The Society, therefore, will place itself in opposition to certain tendencies of modern taste; which taste it hopes gradually to modify and improve. Its object will be best exhibited by stating a few definite proposals which may be regarded as typical.
I. Literary taste at the present time, with regard to foreign words recently borrowed from abroad, is on wrong lines, the notions which govern it being scientifically incorrect, tending to impair the national character of our standard speech, and to adapt it to the habits of classical scholars. On account of these alien associations our borrowed terms are now spelt and pronounced, not as English, but as foreign words, instead of being assimilated, as they were in the past, and brought into conformity with the main structure of our speech. And as we more and more rarely assimilate our borrowings, so even words that were once naturalized are being now one by one made un-English, and driven out of the language back into their foreign forms; whence it comes that a paragraph of serious English prose may be sometimes seen as freely sprinkled with italicized French words as a passage of Cicero is often interlarded with Greek. The mere printing of such words in italics is an active force towards degeneration. The Society hopes to discredit this tendency, and it will endeavour to restore to English its old reactive energy; when a choice is possible we should wish to give an English pronunciation and spelling to useful foreign words, and we would attempt to restore to a good many words the old English forms which they once had, but which are now supplanted by the original foreign forms.
Other foreign denizens which are claiming naturalization we would encourage on the principle of preferring their more English forms. It would plainly be useful for writers to be acquainted with such matters; and a list of all such words with their English history would be a good example of the sort of academic service which this Society might render.
II. The large and necessary importation of foreign words into the English language has undoubtedly weakened its ancient word-making powers; and while all fantastic and awkward inventions and ill-sounding compounds should be avoided, it seems desirable to give at least a fair chance to words formed out of English material. Such new English words, especially new English compounds, need, it would seem, to be used for some little time before we can overcome our dislike of them, while terms of Greek and Latin origin, however cumbrous and unsuitable they may be, are accepted almost without question. We would discourage such unimaginative and artificial formations, and on principle prefer terms made of English material, which are easily understood and naturally spoken by English-speaking people.
III. Until recent years English writers were in the habit of experimenting somewhat freely in language, and to their word-coining activity we owe many of our current and most useful terms. But since Carlyle there have been until lately few experiments of this kind. Many words are added every year to the English vocabulary, but they are for the most part the deliberate creations of scientific writers; while the very men who should concern themselves with this matter stand aloof, and leave it to those who by nature and profession are least sensitive to the aesthetic requirements. We would therefore encourage those who possess the word-making faculty to exercise it freely; and we hope in the future that suggestions from our members may help men of science and inventors in their search for new and appropriate names.
IV. Although men of letters may occasionally add to the resources of the language by word-coinage, their main activity is and must be one of selection. They are forced, for the most part, to choose their vocabulary from the supplies at hand, and by their choice they do much to give prevalence to the words which meet with their approval. Now, believing that language is or should be democratic both in character and origin, and that its best word-makers are the uneducated, and not the educated classes, we would prefer vivid popular terms to the artificial creations of scientists. We shall often do better by inquiring, for instance, not what name the inventor gave to his new machine, but what it is called by the workmen who handle it; and in adopting their homespun terms and giving them literary currency, we shall help to preserve the living and popular character of our speech.
V. The present spread of education, and the enforcement of a uniform and town-bred standard of speech throughout the schools of the country, is destroying dialects and local forms with great rapidity. These have been studied by specialists, and their value is fully recognized; but the attitude of the educated classes towards them is still contemptuous or indifferent. This ignorant contempt is to be regretted for many reasons. Not only is some knowledge of dialects needful for any true understanding of the history and character of our language, but the standard speech has in the past derived much enrichment and what is called 'regeneration' from the picturesque vocabularies of local vernaculars. The drying-up of these sources cannot but be regarded as a misfortune. We shall therefore actively encourage educated people, and, above all, teachers in country schools, to take a more sympathetic interest in the forms and usages of local speech. The Scotch Education Board has recently ordered that dialect should not be unduly discouraged in Scottish schools, and advised that children should be allowed some use of their natural speech in class. We hope that this example may be followed all over the country. We also believe that a knowledge of provincial pronunciation, and a familiarity with the richness and beauty of the vowel sounds which it often preserves, especially in the North, would be of value to those who speak the standard language, and would certainly lead to some correction of the slurred and indistinct way of speaking which is now regarded as correct English, and deliberately taught as such on the Continent.
VI. As to idiomatic pronunciation involving speech-rhythm. The literary taste of the eighteenth century, as typified in Dr. Johnson, consciously discredited idioms which it held to be ungrammatical; and this error persists. A simple instance is the growing loss of our enclitics. The negative not was enclitic after the verb, and this gave us our shan't, don't, won't, &c. Dr. Johnson held the not to be too important a qualification to leave unaccented. Again, where prepositions made a pronoun enclitic, the old accent is perishing. For it, which used to be pronounced forrit as one word, is now generally spoken faw it, as two. The result of such conscious pedantries is not only a great damage to the rhythmic beauty of our older literature, actually teaching the folk to misread the admirable prose of our Bible, but it is a bungling interference with the natural evolution of our sentences, as we mould them to our convenience. We would trust the general ear in such questions of syllabic rhythm, and would protect as far as possible the old harmonious cadences of our traditional speech.
We have no present intention of engaging in the vexed question of the illogical and often absurd orthography of English. Members of the Society would perhaps desire some relaxation of these bonds, but we think it better to concentrate on other profounder modifications of the language which, though of first importance, are receiving no special attention. We are aware that proposals for violent change often defeat their own end, and make all reform impossible. We shall therefore not insist on any doubtful or disputable detail as a rule of correctness; but we shall rely on suggestion, believing that we shall attain the best results by causing those who lead the fashion to consider the problems and think them out for themselves. We are convinced that by this means an ideal of self-harmonized speech will be gradually approved, and will spontaneously create a better standard of national taste, to which the future developments of the language may be safely entrusted.
These proposals will be distributed and privately circulated from hand to hand. Sympathizers, especially writers and teachers, who find themselves in agreement with the main principles of the Society, and are willing, as far as convenience and current usage allow, to promote its aims by their example, can, for the present at least, join it by invitation from one of its members.