The Cheyenne daily leader. [volume] (Cheyenne, Wyo.) 1870-1884, 1881-10-04
y English and American English.

~ English and American English.
An American friend of mine, I'm re-
Spouse to the question by an English
man Gan exceedingly positive and dog
matte person. as it chanced), Why do
Englishmen never say Il guess, " re-
piled more wittily than justly. .'because
they are always SO positive about every
thing" But it is noteworthy that,
whereas the American says frequently
II guess" meaning 81 know" the
Englishman as freely lards his discourse
with Ihe' expression, "You know,
which is, perhaps, more modest. Yet
ON the other side, it may be noted, that
the '-down East American often uses
the expression. II want to know in
the same sense as III English expires
sion of attentive interest Indeed"
Among other familiar A~mericanisms
may be mentioned the following
An American who is interested in a
narrative or statement will say .'Is
that SOP" or simply $50 r. The express
sion Possible y is sometimes but not
often heard. Dickens misunderstood
this exclamation as equivalent to at is
possible. but does not concern me -
whereas in reality it is equivalent to
the expression '.Is it possiblePn have
occasionally heard the expression. do
tell - but it is less frequently heard
now than of yore.
The word fright is more frequently
used han in England. and used also in
senses different from those understood
in our English usage Of the word.
Thus. the American will say fright
here and fright there" where an
Englishman would say lust here' or
lust there. or simply ''here' or
there" Americans say fright away
where we say directly" On the other
hand. l am inclined to think that the
English expression fright WE'LL" for
very well' is not commonly used in
America.
Americans say Eyes, SIR" and mo
SIR" with a sense different from that
with which the words are used in Eng
land but they mark the difference Of
sense by a difference of information.
Thus, if a question is asked to which
the reply in England would be simply
Eyes" or mo" Cor. according to the
rank or station of the querist. Eyes, SIR"
or mo, sir'), the American reply
would be Eyes. SIR" or mo, sir" in
donated as with US in England. But if
the reply is intended to be emphatic,
her tho %intonation is such as to throw
the emphasis on the word '.sir''-the
reply is Eyes, SIR" or "no, sir" In
passing. l may note that never heard
an American waiter reply '.yessir,n as
our English walters do.
The American use of the word ''quit''
is peculiar. They do not limit the word,
as we do, TO the significant 'take leave'
i'm fact, l have never heard an Ameri-
can use the word in hat sense. They
generally use it as an equivalent to
~,''leave Off or ''stop." In passing,
one may notice as rather strange the
circumstance that the word quit"
which properly means ''to go away
from" and the word stop" which
means 10 stay" should both have
come to be used as s~ignifying of ''leave
OFF, Thus Americans say ''quit fool
ing" fol- ''leave off playing the fool"
,''quit singing" '.quit laughing" and
so forth.
I; To English ears an American use of
the word some sounds strange-viz.,
rs an adverb. An American will say,
Il think some of buying new house,"
or the like, for 81 have some idea of
buying, etc. l have, indeed heard the
usage defended as perfectly correct,
Though assuredly there is not an in
stance in all the wide range of English
literature which will Justify it.
So, also, many Americans defend as
good English the use of the word
good in such phrases as the follow
ing Il have written that note good"
for well" That will make you feel
good for that will do you good" and
in other ways, all equally incorrect.
OF course. tore are instances in which
adjective re allowed by custom to'be
used as verb, rs for instance, fright"
for brightly" etc. but there can be no
reason for substituting the adjective
good" in place of the adverb SWELL"
which is as short u word and at least
e%uphonious. The use of "reals'
Tor "realll," as 'real angry" real
is. Of course dramatically in-
The use of the word elegant for
'.fine'' strikes English ears as strange.
For instance. if you say to an Ameri-
can. .sThis is q fine morning" he is
likely to reply. at is an elegant orn
or perhaps oftener by using simp-
ly the word Elegant" 1t is not a
pleasing use Of the word.
There are some Americanisms which
seem more than defensible-in fact,
dramatically more correct than our
English usage. Thus. we seldom hear
in America the redundant word '.got"
in such expressions as 81 have got"
etc., etc. Where the word would not BIO
redundant. it is yet generally replaced
by the more euphonious word ''gotten,"
now scarcely ever heard in England.
Yet. again. we often hear in America.
such expressions as II shall get me e
new book" II have gotten me a dress"
II must buy me that" and the like:
This use of ''me" for ..myself' is good
old English. at any rate.
! have been struck by the circum-
stance that neither the conventional.
but generally very absurd, American If
our English novelists, nor tho conven-
tional, but at least equally absurd, En-
glishman Of American novelists, il
made to employ the more delicate
A~mericanisms or Anglicisms. We gen.
orally find the American guessing" or
Calculating il not even come coarsely
Yankee. like Reade's Joshua Fullalove.
while the Englishnan of American
novels is almost always very coarsely.
British, even IL he is not represented as
using what Americans persist in re-
garding MS the true "Henglish hac-
cent" Where an American is less
conrsely drawn. as Trollope's stAmeri-