ, κοαξ. This is, to say the least of it, very ingenious, and, in its way, beautiful, because true. 2. The same principle seems to apply in the πολυφλοίσβοιο θαλάσσης (poluphloisboio thalassēs) of Homer, where the first word was probably intended to represent the roaring of the wave mounting on the sea-shore; and the second, the hissing sound which accompanies a receding billow. 3. Another example of onomatopœia, in Virgil’s Æneid, viii. 452, has been often quoted: ‘Quadrupedante putrem sonitu quatit ungula campum;’ where the succession of dactyls is admirably adapted to represent the sound of the hoofs of a galloping horse. 4. Several examples of the same figure may be found in Milton. Describing the thronging of the fallen angels in Pandemonium: Thick swarmed, both on the ground and in the air, Brushed with the hiss of rustling wings. 5. Also, speaking of the gates of hell: ... open fly Th’ infernal doors; and on their hinges grates Harsh thunder ... [Pg 1] [2] [3] [4] Here the recurrence of the letter r is well calculated to convey the idea of a harsh, creaking, grating sound. 6. A similar effect is produced in Tasso’s ‘Gerusalemme Liberata.’ Il rauco son della Tartarea tromba. This connection between sound and sense may very probably exist in many words where we now fail to perceive it; but in the present state of our knowledge of the subject, we can hardly pronounce positively in favour of this view as applied to the whole body of a language. The question remains, for the present, in abeyance. Families of Words (Saxon). But setting aside the origin of words, it is not difficult to show the affinity which many springing from the same root have for each other. There are in English, as in other languages, hundreds of words which may be said to have a family connection, and which are traceable to one common origin, or root. This connection may be found in the Saxon as well as the Romance part of our language. Th (soft) may be considered as the type of the idea of demonstration. All the English pronouns and adverbs beginning with these letters have that general meaning, which may be seen in ‘that,’ ‘the,’ ‘there,’ ‘thence,’ ‘this,’ ‘thither,’ ‘those,’ ‘thus,’ and others. Again, the initial wh may be considered as the type of an interrogative, or relative meaning. This also may be seen in many English pronouns and adverbs; as in ‘what,’ ‘when,’ ‘whence,’ ‘where,’ ‘whither,’ ‘who,’ ‘whom,’ ‘whose,’ &c. The principle of inversion has affected the whole of this class of words. They are all of Saxon origin, and were spelled in that language hw, and not wh; as in ‘hwæt’ (what), ‘hwaer’ (where), ‘hwanne’ (when), &c. Tw. The Saxon initial tw corresponds with the Romance du. There are many English words having this initial, which convey the idea of ‘two.’ 1. The numeral itself, ‘two’ 2. ‘Twain,’ a now obsolete form of ‘two.’ 3. ‘Twin,’ one of two children born at a birth. 4. ‘Between,’ which is only another form of ‘by twain.’ 5. ‘Twilight,’ i.e. between two lights— daylight and lamplight. 6. ‘Twice’ is equivalent to ‘two’ times. 7. To ‘twist’ is to bend two or more threads together. 8. To ‘twine’ is to interlace, so as to form one body out of two. And 9. A ‘twig’ is so called from its being easily twisted. It is said that the word ‘nose’ originally signified a promontory—something prominent—and that it is so called from being the prominent feature of the face. This view is supported by its analogy with naze, a headland, and the Scotch ness (as in Inverness), a part of the coast which juts forward. It may be observed that the word meaning ‘nose’ has in most European languages the form N-S-. This may be seen in the Greek νῆσος, an island or promontory; the Latin nasus, the Italian naso, the German Nase, the French nez, and the English nose. Whether this be or be not an onomatopœia one thing is certain, viz. that in English the initial sn (ns inverted) in so many cases expresses nasal action, that it may be taken as a general type of that meaning. This may be found in a multitude of words having that initial, all expressing various actions of the nose. It may be seen in ‘snarl,’ ‘sneer,’ ‘sneeze,’ ‘sniff,’ ‘snore,’ ‘snort,’ ‘snooze,’ ‘snout,’ ‘snub,’ ‘snuff,’ &c. Ber-an—to bear. This is the source of our English verb ‘to bear.’ It produces the following:—1. ‘Barrow,’ an implement used for carrying or bearing. 2. ‘Berth,’ a place in which one is borne. 3. ‘Bier,’ a coffin in which a corpse is borne to the grave. 4. ‘Birth,’ the bearing of a child. 