PREFACE.
This uncertainty is moſt frequent in the vowels, which are ſo capriciouſly pronounced, and ſo differently modified, by accident or affectation not only in every province, but in every mouth, that to them, as is well known to etymologiſts, little regard is to be ſhewn in the deduction of one language from another.
Such defects are not errours in orthography, but ſpots of babarity impreſſed ſo deep in the Engliſh language, that criticiſm can never waſh them away; theſe, therefore, muſt be permitted to remain untouched: but many words have likewiſe been altered by accident, or depraved by ignorance, as the pronunciation of the vulgar has been weakly followed; and ſome ſtill continue to be variouſly written, as authours differ in their care or ſkill: of theſe it was proper to enquire the true orthography, which I have always conſidered as depending on their derivation, and have therefore referred them to their original languages: thus I write enchant, enchantment, enchanter, after the French, and incantation after the Latin; thus entire is choſen rather than intire, becauſe it paſſed to us not from the Latin integer, but from the French entier.
Of many words it is difficult to whether they were immediately received from the the French, ſince at the time when we had dominions in France, we had Latin ſervice in our churches. It is, however, my opinion, that the French generally ſupplied us; for we have a few Latin words, among the terms of domeſtick uſe, which are not French; but many French, which are very remote from Latin Even in words of which the derivation is apparent, I have been often obliged to ſacrifice uniformity to cuſtom; thus I write, in compliance with a numberleſs majority, convey, and inveigh, deceit and receipt, fancy and phantom; ſometimes the derivative varies from the primitive, as explain and explanation, repeat and repetition.
Some combinations of letters having the ſame power are uſed indifferently without any diſcoverable reaſon of choice, as in choak, choke; ſoap, ſope; fewel, fuel, and many others; which I have ſometimes inſerted twice, that thoſe who ſearch for them under either form, may not ſearch in vain.
In examining the orthography of any doubtful word, the mode of ſpelling by which it is inſerted in the ſeries of the dictionary, is to be conſidered as that to which I give, perhaps not often raſhly, the preference. I have left, in the examples, to every authour his own practice unmoleſted, that the reader may balance ſuffrages, and judge between us: but this queſtion is not always to be determined by reputed or by real learning; ſome men, intent upon greater things, have thought little on founds and derivations; ſome, knowing in the ancient tongues, have neglected thoſe in which our words are commonly to be ſought. Thus Hammond writes fecibleneſs for feaſibleneſs, becauſe I ſuppoſe he imagined it derived immediately from the Latin; and ſome words, ſuch as dependant, dependent; dependence, dependence, vary their final ſyllable, as one or other language is preſent to the writer.
In this part of the work, where caprice has long wantoned without controul, and vanity fought praiſe by petty reformation, I have endeavoured to proceed with a ſcholar's reverence for antiquity, and a grammarian's regard to the genius of our tongue. I have attempted few alterations, and among thoſe few, perhaps the greater part is from the modern to the ancient practice; and I hope I may be allowed to recommend to thoſe, whoſe thoughts have been, perhaps, employed too anxiouſly on verbal ſingularities, not to diſturb, upon narrow views, or for minute propriety, the orthography of their fathers. It has been aſſerted, that for the law to be known, is of more importance than to be right. Change, ſays Hooker, is not made without inconvenience, even from worſe to better. There is in conſtancy and lability a general and laſting advantage, which will always overbalance the ſlow improvements of gradual correction. Much leſs ought our written language to comply with the corruptions of oral utterance, or copy that which every variation of time or place makes different from itſelf, and imitate thoſe changes, which will again be changed, while imitation is employed in obſerving them.
This recommendation of ſteadineſs and uniformity does not proceed from an opinion, that particular combinations of letters have much influence on human happineſs; or that truth may not be ſucceſſfully taught by modes of ſpelling fanciful and erroneous: I am not yet ſo loſt in lexicography, as to forget that words are the daughters of earth, and that things are the ſons of heaven. Language is only the inſtrument of ſcience, and words are but the ſigns of ideas: I wiſh, however, that the inſtrument might be leſs apt to decay, and that ſigns might be permanent, like the things which they denote.
In ſettling the orthography, I have not wholly neglected the pronunciation, which I have directed, by printing an accent upon the acute or elevated ſyllable. It will ſometimes be found, that the accent is placed by the authour quoted, on a different ſyllable from that marked in the alphabetical ſeries; it is then to be underſtood, that cuſtom has varied, or that the authour has, in my opinion, pronounced wrong. Short directions are ſometimes given where the ſound of letters is irregular; and if they are ſometimes omitted, defeat in ſuch minute observations will be more eaſily excuſed, than ſuperfluity.
In the inveſtigation both of the orthography and ſignification of words, their Etymology was neceſſarily to be conſidered, and they were therefore to be divided into primitives and derivatives. A primitive word, is that which can be traced no further to any Engliſh root; thus circumſpect, circum-vent,
