Conversation: Its Faults and Its Graces

by Unknown

XI.

There is a vicious mode of amalgamating the final s of a word (and sometimes the final c, when preceded and followed by a vowel) with the first letter of the next word, if that letter happens to be a y, in such a manner as to produce the sound of sh or of usu in usual; as, "A nishe young man," "What makesh you laugh?" "If he offendsh you, don't speak to him," "Ash you please," "Not jush yet," "We always passh your house in going to call on Missh Yates,—she lives near Palash Yard;" and so on through all the possibilities of such a combination. This is decided, unmitigated cockneyism, having its parallel in nothing except the broken English of the sons of Abraham; and to adopt it in conversation is certainly "not speaking like a Christian." The effect of this pronunciation on the ear is as though the mouth of the speaker were filled with froth, which impedes the utterance, and gives the semblance of a defect where nature had kindly intended perfection; but the radical cause of this, and of many other mispronunciations, is the carelessness, sometimes the ignorance, of teachers, who permit children to read and speak in a slovenly manner, without opening their teeth, or taking any pains to acquire a distinct articulation.

XII.

Whilst we are on the subject of Prosody, we must not omit to mention the vicious pronunciation occasionally given to the words new, due, Tuesday, stupid, and a few others, sometimes corrupted into noo, doo, Toosday, stoopid, &c., by way of refinement, perhaps, for lips which are too delicate to utter the clear, broad, English u.

XIII.

Never say "Cut it in half," for this you cannot do unless you could annihilate one half. You may "cut it in two," or "cut it in halves," or "cut it through," or "divide it," but no human ability will enable you to cut it in half.

XIV.

Never speak of "lots" and "loads" of things. Young men allow themselves a diffusive license of speech, and of quotation, which has introduced many words into colloquial style that do not at all tend to improve or dignify the language, and which, when heard from ladies' lips, become absolute vulgarisms. A young man may talk recklessly of "lots of bargains," "lots of money," "lots of fellows," "lots of fun," &c., but a lady may not. Man may indulge in any latitude of expression within the bounds of sense and decorum, but woman has a narrower range,—even her mirth must be subjected to rule. It may be naïve, but must never be grotesque. It is not that we would have primness in the sex, but we would have refinement. Women are the purer and the more ornamental part of life, and when they degenerate, the Poetry of Life is gone.

XV.

"Loads" is a word quite as objectional as "lots," unless it can be reduced to a load of something, such as a ship-load, a wagon-load, a cart-load, a horse-load, &c. We often hear such expressions as "loads of shops," "loads of authors," "loads of compliments;" but as shops, authors, compliments, are things not usually piled up into loads, either for ships or horses, we cannot discover the propriety of the application.