Grammatical purity, therefore, may be violated in three ways:
1st. The words may not be English. This error is called barbarism.
2ndly. Their construction may be contrary to the English idiom. This error is termed solecism.
3rdly. They may be used in a sense different from their established acceptation. This error is named impropriety[137].
The barbarism is an offence against lexicography, by admitting new words, as, “volupty,” “connexity,” “majestatic;” or by using obsolete words, as, “uneath,” “erst;” or an offence against etymology, by improper inflection, as, “teached” for “taught,” “oxes” for “oxen.”
The solecism is an offence against the rules of syntax, as, “I reads,” “you was.”
The impropriety is an offence against lexicography, by mistaking the meaning of words or phrases.
A solecism is regarded by grammarians as a much greater offence than either of the others; because it betrays a greater ignorance of the principles of the language. Rhetorically considered, it is deemed a less trespass; for the rhetorician and grammarian estimate the magnitude of errors by different standards; the former inquiring only how far any error militates against the great purpose of his art—persuasion; the latter, how far it betrays an ignorance of the principles of grammar. Hence with the former, obscurity is the greatest trespass; with the latter, solecism, and that species of barbarism which violates the rules of etymology[138].