Arizona republican., 1904-08-19
connectlves of English speech.

3'- English grammar, like the science of medicine, is passing out of the hands Of the general practitioner and falling atl the better for it. The misused prepoEition is now receiving the atten- tion of James c. Fernald in a timely and valuable book called "Connectives of English Speech" the need of which is illustrated daily.
 MT Speaker, where was I at?" ex- claimed a member of congress a few years ago. That congressman's ignor- ance of the use and functions of prep Ositions is shared by thousands of Americans and Englishmen, many Of whom are university graduates. In British publications the expression different to" instead of different from is frequently used. and occa- sionally some of the British writers of popular fiction even use the expression different than"
 The misuse of propositions is well il- lUstratsd by an incident that occurred
 
 sch0ol. A little Russian-Jew boy came to school one day clad in girls dress. Tue teacher Miss Alice Harmon, saw htfN crying and asked him what was the matter. The boys are calling me a giTL' he said. Why are you wear ing thtS dress?" the teacher asked "'CSRss me pants is worn out and HVt19dlar can't get me no new ones; so SC SnAaS me wear my sisters dress" well. never mind! Don't cry any mora I'll get you pair of trousers" RSi& line teacher kindly. The next day abe 9IttIe fellow came to school wearing th@ neW trousers that the teacher had bought for him. The principal came into tEse room and soon noticed that he wee trying to attract attention to his tFOVseFs. Why hello!" said the prin- cttSI Where did you get those nice tFUWseEg," Il got 'em off Miss Har- HlOn." proudly answered the boy, as the other children shrieked with laugh ter.
 Many grammarians," says MT. Fer maid. "haVe been in error In defining and tR @ certain usage as equivalent to 'tO.' and hence condemning it as supeSa aUOus or incorrect
 If IA Is the equivalent of "to," it is not CleaF why it is hence either su- pEF9wOus or incorrect. Certainly the ROFa "tO" is neither superfuous nor Incorrect in the sentence "try to find it." Then why should the equivalent of ''tO'' be super1uous or incorrect in the sentence try and find it?" Con- tinuins. the note says:
 '''The usage is sustained by the high est authority and when we come to balRBcc the expressions, is sustained also bY the logic of linguistic thought. If We change try and find 1t into try to AHd n. there is an instant loss of force. Why? Because try to find 1t refers only to a purpose which is an tecedeEt 10 the trying and which may never be Fulfilled; while try and find 1t cOnteInplateS the finding as the sure result of ths trying, which may, there A5E AtfA4cA ID IL as all dCGOHlpllSileu fact. GnNtead Of being equivalent to an .h1snise (slc), the and with it's fol- lowing verb is more nearly equal to future tense, try and (you wilD find it. Hence the idiom has a conclusive neea '" be attained by no other form of exrsression."
 Ht3h reference to the relative pro- noun that" Mr Fernald quotes from the CsatIyy Dictionary as follows:
 ''T'Gat' in this use Gas relative pro- n@Ui. is never used with proposition preceding it but may be so used when inc proposition is transposed to the end Of the clause.
 9he examples quoted from the Cen