5. ‘Berry,’ the fruit which a tree bears. Bles-an—to blow. From this verb we have, 1. ‘Blaze,’ a strong flame blown forth. 2. ‘Blast,’ a violent blowing, or gust of wind. 3. ‘Blain,’ a boil, or blowing up of the flesh. 4. ‘Blight,’ injury done to corn, &c., from being blasted. 5. ‘Blister,’ a blowing, or rising, up of the skin. 6. ‘Blossom’ (or ‘bloom’), the blowing forth of the flower. 7. ‘Blush,’ a blowing forth of the blood. 8. ‘Bluster,’ as the wind when blowing hard. Brecc-an—to break. 1. The English verb ‘to break’ is directly from the above. 2. ‘Bridge,’ a building which breaks a passage across a river, &c. 3. ‘Breach,’ that part of a wall or fortification broken into by artillery. 4. To ‘broach’ a cask of ale is to break into it. 5. A ‘brook’ is a stream of water which breaks its way across the country. Bug-an—to bend. 1. A ‘bay’ is a bending in of the line of coast. 2. In sailors’ language, a ‘bight’ is the hollow part of a bay, or a coil of rope bent round. 3. A ‘bow’ is so called from its being bent. 4. To make a ‘bow’ is to bend the body. 5. ‘Beam’ (compare the German ‘Baum’) is so named from its property of bending. 6. A ‘bough’ is the part of the tree that easily bends. 7. A ‘bower’ is made of branches bowed or bent down. 8. The adjective ‘buxom’ (compare the German ‘biegsam’) is properly bending or pliable. 9. ‘Elbow’ is the bow of the ell, or that part where the arm bends. ‘Big’ and [5] [6] [7] [8] ‘bag’ are probably from the same source; they both convey the idea of something bent round. Ceap-ān—to exchange. The essence of buying and selling lies in the exchange of goods for money, or money for goods. Hence come 1. the English word ‘chapman’ (sometimes contracted into chap), which properly means a buyer and seller. 2. To ‘chaffer’ is to bargain about a purchase. 3. ‘Cheap,’ bearing a low price, refers to a similar transaction. 4. We have also ‘Cheapside’ and ‘Eastcheap,’ originally markets, or places for buying and selling. 5. Chepstow, Chipping Norton, and other names of market-towns in England, are from the same root. 6. The wind is said to chop when it changes from one point of the compass to another. Ceaw-an—to chew. 1. The older form of ‘chew’ was ‘chaw,’ which we still occasionally hear in ‘chaw-bacon.’ 2. The cud is the grass chewed by ruminating animals. 3. A quid of tobacco is a piece kept in the mouth to be chewed. Dael-an—to divide. 1. To ‘deal’ is from the above verb. It is used in English in a variety of senses, all containing the idea of dividing into parts. 2. A certain sort of wood is called ‘deal’ from being easily divided, or cut into planks. 3. To ‘deal’ cards is to divide them into packets or parcels. 4. Tradesmen ‘deal’ in certain articles when they sell them in small, divided quantities. 5. We also say ‘a great deal,’ speaking of a large part divided from the mass. [‘Some-deal’ was formerly said, but it is now obsolete.] 6. A ‘dole’ is a small part or share dealt out. (Compare the German ‘theilen.’) Dic-ian—to dig. From this Saxon verb we have, 1. To ‘dig.’ 2. ‘Dike,’ a mound of earth ‘dug’ out. 3. ‘Ditch,’ a line ‘dug.’ 4. ‘Dagger,’ an instrument used for ‘digging;’ and 5. ‘Dock,’ a place ‘dug’ out on the side of a harbour or bank of a river, where ships are repaired. Drag-an—to draw. This Saxon verb gives the English ‘to draw.’ From this we have, 1. ‘Dray,’ a heavy cart drawn along. 2. A ‘drain,’ a tube to draw off water. 3. A ‘draft,’ an order to draw out money from a bank. 4. A ‘draught’ is a quantity of liquid drawn into the mouth. 5. To ‘drawl’ is to drag on the voice heavily. 6. ‘Drudge,’ and 7. ‘Dredge’ (for oysters, &c.); both which express a dragging or drawing. (Compare the German ‘tragen’ and the Latin ‘trahere.’) Dropi-an—to drop. From this root comes 1. The verb ‘to drop.’ 2. To ‘droop,’ i.e. to lean downwards. 3. To ‘drip,’ or fall continually. 4. To ‘dribble,’ or to fall in small ‘drops.’ 5. A ‘driblet,’ or a very small drop. Eri-an—to till. 1. To ‘ear,’ in the sense of ‘to plough,’ is now obsolete in English, though we have an ‘ear,’ or spike, of corn—the result of tilling; and 3. ‘Earth,’ that which is tilled or cultivated. Far-an—to journey. 1. From this verb (German ‘fahren’) comes our verb to ‘fare;’ literally, to go on, or make a journey. 2. The adverbs ‘fore,’ ‘forth,’ and ‘far’ convey a similar idea; viz. that of onward movement. 3. The ‘ford’ of a river is that point at which it can be ‘fared,’ or crossed; and 4. To ‘ferry’ is the act of faring, or passing across a river or lake. 5. ‘Frith’ and ‘firth’ are formed on the same principle; they are those parts of the sea where one can be ferried across. 