A Dictionary of Modern English Usage [antikvár]

PREFACE TO THE REVISED EDITION 'It took the world by storm' said The Times, in its obituary notice of H. W. Fowler, about The King's English, published by him and his younger brother Frank in 1906. That description might have been more fitly applied to the reception of A Dictionary of Modem English Usage which followed twenty years later, planned by the two brothers but executed by Henry alone. This was indeed an epoch-making book in the strict sense of that overworked phrase. It made the name of Fowler a household word in all English-speaking countries. Its influence extended even to the battlefield. 'Why must you write intensive here ?' asked the Prime Minister in a minute to the Director of Military Intelligence about plans for the invasion of Normandy. ^Intense is the right word. You should read Fowler's Modem English Usage on the use of the two words.'' Though never revised, the book has kept its place against aU rivals, and shown little sign of suffering from that reaction which commonly awaits those whose work achieves exceptional popularity in their lifetime. What is the secret of its success? It is not that aU Fowler's opinions are unchallengeable. Many have been challenged. It is not that he is always easy reading. At his best he is incomparable. But he never forgot what he calls 'that pestilent fellow the critical reader' who is 'not satisfied with catching the general drift and obvious intention of a sentence' but insists that 'the words used must . . . actually yield on scrutiny the desired sense'.^ There are some passages that only yield it after what the reader may think an excessive amoimt of scrutiny— passages demanding hardly less concentration than one of the more obscure sections of a Finance Act, and for the same reason: the determination of the writer to make sure that, when the reader eventually gropes his way to a meaning, it shall be, beyond all possible doubt, the meaning intended by the writer. Nor does the secret lie in the convenience of the book as a work of reference; it hardly deserves its title of 'dictionary', since much of it consists of short essays on various subjects, some with fancy titles that give no clue at all to their subject. What reporter, seeking guidance about the propriety of saying that the recep- ' The Second World War, v. 615. s.v. nxoGiCALiTiES.