Preface to a Dictionary of the English Language
54 pages
English

Preface to a Dictionary of the English Language

-

Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe
Tout savoir sur nos offres
54 pages
English
Le téléchargement nécessite un accès à la bibliothèque YouScribe
Tout savoir sur nos offres

Description

The Project Gutenberg EBook of Preface to a Dictionary of the English Language by Samuel Johnson (#9 in our seriesby Samuel Johnson)Copyright laws are changing all over the world. Be sure to check the copyright laws for your country before downloadingor redistributing this or any other Project Gutenberg eBook.This header should be the first thing seen when viewing this Project Gutenberg file. Please do not remove it. Do notchange or edit the header without written permission.Please read the "legal small print," and other information about the eBook and Project Gutenberg at the bottom of thisfile. Included is important information about your specific rights and restrictions in how the file may be used. You can alsofind out about how to make a donation to Project Gutenberg, and how to get involved.**Welcome To The World of Free Plain Vanilla Electronic Texts****eBooks Readable By Both Humans and By Computers, Since 1971*******These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousands of Volunteers!*****Title: Preface to a Dictionary of the English LanguageAuthor: Samuel JohnsonRelease Date: April, 2004 [EBook #5430] [Yes, we are more than one year ahead of schedule] [This file was first postedon July 18, 2002]Edition: 10Language: English*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK, PREFACE TO A DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE***Steve Harris, Charles Franks and the Online Distributed Proofreading TeamPREFACE TO A DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGEBy Samuel JohnsonIt is ...

