The identity of the present tense of lay, vt., with the imperfect tense of lie, vi., has led to the frequent confounding of the two in their literary usage. Lay (in the present tense) being transitive, is always followed by an object; lie, being intransitive, never has an object. Lay, in “I lay upon thee no other burden,” is the present tense of lay, vt., having as its object burden; in “I lay under the sycamore-tree in the cool shade,” lay is the imperfect tense of lie, vi., having no object; laid, in “I laid the book on the table,” is the imperfect tense of lay, vt., having as its object book. The presence or absence of an object, and the character of the verb as transitive or intransitive, may be decided by asking the question “Lay [or laid] what?” The past participles of the two verbs (laid and lain) are also frequently confounded. Laid in tense-combinations is to be followed by a object always; lain, never; as, “He has laid (not lain) the book on the table”; “He has lain (not laid) long in the grave.”

The statement in present time, “The soldier lays aside his knapsack and lies down,” becomes as a statement of a past act; as, “The soldier laid aside his knapsack and lay down”; “The hen has laid an egg”; “The egg has lain (too long) in the nest.”

In poetic phraseology especially, the transitive lay (in all its tenses) is used reflexively as an equivalent of lie, lay, etc., as in the following examples:

learn, teach: Once learn was good English for teach, and signified both the imparting as well as the acquiring of knowledge. An example of this use may be found in Shakespeare (Romeo and Juliet) and the Book of Common Prayer, but general modern usage restricts learn to the acquiring and teach to the imparting of knowledge.

least: Grammatical writers have reason on their side in objecting to the use of a superlative for a comparative. “Of two evils choose the less,” is better than “choose the least.” A careful speaker will observe this form. See MORE and MOST.

leather as a colloquialism for “thrash” should not be used by persons accustomed to refined diction.

lease and hire are loosely used interchangeably. An agent says he has property to hire (= for hire) while the tenant says he leases it. Strictly, the former leases and the latter hires.

legacy. Compare BEQUEST.

lend. Compare LOAN.

lengthen, lengthy: The verb means to “make or to grow longer.” Its participle lengthened no more means “long” than heightened means “high” or strengthened means “strong.” It is correct to say “He lengthened the discourse, but it was still too short”; but not to say “He quoted a lengthened passage from the sermon.” In the latter illustration lengthy should be used. A sermon is lengthy when “unusually or unduly long” (with a suggestion of tediousness), not when it is simply “long.”

lengthways, sideways, endways: Common but none the less undesirable variants of lengthwise, sidewise, endwise.

less. Compare FEW.

lessen. Compare REDUCE.

let her rip: Farmer, in his “Americanisms Old and New,” says, this “most vulgar of vulgarisms” is used to convey the idea of intensity of action. The phrase is coarse and should not be used as a substitute for “go ahead.”

level, on the: A vulgar intensive used to emphasize the fact that the thing stated is stated truthfully, or that the person spoken of is, to the speaker’s knowledge, upright and “on the square.” Compare SQUARE.

levy, levee: Exercise care in the use of these words. Levy is to impose and collect by force; levee, a morning reception.

liable, likely: The first of these words which is properly used as expressive of “having a tendency” is improperly used in referring to a contingent event regarded as “very probable.” Thus, though one should not say “It is liable to storm,” but “likely to do so,” one may say, “the building is liable to be blown down by the storm.”

libel, slander: These are not synonymous terms. Libel differs from slander in that the latter is spoken whereas the former is written and published.

lick: An inelegant term used colloquially as a synonym for “effort”; as, “he put in his best licks.” Say, rather, “He put forth his best efforts.”

lid: A slang term for cover, hat, etc., used especially in the phrases keeping the lid down, sitting on the lid, political colloquialisms for closing up places of business, as pool-rooms, saloons, etc., or keeping a political situation in control.

lie. Compare LAY.

lightening, lightning: The spelling of these words is sometimes confused. Lightening is to relieve “of weight”; as, “to lighten a burden”; lightning is a sudden flash of light due to pressure caused by atmospheric electricity. The shorter word designates the flash of light.

