I WANT TO KNOW.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4535, 2 October 1875, Page 2

I WANT TO KNOW.

TO THIS EDITOR. OF TUB NEW ZEALAND TIMES. Sm,—l want to know why people can continue to tolerate the ridiculous phraseology which is often printed and published, and which is tending to destroy in half-educated people all knowledge of the English language. In reading certain books and papers, I occasionally light upon some very extraordinary words, and expressions made up of slang words, Americanisms, and false orthography and syntax, which should certainly have no place in sound English composition. 1 want to know why the word “ wharves'’ is almost always used in place of the legitimate plural “wharfs, 1 ’ as laid down by all respectable grammarians. Why is the past tense “drank” so often used instead of the participle drunk ?'* Why is the adverb so frequently banished from its proper place before or after the verb, and erroneously inserted, even by some good writers, between the*“to" of the infinitive mood and the verb? Thus: “I told him to quickly run," instead of “ run quickly.” “He seemed to exaggerating!}' state the case.” “That horse is known to viciously kick. “ Wo ought to again go.” These are examples of the trash that is daily foisted upon us for English. ; To, the sign of the infinitive mood, must be considered as an Inseparable proposition, and no word, adverb or other, should dare usurp a place between it and the Again, why is the anomalous word “cablegram” so ostentatiously forced upon our notieo ? All compound words ought by right to bo manufactured from one language, but In this nonsensical word we have English and Greek tied together in a way that to etymologists is perfectly ridiculous. VI hy is the noun “interview” harloqutnlsed into a verb, resulting, like the transformations In a pantomime, in a perfect absurdity? An “Interview,” grammatically considered, means a mutual approach of two persons to confer together. How on earth, then, can one person “ interview” another ? How pitiable It is to see men of education, who ought to know better, adopt words which a little consideration would show to be utterly Inconsistent and nonsensical. The morbid appetite for using words Indiscriminately for all parts of speech, and abjuring all rules of derivation, is shown in the invention of the words “collude” and “collide,” derived backwards from “collusion” and “collision: but horror of all, I once road in a newspaper published in this province, the unknown word “diagnose, used as a verb derived from “ diagnosis.” The power of nonsense can no farther go. I beg pardon, I did

once aee something almost as bad; in an advertisement by a Wellington linen draper, the word “socks was spelt “sox.” Truly it is high time that the schoolmaster went abroad, with his cane behind him, ready to rap the knuckles of the noodles who persist in putting forth such abominable stuff.—l am, &c.. Philomath.