October 1, 1886.] 



♦ KNOWLEDGE ♦ 



353 



pointed it out (quite unnecessarily) lonj; ago. But the 

 word is an Auierieanism now. It is nevei- lieaid in England 

 except a.s a provincialism. It does not appear in any 

 English dictionary, from oU Walker to the modern and 

 most excellent Annandale. On the other hand, it is quite 

 commonly used in America ; it appears in many American 

 books, and it is given both by Webster and by Worcester, 

 the two chief American lexicographere. 



To '■■ elect," in the sense of choosing one of two alterna- 

 tives, is only " a literary vulgarism," not an Americanism 

 at all, says my critic, who ought to be a judge of 

 vulgarisms. So the expression " at it again " is a vulgarism, 

 yet, as it is a vulgarism very commonly heard among 

 clowns, we call it clowni.sh. In a similar way. " elect," in 

 the sense referred to. is much more commonly used in 

 America than in England, and is properly called an 

 Americanism. 



Having indulged in this puerility, which would exclude 

 ninety-nine out of a hundred of the most characteristically 

 American expressions, my critic takes me to task for what 

 he pretends to regard as mistakes. After " bullyragging " 

 me as he ha-s, he ought to find " dozens " (his own word) of 

 bad blunders, and let us see how many he does find. 



He says, I '•' fail miserably " in defining Chowder as a 

 dish consisting " of fish, pork, onions, and biscuit " — " a 

 most inaccurate definition of a most delicious dish." (I 

 remark the womanish " most delicious.") Considering that 

 Grose, Bartlett, Webster, and Worcester agree in defining 

 " Chowder " as I have done, I venture to consider the 

 definition probably sufficient. Possiblj' my critic may have 

 tasted some less usual form of Chowder. But if I had .said 

 that Chowder is a dish in which '• birds, squirrels, crayfish, 

 potatoes, onions, pork, fish, biscuit.s. and a number of other 

 articles of food are cooked together in a camp-kettle," I 

 should have been describing a special Chowder iis dis- 

 tinguished from ordinary Chowder— -substituting my special 

 experience for the more generalised experience represented 

 in the definition given by Webster and Worcester. As for 

 the derivation of " Chowder " from a Canadian corruption 

 of chauJiere (a matter which could only interest a 

 Canadian), my " Notes on Americanisms " have little 

 to do with such points. I observe this second Canadian 

 touch. 



He next takes the word " Bonanza." The word is applied 

 in California to the discovery of a rich vein of gold or silver ; 

 and the name came into general use in th.at sense soon after 

 the discovery of the great silver mines on the Cornstock 

 lode. So much the Saturdai/ Review, borrowing from the 

 despised Bartlett, is careful to explain ; and so much I 

 might easily have stilted without borrowing — though, had I 

 been ignorant of the ficts, there was Bartlett before me to 

 set me right. I omitted it, however, for two excellent 

 reasons. First, I supposed every one knew it ; * and 

 secondlv, the use of the familiar word in that sense is 

 not an Americanism — it belongs to the slang of miners 

 and stock specidators. The word " Bonanzix " is only 

 an Americanism in the sense in which I defined it. The 

 Saturdat/ Nevieioer si\ys the point is completely mis.sed by 

 me ; it is i-eally missed by himself. If he had lived, as I 

 have, where the word " Bonanza " has come to be used as a 

 true Americanism, he would know that it has just the 

 significance I have given to it. But his acquaintance with 

 Americanisms is evidently loail — not to say provincial — 

 and far behind date. Down east, or in Canada, they might 

 make such a mistake ; not where I live — in the very heart 



* The " Big Bonanza " must have been acted before three 

 millions of folk, and discussed in papers reaching twenty millions 

 more. No one needs to be told the original meaning of this 

 Spanish word, or about its first application to mines. 



of the United States. I observe this blundei', however, 

 attentively. 



With the most obvious desire to smash and pulverise my 

 ■' Americanisms," these are positively all the words on which 

 my weak, though spiteful, critic can comment unfavouralilv. 

 He notes only one omission — " buzz saw " for circular saw. 

 Friendly correspondents have earned my thanks by noting 

 at least a dozen, which will hereafter be added in a .short 

 list alphabetically arranged. I have no doubt many more 

 will be noted. My critic's failure to show worse faults 

 involves the highest commendation he could pay me. 



And now let me touch on the question whether, as my 

 critic asserts, I am going entirely out of my way in dealing 

 with Americanisms. I wonder whether every student of 

 science who h.as dealt with sulijects seemingly outside his 

 province, could indicate quite such special study of them as 

 I have given to this one. Our contributor, Mr. Grant 

 Allen, for example, whose graceful and generally sound 

 essays on a singularly wide range of scientific subjects we 

 have all read with pleasure — could he, I wonder, give an 

 equally good raL'ioii iVetre, for his novels* as I am about to 

 give for my "Notes on Americanisms" ? 



The readere of Knowledge know that in commencing 

 these papers I did not claim any specml knowledge of the 

 subject, only great interest in it. I even stated that I 

 should take Bartlett for my guide, supposing that I should 

 find him trustworthy, though in reality I merely- proposed 

 to use his book as giving a convenient alphabetical arrange- 

 ment, by running along which I should probably get in all 

 the words requiring to be dealt with. If, however, I had 

 wished to indicate exceptional study of the subject, I might 

 have made out a rather strong case. To say that my critic 

 has not had a tithe of my opportunities is to say nothing ; 

 for evidently he has only picked up a few words from the 

 pretentious pages of Grant White, which he uses after the 

 manner advised by Sam Slick for deceiving the inexperi- 

 enced. But I might ask fairly enough, if there are twenty 

 men living, if there are ten, if there are tiro, who can match 

 my own opportunities for obtaining that kind of knowledge 

 about Ameiicanisms to which alone I {and only nowjor the 

 first time) lay claim. 



I have been from my boyhood upwards a loving reader 

 .and student of old English writers from the time of Gower 

 and Chaucer to the pre-Shakespearean dramatists. I have 

 read with equal zeal the writings of those who, from 

 the time of Bacon, Hooker, Spenser, and Shakespeare, to 

 the end of the eighteenth century, give us, on the whole, 

 the best means of forming an idea of the English which 

 the first settlers in America took with them. Besides this, 

 and very wide reading of modern English literature, I have 

 taken especial interest in all mattei-s of dialect and provin- 

 cialisms, including the English of Scotland and Ireland. It 

 so chances that I have resided in more parts of the British 

 Isles than most Englishmen know much about. Born in 

 London (in the house where ('arlyle died), I heard a good 

 deal of the London dialect in early boyhood. I lived many 

 years in Kent, and have been a householder in Ayr, Edin- 

 burgh, Blackrock (Dublin), Falmouth, Plymouth, St. Helier's 

 (Jersey), Brighton, Kew, Woolwich, and elsewhere, residing 

 as a visitor in many other places, and travelling, during my 

 lecture tom-s, to almost every nook and comer of the British 

 Isles, with abundant opportunities for hearing and le;irning 

 about local dialects. So much I note, because no one is com- 



* I see no reason why a science writer should not write a novel, 

 it he can write a good one, or even one to sell. Why, for instance, 

 should the skill with which Mr. Grant Allen makes science " very 

 popular" in the Co-r/iliill — keeping her even on the broad grin — cause 

 us to distrust the "delightful self-satisfaction" with which he 

 scatters " most delicious kisses " broadcast through " For Maimie's 

 •S.ike " .' 