like, in the adverbial sense of “in the manner of,” as, “He speaks like a philosopher,” is correctly used, but the tendency to treat this word as a conjunction (which it is not) in substitution for as is altogether wrong. Do not say “Do like I do”; say, rather, “Do as I do.” It is also a colloquialism, not sanctioned by good usage, to give the word the signification of as if, as “I felt like my final hour had come”; and the use of the word as synonymous for somewhat is a vulgarism. Say “He breathed somewhat heavily”—not “heavy like.” When like is followed by an objective case, as “Be brave like him,” the preposition unto must be supplied by ellipsis. For this reason as for the fact that like here has the force of a conjunction, introducing the implied phrase “he is brave,” it is better to say “Be brave as he is.”

like, love: Discriminate carefully between these words, which are often erroneously used interchangeably. A woman may love her children and like fruit, but not like her children and love fruit.

likewise. Compare ALSO.

limb, leg: There exists an affected or prudish use of the word limb instead of leg, when the leg is meant, which can not be too severely censured. Such squeamishness is absurd.

limit, the: A vulgarism designating the extreme of any condition or situation: used indiscriminately of persons or conditions.

limited: Often erroneously used for small, scant, slight, and other words of like meaning; as, “He had a limited (slight) acquaintance with Milton”; “Sold at the limited (low or reduced) price of one dollar”; “His pecuniary means were likely to remain quite limited”—admissible if suggesting the reverse of unlimited wealth, otherwise small or narrow.

lineament, liniment: The lineament is the outline or contour of a body or figure, especially the face. Liniment is a medicated liquid, sometimes oily, which is applied to the skin by rubbing as for the relief of pain. Exercise care in spelling these words.

lip: A very vulgar substitute for “impudence.”

lit in the sense of lighted is not used by careful speakers. Do not say “Who lit (but ‘who lighted’) the gas?”

lit on: A common error for “come across,” “met with,” which should be discountenanced. Do not say “I lit on the quotation by accident”; say, rather, “I came across the quotation.” Nor “I lit on him at the fair.” One does not light on people whom one meets.

little. Compare FEW.

loan, lend: One may raise (put an end to) a loan by paying both principal and interest, and another may lend money to do so. The use of loan as a verb, meaning, “to grant the loan of or lend, as ships, money, linen, provisions, etc.,” dates from the year 1200 and is accepted as good English. Some purists, however, characterize it colloquial.

lobster: A slang term used originally to designate a British soldier, probably, in the phrase boiled lobster, from his red coat: now applied indiscriminately to gullible persons, perhaps on account of the reputed gullibility of the British soldier.

lonely, solitary: These two words must not be confounded, for their meaning is not exactly the same, although the Latin solitarius is derived from solus, alone. Solitary indicates no more than absence of life or society; lonely suggests the idea of being forsaken or isolated. A solitary person is not of necessity lonely, even though he take a solitary walk in a lonely place. A man is not lonely if he is good company to himself.

look: In the intransitive sense of “seem,” this verb should be followed by an adjective, not an adverb. Thus, “he looks kind (not kindly).” It is otherwise in the sense of “exercising the sense of sight.” Here the adverb is used to the exclusion of the adjective. “He looks kindly (not kind) upon the fallen foe.” Actions are qualified by adverbs, but adjectives qualify what one is or seems to be.

lot or lots: A slipshod colloquialism for “great many”; as, “We sold a lot of tickets”; “He has lots of friends”; to be avoided, as are all other vague, ill-assigned expressions, as tending to indistinctness of thought and debasement of language. Compare HEAP.

love. Compare LIKE.

lovelily: To the general exclusion of this word, lovely is now made to do duty both as adverb and adjective.

lovely: A valuable word in proper use, as applied to that which is adapted and worthy to win affection; but as a colloquialism improperly applied indiscriminately to every form of agreeable feeling or quality. A bonnet is lovely, so is a house, a statue, a friend, a poem, a bouquet, a poodle, a visit; and it is even said after an entertainment, “The refreshments were lovely!”—all examples of careless diction.

low-priced: Often confounded with cheap. A thing is cheap when its price is low compared with its intrinsic worth, it is low-priced when but little is paid or asked for it. A low-priced article may be dear; a cheap article may not be low-priced; as, “One horse was low-priced (he paid only $50 for it), and it was dear at that price; the other cost him $500, but was cheap at that price.”

lurid should not be used for brilliant. Lurid means “giving a ghastly, or dull-red light, as of flames mingled with smoke, or reflecting or made visible by such light.”

luxuriant, luxurious: These words are not identical in sense. The former signifies growth, as “hair of luxuriant growth”; the latter implies luxury, as “luxurious ease.”