6. The first syllable (fur) in the word ‘furlough’ belongs to this family. It is leave (lough) granted to a soldier to ‘fare,’ or journey, home for a time. All these forms are devices to explain a variety of modes of faring, or moving onwards. Fed-an—to feed. This gives us, 1. To ‘feed.’ 2. ‘Fat,’ the result of being well ‘fed.’ 3. ‘Fodder,’ provision for cattle; and, 4. ‘Food,’ that which ‘feeds,’ or supplies nourishment. Fi-an—to hate. From this verb we have in English—1. A ‘fiend,’ one who hates. 2. Hence also comes ‘foe,’ an enemy, or one hated. 3. To the same root may be traced ‘fie!’ an interjection expressing dislike or hatred; 4. and also ‘foh!’ or ‘faugh!’ an exclamation of disgust. Fleaw-an—to flow. [9] [10] [11] [12] Hence come, 1. ‘To flow.’ 2. ‘Fleet;’ a number of ships that ‘flow,’ or swim, on the water. 3. The adjective ‘fleet,’ qualifying what flows by. 4. To ‘float,’ or swim, on the water; and, 5. ‘Flood,’ a large flow of water. Fuli-an—to make dirty. From this root come, 1. ‘Foul’ (putrid, offensive). 2. To ‘defile;’ to make ‘foul.’ 3. The noun ‘filth,’ dirt. 4. The adjective ‘filthy;’ and 5. ‘Fulsome;’ full of filth, nauseous, disgusting. G-an—to go. 1. ‘Gan’ is the Saxon verb whence the English ‘to go’ is derived. 2. This gives us ‘gait,’ i.e. a manner of ‘going;’ and, 3. ‘Gate,’ a door through which one ‘goes.’ To these may be added 4. ‘Gang,’ a number of people ‘going’ together; and, 5. the nautical term ‘gang-way,’ i.e. a passage ‘to go’ through. 6. The verb ‘to gad,’ i.e. to be continually ‘going’ from one place to another, also probably belongs to this family. Glowi-an—to burn. The verb ‘to low,’ in the sense of ‘to burn,’ does not now exist in the language; but the above verb gives us, 1. To ‘glow,’ i.e. to burn intensely; whence come the forms, 2. ‘Gleam;’ 3. ‘Glimmer;’ and, 4. ‘Glimpse;’ 5. ‘Gloom,’ or a state into which light ‘gleams;’ and, 6. the word ‘light,’ which is a participial form of the old verb to ‘low.’ In one English word the root ‘low’ is still retained, viz. ‘whitlow,’ a painful white burning on the finger or thumb. Graf-an—to dig. From this verb we have in English, 1. ‘Grave,’ a pit dug. 2. To ‘engrave,’ i.e. to scratch or dig in. 3. ‘Groove,’ a line dug in. 4. ‘Gravel,’ earth dug up. 5. To ‘grovel,’ literally, to dig up earth; and, 6. To ‘grub,’ or scratch into the earth. Gyrd-an—to enclose. The English words derived from ‘gyrdan,’ and having a cognate meaning are, 1. To ‘gird,’ to enclose by tying round. 2. ‘Girdle,’ a small band or cincture. 3. ‘Girth,’ the band which ‘girds’ the saddle on a horse. 4. ‘Garter,’ a band tied round the leg; and, 5. ‘Garden,’ a space enclosed for the cultivation of fruit, vegetables, &c. Lang—long. From the Anglo-Saxon and German ‘lang’ is derived, 1. our adjective ‘long;’ from which again comes, 2. the abstract noun ‘length.’ 3. The adjective, ‘lean;’ and 4. ‘lanky’ are also members of this family. 5. To ‘linger,’ i.e. to remain a long time in a place. 6. To ‘lunge;’ to make a long stroke with a rapier; and, 7. A ‘link,’ that which makes a chain ‘longer.’ Lecj-an—to lay. 1. Both the English verbs ‘lay’ and ‘lie’ (which is to lay oneself down) come from this verb, 2. ‘Ledge,’ a place on which to lay anything; 3. ‘Ledger,’ a book which lies on a merchant’s desk; and, 4. ‘Law,’ a rule laid down. Læd-an—to lead. 1. Besides the verb ‘to lead,’ we have from this source: 2. ‘Ladder,’ an instrument which leads to a higher place. 3. Load-star, and loadstone, i.e. a leading star or stone. (H)lifi-an—to lift. This is the source of, 1. our verb to ‘lift.’ Also, 2. ‘Loft,’ i.e. a room ‘lifted’ high. 3. The adverb ‘aloft’—‘lifted up.’ 4. ‘Aloof;’ and 5. The adjective ‘lofty.’ Maw-an—to cut down. From the Saxon root ‘maw’ comes immediately 1. Our verb to ‘mow,’—as well as a ‘mow’ (a barley-mow or a hay-mow); i.e. a quantity of barley or hay mown and heaped together. From this is derived, 2. ‘Mead,’ i.e. a mowed field; and, 3. Meadow, a large mead. 4. Farmers still use the word aftermath, which, with them, is a second mowing. 5, The now obsolete ‘mo’ or ‘moe,’ as used in the sense of a collected quantity or heap by Chaucer and other writers down to Lord Surrey, is said to give us the words ‘more’ and ‘most’ as the comparative and superlative forms of ‘mo;’ but this is doubted by many etymologists. Pocca—a bag. There are several English derivatives from this root. 1. We find it in the word ‘smallpox’ (or pocks), where it means little bags or holes left in the skin by the action of this disease. 