Ains is lost; the vowel beginning it, and which could so easily be cut off, could not save it; it gave way to another monosyllable which at best is but its anagram.[817] Certes is beautiful in its old age, and has yet strength, though declining; it should be used in poetry, and our language is under some obligation to those authors who employ it in prose and defend it in their works. Maint is a word which should never have been forsaken, and on account of its adaptability for any style and for the sake of its French origin.[818] Moult, though descended from the Latin, possessed in its time the same merit, and I do not see why beaucoup should be preferred to it. Car has endured some persecution, and if it had not been protected by some men of culture, it would have been shamefully banished from a language which it had served so long; and this without knowing what word to put in its place.[819] When cil was in fashion it was one of the prettiest words of the French language; and it is a sad thing for the poets that it has become antiquated. Douloureux is, of course, derived from douleur, and so are chaleureux or chaloureux from chaleur: yet chaloureux is going out,[820] though it enriched our tongue, and was employed quite correctly when chaud was not the right expression. Valeur ought also to have given us valeureux; haine, haineux; peine, peineux; fruit, fructueux; pitié, piteux; joie, jovial; foi, féal; cour, courtois; gîte, gisant; haleine, halené; vanterie, vantard; mensonge, mensonger; coutume, coutumier; just as part should have produced partial; point, pointu and pointilleux; ton, tonnant; son, sonore; frein, effréné; front, effronté; ris, ridicule; loi, légal; cœur, cordial; bien, benin; and mal, malicieux. Heur was allowed when bonheur did not suit; from the first arose heureux, which is so French and yet exists no longer; if some poets have employed it, it is more for the sake of the measure than from choice. Issue prospers, and comes from issir, no longer in existence. Fin is used, but not finer, which is derived from it, whilst cesse and cesser are still flourishing. Verd no longer gives verdoyer, nor fête, fétoyer; nor larme, larmoyer; nor deuil, se douloir and se condouloir; nor joie, sʼéjouir; though it still makes se réjouir and se conjouir, whilst orgueil gives sʼenorgueillir. Formerly gent was used, as in le corps gent; this easy word is not alone no longer in use, but it has involved gentil in its ruin. We employ diffamé, which proceeds from fame, which is out of date, and curieux is derived from cure, now obsolete. It was much better to say si que than de sorte que or de manière que, de moi instead of pour moi or quant à moi; je sais que cʼest quʼun mal[821] than je sais ce que cʼest quʼun mal, whether you consider the Latin analogy, or the benefit we often derive from using a word less in a phrase.[822] Custom has preferred par conséquent to par conséquence, and en conséquence to en conséquent; façons de faire to manières de faire, and manières dʼagir to façons dʼagir ...; in the verbs travailler to ouvrer; être accoutumé to souloir; convenir to duire; faire du bruit to bruire; injurier to vilainer; piquer to poindre; and faire ressouvenir to ramentevoir ...; and in the nouns pensées to pensers, which is such a beautiful word and so suited for poetry; grandes actions to prouesses; louanges to los; méchanceté to mauvaistié; porte to huis; navire to nef; armée to ost; monastère to monstier; and prairies to prées ...; all words, equally fine, which might have been used together and rendered the language more copious. Through adding, suppressing, changing, or displacing some letters, custom has formed frelater from fralater; prouver from preuver; profit from proufit; froment from froument; profil from pourfil; provision from pourveoir; promener from pourmener, and promenade from pourmenade.[823] This same custom upon occasion makes the adjectives habile, utile, facile, docile, mobile, and fertile of different genders, without changing anything in their spelling; whilst, on the contrary, the masculine vil and subtil change in the feminine and become vile and subtile.[824] It has altered the old terminations, and of scel made sceau; of mantel, manteau; of capel, chapeau; of coutel, couteau; of hamel, hameau; of damoisel, damoiseau; of jouvencel, jouvenceau;[825] and yet all these differences and changes have been of no perceptible advantage to the French tongue. Is it, therefore, a progress for a language to be governed by custom, and would it not be better to shake off the yoke of such despotic sway? Or shall we in a living language only listen to reason, which prevents the use of words having a double meaning, traces these words to their roots, and discovers what relation they bear to those languages from which they sprang, if that very reason bids us follow custom?[826]
Whether our ancestors wrote better than we do, or whether we excel them in our selection of words, style, and expression, perspicuity and brevity, is a question often debated but never yet decided. But this question is not at an end, if people will compare, as they sometimes do, a dull writer of a past century to the most celebrated authors of the present age, or the verses of Laurent,[827] who is paid for not writing any more, to those of Marot and Desportes.[828] In order to judge sensibly in this case we should compare one age to another, and one first-rate piece of literary work to another, such as, for example, the best rondeaux of Benserade and Voiture[829] to the following two, which tradition has handed down to us, but without transmitting to us the name of the authors, or the time when they were written:[830]—
In timely sort Ogier came into Fraunce,
Of Paynim misbegot to rid the lond;
Needs not that I should tell his puissaunce,
Sit never foeman durst his glaunce withstond.
Thoʼ when he hath set all in happy chaunce,
Forth on a perlous jorney bent, he fond
In Paradise the well of youthʼs joyaunce,