M

mad: Used for “angry” by the careless or the indifferent. A colloquialism not in vogue among persons who use refined diction. Mad may, however, be used correctly to designate a condition of overmastering emotion, intense excitement, or infatuation due to grief, terror, or jealousy; as mad with grief; mad with terror. Formerly used correctly as a synonym for “angry” it is now used only colloquially in this sense. Mad, in the present day, denotes a species of insanity.

man. Compare GENT.

manifest. Compare APPARENT.

manner born, to the: A phrase often incorrectly written to the manor from a faulty knowledge of its meaning—familiar with something from birth, or born to the use or manner of the thing or subject referred to.

marine, maritime, naval, nautical: There are distinctions among these words. Marine and maritime, from the Latin mare, the sea, signify belonging to the sea; naval, from the Latin navis, a ship, signifies belonging to a ship; nautical from the Latin nauta, a sailor, signifies belonging to a sailor or to the sailor’s pursuit, navigation. A maritime nation must be well supplied with marine stores, must have a large naval force and be skilled in matters nautical.

marry: Now used correctly of both acceptance in marriage and union in matrimony: formerly condemned as incorrect.

masses: The masses, in the sense of the common people, the great body of the people, exclusive of the wealthy or privileged, has so entered into popular speech that the expression is now beyond criticism, although exception has been taken to it, on the ground that the subject of the mass should be specifically named. The masses of what?

matinee from the French matin, morning, is strictly a morning reception; and to talk of an “afternoon matinée” is therefore, if not a solecism, a contradiction in terms. Still nowadays the word is used to mean an afternoon rather than a morning reception, or entertainment.

me: “It is I,” never “It is me.” And so with all personal pronouns following the verb to be and in apposition with its subject. The same form of error is constantly made in such phrases as “She is better looking than me,” where, if the elliptical verb were supplied, the correct construction would readily be seen to be “She is better looking than I (am).”

mean: A word often erroneously used. Its generic meaning is “common” and therefrom it has been accepted as meaning “of humble origin, of low rank or quality, of inferior character or grade” and is used in England as a synonym for “miserly in expenditure, stingy.” In the United States it is commonly misused as a substitute for “ill-tempered; disagreeable.”

mean. Compare INTEND.

means: As means or some means covers “any means,” it is pleonastic to write “by some means or another.” For the same reason some means or other may be condemned; its only excuse is that “other” refers not to “means” but qualifies the word “procedure” (understood). If this form of speech is desired, the correct utterance would be one mean or another.

memoranda should never be used as a singular. It is the plural of memorandum and the distinction should always be observed in speech or writing.

me or my going: Erroneous combinations sometimes used by persons careless with their diction. Do not say “Instead of me (or my) going to London I went to Bermuda”; say, rather, “Instead of going....” Here “me” and “my” are redundant.

merely: Sometimes misused for simply. Merely implies no addition; simply, no admixture or complication; e. g., “The boys were there merely as spectators; it is simply incredible that they should have so disgraced themselves”; “It is simply water.”

midst: The Standard Dictionary has the following: “In our, your, or their midst, in the midst of us, you, or them: a form pronounced analogically irreproachable by Fitzedward Hall, in Modern English p. 50, but objected to by some authorities.” Dr. William Mathews is one of these. In his work on “Words: their Use and Abuse,” he asks “Would any one say ‘In our middle?’... The possessive pronoun can properly be used only to indicate possession or appurtenance.”

