A PROOF-READER'S LETTER
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] .
Sm,—I am a proof-reader, the son of a proof-reader ; and am distressed to find that the Spectator has recently revealed signs of a weakening in its display of pure English. I do not complain of the manifest influence of America on the language used in the advertisements—(" there is no small ear made that can stand up to the roads like this one ")—but of other things which are seriously disturbing to one living in a bilingual country and who has for years regarded the Spectator as almost a Court of Appeal where the right use of language is concerned.
My present pain arises from your issue dated June 19th, 1926. (The paper reaches me after it has served two families in different parts of England and one in East Griqualand.) A word -is omitted in the first column of page 1054, sixteenth line from the bottom. But on page 1050 it is said :- " In the delta lay the Island of Thorney, on which the wild duck rested and in the creeks where the British hunter poled his coracle as he fished."
Surely " of which " should be used in place of " where " ? On page 1045 of the same number appears the following
" The grandeur of their phrasing and philosophy—illumining the hinterlands of consciousness like summer lightning over massed thunderclouds—are a definite addition to tho English language."
Indeed !—" the grandeur are." Why not " is " ?
My distress becomes more acute, however, when I read in the issue of August 28th, among the book reviews on page 31,4, a reference to " the love-interest between David and Michael, Saul's second daughter." Not love, but vanity-, spells Michal with an " e."—I am, Sir, &c.,
" Woodburn," Marilzburg, Natal. PHILIP TOWNSHEND.
[We plead guilty to passing the last two errors, but disagree with our correspondent about " standing up to " being new slang : it is a good old English use.--En. Spectator.
Previous page
