The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1889-07-24
oUxEw Usk or wORDs.
Expreeaions Peculiar to the North
and svuah--ssYou Re-" Etc.


ChantsuQusa-
TX seeas the most natural thing ia
the world for Soaiherner ia calling
another to say, %. john - bat il al
WAYS seems To anxu>e oar friends scross
the way. Ii is tie s.o' that exci,es
their merriment. and in attempting 10
give the popularity they often repre-
sent US as saving. uaf John, which
we never say.
Another Southern expression which
always sounds queer 10 Northern ears
is the use oil the wor3 mighty" as sn
adyerb. Bat 10 those accustomed To
it. Mighty pretty conveys an idea
OF beauty that he 6veraurdesed North
ern word lovely" Doesn't reach.
Turning to Webster 10 see il il must
BE given up. We find that il is allow
allie when used colioquially. Good,
We should never wan, 10 use II except
coll. quially.
In ,ue North man. Sis his wagon
! box" with corn and draws it 10
town: in the South he ILLS his wagon
bed with corn and "bauls' il 20 the
same place.
In New England they say "the go
ros,isl i bad; in the South they say
! '.the travelling" Is bad. Perhaps tn
saw the roads are bad would be more
i ineligible than either.
/ Sculherners say like" for las IT,
as ''she looked ike she wanted to yo,
/ They laugh AZ il III the North. and in
/ the same breath saw las for that"
! ~ don't know as | ever heard ii
/ here'-and then the Southerner
/ laughs, and both are happy. So IN
grained are both expressions, how
ever, that the delinquents are seldom
j conscious Of the Delinquency.
I 4 large proportion of grammati al
mistakes are common TO the une,iu-
/ Gated wherever they are found, hut
! there are some which are SD peculiar
| to certain sections that their use set
/ ties 1T once the question of whether
| the person using them is from the
/ North or South. The expression II
I seen" for II saw" Is very common
/ mistake in tie Soath and rare in the
/ North, while II seen him yesterday
| for II saw him yesterday" 80 COM
mon. even among educated people at
the North, Is never heard in the South.
This makes it di;bcult for writer's
who have never lived in certain sec
/ ton To initiate successfully the dialect
OF that people. They are apt to be
betrayed into the mistake of putsing
into the mouths of certain class in
I another part of the country such
words as they would hear from the
same class in their own section. This
undoubtedly is the difficulty which
many Northern writer's lind in truth
| fully portraying the negro dialect
| They take as models the negroes they
have known, and Judge, incorrectly,
/ that the talk of tae Southern negro
would be the same; consequently, a
| practised ear can almost always de-
tect the difference between one who
assumes familiarity and one who is
Ito this manner born. The incon-
| gruity of making a Southern negro
say '.Whar be you goin'?" as We saw
recently in some story, Is inexpressibly
lu!icrous TO one familiar with their
dialect. He might say "Whar you
| goin ?" or "Whar is you goin' ?" but
never ''Whar be you goin'g" The
honor of the expression You be. T"
belongs exclusively to the North
What he would be most likely to say
il, "Whar you gwine?"