The independent press. (Abbeville C.H., S.C.) 1853-1860, 1858-05-14
---->c- -r~-------
That Question Of Ph.lologY Aeain

Our readers will perhaps rccolcct. that a
few w'ckr ago, We PROPOSED nn enquiry as 10
the authority for the Use of the plural form .!
the word people. to wit 'pe"p,r-." whicl, We
were d!sr"s'd to regard an iunovatiun upon
the propivties of speech, nnd upon the purity
of our go"l mother tongue. Our position WAS
this--that the singular form of the word con.
tanned within itself the idea of plural. aud ,ha,
the plural form WAS unnecessary.
The enquiry has elected n response from the
editor of the Winnshoro Register. who armed
with ""rhster's Cnahridgc'l." and ''proofs from
Holy Writ intinatrs his competency not mere
" to answer our question. hut to propose one,
On his own account Our friend thinks he has
furnished. n conclusive reply to our cnqriry,
by citing with Wcbster's assistance, passage
from Revelations. in which the plural form of
the word does occur, rs if the Good Book has
not often, been quoted to justify II thousand
llcrcs.s ofdortrnc and why not anomalies in
phiioiogy. 1t has been indeed an .jfc:na gc,..
tam, and the pregnant aIln"ry ofrvery conlru-
vrrsul weapon. aud sometimes innicts equal
damage upon friend and foe. The Devil hinself
quotes Scripture ard perhaps with equal cifec,
rs our friend, in this Instance.
"case in point" however often fails to set.
tie doubtful question law and us tn.
learucl counsel "rrugns the authority of al
Judged cases, by citing cases of c1nal weight,
and showing where the current Of authority
lies so in the present instance, We shall quote
the Scripture itself against our friend, and
show that the translators, used the singular
form Of the word ''reopl..' in the same sense
aud III the snme connection. as the plural is
used in the passage cited In Revelations. Z
ehaPt. verse. occurs the phrase. 'all nations
and kindreds. and peop and tongues" and 50
IN the II chap. Verse, is the phruse, "pcuple
.nd kindred and tongues and nntion."-where
the word people" (lhe singular form) is used in
the sHme sense. as in the passage cited to jus.
t'fy the plural form. These passages are suifi j..
cien', we think to justify the rejection of a
term unwarrauted hy the norma lngaenli and
d'ssonant and burbarons to ears p"litc." ..pco.
pie Is a collective noun, including within it
self the idea of plural. aud taking always a
plural verb; and the form peoples" is simply
useless expIetive.
But our friend, is not content to answer SIM
ply, but undertakes to propose all interroga
tory himself, and enquir-s whether a deeper
research in'o phiol"gy. might not induce lis
to adopt the phrase n mess Of pesse" instead
OF '''ness of peas as used by us. Here our
friends authority Webster fails him for
though TINT wor", does give the first form Of
expression. yet it at the the same time pro.
nounces it "arbitrary and ,npr"per.'' Aud lie
himself. seems to regard il so, aud twice in the
article. i'll which occurs the criticism, he uses
the Identical expression criticised. lie fails to
adhere to hi, own canons OF criticism (n.l:nit.
ting them TO be correct, which however, we
have seen are discu, dcd by his own authority
Webster.")
y! Tempora o Mores.