STORM'S ENGLISCHE PHILOLOGIE.* IF there were, as there ought to
be, a Professor of English, as well as of Telugu and Chinese, at Oxford, this book would not be long without a translator. Even as it is, such a translation, if duly condensed, would pay extremely well. But condensa- tion, especially in the earlier chapters, must be freely used For the book is written expressly for the German public, and contains a mass of information neither useful nor intelligible to Englishmen. The author, as is natural enough in a foreigner, does not always see things in their right perspective. On the other band, be has the foreigner's advantage of seeing a great many things to which tyrannous custom makes the native blind. The chapters which deal with the pronunciation of English are necessarily the least satisfactory. But the author, although he has the advantage of knowing Mr. Sweet, is quite sound in his views of phonetic spelling. And in point of fact, the case against that curious " fad " lies in a nutshell. Practically, English spelling is at present uniform. What it would become if Mr. Pitman and his rivals had their way, is a thing to dream of, not to tell. But the stars, not to mention the compositors, fight in their courses against phonetic spelling. As Mr, Storm quietly puts it, it is a difficult thing to reform an ortho- graphy like that of France and England. And what the Pit-
manites have set their hearts on is not reform, but revolution- Boglische Phitologie. Von Johann Storm. Heilbronn. 1981.
We really think, and have long thought, that their delusions are not worth discussing. We may pass, too, very lightly over the chapter on " English Pronunciation and Pro- nouncing Dictionaries." The latter have little to recommend them, and the former, if measured by any exact or comprehensive standard, is as "oncloyant et divers" as Montaigne said that man was. If an Irish debate were taken by the phonograph, a Champollion might be needed to decipher it. There are, how- ever, some amusing antiquarian facts in this chapter. One, more than half forgotten now, is that in Walker's time "cucum- ber" and " asparagus " were pronounced " cowcumber " and " spar- rowgrass." The last is an instance of that curious etymological law which gives us "crayfish " for dcrevisse ; and for the former we must go, we suppose, to George Stephenson's " so much the worse for the coo," and to the fact that the poet Cowper made his surname rhyme with " trooper."
The next chapter, on English-German, English-French, and what the author calls English-English Dictionaries, is excel- lently done. Dr. A. Hoppe's Englisch-Deutsches Supplement- Lexicon comes in for well-merited praise ; and when we mention that it includes such words as Trollope's " boodying over a thing," and George Eliot's "greentlt," it may well be believed that very few recent words of our home manufacture have es- caped the eye of its industrious compiler. In all that Mr. Storm says of English dictionaries proper we entirely agree. The smaller Richardson is as worthless as the etymologies which it retains from the larger edition, and the larger edition, with its numerous quotations chronologically arranged, is still the best, and by far the best book for historical students of English. As for the etymology, Mahn's derivations in Web- ster's Dictionary are sufficient for all practical purposes, and they worthily fill a gap which once existed in a book which, so far as the general student is concerned, needs no commendation Mr. Storm would evidently rather keep seven pounds sterling in his pocket than give them for Latham's Johnson, and we heartily commend his wisdom. He does not, however, omit to quote the grudging praise which a writer in the Athenceum gave the book, " For the student of late English alone, whether native or foreign, can we recommend Dr. Latham's Johnson. Him it must serve, ill-conceived in plan, ill-carried out in execution, though it be." He rightly says of Wedgwood, that his tendency to derive words onomatopoetically is carried too far ; and the strictures which he makes on E. Muller's Etymologisches Wiirterleach der Englishchen Sprache, and on Skeat's Etymo- logical Dictionary of the English Language, seem as fair as they are judicious. Both of these works are good, nay, indispensable, for all who would go deeply into the study of English etymology, but neither of them quite deserves the praise which enthusiastic admirers have given it. We are aware that criticism of this kind is vague and even trivial, but as Mr. Storm's remarks corroborate the impression which these dictionaries have made upon ourselves, we venture to let it stand. Of the prospects of the gigantic dictionary projected by the Philological Society we can form no conjecture. Mr. Storm does not think very highly of them, and opines that in the multitude of Readers who are to assist the editor, Dr. Murray, there will not be wisdom. He fears, and apparently with justice, that they will " go," for the most part, for strange words and curious expressions, (what a mine, by the way, of them both are Owen Felltham's Resolves !) and that the commoner, but more important elements of the language will be com- paratively neglected. He refers to the example of Littre ; but seems to forget that Littre was a man of ten million, —a lexicographical prodigy with something more than Mr. Carlyle's " ten-mule" capacity for dogged industry. We do Dr. Murray no wrong whatever in believing that he may shrink from entering the lists with a competitor so formidable. Mr. Storm finishes his chapter with a capital account of the Slang Dictionary, published by Chatto and Windus, and we are glad to find him quoting from the one bright poetical ornament which still adorns Punch. The lines are so vigorous, as well as philosophically and philologically so true, that we are fain to follow his example. They are from " 'Arry on Himself :"— " Some have called me a cad ! I did 'ope as that old bit of 'umbug was stale ; It ought to have been snuffed oat, I think, since the Nobs took to foller our trail.
