If you ever fancy trying your hand at writing an Austenesque story or dialogue, or if you just enjoy using historical language in your every day speech, it can help to have a few key words and phrases in your back pocket, to give it an authentic flair. These are just a very few that I like, to get you started, vocabulary that has fallen out of use, or at least have changed in their use since the early 1800s. I referred to "a want of evidence" in a legal submission recently, and thought it made me sound very distinguished. Let me know how you get on with using them, or if you have a particular love of your own antiquated colloquialisms.
Haste - meaning quick speed, or rapidity as it were. You can tell someone to hurry by saying, "make haste!" Or you can do something hastily, often to your regret. Or you can be hasty. It is a terrific word, and very efficient, for in one syllable there is so much mood and subtlety, I feel.
Alacrity - meaning enthusiasm and haste (see above). This word is quite common in Jane Austen's writing, and we NEVER see it any more. I have only ever seen it as a noun, though if anyone knows its adjectival form, please do share!
Vast - meaning very, very large. It can be used simply to describe a physical thing, such as the most common example of a vast ocean. You can also speak of there being a vast deal of something, which is very Jane-Austen in my opinion. And you can use it as an intensifier, such as being vastly disappointed in the shocking want of cake.
Directly - meaning immediately. We still use this word, of course, but not quite in the same sense. Think of Mr. Bingley saying, "I shall speak with the solicitor directly." You can also use it to replace the phrase, "as soon as," as in, "I shall ask him directly he comes here." This sounds very awkward to our modern ears, but that is what makes it authentic.
Parched - meaning thirsty. Actually, in some places they still use this word, like Newfoundland, for example, which actually has the oldest form of English currently spoken in our modern world - at least according to Trivial Pursuit, or some board game I once played that had that as a question. It's some hot today, byes! I'm right parched.
Want - meaning lack. I wrote a whole post on this word, so I was not going to include it, but decided to at the last minute because, being quite a common word, it comes up a lot and, in my opinion, makes a vast deal of difference to the sound of writing. If you don't have any tea, for example, you can speak of a want of tea. It doesn't necessarily mean you want some tea, though. If you don't have tea, and you want some, you can say that you want for tea. See how exciting this little word is? So much style, I feel.
So make haste, and come with alacrity to my vast offering of tea, directly I call you, for I see you are parched and want refreshment!
Showing posts with label Editing tips. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Editing tips. Show all posts
Thursday, 5 May 2016
Wednesday, 4 May 2016
To smart or not to be smart
If you are familiar with the English spoken on both sides of the Atlantic, you might see the humour in the true story of my brother, who had an interview at Oxford and nothing to wear, going from shop to shop asking if they had any dress pants. Canadian readers might wonder, what is so funny about that? UK readers may react with the same confusion and amusement as did the people in the shops.
Where we here in the colonies say, "dress," the denizens of the old country say, "smart." And when they say, "pants," they actually mean, "underwear."
So, essentially, my poor brother was himself rather dismayed that not a single clothing store in Brighton had any dress pants, while the shop attendants wondered why this American guy wanted underwear with dresses on them, or possibly underwear to wear with a dress? Not sure. What he should have been asking for was, of course, smart trousers.
Here is a picture of my brother, looking smart in both senses of the word. Firstly, he is wearing a tie, and secondly, he ended up going to Yale where he was valedictorian and from where he went to work for Google. (Sorry, a sister has to brag when she can.)
This brings me to my point, which is to clarify the meaning of an English word, for use in historical English fiction. At least here in the New World, we use "smart" to mean intelligent. This usage began in about the mid 20th Century. Prior to that, from about 1700, it meant what it now means in UK English, ie. looking good.
The original meaning, however, is to sting. This, too, is still a use I have heard, though not as common as it once was. It is from this meaning that we get the use for clever, from the idea of having a cutting or sharp or stinging wit. It has also been applied to the sense of being keen in bargaining. These uses are attested from as early as 1300, though are more specific than our modern general use for just being, well, smart.
