New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-08-14
ENGLISH And MEXICAN ENGLISH
r. A. Proctor in The Genueyou's Uooos,oe

AN american friend OF mine, ia response to the
question by an Englishman ian exceedingly positive
E ana aGgmafic person as it changed, Why do
positive about everything" But it is noteworthy
that whereas the American. says frequently II
freely ards his discourse with the expression You
KNOW, which Is, perhaps more modest Yet, on the
other SIDE it may be noted, that the down East y
american often uses the expression :" want to
know III the same our English expression
OF attentive interest " Indeed
Among other familiar Americanisms NAV be mem
toned the following:
An American who is interested in a narrative or
The expression "Possiblep is sometimes Int
not often heard. Dickens misunderstood this
does not concern me-; whereas in reality it is
equivalent to the expression E" Is it possiblep /
have occasionally heard the expression Do teIlr
but 1t is less frequently heard now than of yore
The word right" is more frequently used than
in England. and is nsed also in different from
those understood in our English of the word.
:. i right thege," where an E9glishman would say
there" Americans say right away where we
say " directly" On the other hand, / am inclined
to think that the English expression right WELL
for very well is not commonly used in America.
Americans say yes SIR" and mo- sir" with
sense different from that with which the words are
used In England but they mark the difference of
sense by difference OF intonation. Thus if a ques-
ton Is asaed TO which the reply in England would
or station of the querist yes, sir" no, sir ~
the American reply would he yes sir" or mo sirs
is intended TO be emphatic, then the intonaton is
slch as to throw the emphasis on the word sir" -
may note that / have never heard an American
waiter reply "yessir," as our English walters do.
m The American use of the word quit is peculiar.
They do not limit the word we do, to the signii-
cation take leave in fact, | have never heard
an American use the word in that sense. They gen
orally mse 1t as an equivalent TO " leave OFF" or
stop" I'm passing, may notice as rather
strange the circumstance that the word quit"
which properly means " TO go away FROM" and the
word " stop" which means To stay" should both
have come to be used as signifying to " leave OIL y
Thus Americans say quit foollng" for, leave OF
playing the fool" "qut singing, quit laughing
and SO forth.
To English ears an American use of the word
" some sounds strange--viz., as an adverb. An
american VII say think some OF buying new
ing, etc. | have indeed heard the usage defended
as perfectly correct, though assuredly there is not
ture which will justify il.
So, also, many Americans defend as good English
Ihe use OF me word good IN such phrases as the fol-
= that viii make you feel good" for " that will
do you good and IN other ways all equally incor-
rect OF course, there are instances in which adec-
tlves are allowed by custom 10 be used verbs as
for instance, right for " rightly" etc. but there
can be reason for substituting the adjective
" good in place of the adverb " we'll" which is as
short word and at least equally euphonious. The
use of real for " really" as " real angry real
NICE is, OF course, automatically indeiensible.
The use of the word elegant" for =" tine" strikes
English ears as strange. For instance. if you say TO
an American, Tins is tne morning. he is likely
TO reply IL Is n elegant mornng or perhaps
Elegant" 4
not "A pleasing use OF the word.
There are some AmcncanisIns which more
than deiensible-in tact, gTamnatically more cor
rect than our English usage. Thus, we seldom hear
IN America the redundant word got" in such ex-
prcssons as " have got" &c. &c. Where the
word would not be redundant, II is Yet generally
placed by the more cuphonious word gotten now
scarcely ever heard IN England. Yet again. often
near III America such expressions as " | shall get
a new book" Il have go ten me a Dress" II must
buy me that and the like. This of me- for
myself" is good Old English, at any rate.
] have been struck 10y the circumstance that
neither the conventional but generally very absurd,
American of our English novelIsts, the conyen-
tonal, but at least equally absurd, Englishman of
American noyellsts Is made to employ the del
icate Americanisms AngliclsmS. We generally find
the American " guessing" Calculating" If
not more coarsely Yankee. hike Reade'S
Joshua FullaOve while the EngliShman OF Ameri-
can novels Is almost always very coarsely British,
even If he Is not represented as using what Ameri
persist in regarding the true nenglsh nae
cent" Where an American is less coarsely drawn,
as Trollope's American Senator" he uses express
slons which no American ever uses and of
those Amerlcanisms which, while more delicate, are
III reality more characteristic, because they
mon, all Americans using them. And in like man
ner when an American writer introduces Eng
lishman of the moro natural sort he never makes
him speak as an Englishman would speak before
half uoZen sentences have been uttered he uses
some expression which is purely American. Thus
no Engllshman ever uses and no American may be
recognised at once by using such expressions as
know il or That's 50" Tor Ii is true" by saving
Why, certainly" for certainly and so forIh
There are great number of these slight bat char
acteriSlc peculaTics of American and English Eng
nsh.