A	»	B	»	C	»	D	»	E
F	»	G	»	H	»	I	»	J
K	»	L	»	M	»	N	»	O
P	»		R	»	S	»		T
U	»		V	»	W	»		Z

Jacob Abbott - "The Teacher"

Hector Malot - "Baccara"

Various - "Punch, or the London Charivari, Vol. 99, November 15, 1890"

William Carey - "An Enquiry into the Obligations of Christians to Use Means for the"

Can E-Books On iPhones Outdo The Amazon Kindle?
Moreover Technologies - Premier purveyor of real-time news and RSS feeds from across the Web

Fiction Springs Forward in 2009
Ad - Finally, A Diet That Really Works!As Seen On CNN, CBS, NBC & Fox!

Art Books in a Booming Art Market
Extract not available.

The Works of Samuel Johnson in Nine Volumes by Samuel Johnson

S >> Samuel Johnson >> The Works of Samuel Johnson in Nine Volumes



Oxford English Classics

* * * * *

DR. JOHNSON'S WORKS.

* * * * *

MISCELLANEOUS PIECES.


THE WORKS OF SAMUEL JOHNSON, LL.D.

IN NINE VOLUMES.

VOLUME THE FIFTH.


MDCCCXXV.




CONTENTS OF THE FIFTH VOLUME.

MISCELLANEOUS PIECES.

The plan of an English dictionary

Preface to the English dictionary

Advertisement to the fourth edition of the English dictionary

Preface to the octavo edition of the English dictionary

Observations on the tragedy of Macbeth

Proposals for printing the works of Shakespeare

Preface to Shakespeare

General observations on the plays of Shakespeare

Account of the Harleian library

Essay on the importance of small tracts

Preface to the catalogue of the Harleian library, vol. iii

Controversy between Crousaz and Warburton

Preliminary discourse to the London Chronicle

Introduction to the World Displayed

Preface to the Preceptor, containing a general plan of education

----to Rolt's dictionary

----to the translation of father Lobo's voyage to Abyssinia

An essay on epitaphs

Preface to an Essay on Milton's Use and Imitation of the Moderns in his
Paradise Lost

Letter to the Rev. Mr. Douglas, occasioned by his vindication of Milton,
&c. By William Lauder, A.M.

Testimonies concerning Mr. Lauder

Account of an attempt to ascertain the longitude

Considerations on the plans offered for the construction of Blackfriars
bridge

Some thoughts on agriculture, both ancient and modern; with an account
of the honour due to an English farmer

Further thoughts on agriculture

Considerations on the corn laws

A complete vindication of the licensers of the stage from the malicious
and scandalous aspersions of Mr. Brooke

Preface to the Gentleman's Magazine, 1738

An appeal to the publick. From the Gentleman's Magazine, March, 1739

Letter on fire-works

Proposals for printing, by subscription, Essays in Verse and Prose, by
Anna Williams

A project for the employment of authors

Preface to the Literary Magazine, 1756

A dissertation upon the Greek comedy, translated from Brumoy

General conclusion to Brumoy's Greek theatre

DEDICATIONS

Preface to Payne's New Tables of Interest

Thoughts on the coronation of his majesty king George the third

Preface to the Artists' Catalogue for 1762

OPINIONS ON QUESTIONS OF LAW

Considerations on the case of Dr. T[rapp]'s [Transcriber's note: sic]

On school chastisement

On vitious intromission

On lay patronage in the church of Scotland

On pulpit censure




THE PLAN
OF AN
ENGLISH DICTIONARY.

TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE
PHILIP DORMER, EARL OF CHESTERFIELD,
One of his Majesty's principal Secretaries of State.


MY LORD,

When first I undertook to write an English Dictionary, I had no
expectation of any higher patronage than that of the proprietors of the
copy, nor prospect of any other advantage than the price of my labour. I
knew that the work in which I engaged is generally considered as
drudgery for the blind, as the proper toil of artless industry; a task
that requires neither the light of learning, nor the activity of genius,
but maybe successfully performed without any higher quality than that of
bearing burdens with dull patience, and beating the track of the
alphabet with sluggish resolution.

