The sun., 1898-03-12
Good English and Organic Law.

In another column a cultivated and an
ingenious correspondent objects to the u.s.
sertions lately made by The Sun that Eng.
lish is made by the best authors who write
it, and that question of English is decided
by the usage of English writers of the first
rank English" says our correspondent,
is made by all the people who speak it,
and question of English is to be deter
mined by reference to it's organic laws. y
With the first of these propositions we sub
stantially agree. English has been made,
and is made, by all the people who have
spoken or speak or have written or write
it. The English language is vast recep-
tacle of words and phrases to which almost
every day adds something. The English
language, as we understand it. consists of
every word that has been used or is now
used by any speaker or writer of that
language. The obsolete or decayed word
that has died from the spoken speech is
not wholly dead, even IL it lives only in
glossaries. The latest-born bit of slang,
which has not been and may never be
adopted into the written language, is also a
part of English, as are the new terms to
which new necessities and uses give occa-
lish language, always open for new bust
ness, yet containing in its storerooms and
dusty garrets thousands and thousands of
words unused and out of fashion.
New words take their place almost be-
fore we know it. Old words drop out in
sensibly or are revived and received again;
continual change and motion of the living
speech, continued immobility of most of
what may be called the worn-out part of
the language. All is English, but not all
is good English. How do we find out what
is good Englsh2 We know of no other
method than to consult writers of good
English. In them we shall get good Eng
lish. In the best of them we shall get the
best English.
1--WE cannot elevate any given number or
rank of writers into court of language"
says our correspondent, Choosing some
and casting aside others, without ourselves
first assuming the authority we delegate" 4"
WE'LL how would he determine question
of pronunciation, for instance7 He would
not put too much trust in dictionaries.
He would depend, would he not, in
the last resort upon the usage of
cultivated men and womcn2 He would
make a little court of the cultivated men
and women of his acquaintance, and abide
by their decision. In somewhat the same
way he would depend, consciously or un-
consciously, upon the best English authors
for the best usage of English. They use no
hieroglyphical and esoteric tongue. There
is no important difference between the
spoken and the written language. The
writers are the registers of the language.
as our correspondent admits. No "given
number of writers need be supposed. We
take it for granted that man who tries to
write good English will have to have his
mind saturated with good English. In
most cases the SprachgetaM is not gift,
but the result of cultivation.
Every great writer has his share in max
ing as well as recording the language, but
granting that the great writers are but the
abstract and brief chronicles of the Ian.
guage of their time. whom else shall we
consult as to a question Of good English9
Our correspondent argues very ably that
"a question of English is to be determined
byrcference to its organic laws" Into the
region of organic laws we must decline
to follow him. The organic laws of Ian
guage remind us of the philosophy of his.
tory. These are transcendental regions of
cloudy fairyland. Give us something q
little more concrete and definite.