mighty used as a synonym for very, exceedingly, or extraordinarily is colloquial but borders on the vulgar. “Mighty fine,” “A mighty shame,” “Mighty doubtful” are phrases to be avoided.

misspell: Do not write this word mispell. Its component parts are mis + spell, and it retains the double s.

mistakable: Although formerly correctly mistakeable this word does not now retain the “e” after the “k”—an evidence of spelling reform along lines of least resistance due probably to phonology.

mistaken: Originally mistake meant “to take amiss, misconceive, or misunderstand,” and on this account some persons claim that you are mistaken means “you are misunderstood”; and that when this observation is made it expresses precisely the reverse of the meaning that the speaker desires to convey. According to them to tell a man he is mistaken, that is, misunderstood, is a very different thing from telling him that he mistakes or personally misunderstands.

The Standard Dictionary treating this word says: The anomalous use of mistaken has naturally attracted the attention of speech-reformers; we ought to mean, “You are misapprehended or misunderstood,” they tell us, when we say “You are mistaken,” and if we mean “You are in error,” we ought to say so. But suppose the alleged misuse of mistaken gives rise to no misunderstanding whatever—that everybody, high or low, throughout the English-speaking world, knows what is meant when one says “You are mistaken”—in that case, to let alone seems to be wisdom. The corruption, if it be one, has the sanction not only of universal employment, but of antiquity.

mitten: An obsolete substitute for glove now revived as a colloquialism in the phrase to get the mitten, that is “to get the glove with the hand withdrawn: said of a rejected suitor for a lady’s hand.” An allied phrase is to give the mitten to. None of these is used in polite society.

moment, minute: These words are not exactly synonymous. A moment is an infinitesimal part of time; as, “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye” (I Cor. XV. 52). A minute is the sixtieth part of an hour. One does not take a minute to wink the eye.

monetary. Compare FINANCIAL.

moneys, not monies, although often so (improperly) spelt. The rule is clear. Words ending in y necessarily have as their penultimate letter either a vowel or a consonant. If a vowel the plural is formed by adding s; if a consonant by changing the y into ies. Thus, boy, boys; baby, babies.

money to burn: A slang phrase used to denote possession of ample means.

more: Superlatives are often used, though improperly in a comparison of two. “He is the more promising pupil of the two”—not most. Certain scrupulously careful writers, as Augustine Birrell, will even write “the more part,” instead of the customary “the most part”; and this usage, though possibly pedantic, is in other respects to be commended.

more than probable: That which is probable is likely to happen, but that which is more than probable is almost sure to happen. To object to “more than probable,” as some persons do, one would have to show that “probable” was absolute and incapable of degrees of comparison, whence of course it is a matter of common observation that some things are highly probable, while others are barely so. That a lover of truth will speak the truth is highly probable, whereas that a confirmed liar will do so is so little probable that the probabilities are on the other side.

’most: Often used colloquially but incorrectly for “almost”; an inexcusable and unwarranted abbreviation. Do not say “my work is most done”; say rather, “... is almost done.” Most is used occasionally and correctly for “very”—a use that some writers condemn as incorrect but which is sanctioned by literary usage. Shakespeare says: “So, Sir, heartily well met, and most glad of your company.”—Coriolanus, iv. 3.

Frederic Johnston says: “Concerning the phrase ‘most perfect’ some question might be raised. ‘Perfect’ means, literally, ‘made through, to the end,’ ‘utterly finished,’ therefore, of supreme excellence. In that case, ‘more’ and ‘most’ perfect are meaningless. We are to remember, however, that the literal is not always the true meaning of a word. Thus ‘melancholy’ does not mean full of ‘black bile,’ but ‘gloomy’ for any reason. Moreover, it has of late been pointed out by the best authorities that the true sense of a word is not what it ought to mean, but what it does mean, in the mouths and ears of the upper half of the people. And there can be little doubt that ‘perfect,’ in this case, merely expresses great rather than supreme excellence. We may even say, further, that the word in its original sense could not be used without a qualifying word (as ‘nearly perfect’ for example) in a world in which nothing is utterly free from defect. To go about saying that things are ‘nearly perfect’ would be gross pedantry.”