Informations

Publié par
Publié le 08 décembre 2010
Nombre de lectures 48
Langue English

Extrait

The Project Gutenberg EBook of Preface to aDictionary of the English Language by SamuelJohnson (#9 in our series by Samuel Johnson)sCuorpey triog hcth leacwk st haer ec cohpayrniggihnt gl aawll so fvoerr  ytohue r wcooruldn.t rByebefore downloading or redistributing this or anyother Project Gutenberg eBook.vTiheisw ihneg atdhiesr  Psrhoojuelcdt  bGeu ttheen bfierrsgt  tfihlien. gP lseeaesne  wdhoe nnotremove it. Do not change or edit the headerwithout written permission.Please read the "legal small print," and otherinformation about the eBook and ProjectGutenberg at the bottom of this file. Included isimportant information about your specific rights andrestrictions in how the file may be used. You canalso find out about how to make a donation toProject Gutenberg, and how to get involved.**Welcome To The World of Free Plain VanillaElectronic Texts****eBooks Readable By Both Humans and ByComputers, Since 1971*******These eBooks Were Prepared By Thousandsof Volunteers!*****Title: Preface to a Dictionary of the English
LanguageAuthor: Samuel JohnsonRelease Date: April, 2004 [EBook #5430] [Yes, weare more than one year ahead of schedule] [Thisfile was first posted on July 18, 2002]Edition: 10Language: English*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERGEBOOK, PREFACE TO A DICTIONARY OF THEENGLISH LANGUAGE ***Steve Harris, Charles Franks and the OnlineDistributed Proofreading TeamPERNEGFLIASCHE  LTAON AG UDIACGTIEONARY OF THEBy Samuel JohnsonIt is the fate of those who toil at the loweremployments of life, to be rather driven by the fearof evil, than attracted by the prospect of good; to
be exposed to censure, without hope of praise; tobe disgraced by miscarriage, or punished forneglect, where success would have been withoutapplause, and diligence without reward.Among these unhappy mortals is the writer ofdictionaries; whom mankind have considered, notas the pupil, but the slave of science, the pionier ofliterature, doomed only to remove rubbish andclear obstructions from the paths through whichLearning and Genius press forward to conquestand glory, without bestowing a smile on the humbledrudge that facilitates their progress. Every otherauthour may aspire to praise; the lexicographercan only hope to escape reproach, and even thisnegative recompense has been yet granted to veryefw.I have, notwithstanding this discouragement,attempted a dictionary of the English language,which, while it was employed in the cultivation ofevery species of literature, has itself been hithertoneglected; suffered to spread, under the directionof chance, into wild exuberance; resigned to thetyranny of time and fashion; and exposed to thecorruptions of ignorance, and caprices ofinnovation.When I took the first survey of my undertaking, Ifound our speech copious without order, andenergetick without rules: wherever I turned myview, there was perplexity to be disentangled, andconfusion to be regulated; choice was to be madeout of boundless variety, without any established
principle of selection; adulterations were to bedetected, without a settled test of purity; andmodes of expression to be rejected or received,without the suffrages of any writers of classicalreputation or acknowledged authority.Having therefore no assistance but from generalgrammar, I applied myself to the perusal of ourwriters; and noting whatever might be of use toascertain or illustrate any word or phrase,accumulated in time the materials of a dictionary,which, by degrees, I reduced to method,establishing to myself, in the progress of the work,such rules as experience and analogy suggested tome; experience, which practice and observationwere continually increasing; and analogy, which,though in some words obscure, was evident inothers.In adjusting the ORTHOGRAPHY, which has beento this time unsettled and fortuitous, I found itnecessary to distinguish those irregularities thatare inherent in our tongue, and perhaps coevalwith it, from others which the ignorance ornegligence of later writers has produced. Everylanguage has its anomalies, which, thoughinconvenient, and in themselves onceunnecessary, must be tolerated among theimperfections of human things, and which requireonly to be registered, that they may not beincreased, and ascertained, that they may not beconfounded: but every language has likewise itsimproprieties and absurdities, which it is the duty ofthe lexicographer to correct or proscribe.
As language was at its beginning merely oral, allwords of necessary or common use were spokenbefore they were written; and while they wereunfixed by any visible signs, must have beenspoken with great diversity, as we now observethose who cannot read catch sounds imperfectly,and utter them negligently. When this wild andbarbarous jargon was first reduced to an alphabet,every penman endeavoured to express, as hecould, the sounds which he was accustomed topronounce or to receive, and vitiated in writingsuch words as were already vitiated in speech. Thepowers of the letters, when they were applied to anew language, must have been vague andunsettled, and therefore different hands wouldexhibit the same sound by different combinations.From this uncertain pronunciation arise in a greatpart the various dialects of the same country,which will always be observed to grow fewer, andless different, as books are multiplied; and fromthis arbitrary representation of sounds by letters,proceeds that diversity of spelling observable in theSaxon remains, and I suppose in the first books ofevery nation, which perplexes or destroys analogy,and produces anomalous formations, that, beingonce incorporated, can never be afterwarddismissed or reformed.Of this kind are the derivatives length from long,strength from strong, darling from dear, breadthfrom broad, from dry, drought, and from high,height, which Milton, in zeal for analogy, writeshighth; Quid te exempta juvat spinis de pluribus
