10 s. vii. JAN. 3, 1907.] NOTES AND QUERIES.
17
rafter the service. I rather think that
have seen such a cupboard in use, but cannot remember where. J. T. F.
Durham.
Dole cupboards were used for keeping charity loaves. Two may be seen in St. Albans Abbey. A. S. LEWIS.
Library, Constitutional Club.
SANTA FE : AMERICAN PLACE-NAME (10 S. vi. 310, 353, 394, 452). Faneuil Hal An Boston is not pronounced " Funnel,' as stated by MB. PLATT at the second refer 'ence, except by a small and decreasing Temnant of the old families (Wendel Phillips used to roll it on his tongue witl great unction), and by those who adopt their hall-marks of tenacious special locutions for business or personal reasons. It never hac any excuse in the Faneuil family's own usage, that I know of, and " Fan-u-il " is now
- almost universal. " Arkansaw " is the legal
pronunciation, by enactment of the Arkansas legislature the r of course silent in Southern usage, and the sounds thus quite accurately representing the original and correct name of the "Akansa" tribe. " Arkanzas " is merely ridiculous, widely as it is used, being the pronunciation of French letters in English fashion, to give sounds they were never in- tended for. In French use they made " Ahkansaw," as they should. The English misuse is exactly like the comic pronuncia- tion of " Esquimaux " as " Eskwimawks " ; or the absurd ' Century Dictionary ' pro- nunciation of the Vancouver's Island dry- dock station, Esquimalt, as " Eskwimault," instead of the local " Squimo " it being, in fact, the same word as " Esquimaux," now universal in English as " Eskimo."
The French of course used ou to represent the same sound as our w, and ch for our sh. In general the English form lias been sub- stituted in America, as Wabash (" Waw'- bash") for Ouabache ; but sometimes they exist peaceably side by side, as in Ouachita and Washita. Even here the English form gains ground. The misleading of the English tongue by the ch is shown in the occasional use of " Mitcliigan " instead of " Mishigan " for Michigan. Some thirteen years ago a writer in The Saturday Review sneered at the Americans as a people " who pronounce the name of their great city
- She-cah-go ' " : I have never been able
to guess what the writer would have us say perhaps " Tchic-a-go," sometimes heard on that side of the water. Of course She- cahgo or Shecawgo is correct. The difference betewen ah and aw in these names is not
one between good and bad usage, either
way, the good being often evenly divided.
Incidentally, I was once severely taken to task by an Englishman for saying " Con- netticut." My trivial excuse that it was. correct, and there never had been any other pronunciation, was not admitted: "he in- sisted that it should be " Connecticut," as spelled. I might have cited Kotlierhithe and Cirencester, but a tu quoque is useless, The truth is, our forefathers had two things to do with the unpronounceable Indian guttural in " Quonnaghtekut " ; to write it and to pronounce it. Like sensible and illogical Englishmen, they did not allow one to interfere with the other. For the written form, they used the handiest avail- able guttural ; in pronunciation they dropped it altogether. But the former comes no nearer to the original sound than the latter.
No single rule can be formulated for the acceptance of local pronunciations as final authorities ; they may represent a cultivated choice which finally determines usage, or mere ignorant, slovenly corruptions which carry no weight though in the latter case the inhabitants of course take all the more pride in them as part of their superior local knowledge, and scorn the " tenderfeet " proportionately for using more accurate ones. Of this sort are a great number of the local pronunciations of Spanish name* in the South West, many of which ar^ of the same " stripe " as " Iky on pad." Whether the current " Loss Angheless " will win out cannot, perhaps, yet be told; but " Naki- iosh " for Natchitoches has done so. More jastwardly, " Terry Hut " for Terre Haute, ' Skinny Atlas " for Skaneateles, and the lot unheard " Porchmouth " for Ports- nouth, are of course only vulgarisms. k Glos-es-ter " and " Wors-es-ter," though sometimes used by anxiously pedantic people who fall into the slough on the other ide (the former actually sanctioned by a Boston city council and embodied in the lame of a street), are not common nor preading. (The curious form " Glockster " las been heard apparently an effort to >ronounce from the spelling, in conviction hat the clipped " Gloster " must be wrong.) 3ut " -wich " is witch almost universally ; nor can I see why this restoration of his- orical form, through following the spelling. s not a good thing. It is curious that so nany of those who object to the " reformed w pelling as obliterating etymology should t the same time be full of scorn for " Nor- atch " and " Green-witch " in place of Xorridge " and " Grinidge," where th
