The London Mercury, Vol. I, Nos. 1-6, November 1919 to April 1920Various
General
The London Mercury, Vol. I, Nos. 1-6, November 1919 to April 1920
Various
English literature -- Periodicals; London (England) -- Periodicals
The issue of the War has established more firmly than ever the
predominance of the English language in the world. If our schools
would rise to their opportunity and raise English into a culture
worthy of its qualities there seems no reason why it should not become
the universal medium of civilisation for the world. The richness and
variety of its literature and the simplicity and flexibility of its
structure render it, as a language, amply sufficient. Whether this
is visionary or not, it is no longer safe for those who cherish the
humanities in education to rely upon the old impregnable position of
Latin and Greek. The world has received one of those secular shocks in
which tradition crumbles to dust.
AN ARTICLE ON PARTICLES
By ALICE MEYNELL
"_Inconquerable_"--BACON
A general good habit might long ago have been ruled for our national
literature in the use of two negatives--"un" or "in," and "less."
A good rule once made known, long ago, would surely have lasted.
We might set about it even yet, though with much to chastise. Let
us try. The fault of "un" and "in" is of long standing. That of a
misapplied "less" is probably quite modern. What I have to suggest is
an obvious enough correction, but the offence is broadcast, therefore
correction cannot surely be inopportune or importunate. For who is
there who does not give the teutonic "un" to the Latin or Romance word,
writing "unfortunate" or "ungracious"? Or who now is careful to write
"inconquerable"? Any man to-day would certainly write "unconquerable."
It may not be that Bacon is always consistent; nor is Landor, who had
something--but that something has proved altogether ineffectual--to
say on this question of good English. We must own the incorrect use of
the German particle to be the commonest thing in the world, but the
incorrect use of the Latin or Romantic derivative, on the other hand,
does not occur.
The Teutonic "un" comes more readily to the English pen than the Latin
"in," and thus is joined habitually to the wrong kind of adjective
and verb and adverb. Not only, moreover, to the Romantic word, but
also to the Greek. We have learnt to write "asymmetry," but not to
avoid "unsymmetrical." There is also a very frequent jumble, so that
"uncivil" appears in the same phrase with "incivility," and "unable"
with "inability," "undigested" with "indigestible," "ungrateful" with
"ingratitude"--but I need cite no more. It is worth noting that these
confusions are not due to a kind of reluctance in the use of "un" for
nouns. We have many nouns with the "un" (not otherwise to my purpose):
"unrest," "unbelief," "unfaith," "unhappiness," "untruth," "unthrift,"
"unskilfulness," and so forth.
Now I know well that the reader has been courteously waiting until I
should draw breath for a paragraph in order to say "_Undiscovered_:
Shakespeare." It is all too true. I can only repeat, murmuring,
"_Inconquerable_: Bacon."
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account