568 Intelligence and Miscellaneous Articles. 



adopts essentially the same, though taking for the first syllable the 

 Swedish spelling " felt-spar," as given in Wallerius (1743). Again, 

 Haidinger's English translation of Mohs (Edinburgh, 1825) has 

 " feldspar." Further, Jameson in his edition of 1804 use's " fel- 

 spar " with a caveat ; for he adds in a note at the bottom of the 

 page, "More properly feldspar." 



Kirwan appears to have decided the question in favour of 

 " felspar " for all his successors (or at least set the current in that 

 direction) by means of a piece of bad etymology. He says, " This 

 name seems to bederivedfrom Fels," a rock," it being commonly found 

 in granite, and not from Feld, " a field ;" and hence I write it thus, 

 felspar" Kirwan recognized the Germanic origin of the word. 

 But he must have reached his decision without taking German works 

 for authority. 



Among the Germans "feldspath " (meaning field-spar) (" felt- 

 spat " or " f alt-spat " of the Swedes) is the only form that has ever 

 been used. Wallerius, in 1747, nearly forty years before Kirwan 

 issued his first edition, and Cronstedt, in 1758, nearly thirty years, 

 used the term " felt-spat " or " falt-spat " in their treatises ; and 

 Grimm, in his German Dictionary, the latest and best, has " feld- 

 spath," and not " fels-spath." There can hence be no dispute as 

 to the true spelling or derivation. " Feldspar " therefore is the right 

 word among those who speak English. 



French mineralogists have conformed, with a rare exception, 

 to the German style, they retaining the d. Thus it is with 

 Des Cloizeaux (1862), Dufrenoy (1844-1860), Huot (1841), 

 Beudant (1824, 1832), Brochant (i808), Haiiy (1801-1822), Eome 

 de Lisle (1783), Demeste (1779). But Brongniart (1807) thought, 

 like Kirwan, that " feldspath " must be a corruption of the " mot 

 originaire fehpath ;" and hence, as he says, he "restored to the 

 mineral its first name." Later French mineralogists have not 

 followed Brongniart's example. 



In the United States, " feldspar," except in sporadic cases (a 

 consequence of British example), has been the adopted form. It is 

 the word used in the works of Dana (1837-1868), Shepard 

 (1832-1857), Eobinson (1825), and Cleveland (1816-1822)*. 



Thus British mineralogists are at present alone in using "felspar." 

 There is nothing in favour of the word, unless it be its fewer letters by 

 one, and its smoother pronunciation ; and such a reason for change, 

 if acted on, would make havoc of good English. Being wrong, 

 and " feldspar" being right, its rejection should encounter no impedi- 

 ment in the fact of long national usage. Science is not national ; 

 and only by the change can uniformity of nomenclature be secured. 



The case between " feldstone " and " felstone " is very similar to 

 that between "feldspar" and "felspar." The original German 

 word is " feld-stein," one long since introduced into the science, and 

 not j 'els-stein. Fels-stein would be as bad in German as rock-stone (its 

 signification) in English. The Germans cannot adopt fels-stein, 



* Phillips's 'Mineralogy,' in its republications in the United States, has retained 

 the English orthography. 



