The author’s main purpose in
this book is to teach precision in writing; and of
good writing (which, essentially, is clear thinking
made visible) precision is the point of capital concern.
It is attained by choice of the word that accurately
and adequately expresses what the writer has in mind,
and by exclusion of that which either denotes or connotes
something else. As Quintilian puts it, the writer
should so write that his reader not only may, but must,
understand.
Few words have more than one literal
and serviceable meaning, however many metaphorical,
derivative, related, or even unrelated, meanings lexicographers
may think it worth while to gather from all sorts and
conditions of men, with which to bloat their absurd
and misleading dictionaries. This actual and
serviceable meaning—not always determined
by derivation, and seldom by popular usage—is
the one affirmed, according to his light, by the author
of this little manual of solecisms. Narrow etymons
of the mere scholar and loose locutions of the ignorant
are alike denied a standing.
The plan of the book is more illustrative
than expository, the aim being to use the terms of
etymology and syntax as little as is compatible with
clarity, familiar example being more easily apprehended
than technical precept. When both are employed
the precept is commonly given after the example has
prepared the student to apply it, not only to the
matter in mind, but to similar matters not mentioned.
Everything in quotation marks is to be understood as
disapproved.
Not all locutions blacklisted herein
are always to be reprobated as universal outlaws.
Excepting in the case of capital offenders—expressions
ancestrally vulgar or irreclaimably degenerate—absolute
proscription is possible as to serious composition
only; in other forms the writer must rely on his sense
of values and the fitness of things. While it
is true that some colloquialisms and, with less of
license, even some slang, may be sparingly employed
in light literature, for point, piquancy or any of
the purposes of the skilled writer sensible to the
necessity and charm of keeping at least one foot on
the ground, to others the virtue of restraint may
be commended as distinctly superior to the joy of
indulgence.
Precision is much, but not all; some
words and phrases are disallowed on the ground of
taste. As there are neither standards nor arbiters
of taste, the book can do little more than reflect
that of its author, who is far indeed from professing
impeccability. In neither taste nor precision
is any man’s practice a court of last appeal,
for writers all, both great and small, are habitual
sinners against the light; and their accuser is cheerfully
aware that his own work will supply (as in making
this book it has supplied) many “awful examples”—his
later work less abundantly, he hopes, than his earlier.
He nevertheless believes that this does not disqualify
him for showing by other instances than his own how
not to write. The infallible teacher is still
in the forest primeval, throwing seeds to the white
blackbirds.
A.B.