LEND ME YOUR EAR: HISTORY OF ENGLISH USAGE FASCINATING IF OFTEN MISLEADING

While Charles Osgood was on vacation some weeks back, his stand-in announced that a dictionary of Middle English has been in progress for years. Researchers have just begun on W, he enlarged, and W alone could take years to complete.

Much as we appreciate this massive effort, we have trouble enough with the first 22 letters of the English alphabet without access to what our Middlemen have discovered. All we are trying to do is preserve what's left of our language as we know it today.

Recently, I overheard a nearby gardener say "tuck" for "took." He was excusing his temporary absence from the garden by explaining he "tuck" the trash out for an elderly lady. Most literates know the principal parts of "take" are take, took, taken. Few may know that "took" was formerly "tukken," and it's highly unlikely that the gardener knew. His pronunciation was probably regional, and I'd be the last to hand him a Goof Card. His business is gardening, not language.

Actually, I've never given or sent a Goof Card. To ridicule ignorance (or misfortune) is barbaric, though I do deplore it in speakers and writers of stature who appear to be unaware of basic grammar and usage.

Not long ago I came across "indite" in the King James unrevised edition of the Christian Bible. Psalm 45 begins: "My heart is inditing a good matter." In my book, "indite" meant the opposite of "indict", so a bit of research was in order.

Both "indite" and "indict" derive from the Middle English "enditen", meaning to accuse or to write a document. Thus even today, one may document a good matter, or accuse someone of a crime, and use the same word "indite." Fascinating, but hardly clear.

Among the many words that have changed in meaning since the time of King James is "lent." Today, "lent" can be the past tense of "lend", or the Christian season preceding Easter. In King James' day, "lent" was the word for "granted." One granted a favor without expecting anything in return. Although we cannot fault so charitable an attitude, we feel that anyone who lends a favorite book to a mere acquaintance or collector should have his head examined.

In the list of words that have changed in meaning in King James' unrevised edition, "wounds" were "dainty morsels." If we considered wounds "dainty morsels" today, most of the psychiatrists flooding talk shows would go begging a consummation we often devoutly wish. But perhaps the earlier definition originated with owners of vicious canines, kept for the purpose of licking their masters' wounds.

"Master", by the way, was once used for "goodman", meaning "my husband" or master. A husband was a good man though a master? Think what Oprah Winfrey's and Sonya Friedman's guests and callers could make of this!

Dr. Don Higginbotham of Chapel Hill has added another word that has changed the course of history as a result of doubtful usage. To Dr. Johnson of dictionary fame, "federal" originally meant a league or loose association. This term derives from the Greek foedus", denoting "faith." Anyone out there still have faith in the Fed so soon after April 15?

Oddly, a national government in the 18th century was one that was consolidated or centralized. "Why then," queries the president of the Southern Historical Society, "did the Founding Fathers call their document a federal constitution?" To head off complaints that this was going too far in the direction of a national government? By this time our government had both national and federal features, and federalism became a political system that operated at different levels at different times.

In view of the current divisiveness on Capitol Hill, has this circumstance really changed?

In lighter vein, an amusing letter to this newspaper's Public Mind department by Fred Poston of Cape Girardeau recalls a not-too-distant time when "bad" came to mean "good." Poston also wonders why the Walt Disney Corporation keeps inviting televiewers to be their "guest." "When I'm invited by friends to be their guest," he writes, "they don't issue me a bill for the room, board, and entertainment."

But what really upsets this worthy contributor is that he made good grades in English and wonders whether he should go back to school. I suggest he go back as a teacher to teach what continues to be intelligible English despite outside efforts to destroy what he learned in primary school.