2. We once had the word ‘poke’ in the sense of ‘a bag,’ as in the phrase ‘to buy a pig in a poke.’ 3. ‘Pocket’ is a diminutive of poke, i.e. a little bag. 4. To ‘poach;’ and 5. [13] [14] [15] ‘Pouch’ are variations of the same root; for to ‘poach’ is to steal game and conceal it in a ‘pouch.’ 5. A ‘peck,’ and 6. a ‘pack’ are both generic terms of a similar meaning; and, 7. ‘Puckered’ cheeks are bagged or puffed out with the cold. Scuf-ian—to push. This root is a fertile source of English words; we find it, 1. in our now not very elegant word ‘shove,’ that is, to push rudely or roughly. 2. A ‘sheaf’ of corn takes its name from the stalks of which it is composed being ‘shoved,’ or pushed up together; and, 3. the ‘shaft’ of a javelin is the wooden part which is ‘shoved’ into the iron. 4. A ‘shovel’ is a small instrument used to ‘shove,’ or push into, coals, etc.; and, 5. our ‘shoes’ are so called because we ‘shove’ our feet into them. 6. ‘Scuffle’ and ‘shuffle’ are only modified forms of the verb ‘to shove,’ and express a repetition of that act. According to some etymologists the word ‘sheep’ belongs to this family, as being an animal ‘shoved’ or pushed along in flocks from place to place. Hence, perhaps, the name; but this must be considered a doubtful derivation. Scyr-an—to cut. From this Saxon verb come, 1. To ‘shear’ and the noun ‘shears.’ 2. A ‘share’ of anything means, properly, a part ‘cut’ off, or divided from the whole substance; and a ‘ploughshare’ is that part of the implement which ‘cuts’ through the earth. 3. Common experience tells us that the adjective ‘sharp’ qualifies what easily cuts or divides. 4. A ‘shire’ signifies a district cut off or divided from the rest of the country; and ‘sheriff’ is a contraction of ‘shire-reeve,’ i.e. the officer of the ‘shire.’ 5. ‘Shirt’ and, 6. ‘Short’ both belong to the same class; the first is a garment ‘cut’ off, and the second is a participle from the verb ‘to shore’ or divide, the noun ‘shore’ meaning the line which ‘divides’ the sea from the land. From the same root comes, 7. ‘Sheer.’ Sheer impudence and sheer nonsense mean impudence and nonsense unqualified, i.e. ‘divided’ or cut off from any modesty and sense. Besides the above, we have the same general idea in the expression, 8. ‘Shreds’ and patches, little snippings or ‘cuttings.’ 9. Shakspere’s ‘shard-borne’ beetle means the beetle borne on his ‘shards,’ or scaly wings divided in the middle. 10. To these we may add ‘potsherd,’ a piece broken off or divided from a pot. The words ‘scar,’ ‘score,’ ‘scream,’ ‘screech,’ ‘shrill,’ ‘shriek,’ &c., belong to the same class, the leading idea in them all being that of cutting or dividing; and they are all based upon the type ‘scr’ or ‘shr.’ Sitt-an—to sit. 1. This is the origin of our word to ‘sit;’ whence comes, 2. To ‘set.’ The latter is the transitive from the intransitive, formed by a change of the vowel. 3. ‘Settle’ is a frequentative of ‘sit,’ and expresses a permanent sitting. 4. A ‘seat’ is from the same root; it is that on which any one ‘sits;’ and, 5. A ‘saddle’ is a seat on horseback. Sleaw—slow. 1. From the Anglo-Saxon ‘Sleaw’ comes our adjective ‘slow.’ Hence we have, 2. ‘Sloth,’ or the quality of being slow; 3. ‘Sloven’ (m.) and ‘slut’ (f.), which both convey the idea of being slow and negligent; 4. ‘Slug,’ a slow animal, from which comes the verb ‘to slug,’ to indulge in sloth; and, 7. ‘Sluggard,’ a lazy indolent man. Stig-an—to mount. This root gives us, 1. ‘Stair,’ a step to mount by; 2. ‘Stile’ (A.-S. Stigel), a gate to be mounted or got over; 3. ‘Stirrup’ (or stig-rope), a rope by which to mount; and, 4. ‘Stye,’ i.e. a rising pustule on the eyelid. Straeg-an—to spread. From the A.-S. root ‘straeg’ we have the English words ‘straw’ and ‘strew.’ 1. ‘Straw’ is the dry stalks of certain plants ‘strewn’ or scattered about. 2. To ‘stray’ means to go dispersedly or separately. 3. ‘Straggle’ is a frequentative of the last word. 4. The word ‘street’ is by some supposed to be connected with this root. A ‘street’ is a way ‘strewn’ or paved with stones. Taepp-an—to draw drink. Hence we have in English, 1. ‘To tap,’ and, 2. A ‘tap,’ the instrument by which wine or beer is drawn from the cask; 3. ‘Tapster,’ one who draws liquor. 4. To ‘tope’ is to ‘tip’ off beer or spirits. 5. A ‘toper’ is one who topes, and to ‘tipple’ is to be continually toping. 