For the sanction of literary usage see the quotations:

mought: Although recorded by the dictionaries as the imperfect of “may” and often used for might, the use is one which does sufficient violence to euphony to be characterized as undesirable.

muchly: Although formerly in vogue is now obsolete and stigmatized as slang, and as such to be avoided.

mug; A vulgar characterization for the human face.

murderous should not be used for “dangerous” or “deadly.”

music. See CHIN.

Mussulman: The plural of this word is formed by adding s—Mussulmans not Mussulmen. Here the word “man” is no component part of Mussulman.

mutual, common: These words are often confounded and have been so by writers of correct English. Mutual implies interchange; common belonging to more than two persons. Before the middle of the eighteenth century, mutual had two meanings: “joint” or “common,” and “reciprocal.” When Dr. Samuel Johnson published his great dictionary he gave it but one meaning, that of reciprocal, and, his authority as a scholar having grown so great, this meaning became considered the only one which might be correctly given to the word. “Mutual,” says Crabb, “supposes a sameness in condition at the same time; reciprocal supposes an alternation or succession of returns.” Thus we properly speak of “our common country, mutual affection, reciprocal obligations.” While mutual applies to the acts and opinions of persons, and therefore to what is personal, it is not applicable to persons. Macaulay condemned the phrase “mutual friend” as a low vulgarism. A “common friend” is certainly more accurate but unfortunately carries with it the disagreeable idea of inferiority, and probably for this reason is seldom or never used. There is authority of such prolific writers as Scott and Dickens for “mutual friend,” but the rapidity with which they wrote their books may suggest that they paid little heed to such refinements of language as did Macaulay. Yet centuries of English literature authorize the employment of mutual in the sense of joint or common. On the other hand, the very strong disapproval with which this and like uses of mutual are regarded by many writers of good taste may not unreasonably be considered as sufficient ground for avoiding mutual friend and kindred expressions. “Mutual friends,” says Phelps, “would not be accurate” meaning that two persons are friends each to the other.

my. Compare ME.

myself: An emphatic pronoun sometimes misused for “I” or “me”; as, “The property was willed to my wife and myself.” For “myself” substitute “to me” and the sentence is correct. “Myself” is used correctly with a reflexive verb, that is, one whose object, expressed or implied, denotes the same person or thing as the subject; e. g., “I will control myself.”

N

nasty: This word should not be applied to that which is merely “disagreeable,” as nasty weather, for strong terms should not be robbed of their significance by being applied to conditions which could only be referred to in such terms by exaggeration. A pigsty is properly termed nasty, as there filth finds its habitat, and an obscene book is nasty as morally foul.

naught. Compare OUGHT under AUGHT.

need, needs: As an adverb need is now obsolete; needs means “necessarily.” Do not say “as need he must,” say, rather, “as needs he must.”

neglect, negligence: The meanings of these words are sometimes confused. Neglect is the act of failing to perform something, as a duty or task, to leave undone; negligence is the habitual omission of that which should be done. Negligence is a trait of character while neglect may result from preoccupation. Fernald in “Synonyms, Antonyms, and Prepositions,” says: “Neglect is transitive, negligence is intransitive; we speak of neglect of his books, friends, or duties, in which case we could not use negligence.”

negociate, negotiate: The first, now obsolete, was the spelling formerly in vogue; the second is the correct spelling of to-day.

neither, either: For “none” and “any one,” is not the best usage; “That he [Shakespeare] wrote the plays which bear his name we know; but ... we do not know the years ... in which either (correctly, any one) of them was first performed”; “Peasant, yeoman, artisan, tradesman, and gentleman could then be distinguished from one another almost as far as they could be seen. Except in cases of unusual audacity, neither (correctly, no one, or none) presumed to wear the dress of his betters.”

neither, nor: In considering these words the Standard Dictionary says: “As disjunctive correlatives, each accompanied by a singular nominative, often incorrectly followed by a plural verb form; as, ‘neither he nor I were (correctly was) there.’” Neither, that is, not either, means not the one nor the other of two. “Through diligence he attained a position which he neither aspired to nor coveted”—the proper correlative to use here is nor.

