Murray's filing system (OUP Museum)
Enter Keywords:
Thursday, 31 January 2013
Home arrow Role of quotations arrow Johnson arrow Pleasure and instruction
Pleasure and instruction
Role 1 of quotations: to provide pleasure and instruction
In his Plan of 1747, written when he had embarked on but not completed his dictionary, Johnson recognized that 'the credit of every part of this work must depend' on the 'authorities' [i.e. quotation sources] that he would cite to illustrate his analysis of a word. (See http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/plan.html [accessed 5 August 2005].)

It is tempting to a modern reader to assume from this that Johnson was seeking empirical evidence of usage in order to justify his inference of what a word meant. This would be a mistaken assumption. Johnson immediately goes on to say that in citing such authorities,
it will be proper to observe some obvious rules; such as of preferring writers of the first reputation to those of an inferiour rank; of noting the quotations with accuracy; and of selecting, when it can be conveniently done, such sentences, as, besides their immediate use, may give pleasure or instruction, by conveying some elegance of language, or some precept of prudence or piety.
The first and third of these 'rules' indicate that Johnson believed his quotation sources to be important not only because they would illustrate the usage of a word, but also because they would provide aesthetic pleasure on the one hand, and moral uplift and instruction on the other. The latter aim was entirely characteristic of the pedagogic culture of his day and earlier (it is a version of the ancient and much-rehearsed view that one teaches through delight; see Horace, Art of Poetry, ll. 333-44). As one critic has written, 'Quotation gathering, while new in England, was an old story with the Continental dictionaries of the Renaissance (specifically, of the period before 1700). Johnson's sentiments on the value to learning of quotations from various sources closely echo the statements on method found in a number of earlier lexicons [for example, those of Constantine, Faber, Estienne, Buxtorf, and Golius]' (Korshin 1974: 304; for a comparison of Johnson's use of quotations with that of the academicians della Crusca, see Sledd and Kolb 1955: 42, 211).

(Johnson later had to modify his initial scheme for including quotations: 'When the time called upon me to range this accumulation of elegance and wisdom into an alphabetical series, I soon discovered that the bulk of my volumes would fright away the student, and was forced to depart from my scheme of including all that was pleasing or useful in English literature'. He was nevertheless pleased that the ones he retained would 'intersperse with verdure and flowers the dusty desarts of barren philology'; see http://andromeda.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/preface.html [accessed 5 August 2005].)

Johnson acknowledges that the choice of quotation sources will therefore play a central role in his dictionary. 'Who shall judge the judges?' he asks. He replies, '...since...a question may arise by what authority the authorities are selected, it is necessary to obviate it, by declaring that many of the writers whose testimonies will be alleged, were selected by Mr. Pope'.

Pope was one of many contemporary men of letters who felt intense anxiety over the uncontrolled profusion of new words and new forms in the English language, and who favoured various projects, including compiling a dictionary with examples of exemplary usage, to 'correct, improve and ascertain the language' (cf. Swift's Proposal for Correcting, Improving and Ascertaining the English Tongue, 1712: http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/SwiTong.html [accessed 28 January 2006]; and for an excellent recent survey of late-seventheenth- and eighteenth-century attitudes to correctness and standardization, Crystal 2004: chapters 15-16). Pope's list of the prose writers and poets whose usage would function as an authoritative model in a dictionary was made just before his death in 1744 and recorded by Joseph Spence in his collection of Observations, Anecdotes, and Characters of Books and Men (a copious account of Spence's conversations with Pope and other luminaries; see Spence 1966: vol. 1, §389-90).

The prose writers specified by Pope were Bacon, Hooker, Hobbes, Ben Jonson, Lord Clarendon, Barrow, Tillotson, Dryden, Sir William Temple, L'Estrange, Locke, Sprat, Atterbury, Congreve, Addison, Vanbrugh, Swift, Lord Bolingbroke; the poets, a smaller number, were Spenser, Shakespeare, Fletcher, Waller, Butler, Milton, Dryden, Prior, Swift (Butler and Swift were to furnish examples of 'the burlesque style', and 'Fletcher was mentioned too only as an authority for familiar dialogue and the slighter kinds of writing').

In the event, Johnson did not stick to this list very closely. He included many other additional sources, notably the Bible (not mentioned in Pope's list), and famously excluded Hobbes (with some other authors) on the grounds that his views were immoral. Notably, about half of all his quotations were from authors dead before 1700. (See Schreyer 2000; Crystal 2004: 383; DeMaria 1997: 90ff.; and on Johnson's exclusions, McDermott 1998: 61.)

So the appearance of objective empiricism which Johnson's use of quotation evidence might now communicate to us today is effectively specious: Johnson based his definitions on quotations gathered from carefully selected authorities to provide instructive, rather than representative, examples of usage.

In his Preface to the Dictionary, Johnson explains that he sought his examples 'from the writers before the restoration, whose works I regard as the wells of English undefiled, as the pure sources of genuine diction', and emphasizes once more the pedagogical aims behind his choice of quotations:
I have fixed Sidney's work for the boundary, beyond which I make few excursions. From the authours which rose in the time of Elizabeth, a speech might be formed adequate to all the purposes of use and elegance. If the language of theology were extracted from Hooker and the translation of the Bible; the terms of natural knowledge from Bacon; the phrases of policy, war, and navigation from Raleigh; the dialect of poetry and fiction from Spenser and Sidney; and the diction of common life from Shakespeare, few ideas would be lost to mankind, for want of English words, in which they might be expressed.
He could not always find the words he wanted in such sources. In actually compiling rather than just planning his dictionary, Johnson had been forced in some instances to depart from his rule of quoting only from 'masters of elegance or models of stile': 'words must be sought where they are used; and in what pages, eminent for purity, can terms of manufacture or agriculture be found?'

He was nevertheless astonishingly successful in limiting the provenance of his quotations. Just seven sources between them furnish nearly half the quotations in the Dictionary: Shakespeare (15.5%), Dryden (10% ), Milton (5.7%), and Bacon, the Bible, Addison, and Pope (under 4.5% each); just 19 authors provide 67% of the total number of quotations in the Dictionary (figures from Schreyer 2000: 67). As commentators have noted, 'By selecting the domain of research, Johnson limited both the kind of English and the kind of knowledge his book could contain'; 'the very act of selecting a corpus such as Johnson's "wells of English undefiled" is potentially prescriptive' (DeMaria 1997: 90; Barnbrook 2005: 96).

Unlike Johnson, the early editors of OED set out to record words from all available printed sources, and not to confine themselves to authors selected for their propriety or elegance of expression. Nevertheless, it proved difficult for the main editor (1879-1915) of the Dictionary, J. A. H. Murray, to resist calls that he should choose quotations only from texts written by great writers, or found in other sources thought to be appropriate representatives of the culture and history of the nation (see Literature and the nation). 

Despite the difference in the aims and achievements of the two dictionaries, therefore, there are some striking similarities between the instructive and aesthetic role of quotations in Johnson, as discussed here, and in the OED: see Top sources; Literary vs. other sources [*under construction]. Does this make the OED more of a prescriptive dictionary than is usually thought?
Last Updated ( Wednesday, 23 May 2007 )
Next >

Built with Mambo. Any comments or feedback are welcome.
All responsibility for views and data published on this site is that of the author, Charlotte Brewer.
Copyright © 2005-13 Charlotte Brewer. All rights reserved.