graphy, TO STREW is in reality the best, because it is the nearest to the Saxon. We have seen above, that TO STREW is in Saxon reapian. In the orthography of the same language, the substantive STRAW is reɲeop. In the Dutch, STRAW is written STROO. It is hence evident, that we might with as full as much propriety write the substantive STRAW in the form of STREW, as the verb TO STREW in form of STRAW or STROW. There is indeed an anomaly in the orthographies STRAW (the substantive) and TO STREW (the verb;) but there is no good reason why the orthography TO STREW should be disturbed. STROW seems to be direct from the Danish STROE.

This softer sound is even recommended by the orthography and sounds of other words, derived from the same source with STRAW. The primitive word, whatever it may be, appears to imply lineality, or the propensity of acting or being in a line, or in length, or in that form which stands opposed to the being spread or expanded. Hence STRATUM, STRAIT, STREAK, STRIPE, &c. &c. &c. Hence, also, STREAM. 'Stream,' says Johnson, any thing issuing from a head, and moving forward with continuity of parts:' it is obvious that this definition applies equally to a river proceeding from its source, and to a straw or culm proceeding from its root. Now, stream (so written in the Saxon,) is STRAUM in the Islandic, and STROOM in the Dutch.

But the word STRAW, then, implies a thing which has length rather than width, and which is projected or protracted, but not spread. To strew, neverthelesss, signifies to spread: To spread,'

Johnson, by being scattered; to spread by scattering.' This is explained by considering, that the verb refers to the action employed upon the substance, not to the substance upon which the action is employed. To strew is to spread or scatter, as straw is spread or scattered. The ideas of spreading and scattering have nothing in common with the figure of STRAV, but represent the action of which STRAW is the subject. This being so, is it improbable that the verb TO STRAY, any more than that of TO STRAGGLE, are derived from STRAW, (STRÔER, Danish, to spread or scatter,) but may more plausibly be derived from STRAVVIARE, Italian, from EXTRA VIAM, Latin, out of the way or road.' See JOHNSON'S DICTIONARY, TO STRAGGLE, and To STRAY.

The English word Squad is from the French one, Escouade.

A survey, valuation, and registration, of the lands in France is taking place, with a view to a new mode of collecting the land tax. A survey of this nature is called in French a Cadastre,

GEN. CHRON. VOL. III. NO. XI.

D

it

OMNIANA.-No. V.

DR. R. Johnson is in doubt, as to the orthography of the verb To STREW, hesitating between STREW and STROW: 'Skinner,' says he, proposes STREW, and Junius writes STRAW. Their reasons,' he adds,' will appear in the word from which it may be derived: : STRAWAN, Gothic; STROYEN, Dutch; seɲeapan, Saxon; STRAWEN, German; STROER, Danish. Perhaps,' he concludes, 'STROW is best, being that which reconciles etymology with pronunciation.'-In the whole of these remarks, he omits to take notice, that the verb is formed of the substantive STRAW; as, of SAW, we form TO SAW. To straw, is, first, to lay, spread, or scatter straw; and, secondly, to lay, spread, or scatter any thing else. The French verb, which answers to our verb To STREW, is formed in a similar manner, though with some difference as to the material. From JONC, a rush, there is in that language the verb JONCHER, 'to strew' or straw,' but literally to rush.' It will follow, that in strictness, the orthography of the verb TO STREW ought to depend upon that of the substantive STRAW. But is the usual orthography of the word STRAW correct? Does agree with its etymology? The truth is, that under some aspects, the attempt to fix an orthography agreeing with etymology is idle. The languages of Europe are spoken in an infinity of Jialects; it is not a very great length of time since those who spoke the words were wholly unable to write them; words, while unwritten, are mere sounds; the sounds vary with the dialect; and the orthography then only agrees with the etymology, when it is derived from the form in which the word was first written in the particular dialect under consideration. Now, the various words exhibited above as etymons of the verb To Strew, are only the same word differently pronounced, according to different European dialects, and differently spelt according to its sound in each of those dialects, and according to the value of the letters of the alphabet, as given to them by the several nations. Both STRAW and STREW are orthographies which agree with the etymology of the word. If it be asked, why we write the substantive STRAW, and the verb TO STREW, the probable answer is, that we have followed the pronunciation of one dialect for the one, and of another for the other. The mixture of dialects, in the composition of modern English, such, that examples may be produced, in which we have two or more words having a common etymon or original signification, but which, with us, have not only different sounds, but different meanings.

is

Johnson is inclined to the orthography TO STROW; but further observation would perhaps have satisfied him, that our usual ortho

graphy

། །

BA

5:

graphy, TO STREW is in reality the best, because it is the nearest to the Saxon. We have seen above, that TO STREW is in Saxon reapian. In the orthography of the same language, the substantive STRAW is repeop. In the Dutch, STRAW is written STROO. It is hence evident, that we might with as full as much propriety write the substantive STRAW in the form of STREW, as the verb To STREW in form of STRAW OF STROW. There is indeed an anomaly in the orthographies STRAW (the substantive) and TO STREW (the verb;) but there is no good reason why the orthography TO STREW should be disturbed. STROW seems to be direct from the Danish

STEOE.

This softer sound is even recommended by the orthography and sands of other words, derived from the same source with STRAW. The primitive word, whatever it may be, appears to imply lineality, or the propensity of acting or being in a line, or in length, or in that form which stands opposed to the being spread or expanded. Hence STRATUM, STRAIT, STREAK, STRIPE, &c. &c. &c. Hence, also, STREAM. < Stream,' says Johnson, any thing issuing from 2 head, and moving forward with continuity of parts:' it is obvious that this definition applies equally to a river proceeding from its source, and to a straw or culm proceeding from its root. Now, stream (so written in the Saxon,) is STRAUM in the Islandic, and STROOM in the Dutch.