nerve: A slang term sometimes used as a substitute for “impudence,” “over-assurance” or “independence,” any one of which is preferable.

never, not: While literary authority sanctions the use of never for not in cases where a lapse of considerable time is thought of, as, “I shall be there—never fear” (for do not fear now, or at any time in the interim, that I shall disappoint you), it does not justify its use in a sentence where the time referred to is momentary or short. The emphatic use of this adverb in the sense of not a single one, not at all, is perfectly good, as instanced by Coleridge—“And never a saint took pity on my soul in agony.” But the usage will not sanction an extension to things which, from their very nature, could take place—as, say, death—but once. Thus, do not say “Robert Fulton never invented the steamboat”; say, rather, “Robert Fulton did not invent the steamboat.” “Paul Jones was never born in the United States” is incorrect. Say “... was not born in the United States.” Do not say “I met him to-day but he never mentioned the subject.” Say, rather “... but he did not mention the subject.”

never so: Often misused for ever so from which it should be carefully discriminated. Never so means “to an extent or degree beyond the actual or conceivable; no matter how.” In common use ever so, meaning no more than “very” or “exceedingly,” is often confounded with and used for never so.

never mean: A common slip of the tongue in such phrases as “I never mean to” which is frequently used when “I mean never to” is intended. Compare DON’T.

nibs: A vulgar title given usually satirically, to a person in authority; as “His nibs sailed to-day”: a term to avoid.

nice: This word has undergone a peculiar transformation in sense. Derived from the Latin nescius, ignorant, and originally meaning “ignorant, silly weak,” it has now come to signify “characterized by discrimination and judgment, acute, discerning; as, a nice criticism.” The word has, however, also been used colloquially in the sense of “pleasing, jolly, or socially agreeable; as, a nice girl,” and the use has been condemned but is too well established to be abandoned.

nifty: A vulgarism for “stylish.”

nightly, nocturnal: These words do not have the same signification. The one means night by night, the other happening at night. A man has nightly sleep in which he suffers from nocturnal dreams.

no: According to critics no never properly qualifies a verb, that is, it should never be substituted for “not.” But the practise has literary sanction.

no: Often used for “any” by the illiterate. Do not say “We didn’t see no flats”; say, rather, “We did not see any flats.”

nobby: A vulgar synonym for “having an elegant or flashy appearance; showy; stylish”: haberdasher’s cant. Compare NIFTY.

nohow: A vulgarism for “in no way” or “by no means.” If after a negative, say “in any way,” “by any means,” “at all.” “I don’t believe in them nohow” should be “I don’t believe in them in the least,” or “at all.”

nominate: Distinguish from “denominate,” which is now only an obsolete sense of the word. To nominate is to designate or specify; as, “Is it so nominated in the bond?” whereas to “denominate” is to give a name or epithet to. Washington was nominated president, but was denominated “Father of his country.”

nominatives: The coupling of singular and plural. What number, singular or plural, shall the verb take. It couples two sentences—one on either side—the one having a singular nominative and the other a plural. As to which sentence shall be first and which second, there is commonly but little compulsion: it is a matter of choice. But should this choice affect the verb?—“The wages of sin is death.” “Death is the wages of sin.” It is merely a matter of taste in forceful diction which nominative shall precede. Yet which is to govern the number of the verb? “What we seek is riches”; “Riches are what we seek”—Probably these two forms of one idea best illustrate the better usage, which appears to be that the verb is dependent upon the nominative which precedes. In explanation of the scriptural phrase, it may be stated that although the prevailing rule with the translators of the Bible appears to have been to use plural verbs when either nominative was plural (that is, in all such cases), still “Death,” being here that upon which special emphasis is laid and to which attention is particularly drawn, is permitted to govern the verb.

no more: Often incorrectly used for “any more.” Do not say “I don’t want to see you no more”; but “I don’t want to see you any more,” or “again.”

