PARLIAMENTARY ENGLISH

New Zealand Listener, Volume 19, Issue 486, 15 October 1948, Page 8

PARLIAMENTARY ENGLISH

(Written for "The Listener" by

CLYDE

CARR

E all come across words from time to time in our reading which we are seldom called upon to pronounce aloud. If the occasion to do so does arise we may be caught nap-ping-"It is not Homer nods but we that dream." I have heard a V.I.P. say "We are living in momentious times," and an|other, "Some fortuitious circumstance those who stumble over "veterinary" or "veterinarian" and "statistics" or "statistician." "Spoliation" is not often used. When so it will generally be "spoilation." Less frequently nowadays do we hear "maintainance" for "maintenance." A member who should know better spoke the other day of "illogigality." Just a slip, no doubt. Another, a "learned" gentleman, spoke of "somewhat unconscionable delay." I doubt if" undonscionable is capable of qualification. ©

might arise." Muinisters of the Crown are such busy people that they, may be excused for dotting an imaginary me | " I have even heard a Governor-General use a wrong’ word. Lese-majesty, what! He ‘said in praise of something or other that it was "quite unexceptional" which would mean, — in Yankee parlance, just plumb ornery. What His Excelllency meant to say

It might seem unfair to mention the sex of the member who asked the appropriate minister recently "Whether the rural ~ housing difficulties could _be facilitated." This reminds. me that. the form of Notice of Question required in the House is in itself incorrect. "Whether" = should only be used where an alternative _ is offered. The correct introductory .. word should be "if. .

was, "quite unexceptionable" or above criticism. But rank-and-file politicians are no better. There are certain irritating habits abroad. These appear like epidemics. I don’t know who in the House first gave the indefinite article, "a," the long sound as in "Kate." One member actually did that the other day in Using the word "another." Some use the same "long a" sound, and just as wrongly, in "says" and "ate," which should, of course, be "sez" and "et." The same long vowel in. "again" and "against" may be allowed to pass, but not in the noun "estimates." The verb, of course, has its "a" long. One must have some basis of knowledge even to bea pedant. What shall we say of those who sound the "t" in "often" and "soften?" Another prevailing error is one. of accent. Frequently a member will offer a few comments, with the emphasis on the second syllable, here again confusing noun with verb. When a man says "high-faluting" for "highfalutin,’ would you put it down to pedantry, ignorance or both? The same question might be addressed to lawyers who use the Latin pronunciation of such terms as "sub judice," "prima facie," and the French for "puisne." Both Ministers and "ordinary" members confuse "eligible" with "illegible." Here it is not only a matter of accent but of noticing the relative positions of the ‘e" and the "i." Incredible is it in these days of reports of Royal Commissions to hear’ so many leaving the "s" out of the word "licensing." Such is not the only respect, I suggest, in which bad habits are so readily followed in Parliament. Those who might be expected to exercise greater cate will be heard to say "partic’ly" and "tempora’ly"’ when they -|mean "temporarily." We may forgive

Where an error prevails outside, it is hardly fair to expect legislators to be without fault, for "they are a cross-sec-tion of the community. How common it is to say, "I cannot help but wonder." That is a sort of double negative. One should rather say,-"I cannot but wonder," or "I cannot help wondering." Another popular mistake is the use of a plural verb with a singular noun just because a plural comes in between. Here is an example, "A long list of exceptions are available," instead of "is available." An almost endless list -of mispro‘nunciations could be given-"rece’s" and "research" with the accént on the first syllable, ‘instead of the second; "industry,’ "controversy," "amicable" and many. more, with the accent on’ the second instead of the first; "antithesis" with the accent on the third instead ‘of the second. Shall; we conclude for the present with a little argument about the words "infer" and "imply?" A member often charges another with inferring so-and-so, when I should prefer to say he implied it. An inferefce is a purely mental process and not many people lay claim to thought-reading. On the other hand I cannot but admit that when a thing is implied, it is fairly safe to claim that it was inferred, So where are we? As you were, which so often happens.