other or on each other, the thought conveyed by these words being already expressed in the word mutual. "Dependent on each other" is the exact equivalent of "mutually dependent."

Mutual is often misused for common. Here are some examples of the correct use of the two words:

"After the hurry of our recognition was over, he pointed out two of our common friends."

"Common enmities are said to cement friendship." Substitute mutual for common and the meaning will be wholly changed. Mutual enmity means ill-will borne by two persons, the one toward the other, while common enmity means ill-will borne by two or more persons toward a common object.

"Our former correspondence was renewed, with the most hearty expression of mutual good will."

"These particulars I learned from the vicar, when we left the room, that they might be under no restraint in their mutual effusions."

" As

you

and I have no common friend, I can tell you no private history."

"Of two adversaries, it would be rash to condemn either upon the evidence [testimony] of the other; and a common friend must keep himself suspended at least till he has heard both."

"The parts of our constitution have gradually, and almost insensibly, in a long course of time, accommodated themselves to each other [one another] and to their common as well as to their separate purposes."

"They met at the house of a common friend."

“A common dislike is a great bond of friendship.” "Their mutual dislike (i. e., their dislike for each other) was well known."

"With compliments to all our common friends, I am,” etc. Here are some examples of the misuse of the two words: "They speedily [soon] discovered that their enjoyment [love] of dancing and music was mutual [common]."

“The king saw he had no interest in becoming their mutual [common] executioner."

'We have the vulgarism of mutual friend for common friend."-Macaulay.

"When suddenly, and much to our mutual [common] astonishment, we found ourselves within ten paces of my wife and brother."

"Our sincere and grateful sense of their kind and heartfelt sympathy with us in the mutual loss we have sustained by the untimely decease [death] of our late brother.”

Mutual is here not only misused, but, like late, it is superfluous, unless the meaning intended is that the loss was common to all parties-to the sympathizers as well as to the sympathized with—which does not seem to be the

case.

"To their mutual [common] astonishment they saw a pen move itself into an erect position."

"Our intercourse with our mutual [common] cousins was like that between [among] brothers and sisters."

'Shakespeare, the mutual [common] ancestor of Englishmen and Americans."

"Our astonishment was mutual [common] at the altered tone of these papers."

Myself. This form of the personal pronoun is properly used in the nominative case only where increased emphasis is aimed at.

"I had as lief not be, as live to be

In awe of such a thing as I myself."

"I will do it myself," "I saw it myself." It is therefore

incorrect to say, Mrs. Brown and myself [I] were both much pleased."

"I intended to send James, but he was ill, so I had to go myself." See REFLEXIVE PRONOUNS.

Name. This word is sometimes improperly used for mention; thus, "I never named the matter to any one should be "I never mentioned the matter to any one."

Nasty. In England much used in the sense of disagreeable.

"This word, at best not well suited to dainty lips, is of late years shockingly misused by British folk who should be ashamed of such slipshod English." A titled English woman is said to have remarked to the gentleman by her side at dinner, "Do try this soup; it isn't half nasty."

“'Oh, don't you think “nice” is a nasty word?' asked Oscar Wilde of a bright Cleveland girl, the other evening, when the little beauty retorted, 'And do you think nasty is a nice word?'"

Neighborhood. See VICINITY.

Neither. See EITHER.

Neither. Should not be used for none nor for any one. "There were artisans, tradesmen, and gentlemen, but neither [none] were allowed any special privileges." "Except in cases of unusual audacity, neither [no one] presumed to wear the dress of his betters." See EITHER.

Neither-Nor. "He would neither give wine, nor oil, nor money."-Thackeray. The conjunction should be placed before the excluded object; “neither give” implies neither some other verb, a meaning not intended. Rearrange thus, taking all the common parts of the contracted sentences together: "He would give neither wine, nor oil, nor money." So, "She can neither help her beauty, nor her courage, nor her cruelty" (Thackeray), should be, “She can help neither,”

etc. "He had neither time to intercept nor to stop her" (Scott), should be, "He had time neither to intercept," etc. Some neither can for wits nor critics pass" (Pope), should be, "Some can neither for wits nor critics pass."

"

Never. Grammarians differ with regard to the correctness of using never in such sentences as, "He is in error, though never so wise"; "charm he never so wisely." In sentences like these, to say the least, it is better, in common with the great majority of writers, to use ever.

New beginner. All beginners are new, hence to qualify beginner with new is tautological.

News. This word is very often improperly used instead of tidings. The difference between the two words lies therein that to news we may be indifferent, while in tidings we are always interested. News gratifies curiosity; tidings allay anxiety or suspense. News is of public, tidings of individual, interest. "What is the news from Washington?" 'Have you had any tidings of your brother?"

66

“His parents received the news [tidings] of his seizure, but beyond that they could learn nothing."

Nice. Archdeacon Hare remarks of the use-or rather misuse of this word: "That stupid vulgarism by which we use the word nice to denote almost every mode of approbation, for almost every variety of quality, and, from sheer poverty of thought, or fear of saying anything definite, wrap up everything indiscriminately in this characterless domino, speaking at the same breath of a nice cheese-cake, a nice tragedy, a nice sermon, a nice day, a nice country, as if a universal deluge of niaiserie-for nice seems originally to have been only niais-had whelmed the whole island." Nice is as good a word as any other in its place, but its place is not everywhere. We talk very properly about a nice distinction, a nice discrimination, a nice calcu

lation, a nice point, and about a person's being nice, and over-nice, and the like; but we certainly should not talk about Othello's being a nice tragedy, about Salvini's being a nice actor, or New York bay's being a nice harbor.*

Nicely. The very quintessence of popinjay vulgarity is reached when nicely is made to do service for well, in this wise: "How do you do?" "Nicely." How are you?" 'Nicely."

No. This word of negation is responded to by nor in sentences like this: "Let your meaning be obscure, and no grace of diction nor any music of well-turned sentences will make amends."

"Whether he is there or no." Supply the ellipsis, and we have, "Whether he is there or no there." Clearly, the word to use in sentences like this is not no, but not. And yet our best writers sometimes inadvertently use no with whether. Example: "But perhaps some people are quite indifferent whether or no it is said," etc.—Richard Grant White. Supply the ellipsis, and we have, “said or no said." In a little book entitled Live and Learn, I find, "No less than fifty persons were there; no fewer,” etc. In correcting one mistake, the writer himself makes one. It should be, "Not fewer," etc. If we ask, "There were fifty persons there-were there, or were there not?" the reply clearly would be, "There were not fewer than fifty." "There was no one of them who would not have been proud," etc., should be, "There was not one of them."

"No is a shortened form of none = not one, and there

* The possessive construction here is, in my judgment, not imperatively demanded. There is certainly no lack of authority for putting the three substantives in the accusative. The possessive construction seems to me, however, to be preferable.