much of the material has been gathered for the following brief discussion of the history and nature of this class of idiomatic phrases.

The first traces of this idiom are found in subjunctive impersonal sentences containing the comparative of lief or liev (meaning dear) and a dative personal pronoun, as," Me were liefer,” i. e.: “It would be dearer to me. Similar sentences were formed with the subjunctive of have which meant to hold, as, "Him hadde it liefer," i. e. "It would be held dearer to him." Later the dative of the pronoun was changed for the nominative. These impersonals with liefer or liever are often met with in the writings of Chaucer, as,

Liefer I had to dien on a knife

Than thee offendè, truè dearè wife.

For about two hundred years "had liefer' was in full sway, but in the fifteenth century a rival phrase "had rather" sprang up, conveying the same idea with a different word. This grew rapidly and finally drove "had liefer" almost entirely out of use. In Shakespeare's plays "had rather" occurs many times, but "had liefer" not at all. "Had liefer" was not wholly extinguished, however, and Tennyson revives the old phrase in his poem Enid.

Far liever had I gird his harness on him

A descendant of the phrase is in full colloquial use to-day in the positive form "had as lief."

In the phrase "had rather" which thus supplanted

"had liefer," rather seems to have been thought of as an adjective as liefer had been. It being the comparative of rathe, meaning early, or quick, the phrase “had rather" carried the meaning of "hold it quicker" or "more desirable." Thus the Bible verse "I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God," may be paraphrased as, “I hold it preferable to be a doorkeeper," etc.

For a long time the phrase was accepted naturally without close analysis. But in the eighteenth century, when English began to be studied critically, it was inevitable that so peculiar a phrase as "had rather" should attract attention, and become the object of criticism from those who did not understand it. The corresponding phrase "had better" was also in occasional use, and had been from an early period, having been first used in the original form "me were better"a form which was never in use with rather. But "had better" had never come into extensive use, and was now rarely heard. "Had liefer" also had gone out of use, so the force of the grammarian's attack fell only on "had rather." In all other connections rather had come to have an adverbial instead of an adjective use, so that the incongruity of the phrase was sensibly felt. Dr. Johnson in his dictionary of 1755 defines “to have rather" as "to desire in preference," but adds, "This is, I think, a barbarous expression of late intrusion into our language, for which it is better to say will rather." In Sheridan's grammar, a few years afterwards this thought is repeated.

Lowth's grammar of 1762 adds to this misinterpretation of the idiom by advancing the theory that the proper form was "I would rather," that this had been contracted into "I'd rather" and then erroneously expanded into "I had rather." This ingenious etymology, for which there is no justification in fact, became for a long time the accepted solution. It was adopted into the early editions of Webster's Dictionary, and may be found in some of the nineteenth century grammars. Recent dictionaries and grammars, however, have corrected this misinterpretation, giving the true origin and history of the phrase, and have endorsed it as a true English idiom that has had an accepted literary use from an early period.

ļ But while "had rather" has been reinstated among the approved literary idioms of English, it is undeniable that the use of "had rather"-both the literary and especially the colloquial use-has declined in modern times in favor of the newer phrase "would rather." Although "would rather" lacks the ancient prestige that belongs to "had rather," it does say, even if a little imperfectly, what it is intended to say. While in “had rather" both words are used in a somewhat archaic sense and relationship, in "would rather" the verb is used in its modern sense, and rather sustains its usual adverbial relation. But in spite of the growth of "would rather" it is not likely that "had rather" will share the fate of "had liefer" and be abandoned as a true idiom of the English tongue.

66

Although "had liefer," "had rather" and had

better" were originally formed after the same pattern of speech, the history and present status of "had rather" "Had

and "had better" are by no means alike."

better" developed very slowly into general use, but in recent years it has become very common and it is more frequent than "had rather" in modern English literature. The phrase also has positive and superlative forms, "had as good," and "had best." But while "had rather" has in a sense accommodated itself to the modern sense of idiom by suggesting for rather a quasi-adverbial character, this cannot so easily be done for good, better and best.

The analogy of "would rather” has also inaugurated the doubtful phrase "would better" which is now occasionally met with in speech and in newspaper English. In the words of Professor Lounsbury, "This is as ungrammatical as it is unidiomatic. What the one who employs it really says is that he would do so and so better than something else. What he is trying to say is that it would be better for him to do so and so instead of something else."

In the phrases "had rather” and “had better," the tendency of both rather and better to suggest an adverbial instead of an adjective use, has also led to the employment of other adverbs in the same connection, and "had sooner, ""had as soon,' 99 66 "had as well," are sometimes heard. The propriety of these may be questioned, but as to the original consistency of "had rather" and "had better" with the true idioms of English, there is no question,

LIV

CASE SHIFTINGS OF PRONOUNS*

"It is me," a stereotyped, idiomatic, colloquial form used by the masses, and shunned by the fastidious. "It is I," more literary and formal, used by those with strong feeling for grammatical consistency.-CARPENTER.

It is only the influence of ignorant grammarians that prevents such phrases as "It is me" from being adopted into the written language and acknowledged in the grammars. SWEET.

"It is me" is an expression which every one uses. Grammarians (of the smaller order) protest; schoolmasters (of the lower kind) prohibit and chastise; but English men, women, and children go on saying it, and will go on saying it as long as the English language is spoken.-DEAN ALford.

"It seems as if the last refuge of 'whom' is the construction 'than whom' where it had originally nothing to do." Every error in grammar might be established if frequent usage or the occasional slips of good authors are to be accepted as final authority.-MARSHALL T. BIGELOW.

When the English language gets in my way it doesn't stand a chance.-HENRY WARD BEECHER.

The case distinctions of the pronouns are often obscure or variable. Grammatical laws have always seemed to have a weak hold on the case forms of the

*JESPERSEN's Progress in Language (London, 1894) has an important chapter on Case-Shiftings.