Morris tribune., 1899-02-11

Americans zsot Guilty of the Charge OF
dss,t.,Aif sl1eannsr fI,S, Il 1,nnarna GO

Are we Americans 'corrupting
i the English indebted of London
Not long ago heard an Engfishman
state that over here they quite often
say pants" for trousers. = told
him he was wrong and that the word
was only applied to articles of I'M
derwear. Still would have been
just as decided on the subject of
west" for waistcoat." And yet
only recently received from Lon
don tailor bill on which the word
| vest was distinctly written. In
reality 'waistcoat'' is an incorrect
word as used here, since the gar
ment is not coat for the waist at
all and does not in the faintest de-
gree resemble one. The English are
intensely fond of the word lovely"
They use it on all occasions. The
habit seems even to be growing upon
them. They tell you of a lovely
sunset, a lovely horse, a lovely game
of golf, lovely cross country ride,
lovely nosegay. Their ''quite so"
always diverts me. AS rule, it is
so entertainingly incorrect An
American viii say, for example, II
had just got into town, ] had not
been able to dine on the train, and
was almost ready to snatch their
bags of provender from the noses of
the cab horses at the station. p"
''Quite SO, = smiles the Englishman.
You say, Imagine my displeasure,
my disgust at such an occurrence. =
"Quite so, = you are sympathetical-
~ answered. "Cravat' is a word
you seldom meet with in England.
1t is invariably site, y word which
has slight authority to exist at all in
the shape of a noun, and one which
we almost solely use in connection
with matters of sport Fancy" is
charming popular English phrase.
You love to hear it from the lips of
a pretty woman, though you hear
it from all sorts of lips. It is the
equivalent of our Just Think" and
is much more graceful. Of course
this question of international YER
balism is an endless one.
Our hideous Il guess" you never
hear, but II expect is often used
wrongly, as Il expect you didn't en-
joy yourself yesterday etc.
Sick, F" of course. is hardly under
stood here as anything but "nause-
ated, though it is a good old Shakes
pearean word and one of much sol
ider claim than ill F" Our drug
store" is unknown to British ear or
eye Both prefer chemist" and
with far better taste. Still, why
they have abandoned "apothecary''
I cannot see. Is it not, after all, an
apter word than chemist" in this
sense? We speak of the great Fara-
day as "a chemist. There is an
American shoe store rather
set forth as such, in Re
gent street, but this is obviously in
tended to attract the tourist. Store
for "shop" is as much discounte- |
nanced as elevator" for lift. - The |
habit of calling maya
zine of commerce 'store" cannot |
be defended, but Elevator is a
much more sensible term than |
''lift, " which is almost classible un-
der the head of slang. If you asked |
an Enghshman which depot would
be the best wherefrom to take the
train for Brighton, you would run
the risk of not being understood.
Why we call a railway station a
depot" is hard to explain. II is not
taken from the French in this con-
nection, since "gare" is invariably
throughout France, and
depot has no such definition. And
SO the colloquial vocabulary of our
English and of England's English
has twisted itself wrong or kept it
self right in either country. Alto
3ether about an equal number OF
faults and inaccuracies exist on Ell
her side. The instant we feel our
selves entitled to blame them they
can seize upon logical pretext for
blaming us. They speak the lam
yuage far more unsteady and en-
gagingly than we do, but we both
speak it with about the same ran
lom disregard. -Collier's Weekly.