New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1891-04-19
DE MINIMIS.
MR.. FURNIvALL AND LIKE" AS A CONJUNC"
TION-POINTS OF PUNCTUATION
"CHRLSTEN' IN ITS PRoFANE
USE.

in the arena in defence of :" like" as con-
junction: or rather, since he prefers attack
to defence to do battle against all who decline TO
accept his doctrine in favor of the conjunctional
use of this particular part of speech. 1t were bet
ter to have the proverbial milestone about your
| neck than Mr. Furnivall against you when
point of philoogy or linguistics or any related
subject is in dispute. He ought to have lived in
the golden age of Shakespearean warfare, when
critic set lance in not against critic. or. more prob
ably Glove his head with O battle axe and smashed
it in with a mace.
To differ from Mr. Funnivall is arch-heresy, and
you will be told Of it in language more energetic
than elegant. 1t is vulgar error" that like
cannot rightly be used as conjunction. Every
decently taught school boy knows it; journalists
of forty" whoever they may be. are to be excused
for ignorance; whether because they are forty or
because they are journalists, is not quite clear
Still, our brethren of the press"-in Mr.. Furni-
wallis mouth term of bitter contempt-Ought not
to make absurd statements" or infict upon
students of English IAN antithesis to brethren
of the preSs"-the irritation of seeing nonsense
put forth as truth" Shakespeare, whose name
Mr. Furnival misspells has instances of the orig
inal use of like with AS and with tor, and
we are referred to Schmidts Shakespeare Lexicon,
to save us from making absurd statements
The rapid newspaper reader might understand
Mr.. Furnivall to cite Shakespeare as ON authority
for this use of like and dare say he does mean
the rapid reader to understand this But not one
of the instances in Schmidt is decisive or unequiv
Ocal. Other authors are appealed to. rightly or
wrongly, know not, nor does it matter. Is it not
enough to have Mr. Furnivall tell u.s. in his modest
kindly way, that like is just as good conjunc-
ton it is proposition" even though popular
writers. in the insolence of their ignorance have
set themselves up declare that like has right
to be conjunction?
The popular writer" thus held up to execration
and general contumely is none other than Mr.
Andrew Lang Mr.. Langs letter in reply to Mr.
Furnivall is such model of good sense and good
humor and good manners and of delicate irony
that l will just quote the whole of it:
Il do not know English literature like Dr. Fur
nivall does, but surely / may have an opinion
about the modern use of like as conjunction
No doubt it was used by Shakespeare, Shelley,
Mr.. William Morris, and other classical authors
who denies it? The only question is as to whether
it is at present sanctioned by the majority of good
writers. AS far as have remarked it is now al
most peculiar to some lady novelists. Would DIR.
Furnivall recommend a young author to write as
they do or to conform to harmless but popular
prejudice by writing as they don't? Idioms come
and go; this particular idiom has nearly gone,
| and about idiOms as about words one may take the
advice quoted by Aulus Gellus, from julius
Caesar, l think. But anything for quiet life.
Rather than ruffe DR.. Furnivall l would write
like Mrs Henry Wood wrote"
Probably it would be wrong to commend this to
young writer's as an example. Mr.. Lang needs
no commentator Of mine, and besides, if gram
NAUTICAL controversies are to be conducted on one
side in this amiable light spirit, what will be-
come of the sledge hammer disputants like the
always astonishing Mr.. Furnivall, like Mr.
Frederic Harrison? To men of amiability or
lightness of spirit Mr.. Furnivall seems to have
antipathy violent as he has against writer's who
do not agree with him and Mrs Henry Wood in
the use of like" "Confound their impudence,
says the fierce Mr.. Furnivall
There is point which Mr.. Lang does not care
to make The colloquial use Of like" as con-
junction is l think, altogether confined to Eng
land and is not in use in the United States Does
anybody in New.York or Boston say /" like l
did,? 1t is common in London and it must not
be called vulgar because it is to be heard in the
best society Who, now that Thackeray is gone
dare say that the best society, or any usage
which it sanctions, is vulgar? Society does not
care much for Shakespeare, and says what it
chooses to say, with little regard, fear, even to
the DEGREES of Dr. Fumivall; Of whom, perhaps,
MANY of its members never heard. 1t is in Amer
lea, as we all know, that so many Elizafethan
and other good English phrases and loeutions, here
forgotten, survive. To deride them as American
lsms does not alter their true history.
1t might be hard to say why such discrepancies
in the use of English should become SO firmly fixed
on either side Of the ocean which divides the
mother country from our own, but they do No
complete list of them has ever been made. One
or another of them is noted from time to time,
then forgotten. Some attract no attention. Has
anybody, for example, dwelt on the English habit
of using IAN" before such words as hospital"
and hotel" or, which is q stronger instance De-
fore Union? Do you ever say in New-York
| a" an hospital" " an hotel? Here they never say
anything else. Is ian Union" American? 1t is
certainly English. Mr.. Lecky always uses IT, and
other writer's use it. 1t may be optional to treat
"h" as an aspirate or otherwise, but when "u'
has the force of "y" and does duty as oonsonant,
is it in America treated as vowel!
r. W., who wrote you lately on the subject OF
punctuation, touched subject on wmch-uhe
same thing maybe alleged Of most other suoJecoS-
much remains to be said. lie wants more punc-
tuation than he gets, and in one OF MS TWO eA-
amples is clearly entitled to it, In the other nc
asks for too much or for not enough buC Uhe
general comment snOulu DON ie"'N "
his letter is of different kind, namely, that cur
rent English prose is, for the most part over
bunctuated and not underpunctuated. IL Is a
matter in which we are very much III the hands
of our friends the printers and prooi-readers'
Sometimes they are our friends and sometimes
our enemies, but prefer to call them friends.
There are authors who settle this matter 1or
themselves, or try to- There are others WHO COM
NIT their manuscript with or without prenm-
mary exercise of prayer, to the tender mercies of
the compositor. Now, printing offices vary in
their customs and usages; whence it follows that
the sense of an author may depend very much
upon his choice of a printer; or upon the choice
which his publisher makes for him. The Scottish
printer has passion for punctuation, and finds