Reproach to my Diligence, that I have retired without a Triumph, from a Contest with united Academies, and long Succeffions of learned Compilers. I cannot hope, in the warmeft Moments, to preferve fo much Caution through fo long a Work, as not often to fink into Negligence, or to obtain so much Knowledge of all its Parts, as not frequently to fail by Ignorance. I expect that fometimes the Defire of Accuracy will urge me to Superfluities, and fometimes the Fear of Prolixity betray me to Omiffions; that in the Extent of fuch Variety, I fhall be often bewildered; and in the Mazes of fuch Intricacy, be frequently entangled; that in one Part Refinement will be fubtilised beyond Exactness, and Evidence dilated in another beyond Perfpicuity. Yet I do not defpair of Approbation from those who, knowing the Uncertainty of Conjecture, the Scantinefs of Knowledge, the Fallibility of Memory, and the Unfteadiness of Attention, can compare the Caufes of Error with the Means of avoiding it, and the Extent of Art with the Capacity of Man; and whatever be the Event of my Endeavours, I fhall not easily regret an Attempt which has procured me the Honour of appearing thus publickly,

My Lord,

Your Lordship's moft obedient,

And most humble Servant,

SAM. JOHNSON.

PREFACE

то

The FOLIO EDITION of

DR. JOHNSON's DICTIONARY.

Tis the Fate of those who toil at the lower Employments of Life, to be rather driven by the Fear of Evil, than attracted by the Profpect of Good; to be expofed to Cenfure, without Hope or Praife to be difgraced by Mifcarriage, or punifhed for Neglect, where Succefs would have been without Applaufe, and Diligence without Reward.

Among these unhappy Mortals is the Writer of Dictionaries; whom Mankind have confidered, not as the Pupil, but the Slave of Science, the Pioneer of Literature, doomed only to remove Rubbish and clear Obstructions from the Paths of Learning and Genius, who prefs forward to Conqueft and Glory, without beftowing a Smile on the humble Drudge who facilitates their Progrefs. Every other Author may aspire to Praife; the Lexicographer can only hope to escape Reproach, and even this negative Recompence has been yet granted to very few.

I have, notwithstanding this Difcouragement, attempted a Dictionary of the English Language, which, while it was employed in the Cultivation of every Species of Literature, has itfelf been hitherto neglected, fuffered to fpread, under the Direction of Chance, into wild Exuberance, refigned to the Tyranny of Time and Fashion, and expofed to the Corruptions of Ignorance, and Caprices of Innovation.

When I took the first Survey of my Undertak ing, I found our Speech copious without Order, and energetic without Rules: wherever I turned my View, there was Perplexity to be difentangled, and Confufion to be regulated; Choice was to be made out of boundless Variety, without any established Principle of Selection; Adulterations were to be detected, without a fettled Teft of Purity; and Modes of Expreffion to be rejected or received, without the Suffrages of any Writers of claffical Reputation or acknowledged Authority.

Having therefore no Affistance but from general Grammar, I applied myself to the Perufal of our Writers; and noting whatever might be of Ufe to afcertain or illuftrate any Word or Phrafe, accumulated in Time the Materials of a Dictionary, which, by Degrees, I reduced to Method, establishing to myself, in the Progrefs of the Work, fuch Rules as Experience and Analogy fuggefted to me; Experience, which Practice and Obfervation were continually increasing; and Analogy, which, though in fome Words obfcure, was evident in others.

In adjusting the Orthography, which has been to this Time unfettled and fortuitous, I found it neceffary to distinguish those Irregularities that are inherent in our Tongue, and perhaps coeval with it, from others which the Ignorance or Negligence of later Writers has produced. Every Language has its Anomalies, which, though inconvenient, and in themselves once unneceffary, muft be tolerated among the Imperfections of human Things, and which require only to be registered, that they may not be increased; and ascertained, that they may not be confounded: But every Language has likewife its Improprieties and Abfurdities, which it is the Duty of the Lexicographer to correct or profcribe.

As Language was at its Beginning merely oral, all Words of neceffary or common Ufe were fpoken be

fore

fore they were written; and while they were unfixed by any vifible Signs, must have been fpoken with great Diversity, as we now obferve those who cannot read to catch Sounds imperfectly, and utter them negligently. When this wild and barbarous Jargon was firft reduced to an Alphabet, every Penman endeavoured to exprefs, as he could, the Sounds which he was accustomed to pronounce or to receive, and vitiated in Writing fuch Words as were already vitiated in Speech. The Powers of the Letters, when they were applied to a new Language, muft have been vague and unfettled; and therefore different Hands would exhibit the same Sound by different Combinations.

From this uncertain Pronunciation arife, in a great Part, the various Dialects of the fame Country, which will always be obferved to grow fewer, and lefs different, as Books are multiplied; and from this arbitrary Representation of Sounds by Letters, proceeds that Diversity of Spelling obfervable in the Saxon Remains, and I fuppofe in the firft Books of every Nation, which perplexes or deftroys Analogy, and produces anomalous Formations; which, being once incorporated, can never be afterwards difmiffed or reformed.

Of this Kind are the Derivatives Length from long, Strength from Strong, Darling from dear, Breadth from broad; from dry, Drought, and from high, Height; which Milton, in Zeal for Analogy, writes Highth: Quid te exempta juvat spinis de pluribus una; to change all would be too much, and to change one is nothing.

This Uncertainty is moft frequent in the Vowels, which are so capricioufly pronounced, and fo differently modified, by Accident or Affectation, not only in every Province, but in every Mouth, that to them, as is well known to Etymologifts, little Regard is to

be

be fhewn in the Deduction of one Language from another.

Such Defects are not Errours in Orthography, but Spots of Barbarity impreffed fo deep in the English Language, that Criticism can never wash them away, thefe, therefore, must be permitted to remain untouched: but many Words have likewife been altered by Accident, or depraved by Ignorance, as the Pronunciation of the Vulgar has been weakly followed and fome ftill continue to be varioufly written, as Authours differ in their Care or Skill: Of these it was proper to enquire the true Orthography, which I have always confidered as depending on their Derivation, and have therefore referred them to their original Languages: Thus I write enchant, Enchantment, Enchanter, after the French, and Incantation after the Latin; thus entire is chofen rather than intire, because it paffed to us not from the Latin integer, but from the French entier.

Of many Words it is difficult to fay whether they were immediately received from the Latin or the French; fince at the Time when we had Dominions in France, we had Latin Service in our Churches. It is, however, my Opinion, that the French generally fupplied us for we have few Latin Words, among the Terms of domeftick Ufe, which are not French; but many French, which are very remote from

Latin.

Even in Words of which the Derivation is apparent, I have been often obliged to facrifice Uniformity to Cuftom: Thus I write, in Compliance with a numberlefs Majority, convey and inveigh, Deceit and Receipt, Fancy and Phantom; fometimes the Derivative varies from the Primitive, as explain and Explanation, repeat and Repetition.

Some Combinations of Letters having the fame Power, are ufed indifferently without any discoverable Reafon of Choice; as in choak, choke; Soap, Sope;

Fewel