The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1879-05-03
Our 0liu.
COMMON ERRORS OF SPEECH.
Some Of The most GldriHg Pointed Out ane
Corrections Gipea-A Fen Expressions Joi
The Careless 10 Ponder.

Corrections Gipen-A Fer Expressions for
The Careless 10 Ponder.
a grammarian correspondent writing to
the press remarks that very few PERSONS
fewer, indeed, than is generally supposed
speak and write our language correctly,
and expresses the belief that every one
gives too little attention TO the proper use
Of words-their exact meaning, orthogra- |
ply and pronunciation. We should not
be satisfied with our ability to speak and
write "well enough for all practical pur
poses" lie also suggests that much pro-
gress may be made in acquiring knovl-
edge Of words by q careful study OF the
introduction to Webster's dictionary-the
unabridged edition. 1t gives information
as to the philosophy Of our language
which cannot fail to interest the reader.
The writer picks out number Of exam
pies Of words most frequently applied
wrong, and sets them forth thus 1T is
the exception rather than the rule when
shall and will, should and would are used
correctly, especially in conversation. The
Frenchman who fell overheard from YES
sci gave us as sort Of legacy, pointed
illustration of the misuse of shall and will
He Justify cried out II will be drowned
and nobody shall help me" The specta-
tors, with proper regard for his express
ed intention, and feeling, doubtless, that
the result would be simply retributiye jus.
tice for his numbering the "King's Eng
lish," kindly held off and permitted him
to be drowned.
Shall primarily denotes obligation, and
will, purpose of inclination; the futurity
of the action being naturally inferred.
These verbs are now used 90 y as auxilia-
ries, but they still retain to great extent
thOir primary Specification. Tue following
examples will show their proper use 81
will write now" "You shall write now"
ale intends that shall write" With
reference to the future time we should say:
81 shall 90 tomorrow" "He will go to-
morrow" And in asking questions
Shall | sing?" "Will you sing ?"
"Shall you be at home tomorrow" "Mill
he arrive in time ?" Shall is used instead
Of will after certain coDjunctions--if, pro-
yided, though, unless, etc, and adyerbs
when, before, after, until, while, etc,
Should is used in the past tense in place
Of shall and would in place Of will. "Ile
intended that or you should write--he
(himself) would write" ~ should be
glad to see you to-morrow,
A very common error Is found in the
expression, 81 am opposed to those sort
of things making the prOnoun agree with
"thngs' in the plural instead Of ''sort' in
the singular number. The most careless
reader will say, il should be "that sort of
things but if he give the matter some
attention he will find that even careful
speakers frequently make the mistake.
Another common error is in the use Of like
for as and as if. We hear, "You read
like George speaks for "You read as
George speaks" "He spoke like he
meant what he said, for, "He spoke rs
if he meant what he said" Without is
often enormously used for unless 81
cannot do it without you help me, should
be, l cannot do it unless you help me. y
Not long since l heard man, who had
the appearance of one who should know
better, say to friend, "There is no use in
me going" He evidently intended to say
that there was no use in the "going," but
what he really said was equivalent to !:
"There is no use in me while | am going"
He should have used the possessiye pro-
noun my instead Of the objective me, and
his sentence would have been, "There is
no use in my going" This mistake is
often made, not only coliloquially but in
print, as per example. A daily paper said
some days ago: "In the event Of Col
Black resigning," etc., when it should have
said using the possessiye case :-"In the
event of Colonel Blacks resigning," etc.
Probably one Of the most common and
objectionable errors is in the use Of who
for whom in certain forms Of speech. 1t
is made universally in conversation by those
who are well educated, as well as by those
who are not, and reputable journals are
not free from the fault. For example
"Who did you see ?" "Who do you want2"
at was the man, who, of all others, we
desired to sec" Of course the sentences
should be;-"Whom did you see ?"
"Whom do you want?" at was the man
whom, Of all others, we desired to see."
This error is one OF the best illustrations
ofthat carelessness ofspeech to which have
above REFEREED carelessness which, when
INDUCED by educated persons, leaves its
impress upon the minds of those who are
not educated with results which cannot be
otherwise than injurious Another, not
so common, but which needs correction, is
in such expressions as "She looked beau
tifaly." This sentence, properly spoken,
is objective, not subjective, and the idea
to be conveyed is that her appearance was
beautiful, but the words are made to say
that she looked, /. e., saw beautifully"
thus completely changing the sense. The
error consist in the use Of the adverb for
the adjective, The correct expression
would be, "She looked beautiful"
We sometimes hear the word lily used,
even by persons of culture, as in the SEN
tence, "The house was lily constructed"
1t should be, "The house was i'll construct
ed, There is no such word in the lang
uage as lily. Ill is an adverb, but as il
has not the usual adverbial form, careless
speakers aud writers glide into lily.
The following are very common errors
Il should have been glad to have met you. "
will you learn me to dance 2" instead Of
"Will you teach me to dancer "This
much BY way ofapology," instead of "Thus
much, etc. 81 have looked eyerywheres,
instead of al have looked everywhere"
There are no news" instead Of, "There
is no news" "These molasscs," instead
Of This molasses," "A preventative Of
disease, instead of"preyentiye Of disease. 2
"a little Of that will go great ways" in
stead Of "a great way, etc.
The Boston Transcript is responsible
for the following "A woman win 90 on
ahonninn f.,f.r T., ot,aaf 80 I, ,.<.. 20 A..