Notes and Queries, Number 192, July 2, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc. — John Shaqi
Notes and Queries, Number 192, July 2, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.Various
History
Notes and Queries, Number 192, July 2, 1853: A Medium of Inter-communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, etc.
Various
Questions and answers -- Periodicals
I am gratified by seeing that I have anticipated your able correspondent,
the REV. MR. ARROWSMITH, in his elucidation of "_clamour_ your tongues," by
citing the same passage from Udall's _Apophthegmes_, in my _Vindication of
the Text of Shakspeare_, p. 79. It is a pleasure which must console me for
having subjected myself to his just animadversion on another occasion. If
those who so egregiously blunder are to be spared the castigation justly
merited, we see by late occurrences to what it may lead; and your
correspondent, in my judgment, is conferring a favour on all true lovers of
our great poet by exposing pretension and error, from whatever quarter it
may come,--a duty which has been sadly neglected in some late partial
reviews of MR. COLLIER's "clever" corrector. MR. ARROWSMITH's
communications have been so truly _ad rem_, that I think I shall be
expressing the sentiments of all your readers interested in such {4}
matters, in expressing an earnest desire for their continuance.
S. W. SINGER.
Mickleham.
* * * * *
ON THE PASSAGE FROM "KING LEAR."
(Vol. vii., p. 592.)
Will you allow me to suggest to your ingenious Leeds correspondent (whose
communications would be read with only the more pleasure if they evinced a
little more respect for the opinions of others) that before he asserts the
existence of a certain error which he points out in a passage in _King
Lear_ to be "undeniable," it would be desirable that he should support this
improved reading by other passages from Shakspeare, or from cotemporary
writers, in which the word he proposes occurs? For my own part, I think
A. E. B.'s suggestion well worthy of consideration, but I cannot admit that
it "demonstrates itself," or "that any attempt to support it by argument
would be absurd," for it would unquestionably strengthen his case to show
that the verb "recuse" was not entirely obsolete in Shakspeare's time.
Neither can I admit that there is an "obvious opposition between _means_
and _defects_," the two words having no relation to each other. The
question is, which of two words must be altered; and at present I must own
I am inclined to put more faith in the authority of "the old corrector"
than in A. E. B.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account