The Portland daily press., 1885-01-02

comparison for Mr.. Adams, fol all these au-
thors are fine classical scholars, almost de-
voices of Greek and Latin, and the second
and third have been pointed to as examples
of excessive classical cultivation. The result
of this test is, that out of about 1856 words
taken as above stated, Adams 3es 81 words
derived directly from the Greek and Latin;
Higginson uses 40 such words; Everett, 81;
Schurz, 81; and Summer, 46.
When l say ''words derived directly" l
mean words essentially unchanged in form
and meaning by passage through the Ian
guages of the several Romantic nations of
modern Europe. A far greater number of
words than | have stated, in the same pages,
may he said, in proper but less strict sense,
to bs derived from the Greek and Latin.
The result of this comparison seems so re-
markable, convicting Mr.. Adams as it does,
of the high crime of using more s'Latin-
isms," /. e. "barbarisms," than the mcu
whom he and others would undoubtedly
point to as extreme classicists, that l will
give your readers, including Mr.. Adams, the
means of verifying for themselves my state
ment.
have taken the eleventh page of Mr..
AdamB's address, first edition, beginning
with the words, 81 prefer the philosophy of
Montaigne," which contains about 1856
words; the same number of words from
Higginsou, beginning on page - of "Atlan-
tic Essays" with the words, ''The Chief dis
enlargement of American literature; the
same number from Everett, beginning on
page 80, volume 4, of his orations, published
in 1871 by Little, Brown & Co., with the
words, "Justice is another of the great king
ly virtues of life"; the same number from
Sumner, beginning on page 4O7 OF his works,
volume 5, Lee & Shepard, 1874, with the
words, "As his eminence was without pre-
ole h &c fallf,. ho N
Der from Schurz. beginning on page 203 of
the Sumner memorial volume, published by
order of the Massachusetts legislature in
1874, with the words, "Such was the vital
spirit of the anti-slavery movement"
SO much for Mr. Adams's success in Eek
polling" "barbarsms" from his own writ
ings!
Now, as to bis idea that the use of Greek
and Latin words, or their derivatives. dis
graces our English, venture to say that it
is even more untrue and ridiculous than
have shown the result of his own attempt to
avoid them 10 be- No man, it seems to me,
with particle of "artistic sense" can hest
| tate in deciding that the expulsion of these
| "Latnisms' from any of the authors named
| would not only expel the finest flavor, near
| ly all that we call cultivation or literary
| taste, bat would equally expel the vigor,
| precision and power of these writings.
Mr.. Adams INDUCES In strange sort OF
oracular dogmal ism when he refers to the
Bible, Bunyan, Defoe and Cobbett to sup
| port his thesis.
In passing, let me do an act of simple
| Justice to the author of "Rasselas.' whom
| Mr.. Adams would snuff out by an allusion.
| Johnson's writing has been wittily called
| J0hns0neSe rather than English, but | am
| sorry for any one who does not acknowledge
with gratitude the debt of us all to John
sons style even, for enriching our language
| for the uses of poetry aud prose; and in this
| very matter of "Latinisms" the most alb
| surd exaggerations abound respecting John
sons style. The late Professor Hadley's
s.Brief History of the English Language -
| which prefaces the later editions of Web
| ster's DlcLionary-a mine of wealth on this
| SWEEPSTAKES that Johnson's preface to
his dictionary contains Y per cent of Saxon
words, while in Millions poetical works
about two-thirds of the vocabulary are for
eign. A comparison will show that even
the author of "Rasselas," by this test, uses
relatively fewer sLatinisms," or 'sbarbar-
isms," and far more Saxon words than Mr..
| Adams.
But the reference to the Bible is equally
| NAL q prOpoS for his purposes. Whether
Mr.. Adams refers to King James's version
or the recent revision / do not know, but
/ will venture the opinion, derived from some
careful examination, that the revised Bible
| contains fewer rather than more "Latin-
isms.' But the King James translators
| certainly produced version of wonderful
excellence in point of style. Let one read
! their preface, il one would see whether they
regarded Greek and Latin derivatives as
"barbarisms'' to be 'expelled"! Read the
| first chapter of Genesis; the first chapter Of
| Job; the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah, thai
strain of mingled prophetic hope and sor,
row; the Psalms of David, especially "tbai
| lofty and melancholy psalm in which the
| fraglity of human life is contrasted with
| the immutability of him, in whose sight q
| thousand years are but as yesterday when II
| is past, and as watch in the night" read
the New Testament anywhere, and the
"La:inisms" will be found sown thick
through them all. What error and faulty
| to refer to the Bible, in either version, to
sastainsuch an opinion as Mr.. Adams ex
| pressesl
But as to Bunyan and "Pllgrim's Prog.
| ress:" here surely is an example which, il
any could, ought to sustain Mr.. Adams: but
as soon as one looks into "Pilgrim's Prog
ress" one sees that the ''Latinisms" are still
here-ts very name, both words, pure ''bar-
barisms!" Take list of IFS characters. its
names-Cty of Destruction, Obstinate, PHI
able, Journalist, Hypocrisy, Timorous-Dis-
| content, Arrogancy, Mr.. Implacable, liquor.
| aDce, Sagacity, and SO on od fnena--all
s'Latinisms," or, worse still, Grecisms. ]
| open my copy, as | am very apt to do do, at
that most impressive closing chapter of the
| first part-the fate of ignorance-and read
the last two pages to find that Bunyan, not
| having had Mr.. Adams's classical education.
failed to expel, if he even detected, the
"Latinisms" which stud his immortal work
| so thickly.
| But Defoe: Has Mr.. Adams ever read
| Defoe? Does he not know that ssMoll FIan-
| ders" and Colonel jack" as well as .'Rob-
inson Crusoe," though the most limpid and
! idiomatic of all English, are literally stuffed
| with sLatinisms?" II he does not know
this, let him read and see!
And Cabbett: I think Cobbetts style. his
| English, deserves Southey's praise of it, but
there are three works of Cobbett, to name
no others out of the long list, which refute
| all arguments against Greek or Latin drawn
| from his style; | mean his English Gram
| mar" his 'Letters to Addington' and his
protestant Reformation in England and
| Ireland / would invite those who fancy
the excellence of Cobbett's style consists to
| any degree in "expelling Latinisms," to
read again Cobbett's Introduction TO his
| grammar, in the guse of a letter TO his little
| son, Paul; or in the same work. his 'sSix
lessons. intended to prevent statesmen from
| using false grammar and from writing in an
| awkward mannerr' Each of the two last
named works, but particularly the LAST, from
| its title to its close, pace Mr.. Adams. is a
| striking example of the free as well as the
sterribly effective use for Lard hitting, poem-
ical or denunciatory writing, of eLatin-
isms."
81 much again for Mr.. Adams reliance on
the Bible, Bunyan, Defoe aud Cobbett!
The same result in kind will be reached
by examining any great English writer.
John Bright is another stock illustration
of our friends, the modernists. John
Bright, it is said, knows no Greek or Latin,
but uses the best English, now spoken
therefore, the study of Greek and Latin is
"a Feuchp Tenterden Steeple and Good
win Sands are nothing 10 the incousequence
of such reasoning.
Here let me state one or two fundamental
truths in this matter of English. What is
English, or the English language? Is it
Anglo-Saxon? Is it Celtic? Or Danish? 1t
is no more these, in any sense, than it is
Greek or Latin. English is a fact, not a