Our sentiments match to a moral; and as for your grammar and stuff,
'Taint a haitch or a har more or less makes a party a snob or a rough. As to Slang, and strong language, and so on, objections. to them is all stuff ;
What are they but an anticipation—to-morrow's swell-slang in the rough ?
That the Nobs prig their patter from ours, you may see by their plays and their hooks ;
And the lingo that's used by Fitzfoodle's invented by Snobkins or Snooks."
The next chapter deals with books about synonyms, with col- lections of words and phrases, and with the so-called practical introductions and guides to English. This, however, we must leave untouched, except by noticing the exhaustive care and industry with which it has been compiled. It is followed by a long and interesting dissertation on colloquial English, and that in its turn by another, on vulgar. English. The boundary-line between the two varieties is very weakly marked in reality, and is one about which no two Englishmen would be found to agree. It is not surprising, therefore,. that Mr. Storm occasionally misses it. But surely, Shelley's " No solace left for thou or me," and Byron's " Let he who made thee answer that," are specimens of wilfully careless grammar, and should not be ranked as either colloquialisms or vulgarisms. We cannot say as much for the elder poet's, "There let him lay," which, we think, must be classed as a vulgarism. As to the correctness of trisyllabic and polysyllabic superla- tives, that is a mere question of euphony. It would, however, be as hard, perhaps, to find a satisfactory parallel to Thack- eray's " comfortablest," as it would be to find a trisyllabic superlative for which good authority might not be produced. " Patientest " is the worst which Mr. Storm quotes, but " silentest " is nearly as bad, and " perfectest " is given as a vulgarism put into the mouth of a maidservant. The difficulty of drawing a hard-and-fast line in this matter is obvious, from the fact that the last superlative, which we confess we do not like, is used by Mr. Ruskin himself. Mr. Storm gives consider- able attention, more, perhaps, than it deserves, to the Alford and Moon controversy. He is quite aware that the verdict of the literary public in England, upon nearly all the points in
dispute, was given in favour of the critic, and against the Dean.. It seems to us, therefore, no mean proof of his own critical sagacity that he reverses that verdict—very justly, we think— so far as the root of the matter is concerned, and does not hesi- tate to stigmatise Moon's carping criticisms as neither com- mendable nor profitable. We must quote one specimen, and only regret that we cannot find room for more, of Mr. Storm's: own criticisms. Moon says, "A man parts with his wife lovingly, regretfully, and looks hopefully forward to a reunion- A man parts from his wife angrily, and rushes off in a rage to the Divorce Court, to obtain a judicial separation." " Byron,' Mr. Storm retorts, " knew nothing of this distinction when he wrote,- " Childe Harold had a mother—not forgot, Though parting from that mother he did shun.' " He adds that he should say part from a person and part with er thing. There is little doubt, we think, that he is essentially in the right. Count Imhoff parted from his wife when she left him for India, and parted with her, for a consideration, when he handed her over to Warren Hastings.
We regret that space will not allow us to examine the rest of the interesting and valuable work otherwise than perfunctorily. The chapter on " Americanisms " is a long one, and as good as
any other in the volume. One or two sentences from Mr. Hyde Clarke's grammar we must find room for. They hit the nail on the head, and drive it home unmistakably. " We are too. ready," he says, "to stamp words as Americanisms and Yankeeisms which are good English ; they, however, are as ready to forget that words given to us by our fathers are not obso- lete from being no longer spoken on the other side of the wide sea." The American chapter is followed by an excellent account of eighteenth-century English, and that by a full and accu- rate guide to Shakespearian literature. But it will be better to say nothing, than anything so necessarily brief as further re- marks of ours must be on this part of Mr. Storm's book. We can only express our opinion that it is by far the best book of its kind that we have ever met with, and our hope that it will soon become known, as it deserves to be in England, through a good translation. We have no hesitation, too, in promising the writer of such a translation that, from a pecuniary point of view, he will by no means lose his reward.
Previous page
