wise redundant in the following sentence: "It performs at the same time the offices of both the nominative and the objective case." Also redundant in such a sentence as, He lost all his live stock-both horses, cows, and sheep."

Both is sometimes so used in negative sentences that the meaning is doubtful. "Both candidates were not appointed." Were both rejected? or was one rejected and the other appointed? A little care ordinarily enables one to avoid ambiguity.

Bound. The use of this word in the sense of doomed, determined, resolved, certain, or will be compelled is a barbarism. Not," He is bound to do it," but, "He is determined, resolved, or certain to do it." Not, "He is bound to fail," but, "He is doomed, or destined, or sure to fail."

"The Russian nobleman is fast degenerating; he is bound [destined, or will be compelled] to yield his place to new blood."-Corr. N. Y. Sun.

If the Queen should insist upon [on] the appointment of her son [her son's being appointed], there is bound [certain] to be a ministerial crisis."-—N. Y. Sun.

Here is a sentence in which the meaning of bound is not clear: "The Government is bound, in such a personal matter, to respect the Queen's wishes."-N. Y. Sun. Does the writer mean bound in honor, or will be compelled?

Bran-new. A corruption of brand-new.

Bravery-Courage. The careless often use these two words as though they were interchangeable. Bravery is inborn, is instinctive; courage is the product of reason, calculation. There is much merit in being courageous, little merit in being brave. Men that are simply brave arc careless, while the courageous man is always cautious. Bravery often degenerates into temerity. Moral courage is that firmness of principle that enables a man to do what he

deems to be his duty although his action may subject him to adverse criticism. True moral courage is one of the rarest and most admirable of virtues.

Alfred the Great, in resisting the attacks of the Danes, displayed bravery; in entering their camp as a spy, he displayed courage.

Bring-Fetch-Carry. The indiscriminate use of these three words is very common. To bring is to convey to or toward—a simple act; to fetch means to go and bring -a compound act; to carry often implies motion from the speaker, and is followed by away or off, and thus is opposed to bring and fetch. Yet one hears such expressions as, "Go to Mrs. D.'s and bring her this bundle; and hereyou may fetch her this book also." We use the words correctly thus: " Fetch, or go bring, me an apple from the cellar"; "When you come home, bring some lemons"; Carry this book home with you."

British against American English. "The most important peculiarity of American English is a laxity, irregularity, and confusion in the use of particles. The same thing is, indeed, observable in England, but not to the same extent, though some gross departures from idiomatic propriety, such as different to for different from, are common in England, which none but very ignorant persons would be guilty of in America. . . . In the tenses of the verbs, I am inclined to think that well-educated Americans conform more closely to grammatical propriety than the corresponding class in England. . . . In general, I think we may say that, in point of naked syntactical accuracy, the English of America is not at all inferior to that of England; but we do not discriminate so precisely in the meaning of words, nor do we habitually, in either conversation or in writing, express ourselves so gracefully or employ so

classic a diction, as the English. Our taste in language is less fastidious, and our licenses and inaccuracies are more frequently of a character indicative of want of refinement and elegant culture than those we hear in educated society in England."-George P. Marsh.

66

'We have no dialects in this country, either of locality or of caste. In regard to enunciation, the average American will make himself heard and understood, wherever there is difficulty in hearing, far better than the average Briton-not by virtue of vociferation, but on account of his clearer and more accurate speech, especially in following more closely the spelling. This is illustrated by such words as trait, silver, and schedule, which are pronounced in this country according to regular analogy, but have in Great Britain special and exceptional pronunciations. It is illustrated still more clearly by dozens of geographical names.

"American spelling differs from British in one respect only-its greater simplicity. Illustrations: Waggon, parlour, storey (of a house), pease (plural of pea), plough, draught, shew, cyder, gaol, and many other words that have been simplified in this country.

"American speech changes less than British. (a) We have preserved hundreds of words that have gone out of use in Great Britain, and we avoid the use of many novelties invented in that country, such as totalling or totting, hipped, navvy, fad, randomly, outing, and tund. (b) We avoid many recent changes in meaning that are accepted by the English, such as using traffic for travel or passage, famous for excellent, bargain for haggle, rot for nonsense, jug for pitcher, good form for in good taste, trap for carriage, tub for bathe, starved for frozen, stop for stay, assist for be present, intimate for announce, etc. (c) We refuse to follow the British in their arbitrary restriction of the mean

ing of certain words. Thus, a young person is always a girl in England. The Briton rides in an omnibus, but always drives in a carriage; and though he will say that he is confined to a sick-room or stretched upon a sick-bed, he is horrified at the idea of being called sick, unless suffering from nausea. (d) We do not turn active and reflective verbs into intransitives. (e) We do not abbreviate words so much. (f) We are not so apt to get in superfluous words-- What ever are you doing!' 'The infant mortality is something enormous.' 'I don't say but what this work has got to be done.'

66

American writers of the first class seem to be, on the whole, rather more careful about grammar than are British Of course, however, nobody denies that the language has suffered some bad treatment here as well as abroad.”— Gilbert M. Tucker.

British against American Orthoëpy. "The causes of the differences in pronunciation [between the English and the Americans] are partly physical, and therefore difficult, if not impossible, to resist, and partly owing to a difference of circumstances. Of this latter class of influences, the universality of reading in America is the most obvious and important. The most marked difference is, perhaps, in the length or prosodical quantity of the vowels; and both of the causes I have mentioned concur to produce this effect. We are said to drawl our words by protracting the vowels and giving them a more diphthongal sound than the English. Now, an Englishman who reads will habitually utter his vowels more fully and distinctly than his countryman who does not; and, upon the same principle, a nation of readers, like the Americans, will pronounce more deliberately and clearly than a people so large a proportion of whom are unable to read, as in England. From

our universal habit of reading there results not only a greater distinctness of articulation, but a strong tendency to assimilate the spoken to the written language. Thus, Americans incline to give to every syllable of a written word a distinct enunciation; and the popular habit is to say dic-tion-ar-y, mil-it-ar-y, with a secondary accent on the penultimate, instead of sinking the third syllable, as is so common in England. There is, no doubt, something disagreeably stiff in an anxious and affected conformity to the very letter of orthography; and to those accustomed to a more hurried utterance we may seem to drawl, when we are only giving a full expression to letters which, though etymologically important, the English habitually slur over, sputtering out, as a Swedish satirist says, one half of the word and swallowing the other. The tendency to make the long vowels diphthongal is noticed by foreigners as a peculiarity of the orthoëpy of our language; and this tendency will, of course, be strengthened by any cause which produces greater slowness and fullness of articulation. Besides the influence of the habit of reading, there is some reason to think that climate is affecting our articulation. In spite of the coldness of our winters, our flora shows that the climate of even our Northern States belongs, upon the whole, to a more southern type than that of England. In southern latitudes, at least within the temperate zone, articulation is generally much more distinct than in the northern regions. Witness the pronunciation of Spanish, Italian, Turkish, as compared with English, Danish, and German. Participating, then, in the physical influences of a southern climate, we have contracted something of the more distinct articulation that belongs to a dry atmosphere and a clear sky. And this view of the case is confirmed by the fact that the inhabitants of the Southern