6. One who ‘tipples’ is likely to be often ‘tipsy.’ Tell-an—to count. The ordinary meaning of our English verb ‘to tell’ is to recount the particulars of some event or occurrence. Hence comes a ‘tale,’ which signifies the recounting of such particulars. The passage in Milton’s ‘L’Allegro’— Every shepherd tells his tale Under the hawthorn in the dale— has been explained as ‘every shepherd counts over his sheep.’ Shakspere has, ‘as thick as tale came post with post,’ that is, as rapidly as could be counted. From the same root comes ‘till,’ a box into which money is counted. Again, [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] when we speak of ‘tolling’ a bell, a similar meaning is implied, viz. the numbering or counting out the strokes; and a ‘toll’ is money told or counted into the hands of the receiver. Again, accounts are said to ‘tally’ when, after being reckoned or counted up, they amount to the same sum. Teog-an—to pull. From this verb come, 1. To ‘tow,’ to pull a boat or vessel along; 2. To ‘tug,’ to pull with force. 3. The noun ‘tow’ means flax which must be ‘tugged,’ or pulled, asunder. 4. The adjective ‘tough,’ which qualifies what must be pulled hard. 5. ‘Team,’ a number of horses pulling together; and, 6. ‘Tight,’ what is ‘towed’ or pulled together with force. 7. The sailor’s phrase ‘to haul taut,’ is ‘to pull tight.’ Wan-ian—to decrease. 1. We still say, ‘the moon waxes and “wanes,”’ i.e. apparently increases and decreases in size. 2. ‘Wan,’ an adjective which expresses thinness or decrease of health. 3. ‘Want’ signifies a condition in which our means are decreased; and, 4. To ‘wean’ is to gradually accustom any one to a ‘want.’ Weg-an—to move. 1. From this come the English ‘way,’ which means the space through which one can ‘move.’ 2. To ‘wag’ (the tongue or the head), i.e. to ‘move’ it rapidly. 3. A waggon (sometimes contracted into ‘wain’) is a vehicle which ‘moves’ goods, &c., from one place to another. 4. To ‘sway’ is the intensive of wag—it is to move strongly; and, 5. ‘Swagger’ is the frequentative of ‘sway.’ Weri-an—to wear. 1. This is the origin of our word ‘to wear,’ in its ordinary sense. 2. From this we have ‘weary,’ the state of being ‘worn’ with fatigue. 3. From the same root come ‘worse’ and ‘worst,’ which are really the comparative and superlative degrees of ‘wear,’ i.e. ‘more worn’ and ‘most worn.’ 4. To ‘worry,’ i.e. to ‘wear out’ by importunity. Wit-an—to know. From the root ‘wit’ in this Saxon verb came, in English, 1. The old forms ‘wist’ and ‘wot,’ together with, 2. The modern word ‘wit,’ and the expression, ‘to wit’—all these imply knowledge. 3. We have ‘wise’ (which at first signified knowing much), with its derivative, ‘wisdom.’ 5. ‘Wizard’ and ‘witch’ are both from the same source, and were terms originally applied to those who were supposed to come by their ‘knowledge’ by a compact with the powers of darkness. 6. The word ‘wittingly,’ i.e. of one’s own knowledge; and, 7. A ‘witness,’ or one who tells us what he ‘knows’ about some fact. Wrid-an—to twist. This is the source of many English words: 1. To ‘writhe,’ or twist the body in pain. 2. ‘Wrath.’ When in ‘wrath,’ one is ‘writhed’ or tortured by angry passion. 3. ‘Wry’ and ‘awry,’ i.e. ‘ twisted’ on one side. 4. To ‘wring’ the hands is to ‘twist’ them convulsively. 5. ‘Wrong’ properly means ‘wrung,’ or twisted out of the right path. 6. ‘Wrangle’ denotes a continual distortion or perversity; and, 7. To ‘wriggle’ is the frequentative of ‘to wring;’ it means to twist about repeatedly. Beside these, we have, 8. The wrist, i.e. the joint which ‘twists’ or turns easily; and, 9. To ‘wrest’ and ‘wrestle.’ 10. To ‘wrench.’ These are all modes of twisting. 11. To ‘wreathe’ is to twist or twine together, and, 13. A ‘wrinkle’ denotes a distortion of a smooth surface. CHAPTER II. LAT IN AND FRENCH WORDS. Latin Roots. English words which indicate mental actions, feelings, or general abstractions, come to us from a Latin or a French source. These, though not the most numerous, comprise a very considerable portion of the English language. It must be understood that French is, in the main, composed of Latin words; and we may conveniently divide this portion of the English language into three classes:—1. Words derived directly from Latin; 2. Words derived indirectly from Latin, through a French medium; and, 3. Middle-age Latin words, i.e. those formed from a corrupt Latin by the monks of the [21] [22] [23] middle ages. These last appear in