Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-03-31

Recently we wrote here an article up
holding the proper misuse of grammar.
If one may put it that way.
But there is the other side OF the
question, of course, as there always is.
1t was brought strikingly to our atten-
ton the other day while travelling
along in a public conveyance.
The poor grammar involved will be SO
terrible that the reader may think 1t
preposterous, so all we can do is to
assure him that the constructions given
are what were heard.
It is with some hesitancy that We set
down that the young men involved were
evidently law students. They were
eager, somewhat wild, young men, as
joung students the world over are and
ought to be.
They were talking about their
exams"
One evidently had not done as well in
the tests as he would have liked, be-
cause he was loud in claims OF inno-
cence.
One of his mates was even louder,
you'd "a got through" he an
nounced, eff you'd "a do the work he
told you to did"
If you'd have do what he told you to
did!
For prize poor grammar that beats
anything we ever had heard, and II any
reader here knows of an authentic case
of a worse we would be pleased to hear
about 1t.
Even if one were making 'em up, he
would find it difficult to create worse
example. The above specimen is in the
class known as hopeless. The speaker
had no right to be studying law or any
thing else except grammar.
Now, there are plenty of legitimate
grammatical mistakes made every day
by educated men and women. Who is
there who can say in his heart that he
really has mastered all the intricacles
of ''who" and whom? 1t would take
man a lifetime, and even then he
would wonder if correctness was Cor
should it be "were?") worth the trouble,
But there is no excuse whatever for
any grown person-or even a child
using such constructions as you would
have do" and "he told you to did"
These are masterpieces, indeed, before
which the average mind will stand IN
awe. If one purpoSely, for illustration
of poor grammar-or total lack OF it
should attempt to excel them, he would
find himself hard put to equal them.
AS prOQuCJ OF CKle pubic SciOol SyS-
tenn of the District of Columbia, with
additional fiourishes put on at one OF
the Midwestern colleges. We feel safe
in assuring the world that no locally
educated boy talks as in the instance
quoted. Private and other institutions
will have to share the blame. Better
than that, let us assume that the young
man in question came from some other
city.
Even in such a benighted city which
we here postulate it is impossible foI
educators to check up on such lack OF
grammar, for most pupils have enough
sense of self-protection to extend their
minds a bit when talking before
Teacher. They know exactly what reprt-
mand they will receive for such talk.
In their hours of ease, however, nc
doubt they allow their inventive genius
in poor grammatical constructions full
sway. and perhaps offer prizes among
| themselves for the finest examples. II
such a city exists and records are kept
we enter the example given above tol
| first prize. The boys will know who he
is-there only could be one.
X X X
| Perfect grammar too long has beer
| held up as an ideal, but perhaps 1t Is
necessary In the light Of what we have
given above. The results in mathe-
mates are perfect. Why should moi
| the products of talk be similarly tdeal2
Grammar becomes a bugbear only
when it Is pressed too stubbornly upon