The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1899-10-26

told ii has become usual here also IN
letters Of affairs; but it seems to be
the invariable form on the other side
of the ocean. There is assuredly moth
ing wrong with it except a novelty. we
make no difficulty of Write me let
ter and yet write me by return post
we cannot abide. Why not? ME" In
our monotonous language is as good
a dative as it is an accusative, so that
grammar is not outraged; and this OBJ
viously we acknowledge by our Write
me a letter." Sing me a song and
Give me a book,
In an article on this ever interesting
topic Mr.. William Archer has said that
the Americans do not make princi-
pie of following the Latin emphasis,
else they would say 'orator-y, and so
forth. But as a fact they nearly do say
it. They make a kind of compromise.
To hear them say "oratory'' you would
suppose that in the further inland parts
of their own country they would say
oratory with a quite long o. but that
they have been somewhat discouraged
by the English practice. They nearly
equalize the syllables, as though they
We're speaking French. Nor do they
ever achieve the expert English way of
hurrying a syllable without dropping
it altogether which makes "oratory'
kind of test of English accent. When
they say library they seem to be re-
membering the precepts of their teach
ers in childhood, who had warned them
to divide the two RS, but not with SO
distinct an interva. Altogether, an
American seems to speak with more di-
| o,,+ - I, N.1rI Oh "a
we burden ourselves withal. He is apt
to tell you how carefully he has trained
to pronounce Leigh Hunt with a rhyme
to SAY" for the Christian name. Nor
does he change that fashion when he
learns that Leigh Hunt and his coun-
trymen used a different vowel sound.
On the whole he pronounces with
much more purpose and WEAKNESS and
with more consciousness of education,
than does the Englishman. He has
more scruples. He never writes round
(the adverb) without an apostrophe to
signify the merely colloquial dropping
of the a. And this word he uses very
often, because for some unknown reason
although Biblical English is always
at handand as at least as familiar in
the United States as with us) about
book" but he will never say that he
is "going about" he always says "go-
ing around" or Familiarity round" He
thinks us very slovenly for our way Of
dropping the h in WHITE and he pro-
nounces it carefully, transposing it so
that it begins the word. He sounds the
h in hotel" which seems to us Ill, be- |
cause 1t is not French. And generally |
he let's you understand that what he |
does is not done by chance
He says the address with con-
seriousness that somehow the word so
pronounced requires more care in sen- |
tence than 1t does when spoken in the |
English manner derived from the |
Freeh) with the accent on the second
syllable. That address is the usual
educated way in America is proved not
only by speech but by metre. for I have
Just found the word with that stress in J
American verse.
Why, one may wonder in vain, have
the United States given UP the use Of
branch? Scripture and all the poets
and all English literature have made
the word as familiar there as it is here.
Whey, then, are we always leased, in
print and in speech alike, with limb"
in place of 1t? If America will promise
to take branch back into use, and If
she will give up the ugly word dirt" in
plice of earth as agardening term,
on her part will do something
to please her, or two things. The offer
lisa fair one. Which are they to be? 1t
is only too evident that any American
Is ready to name two things that offend
him in the talk of English people, and
nffo !, i,,, or
would not offer such paltry concession
as the abandonment of different to-"
Forthis, although Americans are still
Of it in our speech, we have
long ago explicitly renounced. 1t is
now many years since we PROGRESSED our
national repentance, and though some
Of us may say it, in that state of mad
to which we are too liable
none of us who have any responsibility '
will ever write it again. We know it
Is modern and of a bad time. We re-
member how i'll 1t looks where it stands
in the Queen Anne English of Thack-
arays "Esmond." Let them ask us for
better
Inadvertently we certainly are, more
han any other European nation, and
much more than America. 1t is by no
means of their own habit of observation |
hat we become aware of the prevalence
If certain habits of speech among
Americans. For instance a novelist,
Who is one of the most vigiant writers
md of men, mimics the speech of an
by printing her manner
# pronouncing "styoupid." Few Eng
ish hearers detect the fact that all :
americans of whatever part of the con-
inent call their chief city Moo York"
Not that they make the double O long
II conspicuous. The word is spoken
lutte quickly, and makes an iambc =
cot whereas We generally take it as
pondee. But the absence of the Eng
ish slight preliminary sound seems to
e invariable in America That cound 4
5, however a little refinement which
We shall take leave to keep.
American indigna tion, even when it is
eserved, is easier to meet than an add 1
lraton that is altogether unmerited. |
N American said to me- by the chance
{ conversation, that he had lived long