Whether this opinion, so long transmitted, and so widely propagated, had
its beginning from truth and nature, or from accident and prejudice;
whether it be decreed by the authority of reason or the tyranny of
ignorance, that, of all the candidates for literary praise, the unhappy
lexicographer holds the lowest place, neither vanity nor interest
incited me to inquire. It appeared that the province allotted me was, of
all the regions of learning, generally confessed to be the least
delightful, that it was believed to produce neither fruits nor flowers;
and that, after a long and laborious cultivation, not even the barren
laurel[1] had been found upon it.

Yet on this province, my Lord, I entered, with the pleasing hope, that,
as it was low, it likewise would be safe. I was drawn forward with the
prospect of employment, which, though not splendid, would be useful; and
which, though it could not make my life envied, would keep it innocent;
which would awaken no passion, engage me in no contention, nor throw in
my way any temptation to disturb the quiet of others by censure, or my
own by flattery.

I had read, indeed, of times, in which princes and statesmen thought it
part of their honour to promote the improvement of their native tongues;
and in which dictionaries were written under the protection of
greatness. To the patrons of such undertakings I willingly paid the
homage of believing that they, who were thus solicitous for the
perpetuity of their language, had reason to expect that their actions
would be celebrated by posterity, and that the eloquence which they
promoted would be employed in their praise. But I considered such acts
of beneficence as prodigies, recorded rather to raise wonder than
expectation; and, content with the terms that I had stipulated, had not
suffered my imagination to flatter me with any other encouragement, when
I found that my design had been thought by your Lordship of importance
sufficient to attract your favour.

How far this unexpected distinction can be rated among the happy
incidents of life, I am not yet able to determine. Its first effect has
been to make me anxious, lest it should fix the attention of the publick
too much upon me; and, as it once happened to an epick poet of France,
by raising the reputation of the attempt, obstruct the reception of the
work. I imagine what the world will expect from a scheme, prosecuted
under your Lordship's influence; and I know that expectation, when her
wings are once expanded, easily reaches heights which performance never
will attain; and when she has mounted the summit of perfection, derides
her follower, who dies in the pursuit.

Not, therefore, to raise expectation, but to repress it, I here lay
before your Lordship the plan of my undertaking, that more may not be
demanded than I intend; and that, before it is too far advanced to be
thrown into a new method, I may be advertised of its defects or
superfluities. Such informations I may justly hope, from the emulation
with which those, who desire the praise of elegance or discernment, must
contend in the promotion of a design that you, my Lord, have not thought
unworthy to share your attention with treaties and with wars.

In the first attempt to methodise my ideas I found a difficulty, which
extended itself to the whole work. It was not easy to determine by what
rule of distinction the words of this dictionary were to be chosen. The
chief intent of it is to preserve the purity, and ascertain the meaning
of our English idiom; and this seems to require nothing more than that
our language be considered, so far as it is our own; that the words and
phrases used in the general intercourse of life, or found in the works
of those whom we commonly style polite writers, be selected, without
including the terms of particular professions; since, with the arts to
which they relate, they are generally derived from other nations, and
are very often the same in all the languages of this part of the world.
This is, perhaps, the exact and pure idea of a grammatical dictionary;
but in lexicography, as in other arts, naked science is too delicate for
the purposes of life. The value of a work must be estimated by its use;
it is not enough that a dictionary delights the critick, unless, at the
same time, it instructs the learner; as it is to little purpose that an
engine amuses the philosopher by the subtilty of its mechanism, if it
requires so much knowledge in its application as to be of no advantage
to the common workman.

The title which I prefix to my work has long conveyed a very
miscellaneous idea, and they that take a dictionary into their hands,
have been accustomed to expect from it a solution of almost every
difficulty. If foreign words, therefore, were rejected, it could be
little regarded, except by criticks, or those who aspire to criticism;
and however it might enlighten those that write, would be all darkness
to them that only read. The unlearned much oftener consult their
dictionaries for the meaning of words, than for their structures or
formations; and the words that most want explanation are generally terms
of art; which, therefore, experience has taught my predecessors to
spread with a kind of pompous luxuriance over their productions.

The academicians of France, indeed, rejected terms of science in their
first essay, but found afterwards a necessity of relaxing the rigour of
their determination; and, though they would not naturalize them at once
by a single act, permitted them by degrees to settle themselves among
the natives, with little opposition; and it would surely be no proof of
judgment to imitate them in an errour which they have now retracted, and
deprive the book of its chief use, by scrupulous distinctions.

