Stories That Words Tell Us Part 14

_Admiral_ comes from the Arab phrase _amir al bahr_, "emir on the sea."

Just the opposite to doublets which do not resemble each other are many pairs of words which are p.r.o.nounced alike and sometimes spelled alike. Very often these words come from two different languages, and there are many of them in English through the habit the language has always had of borrowing freely whenever the need of a new word has been felt.

The word _weed_, "a wild plant," comes from an Old English word, _weod_; while "widows' weeds" take their name from the Old English word _woede_, "garment." The word _vice_, meaning the opposite of _virtue_, comes through the French from the Latin _vitium_, "a fault;" while a "_vice_," the instrument for taking a perfectly tight hold on anything, comes from the Latin _vitis_, "a vine," through the French _vis_, "a screw." Yet another _vice_, as in _viceroy_, _vice-president_, etc., comes from the Latin _vice_, "in the place of." _Angle_, meaning the sport of fishermen, comes from an Old English word, _angel_, "fish-hook;" while _angle_, "a corner," comes from the Latin word _angulus_, which had the same meaning.

We might imagine that the word _temple_, as the name of a part of the head, was a metaphor describing the head as the temple of the mind, but it has no such romantic meaning. _Temple_, the name of a place of wors.h.i.+p, comes from the Latin _templum_, "a temple;" but _temple_, the name of a part of the head, is from the Latin word _tempus_, which had the same meaning in Latin, and also the earlier meaning of "the fitting time." It has been suggested that in Latin _tempus_ came to mean "the temple," because it is "the fitting place" for a fatal blow, the temple being the most delicate part of the head.

_Tattoo_, meaning a "drum beat," comes from the Dutch _tap-toe_, "tap-to," an order for drinking-houses to shut. But _tattoo_, describing the cutting away of the skin and dyeing of the flesh so common among sailors, is a word borrowed from the South Sea Islanders.

_Sound_ meaning "a noise," and _sound_ meaning "to find out the depth of," as in _sounding-rod_, are two quite different words. The one comes from the word _son_, found both in Old English and French, and the other from the Old English words _sundgyrd_, _sund line_, "a sounding line;" while _sound_ meaning "healthy" or "uninjured," as in the expression "safe and sound," comes from the Old English word _sund_, and perhaps from the Latin _sa.n.u.s_, "healthy."

The existence of so many pairs of words of this sort, which have the same sound and which yet come from such different origins--origins as far apart as the speech of the people of Holland and that of the South Sea Islanders, as we saw in the word _tattoo_--ill.u.s.trates in a very interesting way the wonderful history of the English language.

CHAPTER XVIII.

NICE WORDS FOR NASTY THINGS.

In the days of Queen Elizabeth there were in England certain writers who were called "Euphuists." They got this name from the t.i.tle of a book, "Euphues," written by one of them, John Lyly. The chief characteristic of the writings of these Euphuists was the grandiose way in which they wrote of the simplest things. Their writings were full of metaphors and figures of speech. The first Euphuists were looked upon as "refiners of speech," and Queen Elizabeth and the ladies at her court did their best to speak as much in the manner of Euphues as they could.

But all men at all times are unconscious Euphuists, in so far as they try to say ugly and unpleasant things in a way which will make them sound pleasant. This tendency in speech is called "euphemism," a word which is made from two Greek words meaning "to speak well." It is a true description of what the word means if by "well" we understand "as pleasantly as possible." The word _euphemeite_, "speak fair," was used as a warning to wors.h.i.+ppers in Greek temples, in the belief that the speaking of an unfortunate word might bring disaster instead of blessing from the sacrifice.

Every day, and often in a day, we use euphemisms. How often do we hear people say, "if anything should happen to him," meaning "if he died;"

and on tombstones the plain fact of a person's death is nearly always stated in phrases such as "he pa.s.sed away," "fell asleep," or "departed this life." People often refer to a dead person as the "deceased" or the "departed," or as the "_late_ so-and-so." The fact is that, death being to most people the unpleasantest thing in the world, there is a general tendency to mention it as little as possible, and, when the subject cannot be avoided, to use vague and less realistic phrases than the words _death_, _dead_, or _die_.

One reason for this avoidance of an unpleasant subject is the superst.i.tious feeling that mentioning a thing will bring it to pa.s.s.

Or, again, if a misfortune has happened, many people feel that it only makes it worse to talk about it. While everybody avoids speaking on the subject, we can half pretend to ourselves that it is not true.

We might imagine that this kind of "refinement of speech" (which when carried to excess really becomes vulgar) was the result of modern people being so "nervous." But this is not the case. Complete savages have the same custom. If civilized people have a superst.i.tious feeling that to mention a misfortune may bring it to pa.s.s, savages firmly believe that this is the case. Not only will they not mention the subject of death in plain words, but some will not even mention the name of a dead person or give that name to a new-born child, so that in some tribes names die out in this way. Many civilized people have this same idea that it is unlucky for a new-born child to be called by the name of a brother or sister who has already died.