uwnoau l[dH boer atcoeo,  mEpuicsthl,e as,n IdI .t ioi.  c2h1a2n];g teo  ocnhea ins gne otalhling.This uncertainty is most frequent in the vowels,which are so capriciously pronounced, and sodifferently modified, by accident or affectation, notonly in every province, but in every mouth, that tothem, as is well known to etymologists, little regardis to be shewn in the deduction of one languagefrom another.Such defects are not errours in orthography, butspots of barbarity impressed so deep in the Englishlanguage, that criticism can never wash themaway: these, therefore, must be permitted toremain untouched; but many words have likewisebeen altered by accident, or depraved byignorance, as the pronunciation of the vulgar hasbeen weakly followed; and some still continue to bevariously written, as authours differ in their care orskill: of these it was proper to enquire the trueorthography, which I have always considered asdepending on their derivation, and have thereforereferred them to their original languages: thus Iwrite enchant, enchantment, enchanter, after theFrench and incantation after the Latin; thus entireis chosen rather than intire, because it passed tous not from the Latin integer, but from the Frenchentier.Owfe rme aimnym weodiradtse lity  irse cdiefifivceudlt  ftroo msa tyh ew hLeattihne ro rt htehyeFrench, since at the time when we had dominionsin France, we had Latin service in our churches. It
is, however, my opinion, that the French generallysupplied us; for we have few Latin words, amongthe terms of domestick use, which are not French;but many French, which are very remote fromLatin.Even in words of which the derivation is apparent, Ihave been often obliged to sacrifice uniformity tocustom; thus I write, in compliance with anumberless majority, convey and inveigh, deceitand receipt, fancy and phantom; sometimes thederivative varies from the primitive, as explain andexplanation, repeat and repetition.Some combinations of letters having the samepower are used indifferently without anydiscoverable reason of choice, as in choak, choke;soap, sope; jewel, fuel, and many others; which Ihave sometimes inserted twice, that those whosearch for them under either form, may not searchin vain.In examining the orthography of any doubtful word,the mode of spelling by which it is inserted in theseries of the dictionary, is to be considered as thatto which I give, perhaps not often rashly, thepreference. I have left, in the examples, to everyauthour his own practice unmolested, that thereader may balance suffrages, and judge betweenus: but this question is not always to be determinedby reputed or by real learning; some men, intentupon greater things, have thought little on soundsand derivations; some, knowing in the ancienttongues, have neglected those in which our words
are commonly to be sought. Thus Hammond writesfecibleness for feasibleness, because I suppose heimagined it derived immediately from the Latin; andsome words, such as dependant, dependent,dependence, dependence, vary their final syllable,as one or another language is present to the writer.In this part of the work, where caprice has longwantoned without controul, and vanity soughtpraise by petty reformation, I have endeavoured toproceed with a scholar's reverence for antiquity,and a grammarian's regard to the genius of ourtongue. I have attempted few alterations, andamong those few, perhaps the greater part is fromthe modern to the ancient practice; and I hope Imay be allowed to recommend to those, whosethoughts have been perhaps employed tooanxiously on verbal singularities, not to disturb,upon narrow views, or for minute propriety, theorthography of their fathers. It has been asserted,that for the law to be KNOWN, is of moreimportance than to be RIGHT. Change, saysHooker, is not made without inconvenience, evenfrom worse to better. There is in constancy andstability a general and lasting advantage, which willalways overbalance the slow improvements ofgradual correction. Much less ought our writtenlanguage to comply with the corruptions of oralutterance, or copy that which every variation oftime or place makes different from itself, andimitate those changes, which will again bechanged, while imitation is employed in observingtm.he
This recommendation of steadiness and uniformitydoes not proceed from an opinion, that particularcombinations of letters have much influence onhuman happiness; or that truth may not besuccessfully taught by modes of spelling fancifulAnd erroneous: I am not yet so lost inlexicography, as to I forget that WORDS ARE THEDAUGHTERS OF EARTH, AND THAT THINGSARE THE SONS OF HEAVEN. Language is onlythe instrument of science, and words are but thesigns of ideas: I wish, however, that the instrumentmight be less apt to decay, and that signs might bepermanent, like the things which they denote.In settling the orthography, I have not whollyneglected the pronunciation, which I have directed,by printing an accent upon the acute or elevatedsyllable. It will sometimes be found, that the accentis placed by the authour quoted, on a differentsyllable from that marked in the alphabetical series;it is then to be understood, that custom has varied,or that the authour has, in my opinion, pronouncedwrong. Short directions are sometimes given wherethe sound of letters is irregular; and if they aresometimes omitted, defect in such minuteobservations will be more easily excused, thansuperfluity.In the investigation both of the orthography andsignification of words, their ETYMOLOGY wasnecessarily to be considered, and they weretherefore to be divided into primitives andderivatives. A primitive word, is that which can betraced no further to any English root; thus
circumspect, circumvent, circumstance, delude,concave and complicate, though compounds in theLatin, are to us primitives. Derivatives are all thosethat can be referred to any word in English ofgreater simplicity.The derivatives I have referred to their primitives,with an accuracy sometimes needless; for whodoes not see that remoteness comes from remote,lovely from love, concavity from concave, anddemonstrative from demonstrate? but thisgrammatical exuberance the scheme of my workdid not allow me to repress. It is of greatimportance in examining the general fabrick of alanguage, to trace one word from another, bynoting the usual modes of derivation and inflection;and uniformity must be preserved in systematicalworks, though sometimes at the expence ofparticular propriety.Among other derivatives I have been careful toinsert and elucidate the anomalous plurals ofnouns and preterites of verbs, which in theTeutonick dialects are very frequent, and thoughfamiliar to those who have always used them,interrupt and embarrass the learners of ourlanguage.The two languages from which our primitives havebeen derived are the Roman and Teutonick: underthe Roman I comprehend the French andprovincial tongues; and under the Teutonick rangethe Saxon, German, and all their kindred dialects.Most of our polysyllables are Roman, and our
  • Univers Univers
  • Ebooks Ebooks
  • Livres audio Livres audio
  • Presse Presse
  • Podcasts Podcasts
  • BD BD
  • Documents Documents