Next year marks the centennial of Oxford University Press’s publication of H. W. Fowler’s magnum opus A Dictionary of Modern English Usage. It was a category-creating book: a quasi-dictionary dealing not with all the words in the English language but with all its troublesome wordings. During its creation (1911–26), Fowler referred to it variously as “a general vade mecum of English writing,” as “an idioms dictionary,” and as “the Perfect English-speaker’s Companion.” Having just completed the Concise Oxford Dictionary, he meant to compile a novel dictionary-like reference work in which “approval & condemnation would be less stingily dealt out than has been possible in the official atmosphere of a complete dictionary.” Furnishing abundant guidance, the book ended up having an unequaled influence on 20th-century attitudes to the English language.
Having imbibed Fowler’s words as an adolescent, I’ve always considered myself a Fowlerian in spirit — willing to bring literary judgment to questions of English usage. I’ve been skeptical of his many critics, who like to call his enterprise a “dodgy business” because of the fluidity and changeability of language. How justified is the criticism?
Comments