French in a modified form, and come into English still further altered in their spelling and pronunciation. I. In most cases English words of the first class are compounds or derivatives. We have not adopted the roots themselves, but use them only in composition, with some particle or preposition. For example: the Latin root ‘clude’ is never found in English as an independent word, though we have ‘exclude,’ ‘include,’ ‘preclude,’ &c. It is also to be observed that a Latin verbal root, in many cases, produces two forms in English; one containing the root of the verb itself, and the other its participial form. Thus, the above example will give us ‘exclude,’ from the Latin verb ‘excludĕre,’ and also ‘exclusion,’ ‘exclusive,’ from its participle ‘exclusus.’ If we take any one of these roots, say ‘clud’ and ‘clus’ (shut), we may find it in modern English in a great variety of forms. From the participial root (clus) come ‘clause’ (a part of a sentence shut in); ‘cloister’ (a place shut in); ‘close’ (to shut to); ‘closet’ (a small place shut up); ‘recluse,’ one shut out from the world, &c., as well as the verbs exclude, include, preclude, with their derivatives exclusion, inclusion, preclusion; the adjectives ‘exclusive,’ ‘inclusive,’ ‘preclusive,’ and the adverbs ‘exclusively,’ ‘inclusively,’ &c. These words are not often found in the vocabulary of the uneducated classes; they belong rather to the language of books, or to the set forms of eloquence, than to that of daily intercourse. We should say, in common parlance, that a boy was shut out of the room by his companions; but we should hardly say that he was excluded. In a secondary sense, however, such a word would be more properly adopted. We should say correctly, ‘that such considerations were excluded from this view of the subject,’ where we could not very well use ‘shut out.’ Again, we could not properly say that any one was ‘included’ in a dungeon; meaning that he was ‘shut in.’ Words drawn from these Latin roots have a very wide application in English, but they are confined chiefly to a mental, and are seldom used in a physical, sense. Saxon forms the basis of our language, and is used in practical and domestic matters; while our spiritual conceptions are expressed by French or Latin words. Another well-known Latin root is ‘cide’ (from cædĕre, to slay); which corresponds in meaning with the more familiar Saxon word ‘kill.’ We have, not ‘cide,’ but ‘fratricide,’ ‘matricide,’ ‘regicide,’ ‘suicide,’ ‘parricide,’ ‘homicide,’ and ‘infanticide.’ To these may be added, ‘concise,’ ‘precise,’ ‘decision,’ ‘incision,’ &c. All the latter are derived from the participle of the same Latin verb—‘cæsus.’ Again: the root ‘sume’ (sumpt), from the Latin ‘sumĕre,’ to take, gives us ‘assume,’ ‘consume,’ ‘presume,’ with their participial derivatives, ‘assumption,’ ‘consumption,’ ‘presumption,’ ‘sumptuous,’ ‘presumptuous,’ &c. The Latin root ‘cede’ (cess) appears in English in two forms of spelling; one, ‘cede,’ as ‘accede,’ ‘concede,’ ‘recede’; and the other, ‘ceed,’ as in ‘exceed,’ ‘proceed,’ ‘succeed.’ These also have their participial derivatives, as found in ‘excess,’ ‘success,’ ‘process,’ ‘accession,’ ‘succession,’ ‘procession.’ It will be seen that in all these cases the rule holds good. Cry is a more household, domestic word, but ‘acclaim,’ ‘declaim,’ ‘proclaim’ are used on more important occasions. The principle of derivation by the change of an internal vowel-sound prevailed in ancient Latin as well as in Saxon. Thus, from the Latin verb ‘facĕre’ (to make or do) was formed ‘efficere’ (to effect or bring about), the a in the root being changed into an i in the derivative; and we have English words from both these sources:—fact, faculty, facility, &c., from ‘facĕre’; and defect, effect, deficient, efficient, &c., from the other form. Some of these Latin roots are extremely prolific. For example, the Latin verb ‘tenere,’ to hold, produces a very large number of English words. In certain verbs it appears in the form ‘tain,’ as in to abstain, appertain, attain, contain, detain, maintain, obtain, pertain, retain, and sustain. To these may be added the derivatives, continent, pertinent, and impertinent; besides which, we have from the same source, ‘tenant,’ ‘tenable,’ ‘tenure,’ ‘maintenance,’ and ‘sustenance,’ &c. Again: the root ‘duce’ (from ‘ducĕre,’ to lead) gives rise to many English derivatives. First we have (through French) the word ‘Duke,’ which originally meant the leader of an army. Then come the verbs to adduce, conduce, deduce, induce, produce, reduce, seduce, traduce, in all which the idea of leading is involved. To the same origin may be traced ductile, aqueduct, viaduct, conduct, and product, besides deduction, reduction, abduction, production, &c.