The subject of death has gathered more euphemisms around it than almost any other. Some of them are ugly and almost vulgar, while others, from the way in which they have been used, are almost poetical. To speak of the "casualties" in a battle, meaning the number of killed and wounded men, seems almost heartless; but to say a man "fell in battle," though it means the same thing, is almost poetical, because it suggests an idea of courage and sacrifice. The expression, "Roll of Honour," is a euphemism, but poetical. It suggests the one consoling thought which relieves the horror of the bald expression, "list of casualties."

Another cause of the use of euphemisms, besides the superst.i.tious fear of bringing misfortune by mentioning it too plainly, is the fear of being vulgar or indecent. Through this feeling words which are quite proper at one time pa.s.s out of use among refined people. English people do not freely use the word "stomach" in conversation, and are often a little shocked when they hear French people describing their ailments in this region of the body. In the same way, names of articles of underclothing pa.s.s out of use. The old word for the garment which is now generally called a "chemise" was _smock_; but this in time became tinged with vulgarity, and the word _s.h.i.+ft_ was used. This in its turn fell out of use among refined people, who began to use the French word _chemise_. Even this, and the word _drawers_, which was also once a most refined expression, are falling into disuse, and people talk vaguely of "underlinen" in speaking of these garments. The shops which are always refined to the verge of vulgarity only allow themselves to use the French word _lingerie_.

Again, the faults of our friends and acquaintances, and even the graver offences of criminals, are matters with which we tend to deal lightly. Such offences have gathered a whole throng of euphemisms about them. When we do not like to say boldly that a person is a liar, we say the same thing by means of the euphemism a "stranger to the truth." Other lighter ways of saying that a person is lying is to say that he is "romancing," or "drawing the long bow," or "drawing on the imagination," or "telling a fairy tale." A thief will be described as a "defaulter," and we may say of a man who has stolen his employer's money as it pa.s.sed through his hands that he is "short in his accounts."

Especially among the poorer or less respectable people, to whom the idea of crime becomes familiar, the use of slang euphemisms on this subject grows up. A person for whom the police are searching is "wanted." A man who is hanged "swings." These expressions may seem very dreadful to more refined people, but their use really comes from the same desire to be indulgent which leads more educated people to use euphemisms to cover up as far as possible the faults of their friends.

Again, misfortunes which come not from outside happenings but from some defect in a person's mind and body are often the subject of euphemisms. In Scotland a person who is quite an imbecile will be described as an "innocent"--a milder way of saying the same thing.

_Insane_ and _crazy_ were originally euphemisms for _mad_, but now have come to be equally unpleasant descriptions. So for _drunken_ the euphemism _intemperate_ came to be used, but is now hardly a more polite description. We would not willingly speak of a person being "fat" in his presence. If it is necessary to touch on the subject, the word "stout" is more favoured. In the absence of the fat person the humorous euphemism may be used by which he or she is said to "have a good deal of _embonpoint_."

Many words are euphemisms in themselves, just as many words are complete metaphors in themselves. The word _ill_ means literally "uncomfortable," but has come to have a much more serious meaning.

_Disease_ means literally "not being at ease," but the sense in which we use it describes something much more serious than the literal meaning. The word _ruin_ is literally merely a "falling."

One result of words being used euphemistically is that they often cease to have their milder original meaning, and cease therefore to seem euphemistic at all. _Vile_, which now means everything that is bad, is in its literal and earlier use merely "cheap." _Base_, which has the meaning of unutterable meanness, is literally merely "low."

_Mercenary_ is not exactly a complimentary description now. It means that a person thinks far too much of money, but originally it merely meant "serving for pay," a thing which most men are obliged to do.

_Transgression_ is generally used now to describe some rather serious offence, but it literally means only a "stepping across." The "step"

which it describes being, however, in the wrong direction, the word has come to have a more and more serious meaning. The study of euphemisms can teach us much about men's thoughts and manners in the past and the present.

CHAPTER XIX.

THE MORAL OF THESE STORIES.

Most stories have a moral. At least grown-up people have a habit of tacking a little lesson on to the end of the stories they tell to children. And as a rule the children will listen to the moral for the sake of the story. And so even the stories which words tell us have their lessons for us too, and, let us hope, the stories are sufficiently interesting to pay for the moral.

One thing that these stories must have shown us is that the English language is a very ancient and wonderful thing. We have only been able to get mere glimpses of its wonderful development since the days when the ancestors of the peoples of Europe and many of the peoples of India spoke the one Aryan tongue. All the history of Europe and of India--we might almost say of the world--is contained in the languages which have descended from that Aryan tongue.