And just for fun, here is a picture of my brother, with me and my sister, looking smart in a wholly different, much more Regency way.
Where we here in the colonies say, "dress," the denizens of the old country say, "smart." And when they say, "pants," they actually mean, "underwear."
So, essentially, my poor brother was himself rather dismayed that not a single clothing store in Brighton had any dress pants, while the shop attendants wondered why this American guy wanted underwear with dresses on them, or possibly underwear to wear with a dress? Not sure. What he should have been asking for was, of course, smart trousers.
Here is a picture of my brother, looking smart in both senses of the word. Firstly, he is wearing a tie, and secondly, he ended up going to Yale where he was valedictorian and from where he went to work for Google. (Sorry, a sister has to brag when she can.)
This brings me to my point, which is to clarify the meaning of an English word, for use in historical English fiction. At least here in the New World, we use "smart" to mean intelligent. This usage began in about the mid 20th Century. Prior to that, from about 1700, it meant what it now means in UK English, ie. looking good.
The original meaning, however, is to sting. This, too, is still a use I have heard, though not as common as it once was. It is from this meaning that we get the use for clever, from the idea of having a cutting or sharp or stinging wit. It has also been applied to the sense of being keen in bargaining. These uses are attested from as early as 1300, though are more specific than our modern general use for just being, well, smart.
And just for fun, here is a picture of my brother, with me and my sister, looking smart in a wholly different, much more Regency way.
Wednesday, 7 May 2014
How Not to Write Like Austen: use of the word "want"
Try as we may, we can none of us imitate the genius of Jane Austen. We can, however, avoid a few linguistic anachronisms which might interrupt the tenuous suspension of the reader's disbelief in reading one's attempt to do so.
200 years ago, the word want had a slightly different meaning from the one it has now. It used to mean lack. If you would say, "for lack of something," Jane Austen would say, "for want of something." If you said, "he lacks something," Jane Austen would say, "he wants something."
This can sometimes be misleading if you are not aware of the distinction, because we often lack something we want. It gets a bit blurry in statements like, "all we want is a bit of cake to make us completely happy." This means that all that is missing is a bit of cake. If they were really hungry for some cake, they would use a word like wish or desire or long for. "How I long for a ball!"
I searched Jane Austen's complete works and I never found the word lack in any of them. I therefore conclude that she did not use it. Perhaps it was in use at the time, but I choose not to use it in my work because she didn't.
I find that making this substitution, of want for lack automatically makes a text sound more authentic. The same goes for replacing want with would like, or wish, etc. where appropriate.
Happy writing. Go eat some chocolate!
Melanie Kerr is the author of Follies Past: a Prequel to Pride and Prejudice
Read Chapter 1 Watch the Trailers Order Paperback Download eBook
200 years ago, the word want had a slightly different meaning from the one it has now. It used to mean lack. If you would say, "for lack of something," Jane Austen would say, "for want of something." If you said, "he lacks something," Jane Austen would say, "he wants something."
This can sometimes be misleading if you are not aware of the distinction, because we often lack something we want. It gets a bit blurry in statements like, "all we want is a bit of cake to make us completely happy." This means that all that is missing is a bit of cake. If they were really hungry for some cake, they would use a word like wish or desire or long for. "How I long for a ball!"I searched Jane Austen's complete works and I never found the word lack in any of them. I therefore conclude that she did not use it. Perhaps it was in use at the time, but I choose not to use it in my work because she didn't.
I find that making this substitution, of want for lack automatically makes a text sound more authentic. The same goes for replacing want with would like, or wish, etc. where appropriate.
Happy writing. Go eat some chocolate!
Melanie Kerr is the author of Follies Past: a Prequel to Pride and Prejudice
Read Chapter 1 Watch the Trailers Order Paperback Download eBook
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