— nineteen or twenty words from one root! II. A rule has been laid down to enable us to determine whether an English word is derived directly from Latin, or filtered from Latin through French:—‘If the word comes directly from Latin, the only change it will undergo will be in the ending. Thus “actio” in Latin will be “action” in English; “innocentia” will make “innocence;” “tormentum,” “torment,” &c. But if the word comes through French, it will be more altered in its passage; it will be disturbed, not only in its ending, but also internally. Thus “populus” in Latin is “peuple” in French, and “people” in English. The Latin “thesaurus” gives the French “trésor,” and the English “treasure.”’ This may be accepted as a general rule, but it is often impossible to determine by the outward form of a word whether we derive it directly from its primitive Latin source, or take it at second hand from the French. In most cases of doubt the probability is in favour of the French, for there are still many English words which were at first spelled, and probably pronounced, as in French, and whose orthography, and perhaps pronunciation, was afterwards reformed and brought back nearer to the Latin type. ‘Doubt’ and ‘debt’ are still [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] pronounced with the b silent; but when first brought into English they were both written and pronounced as in French —‘doute’ and ‘dette.’ Afterwards, when it became known that they were originally derived from the Latin verbs ‘dubitare’ and ‘debere,’ the b was restored in the spelling, though the French pronunciation was retained; and the same took place with many other Romance words. There are certain classes of English words from whose outward form we may conclude that they are of Latin (or French) origin. First, when an English noun ends in ‘tion’ preceded by a vowel, we may be pretty sure that it is either directly from Latin, or from Latin through French. Such words as ‘formation,’ ‘completion,’ ‘transition,’ ‘commotion,’ and ‘ablution,’ are derived either directly or indirectly from Latin. We never meet with this ending in words of purely Saxon origin. The termination of these was in Latin ‘tio;’ in French they appear in ‘tion;’ and in English the same ending (tion) is adopted. This Latin ending, ‘tio,’ is, however, sometimes found in French in the form son, which has thus been introduced into certain English words of this class. The Latin ‘ratio’ gave the French ‘raison’ and the English ‘reason.’ Again, ‘traditio’ in Latin became ‘trahison’ in French and ‘treason’ in English. But in many cases the French ending has not passed into English; for the words ‘declinaison,’ ‘conjugaison,’ ‘oraison,’ &c., appear in English as ‘declension,’ ‘conjugation,’ and oration, i.e. in their Latin rather than their French forms. Another large class of originally Latin words appear in English with the ending ‘ty.’ These are all abstract nouns, which in Latin end in ‘tas.’ This final tas is expressed in French by té, and in English by ty. Thus the Latin ‘societas’ becomes in French ‘société’ and in English ‘society.’ In the same way, from the Latin ‘bonitas’ come the French ‘bonté’ and the English ‘bounty,’ &c. In many of these cases we find two forms of the same word, each with its own meaning. One of these tends to the French, and the other to the Latin, in spelling; and it may be observed that the French has been more disturbed by contraction, abbreviation, or inversion than the Latin. For example, the two words ‘secure’ and ‘sure’ are both originally from the Latin ‘securus;’ but the former is directly from Latin, whereas the latter is from the French contracted form—‘sûr.’ Another pair of these double forms may be found in ‘hospital’ and ‘hôtel.’ The Latin ‘hospes’ signified either a ‘host’ or a guest, i.e. the entertainer or the entertained. From ‘hospitalis’ came the contracted French form ‘hôtel,’ in the sense of a house where guests or travellers are entertained, as distinguished from ‘hôpital,’ where invalids are taken care of. From the French both these words came into English, each retaining its original meaning. This principle of a divided meaning is also seen in ‘persecute’ and ‘pursue,’ the latter of which was known in English before we became acquainted with the former. ‘Pursue’ is from the French ‘poursuivre,’ and is used in the general sense of following after eagerly. ‘Persecute,’ from the Latin ‘persecutus,’ the participle of ‘persĕqui,’ is distinguished from ‘pursue’ by the meaning of ‘to follow after with an intent to injure.’ Two other words of this class are ‘superficies’ and ‘surface.’ The former is pure Latin; and is compounded of ‘super,’ ‘upon,’ and ‘facies,’ a face. But this word is only used in a scientific or mathematical sense; whereas ‘surface’ has a more general signification, and means whatever we can see of the outside of any material substance. We find a similar difference of meaning, as well as form, between ‘potion’ and ‘poison.’ Both these came originally from the Latin ‘potare,’ to drink. The former is the direct Latin, the latter the French form, and both are now English. But the second denotes a species of the first; for ‘poison,’ as is well known, is that species of ‘potion’ which destroys life. This power of dividing a word into two meanings is not peculiar to English; for many instances of it may be found in German, French, and Italian. But it is of great advantage. It has the effect of providing a large number of terms to express shades of thought by slight differences of meaning, and it thus materially assists in making language a more perfect exponent of human thought. The following list exhibits some of these double forms:— outer utter nib neb morrow morn person parson lance launch beacon beckon wine vine to too wind vent (peg) tone tune wise guise discreet discrete why how sauce souse wagon wain scatter shatter deploy display stick stitch cattle chattels cap cape cross cruise quell kill milk milch glass glaze make match grass graze metal mettle &c. &c. [29] [30] [31] [32] III. The third division of this class consists of Low Latin, or, as they are sometimes called, ‘monkish Latin’ words. These have their origin in classical Latin; but they are all corruptions of that language, and were formed at a time when it had fallen into decay. To this division belong such English words as ‘chance,’ ‘esquire,’ ‘ewer’, ‘forest,’ ‘justle,’ ‘manage,’ ‘noise,’ ‘noon,’ ‘pillage,’ ‘rear,’ &c. In all these we may recognise a Latin origin, though the words themselves were unknown to the ancient Romans. From the Greek verb ‘βάλλειν,’ to cast, probably came the Italian ‘ballo,’ the French ‘bal,’ and the English ‘ball.’ Playing at ball was, in the middle ages, often associated with singing and dancing. Hence the Romance word ‘ballare,’ and the Old Spanish ‘ballar,’ which both meant ‘to sing.’ The French ‘ballade’ and the English ‘ballad’ may be thus accounted for. Apropos of ‘ball,’ it may be here noted that the word ‘bull,’ as in the ‘Pope’s bull,’ is derived from ‘bulla,’ the Latin for ‘ball.’ It was the custom, in the middle ages, after writing any document or letter, to affix to it a seal in the form of a ‘ball,’ so that the Pope’s ‘bull’ really means the Pope’s ‘ball.’ Our word ‘chance’ was in old French ‘chéance,’ from ‘cheoir.’ These are all from the Latin verb ‘cadĕre,’ to fall (out) or happen. The French adjective ‘méchant’ is derived from the old participle ‘més-chéant,’ from ‘més-choir,’ to fall out badly or unluckily. We have not adopted this adjective, but our noun ‘mischance’ may be traced to this source. A curious case of a modern term derived from compound Latin roots may be found in our word ‘squire.’ This is made up of the Latin ‘scutum,’ a shield, and ‘fero,’ I bear. Hence ‘scutifer,’ a middle-age word, meant a shield-bearer, i.e. one who attended on the knight, and carried his shield. In old French, ‘scutifer’ was softened into ‘escuyer,’ or ‘écuyer;’ and it afterwards appeared in English as ‘esquire,’ or ‘squire.’ The old French for ‘water’ was ‘aigue,’ from the Latin ‘aqua.’ From this was formed the word ‘aiguière,’ a water- vessel; and this is the origin of our English word ‘ewer,’as in ‘cream-ewer.’ Of the same class is the word ‘forest.’ This did not exist in ancient Latin, but sprang up in later ages. The monks made the word ‘foresta’ out of the Latin ‘foras,’ abroad, or out of doors; the same root which produced the English words ‘foreign,’ and ‘foreigner,’ one who comes from abroad. The monkish Latin form was ‘foresta,’ the French ‘forêt,’ and the English ‘forest.’ Under this head may be also placed ‘comfort’ and ‘courage.’ The former of these is well known to be peculiarly English, and there is...