Of such words, however, all are not equally to be considered as parts of
our language; for some of them are naturalized and incorporated; but
others still continue aliens, and are rather auxiliaries than subjects.
This naturalization is produced either by an admission into common
speech, in some metaphorical signification, which is the acquisition of
a kind of property among us; as we say, the _zenith_ of advancement, the
_meridian_ of life, the _cynosure_[2] of neighbouring eyes; or it is the
consequence of long intermixture and frequent use, by which the ear is
accustomed to the sound of words, till their original is forgotten, as
in _equator, satellites_; or of the change of a foreign to an
English termination, and a conformity to the laws of the speech into
which they are adopted; as in _category, cachexy, peripneumony_.

Of those which still continue in the state of aliens, and have made no
approaches towards assimilation, some seem necessary to be retained,
because the purchasers of the Dictionary will expect to find them. Such
are many words in the common law, as _capias, habeas corpus,
praemunire, nisi prius_: such are some terms of controversial
divinity, as _hypostasis_; and of physick, as the names of
diseases; and, in general, all terms which can be found in books not
written professedly upon particular arts, or can be supposed necessary
to those who do not regularly study them. Thus, when a reader not
skilled in physick happens in Milton upon this line,

--pining atrophy,
Marasmus, and wide-wasting pestilence,

he will, with equal expectation, look into his dictionary for the word
_marasmus_, as for _atrophy_, or _pestilence_; and will
have reason to complain if he does not find it.

It seems necessary to the completion of a dictionary, designed not
merely for criticks, but for popular use, that it should comprise, in
some degree, the peculiar words of every profession; that the terms of
war and navigation should be inserted, so far as they can be required by
readers of travels, and of history; and those of law, merchandise, and
mechanical trades, so far as they can be supposed useful in the
occurrences of common life.

But there ought, however, to be some distinction made between the
different classes of words; and, therefore, it will be proper to print
those which are incorporated into the language in the usual character,
and those which are still to be considered as foreign, in the Italick
letter.

Another question may arise with regard to appellatives, or the names of
species. It seems of no great use to set down the words _horse, dog,
cat, willow, alder, daisy, rose_, and a thousand others, of which it
will be hard to give an explanation, not more obscure than the word
itself. Yet it is to be considered, that, if the names of animals be
inserted, we must admit those which are more known, as well as those
with which we are, by accident, less acquainted; and if they are all
rejected, how will the reader be relieved from difficulties produced by
allusions to the crocodile, the chameleon, the ichneumon, and the
hyaena? If no plants are to be mentioned, the most pleasing part of
nature will be excluded, and many beautiful epithets be unexplained. If
only those which are less known are to be mentioned, who shall fix the
limits of the reader's learning? The importance of such explications
appears from the mistakes which the want of them has occasioned: had
Shakespeare had a dictionary of this kind, he had not made the
_woodbine_ entwine the _honeysuckle_; nor would Milton, with
such assistance, have disposed so improperly of his _ellops_ and
his _scorpion_.

Besides, as such words, like others, require that their accents should
be settled, their sounds ascertained, and their etymologies deduced,
they cannot be properly omitted in the Dictionary. And though the
explanations of some may be censured as trivial, because they are almost
universally understood, and those of others as unnecessary, because they
will seldom occur, yet it seems not proper to omit them; since it is
rather to be wished that many readers should find more than they expect,
than that one should miss what he might hope to find.

When all the words are selected and arranged, the first part of the work
to be considered is the orthography, which was long vague and uncertain;
which at last, when its fluctuation ceased, was in many cases settled
but by accident; and in which, according to your Lordship's observation,
there is still great uncertainty among the best criticks; nor is it easy
to state a rule by which we may decide between custom and reason, or
between the equiponderant authorities of writers alike eminent for
judgment and accuracy.

The great orthographical contest has long subsisted between etymology
and pronunciation. It has been demanded, on one hand, that men should
write as they speak; but, as it has been shown that this conformity
never was attained in any language, and that it is not more easy to
persuade men to agree exactly in speaking than in writing, it may be
asked, with equal propriety, why men do not rather speak as they write.
In France, where this controversy was at its greatest height, neither
party, however ardent, durst adhere steadily to their own rule; the
etymologist was often forced to spell with the people; and the advocate
for the authority of pronunciation found it sometimes deviating so
capriciously from the received use of writing, that he was constrained
to comply with the rule of his adversaries, lest he should lose the end
by the means, and be left alone by following the crowd.

