The Helena independent., 1889-06-23
STRONG LANGUAGE
The Use Of Oaths to All Appearances
= Disease Which Comes
and Goes.
SO,ss-iog q Fashion Which Never Goes
Out. But SIMPLY Changes
With the Age.
The ~, IuoloEy of swear A. Looked "P 'S
an Authority Three Main


10 pass Oft" cries Sir Toby Belch IN
bust Of yinous confidence, "that terrible
oath, with a staggering accent Sharply
twAnged of. gives manhood more spProDa-
ton than ever truth itself would have
earned him" This Is a doctrine when
has never lacked supporters. Professors
of Strong Language, II they have never
been more plentiful in one age than an
other, have not as yet been seriously
threatened with extinction. No symptoms
have hitherto been developed from which
We could fairly foreteil the approaching
end of the long reign Of imprecAtion. From
tine "a time, II J. true, there appears 20 pe
a Iull in the dlsrasr. It's VlTu!ence, al al
events, become less patent on the surface,
and its exacerbatiOus seem 10 occur al
longer intervals and With somewhat
milder intensity. But none the less u IS
there. swearing, like tailoring, Is mat
ter OF fashion, and never goes out OF Iash-
ion altogether. The form Is apt 10 change;
particular phrases become unpopular then
rare, then obsolete; yet the matter and
fundamental idea remain the same, ana
the satisfaction OF what HOtspur calls
"a good mouth filling oath seems 10
descend, with volume unabated. from
generation TO generation. NOnJuroTs,
of course, have always existed among US
in greater OF less plenty, even as teetotal-
lers ana vegetarians, but imprecations are
no more extinct than alcohol OF butchers
meat So ancient ard popular custom Is
surely worthy OF some little attention
Why do We swear and what2 Whence
arises the apparently inOrdinate feeling OF
contentment which follows the delivery OF
a specially pungent eNecTatiunP why DO
the Oaths Of one age sound ridiculous, ana
lose all their point and aroma IN the mouth
of another? These ana kindred reflections
seem 10 suggest themselves at the outset
EtymOlOgy does NOT help US much here
- 49, d nth
wise We are referred 10 the Aryan root
sWar, Signifying To mum OF "buLZ." To
swear meant originally, we are told, moth
ing more OpprObriuus than Ito declare or
affirm Hence the word answer, OF
which the strict chronological equivalent is
ito swear IN opposition to- Alas there DE-
those unto this day whose answers are thus
only too radically correct. Oath
monOsy liable which may De traced IN the
German Ed, and in sundry other feutonlc
dialects, affords no clue TO the origin ut the
sentiment which II embOdles. BIAS
phemy,' again, OF speaking inluriOusiy-
Is mere descriptive term, easy enough %
derive. but conveying, when resolved into
its factors, no intimatiOn of the special
sense which the word has for centuries car
ried with ~ Finally, TO "curse" Is con-
nected, according 10 some ot our most
modern roOJ-grubhers, with the Swedish
kOrsa, and may thus possibly signify the
act 81 making the sign of the crOss-an
explanation too timsY and faT-tetched 10
Beyond these poor shreds OF pathological
guess work we are IN no wise he ped on
our way by The laboriOus tribe of leXicOg-
raphers.
Roughly speaking, we divide the prGc-
tice OF swearing into three main varieties:
IL Is either asseVeratIve. denunciRtOry OF
Interjectional. These varieties, again. ad-
nit especially the last. of certain subdivis
ions. II is 10 the first class that those Ju-
dicial affirmatiOns belong. under stress of
which We bind ourselves 10 set forth 1.-THE
truth. the whole truth. and nothing but the
truth" sacramento, or Oaths OF allegiance,
fall under the same head. The $50 help
me God" of our own law courts finds q
woethy fOrerunner in the God do SO 10 me
and more RlSo,' or the frequent las thy
soul liVeth," of biblical authority. and with
these may be compared the common ne
Dia and ma Dia OF the Greek classics.
Strong asseverafions. however, of this
nature are more usually conveyed, for col
loQuisl purpose, through the medium of
hypothesis The speaker invites the most
fearful catastrophe conceivable BY reltg-
ious minds If what he asserts be not the
fact. Briefly, he pits his yeracity against
perditiOn.
OF denunciation there is no better speci-
men eXtant than the COmminAtion Service
appointed by the Church of Eugland for |
use Ou Ash Wednesday Ernulphus' ''Di- |
gest 0t Curses whose bitterness so offend
ed Uncle Toby, can scarcely be considered
more exhaustive, or the ban under whose
influence the JACkdaw of Rheims 50 miSer
ably mnulted. But in private life are
accustomed to employ a dclicately gTadu- |
ated scale Of commInatiOn. Starting from
some such generality As ''Occuprt eXtremum |
sca1ies, The devil take the hIndmost," we |
NAV rise 20 the highest nl ghtS of witherlug |
n A. phemy. and illuminate a varied asSOrt- |
meut OF tse choicest EnathemRs against |
those Who may have provoked cur indigna-
tion.s Bgr Il Is IN the third variety, that /
which W. may call the intcrjectiOnai or /
Complementary, that our fancy permits US /
ar,uar
under tbe iorm IT either ejaculation OF /
epithet. and There is a couiuuS glossary of /
both kinds - chNose from Il Is, and for /
many generations has besn, the most pop /
uisr of all varieties If the oath. and, hu- /
mauly speaking, the most harmless. Often, /
indeed % appears as a mere exclamation,
in0dcnSive. meaningless, and bOaStiDg /
neither rhyme nor reason.
Our Older writers abound in imprecations /
Of al shades OF intensity. They sometimes /
afford. 70 those who have that taste. agree
able chronological nuces. being. for the /
most part curious examples Of cTasis OF
contraction. Quite long list night BE-
made of such CALCULATIONS as odds pitti-
kins,n by my baiIdom" "I'fecs."
- Slight" by Gods hggens." and the
iike- What strikes rs most fOrcibly here
is the extreme familiarity with which most
sacred names and attributes are freely
handled. And with this familiarity Is /
Joined an evident disinclinattou To call
things and persons by their accustomed
names: hence the FREQ c0rruptiOns. IL |
is g. though the swearers cf that day ar
gued thar under the cloak Of a more OF
less grotesque traveSty their pro-
family would be condOned- by GUd's /
s0ntles." for instance. which Is
vXrious.y explained by the commentators
as a vulgarism for saints CT ''sanctities.r
10. too. "iakin" for lady" 'ZOunds" and
s-GOg's wOuns' for Gods wounds" "Gis'
for jesus ShyneSs in ordinary social
intercourse is sometimes said TO disguise
itself in excessive brusQnerte, and the
Elizabethsn imprecatOry code seems to
have bAen based on somewhat the same
principle. EOw otherwise are We to ac-
count for the ridiculous diminutives and
parOdies which we so frequently find doing
duty as eXpletives? Another curious re-
decIinn Is this-thaf In nnI own DAY the