6

But the word STRAW, then, implies a thing which has length rather than width, and which is projected or protracted, but not spread. To strew, neverthelesss, signifies to spread: To spread,' Johnson, by being scattered; to spread by scattering.' This explained by considering, that the verb refers to the action employed upon the substance, not to the substance upon which the action is employed. To strew is to spread or scatter, as straw is spread or scattered. The ideas of spreading and scattering have thing in common with the figure of STRAV, but represent the action of which STRAW is the subject. This being so, is it improbable that the verb TO STRAY, any more than that of TO STRAGGLE, are derived from STRAW, (STRÔER, Danish, to spread or scatter) but may more plausibly be derived from STRAVVIARE, Italian, from EXTRA VIAM, Latin, out of the way or road. See JOHNSON'S DICTIONARY, TO STRAGGLE, and To STRAY.

The English word Squad is from the French one, Escouade.

A

survey,

valuation, and registration, of the s taking place, with a view to a new mode

lands in France of collecting the land tax. A survey of this nature is called in French a Ca

GEN. CHRON. VOL. III. NO. XI.

D

dastre,

DR.

OMNIANA.-No. V.

R. Johnson is in doubt, as to the orthography of the verb To STREW, hesitating between STREW and STROW: 'Skinner,' says he, proposes STREW, and Junius writes STRAW. Their reasons,' he adds, will appear in the word from which it may be derived: STRAWAN, Gothic; STROYEN, Dutch; repeapan, Saxon: STRAWEN, German; STRÔER, Danish. Perhaps,' he concludes, 'STROW is best, being that which reconciles etymology with pronunciation.'-In the whole of these remarks, he omits to take notice, that the verb is formed of the substantive STRAW; as, of SAW, we form To SAW. To straw, is, first, to lay, spread, or scatter straw; and, secondly, to lay, spread, or scatter any thing else. The French verb, which answers to our verb To STREW, is formed in a similar manner, though with some difference as to the material. From JONC, a rush,' there is in that language the verb JONCHER, 'to strew' or straw,' but literally to rush.' It will follow, that in strictness, the orthography of the verb To STREW ought to depend upon that of the substantive STRAW. But is the usual orthography of the word STRAW correct? Does it agree with its etymology? The truth is, that under some aspects, the attempt to fix an orthography agreeing with etymology is idle. The languages of Europe are spoken in an infinity of Jialects; it is not a very great length of time since those who spoke the words were wholly unable to write them; words, while unwritten, are mere sounds; the sounds vary with the dialect; and the orthography then only agrees with the etymology, when it is derived from the form in which the word was first written in the particular dialect under consideration. Now, the various words exhibited above as etymons of the verb To Strew, are only the same word differently pronounced, according to different European dialects, and differently spelt according to its sound in each of those dialects, and according to the value of the letters of the alphabet, as given to them by the several nations. Both STRAW and STREW are orthographies which agree with the etymology of the word. If it be asked, why we write the substantive STRAW, and the verb To STREW, the probable answer is, that we have followed the pronunciation of one dialect for the one, and of another for the other. The mixture of dialects, in the composition of modern English, is such, that examples may be produced, in which we have two or more words having a common etymon or original signification, but which, with us, have not only different sounds, but different meanings.

Johnson is inclined to the orthography TO STROW; but further observation would perhaps have satisfied him, that our usual ortho

graphy

graphy, TO STREW is in reality the best, because it is the nearest to the Saxon. We have seen above, that To STREW is in Saxon rereapian. In the orthography of the same language, the substantive STRAW is reneop. In the Dutch, STRAW is written STROO. It is hence evident, that we might with as full as much propriety write the substantive STRAW in the form of STREW, as the verb TO STREW in form of STRAW or STROW. There is indeed an anomaly in the orthographies STRAW (the substantive) and TO STREW (the verb ;) but there is no good reason why the orthography TO STREW should be disturbed. STROW seems to be direct from the Danish

STROE.

This softer sound is even recommended by the orthography and sounds of other words, derived from the same source with STRAW. The primitive word, whatever it may be, appears to imply lineality, or the propensity of acting or being in a line, or in length, or in that form which stands opposed to the being spread or expanded. Hence STRATUM, STRAIT, STREAK, STRIPE, &c. &c. &c. Hence, also, STREAM. Stream,' says Johnson, any thing issuing from a head, and moving forward with continuity of parts:' it is obvious that this definition applies equally to a river proceeding from its source, and to a straw or culm proceeding from its root. Now, stream (so written in the Saxon,) is STRAUM in the Islandic, and STROOM in the Dutch.

But the word STRAW, then, implies a thing which has length rather than width, and which is projected or protracted, but not spread. To strew, neverthelesss, signifies to spread: To spread,' says Johnson, by being scattered; to spread by scattering.' This is explained by considering, that the verb refers to the action employed upon the substance, not to the substance upon which the action is employed. To strew is to spread or scatter, as straw is spread or scattered. The ideas of spreading and scattering have nothing in common with the figure of STRAVA, but represent the action of which STRAW is the subject. This being so, is it improbable that the verb TO STRAY, any more than that of TO STRAGGLE, are derived from STRAW, (STRÔER, Danish, to spread or scatter,) but may more plausibly be derived from STRAVVIARE, Italian, from EXTRA VIAM, Latin, 'out of the way or road.' See JOHNSON'S DICTIONARY, TO STRAGGLE, and To STRAY.

The English word Squad is from the French one, Escouade.

A survey, valuation, and registration, of the lands in France is taking place, with a view to a new mode of collecting the land tax. A survey of this nature is called in French a Cadastre,

GEN. CHRON. VOL. III. NO. XI.

D