Another point which these stories have impressed upon us is that language is a kind of mirror to thought. For every new idea people must find a word, and as ideas change words change with them. These stories have given us some idea of the wonderful growth of ideas in the minds of men in the past; they have shown us men daring all dangers for the sake of adventure and discovery and for pride of country; they have shown us the growth of new ideas of religion and kindness, new notions about science and learning: in fact, they have given us glimpses of the whole story of human progress.

The great lesson which these stories ought to teach us is respect for words. Seeing as we do what a beautiful and wonderful thing the English language has become, it ought to be the resolution of each one of us never to do anything to spoil that beauty. Every writer ought to choose his words carefully, neither inventing nor copying ugly forms of speech. We have seen also from these stories, especially in the chapter on "Slang," how people have misused certain words, until speakers and writers of good taste can no longer use them in their original sense, and therefore do not use them at all.

There are many other faults in speaking and in writing which take away from the beauty and dignity of the language. We shall see what some of these faults are; but one golden rule can be laid down which, if people keep it, will help them to avoid all these faults. No one should ever try to write in a fine style. The chief aim which all young writers should keep before them is to say exactly what they mean, and in as few and simple words as possible. If on reading what they have written they find that it is not perfectly clear, they should not immediately begin to rewrite, but instead set themselves to find out whether their _thoughts_ are perfectly clear.

There is no idea which has no word to fit it. Of course some writers must use difficult language. The ordinary reader can sometimes not understand a sentence of a book of philosophy. This is not because the philosophers do not write clearly, but because the ideas with which they have to deal are very subtle, and hard for the ordinary person to understand.

But for ordinary people writing on ordinary things there is no excuse for writing so as not to be clearly understood, or for writing in such a long and round-about way that people are tired instead of refreshed by reading. Nor is there any excuse for the use of words and phrases which are vulgar or too colloquial for the subject; yet how often is this done in the modern newspaper. It may seem unnecessary to speak to boys and girls of the faults of newspaper writers. But the boys and girls of to-day are the newspaper writers and readers of the future, and the habits which young writers form cling to them afterwards. Of course many of the faults which the worse kind of journalists commit in writing would not occur to boys and girls; but one fault leads to another. The motive at the root of most poor and showy writing is the desire to "s.h.i.+ne." The faults which seem so detestable to the critical reader seem very ingenious and brilliant to the writer of poor taste.

To the journalist, as to the schoolboy and the schoolgirl, the golden rule is, "Be simple."

Let us see what some of the commonest faults of showy and poor writers of English are--always with the moral before us that they are to be avoided.

One great fault of newspaper writers and of young writers in general is to sprinkle their compositions thickly with quotations, until some beautiful and expressive lines from the greatest poetry and prose have almost lost their force through the ear having become tired by hearing them too often. Some such phrases are--

"Tell it not in Gath;"

"Heap coals of fire upon his head;"

"Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof:"

all fine and picturesque lines, the apt quotation of which must have been very impressive, until, through frequent repet.i.tion, they have become almost commonplace.

A similar hackneyed fault is the too frequent application of the name of some historical or Biblical personage to describe the character of some person of whom we are writing. It is much more expressive now to describe a person as a "doubter" than as a "doubting Thomas," though the latter phrase may serve to show that the writer knows something of his New Testament. The first man who called a sceptic a "doubting Thomas" was certainly a witty and cultivated person; but this cannot now be said of the use of this hackneyed phrase. Again, it is better to say a "traitor" than a "Judas," a "wise man" than a "Solomon," a "tyrant" than a "Nero," a "great general" than a "Napoleon;" for all these names used in this way have lost their force.

A similar fault is the describing of a person by some abstract noun such as a "joy," a "delight," an "inspiration"--a way of speaking which savours both of slang and affectation, and which is not likely to appeal to people of good taste. Of course it is quite different when the poet writes--

"She was a vision of delight;"

for poetry has its own rules, just as it has its own range of ideas and inspiration, and we are speaking now of the writing of mere prose.

Another bad fault of the same kind, but more colloquial, and more often met with in speaking than in writing, is the too frequent use of a word or phrase. Some people say "I mean," or "personally," or "I see," or "you see," or similar expressions, at nearly every second sentence, until people listening to them begin to count the number of times these expressions occur, instead of attending to the subject of conversation.

Another very common fault in writing made by newspaper writers, and even more so by young beginners in composition, is the use of long words derived from Latin instead of the simpler words which have come down from the Old English. This does not mean that these words are not so good or so beautiful as the Old English words. As we have seen, these words were borrowed by our language to express ideas for which no native word could be found. But a person who deliberately chooses long Latin words because they are longer, and, as he thinks, sound grander, is sure to write a poor style. A saying which is perhaps becoming almost as "hackneyed" as some of the quotations already mentioned in this chapter is, "The style is the man." This means that if a person thinks clearly and sincerely he will write clearly and sincerely. If a person's thoughts are lofty, he will naturally find dignified words to express them. No good writer will deliberately choose "high-sounding" words to express his ideas. All young writers should avoid what have been called "flowery flourishes."