Historia de la Lengua Inglesa

Introduction
During the 18th century the need to fix and regulate the English language arose. For
many authors it was essential to correct the spelling, grammar and word usage of the
language in order to achieve a greater accuracy and precision of expression. In this context
we can find two different views. On the one hand, there were authors in favour of this
regulation of the English language, such as Jonathan Swift and Daniel Defoe, who declared
that grammars and dictionaries were essential to carry out this task. On the other, there
were scholars who thought that the language should evolve without restrictions.
Many authors defended the correct use of the language, despising what they called
cant or low speech. They also rejected the words that English borrowed from other
languages such as Latin and French, since they maintained that these languages were
corrupting their mother tongue. Indeed, they defended the idea that a fixed system would
make the language stronger and so its nation. For these reasons, Swift, among others,
proposed the creation of an English academy, following the model of France, where
Cardinal Richelieu had founded the Acadmie Franaise.1

Johnsons Dictionary preparation

According to Henry Hitchingss words: the need for a new English dictionary was
[] a matter of both national prestige and philological necessity. 2 In this context a
relevant figure appeared: Samuel Johnson, who was hired to write a dictionary of the
English language. Although this dictionary was not the first English dictionary, it is usually
referred to as the Dictionary because of the innovations Johnson introduced and the great
influenced it had in the history of the English language.
Before beginning to work on his Dictionary, Johnson wrote the Plan for a
Dictionary of the English Language, where he explained his ideas on how a dictionary
1
2

<http://www.ucc.ie/>
<http://www.publications.villanova.edu/>

Historia de la Lengua Inglesa

should be written and how he intended to carry out this task. In this Preface, Johnson
discusses orthography and pronunciation, among other features of the language, showing a
similar attitude to that of Swift. As the following quotation reveals, Johnson found it
necessary to establish some rules to polish the language: In adjusting the Orthography,
which has been to this time unsettled and fortuitous, I found it necessary to distinguish
those irregularities that are inherent in our tongue []from others which the ignorance or
negligence of later writers has produced. Every language has its anomalies, [] its
improprieties and absurdities, which it is the duty of the lexicographer to correct or
proscribe.3 However, as he was preparing the dictionary, Johnson realized that languages
were inevitably subject to changes. For that reason, he focused on describing the English
language as it was used by its speakers instead of focussing on its supposed proper use.
Johnson did not find it appropriate to dictate what usages were socially and politically
correct, but instead, he decided to compile those words and structures that people used in
real speeches. Although he firstly defended a clean and pure language, he realized that
fixing it would not be of any help since languages change in the same way the world does.
Then, he thought that academies were not the solution, since they will become corrupt as
well. To explain this phenomenon he compares the language with the wind, sounds are
too volatile and subtile for legal restraints; to enchain syllables, and to lash the wind, are
equally the undertakings of pride, unwilling to measure its desires by its strength4.
To define the words he made use of literary quotations. Johnson gathered different
examples of how words were used from authors such as Shakespeare, Milton and Dryden,
adding his own notes to these quotations. In this way, he supported his work and
demonstrated that even though many scholars rejected neologisms, these terms have
already been used by prestigious authors. In deciding to include neologisms, Johnson
showed a progressive attitude which differs considerably from Jonathan Swifts one. The
3
4

<http://ethnicity.rutgers.edu/ >
<http://www.bl.uk/ >

Historia de la Lengua Inglesa

latter held that restoring obsolete words was preferable to use neologisms and inkhorn
terms5. They entered the language because English lacked of words to express new ideas or
simply as synonyms for an English concept that already existed. Thus, it seems that there
was no much reason to get rid of them or to rescue words that had already fallen into
disuse.
Johnsons Dictionary laid the foundations of subsequent dictionaries such as the
prestigious Oxford English Dictionary or the Websters Dictionary. In the case of the OED,
James Murray used Johnsons masterpiece served as a word list; it offered contemporary
information related to history, society and religion, among other fields; he even included
some of Johnsons definitions without change6 and above all, it helped Murray and his
team to complement his set/collection of quotations. The same task was done by the
compilers of the Websters Dictionary, who copied all of the quotations appearing in the
Dictionary7.
If the previous information is taken into account, it can be said that Johnson was an
important figure in lexicography. As it has been mentioned, he shifted from a prescriptive
analysis to a descriptive work. In the Preface he wrote: The words which our authors have
introduced by their knowledge of foreign languages, or ignorance of their own, by vanity
or wantonness, by compliance with fashion, or lust of innovation, I have registered as they
occurred.8 In the beginning he dismissed those new words present in the language by his
time but he includes them in his dictionary.
It is necessary to mention that not everything related to Johnsons Dictionary is so
positive. It also, received hash criticism from the part of some scholars. Those who have
studied it carefully have found inaccurate definitions, absurd etymologies and wrong

<http://www.publications.villanova.edu/ >
Hitchings 2005, p.227-8
7
DeMara 1999, 99.
8
<http://ethnicity.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/preface.html>
6

Historia de la Lengua Inglesa

spellings9. Nonetheless, in spite of its faults, A Dictionary of the English Language was the
best dictionary of its days and its influence is still present nowadays. Johnsons decision of
including every term that was used during his time, both proper and cant, made English
richer and more expressive. This may be the reason why it has become a universal
language.

Conclusion
To sum up, it can be said that Samuel Johnson was one of the greatest figures of
Great Britain, who, in this case, stands out for his labour as a lexicographer. His Dictionary
can be described as the first important dictionary of the English language, which was the
based for future linguistic works.

Works cited
19 March 2011 <http://ethnicity.rutgers.edu/~jlynch/Texts/preface.html>
19March 2011 <http://www.bl.uk/learning/images/texts/dict/transcript1387.html>
9

Baugh & Cable 2002, p.272

Historia de la Lengua Inglesa

20 March 2011
<http://www.publications.villanova.edu/Concept/2007/07_papers_html/Lasak.ItWillGrow
Muddy.htm>
20 March 2011 <http://www.ucc.ie/celt/published/E700001-017/index.html>
Baugh & Thomas. A History of the English Language. London: Routledge, 2002
Demara, Robert. Johnsons Dictionary. The Cambridge Companion to Samuel Johnson.
Ed. Greg Clingham. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 85-101.
Hitchings, Henry. Dr Johnson's Dictionary: The Extraordinary Story of the Book that
Defined the World. London: John Murray, 2005