When a question of orthography is dubious, that practice has, in my
opinion, a claim to preference which preserves the greatest number of
radical letters, or seems most to comply with the general custom of our
language. But the chief rule which I propose to follow is, to make no
innovation without a reason sufficient to balance the inconvenience of
change; and such reasons I do not expect often to find. All change is of
itself an evil, which ought not to be hazarded but for evident
advantage; and as inconstancy is in every case a mark of weakness, it
will add nothing to the reputation of our tongue. There are, indeed,
some who despise the inconveniencies of confusion, who seem to take
pleasure in departing from custom, and to think alteration desirable for
its own sake; and the reformation of our orthography, which these
writers have attempted, should not pass without its due honours, but
that I suppose they hold singularity its own reward, or may dread the
fascination of lavish praise.

The present usage of spelling, where the present usage can be
distinguished, will, therefore, in this work, be generally followed; yet
there will be often occasion to observe, that it is in itself
inaccurate, and tolerated rather than chosen; particularly when, by the
change of one letter or more, the meaning of a word is obscured, as in
_farrier_ for _ferrier_, as it was formerly written, from
_ferrum_, or _fer_; in _gibberish_ for _gebrish_, the jargon of Geber,
and his chymical followers, understood by none but their own tribe. It
will be likewise sometimes proper to trace back the orthography of
different ages, and show by what gradations the word departed from its
original.

Closely connected with orthography is pronunciation, the stability of
which is of great importance to the duration of a language, because the
first change will naturally begin by corruptions in the living speech.
The want of certain rules for the pronunciation of former ages, has made
us wholly ignorant of the metrical art of our ancient poets; and since
those who study their sentiments regret the loss of their numbers, it is
surely time to provide that the harmony of the moderns may be more
permanent.

A new pronunciation will make almost a new speech; and, therefore, since
one great end of this undertaking is to fix the English language, care
will be taken to determine the accentuation of all polysyllables by
proper authorities, as it is one of those capricious phaenomena which
cannot be easily reduced to rules. Thus there is no antecedent reason
for difference of accent in the two words _dolorous_ and
_sonorous_; yet of the one Milton gives the sound in this line,

He pass'd o'er many a region _dolorous_;

and that of the other in this,

_Sonorous_ metal blowing martial sounds.

It may be likewise proper to remark metrical licenses, such as
contractions, _generous, gen'rous; reverend, rev'rend_; and
coalitions, as _region, question_.

But still it is more necessary to fix the pronunciation of
monosyllables, by placing with them words of correspondent sound, that
one may guard the other against the danger of that variation, which, to
some of the most common, has already happened; so that the words
_wound_ and _wind_, as they are now frequently pronounced,
will not rhyme to _sound_ and _mind_. It is to be remarked,
that many words written alike are differently pronounced, as
_flow_, and _brow_: which may be thus registered, _flow,
woe; brow, now_; or of which the exemplification may be generally
given by a distich: thus the words _tear_, or lacerate and
_tear_, the water of the eye, have the same letters, but may be
distinguished thus, _tear, dare; tear, peer_.

Some words have two sounds, which may be equally admitted, as being
equally defensible by authority. Thus _great_ is differently used:

For Swift and him despised the farce of state,
The sober follies of the wise and _great_. POPE.

As if misfortune made the throne her seat,
And none could be unhappy but the _great_. ROWE.

The care of such minute particulars may be censured as trifling; but
these particulars have not been thought unworthy of attention in more
polished languages.

The accuracy of the French, in stating the sounds of their letters, is
well known; and, among the Italians, Crescembeni has not thought it
unnecessary to inform his countrymen of the words which, in compliance
with different rhymes, are allowed to be differently spelt, and of which
the number is now so fixed, that no modern poet is suffered to increase
it.

When the orthography and pronunciation are adjusted, the etymology or
derivation is next to be considered, and the words are to be
distinguished according to the different classes, whether simple, as
_day, light_, or compound, as _day-light_; whether primitive,
as, to _act_, or derivative, as _action, actionable; active,
activity_. This will much facilitate the attainment of our language,
which now stands in our dictionaries a confused heap of words without
dependence, and without relation.

