86 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



Besides the units of a system, the names are to be considered ; this 

 leads us to by far the most important subject of discussion 



Nomenclature. Let us with this begin a lesson derived from the 

 actual observation of human habits. The case of the French has been 

 already cited : they adopted the new units, but rejected the new names. 

 This is very suggestive. In the United States a similar instance oc- 

 curs in the names of coins. We still have, in many parts of the coun- 

 try, shillings, sevenpences, thrips, etc. In New Orleans we get bits in 

 change. In the great commercial city of New York prices are still 

 given, and goods marked, in shillings, viz., 6 shillings a yard, not 75 

 cents ; ten shillings, not $1.25. 



What is the lesson from all this? Plainly, that new words are 

 harder than new things. How much easier, too, were the names of the 

 new coins than the long and learned names of the metric nomenclature ! 



" None of your Latin for me ! " begs the Frenchman, unfamiliar 

 with that tongue. " Especially, none of your Greek ! It is enough if 

 I accept your units ; pray excuse me from your names." And even the 

 French Government, which attends to everything, has had ill success 

 in this. The Englishman finds in French forms and accents additional 

 impediments. Unless corrected, he would, to begin with, mispronounce 

 fully half the words ; knowing barometer and thermometer, he would 

 be sure to say "ki-fom-e-tre" also. 



Seriously, it were easier for the learned to acquire a nomenclature 

 founded on Hottentot and Sanskrit, dressed off in Kamchatkan forms, 

 than for the unlearned to acquire one in Latin and Greek with French 

 forms ; the learned have some familiarit}^ in dealing with new languages 

 to start with. The metric words are ferai natural to all people, and 

 will not domesticate. To the common people they are simply out- 

 landish, and " neither have the accent of Christians, nor the gait of 

 Christian, pagan, nor man." 



Broadly, a system of weights and measures furnishes no case for 

 learned nomenclature. The system is intended for wholly untechnical 

 uses and people, while the words are adapted only to the learned, and 

 even for them are too stiff for daily use. It is clearly a case for easy 

 and familiar names. 



More results hinge on the nomenclature than on any other feature 

 of the system ; yet it has received little real discussion ; it has been 

 simply taken for granted on its looks and outside. Indeed, it has been 

 the boast and pet of the whole metric system, unsuspected as really the 

 chief clog upon its progress. Brought to the tribunal of fair criticism, 

 it is thoroughly unphilosophical, and needs to be remodeled in the 

 light of modern investigations into the first principles of language, all 

 of which principles it violates. 



Take the first word of the first table millimetre without explana- 

 tion, aliunde, it conveys no information even to a learned man. Metre 

 is merely a measure, not any definite measure, not even necessarily a 