none: Although etymologically equivalent to not (a single) one this word is commonly used as a singular under a mistaken idea that it can not be used correctly as a plural, but many writers of standard English have used it as a plural. The Standard Dictionary authorizes the use of the word both as a singular and plural according to the meaning of the context. Where the singular or the plural equally expresses the sense, the plural is commonly used and is justified by the highest authority. “Did you buy melons?” “There were none in the market.” “Did you bring me a letter?” “There was none in your box.” “None of the three cases have been received” is correct. In illustrating this point the Standard Dictionary gives the following quotation: “Mind says one, soul says another, brain or matter says a third, but none of these are right.” And says, “In the preceding quotation the ‘are,’ altho ungrammatical, connects ‘right’ with any one of the persons named—not with any one of the things named. If is be substituted for ‘are,’ ‘right’ may be as reasonably connected with ‘mind,’ ‘soul,’ or ‘brain’ as with the persons (or classes of persons) spoken of.” None used with a plural verb is found repeatedly in such English classics as the works of Bacon and Shakespeare, as well as in the Authorized Version of the Bible.

nor, or: Discriminate carefully between these words when using them after no and not. In such a sentence as “He has no cash or credit,” the word “credit” is used as an alternative for “cash,” and merely, though perhaps redundantly, to amplify the thought. But if one says “He has no cash nor credit” the meaning is very different, and implies he is without both, “credit” being here considered as an additional asset. In more involved statements the distinction may be of great importance. “Will or disposition,” “power or faculty,” may be but pairs of synonyms. The locution “will nor disposition” “power nor faculty,” distinguishes the two members of a pair as different.

not. Compare NEVER.

notable: Discriminate carefully between the different meanings of this word. A no'table event is an event worthy of note; a not'able woman is one who exercises care or skill or is prudent as in housewifery.

noted. Compare NOTORIOUS.

nothing like: Not to be used adverbially for not nearly. Do not say “He was nothing like as handsome as his brother,” but “He was not nearly so handsome,” etc.

nothing to nobody: An ungrammatical phrase used for “no one’s business.” Say, rather, “not anything to any one.”

not on your life: A vulgar phrase for “not by any means.”

notorious is so commonly applied to that which is unfavorably known to the general public, as a notorious crime, just as noted is applied to that which is favorably distinguished, as a noted speech, that it is well not to confound the expressions, but to reserve their use for their own several functions. However, the rule is not invariably followed; for the following expression by Spencer, on “Education” is good. “It is notorious that the mind like the body, can not assimilate beyond a certain rate.”

no use: Often incorrectly used for “of no use.” Do not say “It’s no use to discuss it with you,” say, rather, “It is of no use to discuss it.”

novice. Compare AMATEUR.

number should not be used with such words as innumerable and numerous, which themselves contain the idea of number (Latin numerus). Say “A countless number,” not “an innumerable number.”

numerous: Often misused for many. Do not say “numerous cattle were in pasture”; say, rather, “Many cattle were in pasture.”

nutty: Used in the sense “lacking in intelligence,” this word is a vulgarism to be avoided.

O

obnoxious: Formerly this word meant “liable, amenable, subject,” but the meaning is sometimes forgotten in the more recently acquired sense, “odious, hurtful.” This difference is beautifully illustrated by a question propounded to Dean Alford—“Which of these two is right, ‘Death is obnoxious to man’ or ‘Men are obnoxious to death?’” Death, or the idea of death, is certainly distasteful to most men, but, this notwithstanding, all men are subject to death.

observance: Distinguish from observation. Though the act of observing is signified by both, it is, as regards observance, in the sense of holding sacred, whereas, so far as observation is concerned it is in the sense of making examination or careful note. Thus there is an observance of the law, but an observation of the works of nature.

occupancy, occupation: The word occupancy differs only slightly from occupation in meaning. The first refers rather to the state or fact of possession, while the second carries with it an idea of the rights or results of such occupancy. The right or legal fact of occupancy entitles a person to occupation at will. One may speak of the occupancy of a domain and the occupation, not occupancy, of a region by troops.

occur, take place: These terms are not always synonymous. Occurrences are due to chance or accident but things take place by arrangement. Compare TRANSPIRE.