When this part of the work is performed, it will be necessary to inquire
how our primitives are to be deduced from foreign languages, which may
be often very successfully performed by the assistance of our own
etymologists. This search will give occasion to many curious
disquisitions, and sometimes, perhaps, to conjectures, which to readers
unacquainted with this kind of study, cannot but appear improbable and
capricious. But it may be reasonably imagined, that what is so much in
the power of men as language, will very often be capriciously conducted.
Nor are these disquisitions and conjectures to be considered altogether
as wanton sports of wit, or vain shows of learning; our language is well
known not to be primitive or self-originated, but to have adopted words
of every generation, and, either for the supply of its necessities, or
the increase of its copiousness, to have received additions from very
distant regions; so that in search of the progenitors of our speech, we
may wander from the tropick to the frozen zone, and find some in the
valleys of Palestine, and some upon the rocks of Norway.

Beside the derivation of particular words, there is likewise an
etymology of phrases. Expressions are often taken from other languages;
some apparently, as to _run a risk, courir un risque_; and some even
when we do not seem to borrow their words; thus, to _bring about_, or
accomplish, appears an English phrase, but in reality our native word
_about_ has no such import, and is only a French expression, of which we
have an example in the common phrase _venir a bout d'une affaire_.

In exhibiting the descent of our language, our etymologists seem to have
been too lavish of their learning, having traced almost every word
through various tongues, only to show what was shown sufficiently by the
first derivation. This practice is of great use in synoptical lexicons,
where mutilated and doubtful languages are explained by their affinity
to others more certain and extensive, but is generally superfluous in
English etymologies. When the word is easily deduced from a Saxon
original, I shall not often inquire further, since we know not the
parent of the Saxon dialect; but when it is borrowed from the French, I
shall show whence the French is apparently derived. Where a Saxon root
cannot be found, the defect may be supplied from kindred languages,
which will be generally furnished with much liberality by the writers of
our glossaries; writers who deserve often the highest praise, both of
judgment and industry, and may expect at least to be mentioned with
honour by me, whom they have freed from the greatest part of a very
laborious work, and on whom they have imposed, at worst, only the easy
task of rejecting superfluities.

By tracing in this manner every word to its original, and not admitting,
but with great caution, any of which no original can be found, we shall
secure our language from being overrun with _cant_, from being crowded
with low terms, the spawn of folly or affectation, which arise from no
just principles of speech, and of which, therefore, no legitimate
derivation can be shown.

When the etymology is thus adjusted, the analogy of our language is next
to be considered; when we have discovered whence our words are derived,
we are to examine by what rules they are governed, and how they are
inflected through their various terminations. The terminations of the
English are few, but those few have hitherto remained unregarded by the
writers of our dictionaries. Our substantives are declined only by the
plural termination, our adjectives admit no variation but in the degrees
of comparison, and our verbs are conjugated by auxiliary words, and are
only changed in the preter tense.

To our language may be, with great justness, applied the observation of
Quintilian, that speech was not formed by an analogy sent from heaven.
It did not descend to us in a state of uniformity and perfection, but
was produced by necessity, and enlarged by accident, and is, therefore,
composed of dissimilar parts, thrown together by negligence, by
affectation, by learning or by ignorance.

Our inflections, therefore, are by no means constant, but admit of
numberless irregularities, which in this Dictionary will be diligently
noted. Thus _fox_ makes in the plural _foxes_, but _ox_ makes _oxen_.
_Sheep_ is the same in both numbers. Adjectives are sometimes compared
by changing the last syllable, as _proud, prouder, proudest_; and
sometimes by particles prefixed, as _ambitious, more_ ambitious, _most_
ambitious. The forms of our verbs are subject to great variety; some end
their preter tense in _ed_, as I _love_, I _loved_, I have _loved_;
which may be called the regular form, and is followed by most of our
verbs of southern original. But many depart from this rule, without
agreeing in any other, as I _shake_, I _shook_, I have _shaken_ or
_shook_, as it is sometimes written in poetry; I _make_, I _made_, I
have _made_; I _bring_, I _brought_; I _wring_, I _wrung_; and many
others, which, as they cannot be reduced to rules, must be learned from
the dictionary rather than the grammar.

The verbs are likewise to be distinguished according to their qualities,
as actives from neuters; the neglect of which has already introduced
some barbarities in our conversation, which, if not obviated by just
animadversions, may in time creep into our writings.