The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1908-09-05
Some Niceties of Speech.

An interesting development of inter-
national philologics is to be perceived
in the widespread curiosity which is
reported to prevail in Great Britain,
both popularity and academically. con-
corning the etymology and precise sig
nlf1cance of the word 'laIlapaloosa, ~
which has long formed so indispensa BILE
a member of the American vocabulary.
Letters are written to critical journals
and the demand for genealogical die
tionaries has perceptibly Increased
without securing entire satisfaction for
the public mind. Parliament is not now
In session, so that no question on the
subject can be propounded to the
Treasury Bench, and for the same rea-
son the appointment of royal COM
mission on the subject is impractical
bic. Nevertheless, it seems desira BILE
that some authentic announcement
shall be made, and we must regret that
the existing dictionaries which are
considered standard in the United
Kingdom do not adequately meet this
widely felt want. Mr.. Murray's great
lexicon has not yet, we believe.
reached Lar in it's alphabetical prog
ress.
1t is not surprising that our British
kinsmen are at loss to appreciate the
precise significance of the word. al
though they are, of course, familiar
enough with its general meaning.
There are subtle niceties of speech
such as distinctions between words
which we might technically term near
synonyms. which are to be perfectly
understood without effort by only those
who are, as it were, to the manner born.
An Englishman or an American. for
example, could not make the mistake
which a Tibetan or Congolese might
make of calling Niagara Just too run
ming for anything" or of describing a
humming bird as sublime. He would
almost instinctively know that while
the words in question are all in a sense
synonyms, crowd of sheep is better
called flock, and flock of fishes a
school, and a school of bees a swarm,
and a swarm of swallows flight, and
a flight of ruffians mob.
Now it is precisely thus that Italia
palooSa" needs to be distinguished from
the various other words of similar and,
indeed, almost identical meaning. The
difference is not so much in the intrin-
sic significance of the words as in their
application. Thus an ''umpalalla' ap
proximates very closely to a ''lalapa
loosa," but the result of attempting
actually to identify one with the other
would be incongruous. A similar sub
tie but none the less essential diStinc-
ton in application is to be observed
between each of these words and "lah- |
dedah" "socdologer," "corker." ''sog-
woggler" and various others. Each has |
its own delicate but distinct and indis- |
pensable characteristics of significance, |
and it is upon the felicitous selection |
of precisely the right one of them that |
the perfection of literary style depends
A copious vocabulary, rich in verbal
shadings, is the pride of our language |
and literature, but that very opulence
may be a source of weakness and of err
ror unless its resources are employed |
with discrimination. That is why it is
so gratifying to find our transatlantic
kinsmen devoting themselves with
scholarly assiduity to the task of com
the exact shade of differ
ence between a "lallapaIoosa" and an
"umpalalla. New York Tribune.