The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1920-01-19
FAULTY ENGLISH

Horace Teall, IN the Inland Printer.
One undubitable fact that is sell
dom sufficiently recognized is here
the subject of thought which must be
out sketchily expressed but which
at least so the writer thinks-is
worthy of a suggestive attempt.
Faulty English does not consist
merely in violation of grammer rules,
but comprises many other kinds of
faulty expression. The fact alluded
to is that the utmost effort by the
best qualified person has always
failed to secure absolute correction
of the evil in whole or in part Gt is
strictly not so evil as some people
Think, and presumably always will
so fail
Reason for the opinion just pre-
ceding is like Coleridge's saying
which A. S. Hill quoted in his book
'"Our English" as follows: 'In prose
1 doubt whether it be even possible
to preserve our style wholly Snalloy-
ed by the vicious phraseology which
meets us everywhere, from the SER
mon to the newspaper, from the har-
angue of the legislature to the
speech from the convivial chair an
nouncing toast or sentiment. Our
chains rattle even while we are COM
planning of them.-Much, however,
may be effected by education.'
Coleridge's work from which this
was quoted was published in 1917,
and the century following has
wrought little change in the general
status, though education has had
mach good effect.
Coleridge's expression, "Our
chains rattle even while we are COM
planning of them," plainly means that
those who decry erroneous use of
language themselves make errors
even in uttering their complaint. 1t
is simply another way of saving what
H. L. Mencken meant when he said
of grammarians: More than once,
plowing through profound and inter-
minable treatises of grammar and
syntax in preparation for the present
work, | have encountered the cheer
ing spectacle of one grammarian eX-
posing, with contagious JOY, the
grammatical lapses of some other
grammarian. And nine times out of
ten, few pages further on, | have
found the enchanted purist er"lng
himself. The most funereal Of the
sciences is saved from utter hC""or
by such displays of human ma!ice
and fallibility. Speech itself; indeed,
would become almost impossible if
the grammarians could follow their
own rules, unfailingly and were al
ways right" Mencken herein over
steps the bounds and proper criti-
cism, as in the charge of malice, but
it is true that many grammarlans
violate their own rules, and that
many of the rules are worthless. 1t
is at least doubtable whether any
grammarians, even in expressing
strong dissent from the teaching of
another or others, ever exhibited
malice in his textbook.
! Grammatical errors constitute the
great majority of the defects which
are commonly classed as faulty Eng
lish, and are most frequently the
subjects of current criticism. One of
the most recent journalistic essays
in this field striking exemplifies the
prevalent human fallibility. 1t is
prompted by an item appearing in
another paper which said that Henry
Watterson made two grammatical
errors in the following passage:
"There sat at the table a gentleman
by the name of Tyndall and another
by the name of Mill-of neither had
l ever heard-but there was still an
other, of the name of Spencer, whom
l fancied must be a literary man, for
| recalled having reviewed a clever
book on Education some four years
ago by a writer of that name, a GER
tain Herbert Spencer, whom | right
lv iuIpnd nipht hn he "