of: That the force of this word is not fully understood is proved by the fact that many ministers choose to omit it from the title of Scriptural books. Dean Alford in referring to the habit of announcing “The Book Genesis” instead of “The Book of Genesis,” says, “This simply betrays the ignorance of the meaning of the preposition of. It is used to denote authorship, as the Book of Daniel; to denote subject matter, as the first Book of Kings; and as a note of apposition signifying which is called, as the Book of Genesis.... The pedant, who ignores of in the reading-desk must however, to be consistent, omit it elsewhere: I left the city London, and passed through County Kent, leaving realm England at town Dover.” Of is also frequently misused for from. Nothing but custom can justify the common form of receipt, “Received of...”.

of any: Sometimes used incorrectly for of all; as, “This is the finest of any I have seen”; say, rather, “finer than any other,” or “finest of all.”

off of: The preposition off, when noting origin and used in the sense of from is frequently followed most ungrammatically by of. No well educated person would say “I got these eggs off of Farmer Jones,” nor would they “buy a steak off of the butcher” but “of” or “from” him. Off should not be used of a person, where from would suffice. You take a book from, not off, your friend; who may take it off a shelf. You do not even, in correct speech, take a contagious disease off him, as though it were something visible and tangible, and were bodily removed from his person.

official: A term sometimes used incorrectly for officer. An official is one holding public office or performing duties of a public nature; usually he is a subordinate officer; an officer is one who holds an office by election or appointment, especially a civil office, as under a government, municipality, or the like.

of the name of. Compare BY THE NAME OF.

older, oldest: These terms are, according to best usage, applied only to persons belonging to different families or to things, as, Lincoln was older than Hay; this book is the oldest in the library. Compare ELDER, ELDEST.

on is frequently used where in would be preferable. Fitz-Greene Halleck once said to a friend, “Why do people persist in saying on Broadway? Might they not as well say Our Father, who art on Heaven?”

one another. Compare EACH OTHER.

one-horse: A slang term for “second rate”; implying “of inferior capacity, quality or resources.”

only: This word, whose correct position depends upon the intention of the author, is often misplaced. The examples of the uses of only here given will serve to illustrate correct usage. “Only his father spoke to him”; here only means that of all persons who might have spoken, but one, his father, spoke to him. “His father only spoke to him” implies that his father “only spoke” and did not scold him, which, perhaps, he might have felt his duty called upon him to do. “His father spoke only to him” means that, of all the persons present, his father chose to speak to him alone, but this sentence may perhaps be more lucidly expressed “His father spoke to him only.”

on the level. See under LEVEL.

on the street. Compare IN THE STREET; ON.

onto: A word meaning “upon the top of,” avoided by purists as colloquial or vulgar. Condemned by Phelps as a vulgarism but now gradually growing in popularity. Inasmuch as its form is analogous to into, unto, upon, all of which are sanctioned by best usage, Phelps’s condemnation is perhaps a little premature. The word has been objected to by some critics as redundant or needless. “Considered as a new word (it is in reality a revival of an old form), it conforms to the two main neoteristic canons by which the admissibility of new words is to be decided. (See Hall, Modern English, pp. 171, 173.) It obeys the analogy of in to = into. It may also be held to supply an antecedent blank, as may be shown by examples. It never should be employed where on is sufficient; but simple on after verbs of motion may be wholly ambiguous, so that on to, meaning ‘to or toward and on,’ may become necessary to clear up the ambiguity. ‘The boy fell on the roof’ may mean that he fell while on the roof, or that he fell, as from the chimney-top or some overlooking window, to the roof so as to be on it; but if we say ‘The boy fell on to the roof,’ there is no doubt that the latter is the meaning. The canons for deciding the eligibility of new words appear therefore to claim for on to the right to struggle for continued existence and general acceptance.” So says Dr. I. K. Funk in the Standard Dictionary.

O, Oh: Although often used indiscriminately it is generally conceded that “O” is used to express exclamation or direct address while “oh” is used to express the emotion of joy, pain, sorrow, or surprise. See the examples.