...fear a stern keeper enforcing rigorous regulations. The English language would not have been wljat it. is if the English had not been for centuries great...liberties of each individual and if everybody had not been~iree to strike out new paths for himself. 18. This is seen, too, in the vocabulary. In spite of...

...everywhere according to your own fancy without having to fear a stern keeper enforcing rigorous regulations. The English language would not have been what it is...not been free to strike out new paths for himself. 18. This is seen, too, in the vocabulary. In spite of the efforts of several authors of high standing,...

...are not 'strictly grammatical'." This freedom to choose reality Jesperson relates to other freedoms: "The English language would not have been what it...everybody had not been free to strike out new paths for himself."26 This is the difference between Hugo and Whitman. The article "Ne-cessaire" that Voltaire...

...everywhere according to your own fancy without having to fear a stern keeper enforcing rigorous regulations. The English language would not have been what it is...individual and if everybody had not been free to strike out in new paths for himself. I0 Borrowing from several other languages, English near the end of the twentieth...

...course merely repeating an old image of English, one that the linguist Jespersen was quite happy with: 'The English language would not have been what it...not been free to strike out new paths for himself.' (Jespersen 1938/1982: 14). And this linguistic democracy is, as ever, far superior to the narrow-minded...

...course merely repeating an old image of English, one that the linguist Jespersen was quite happy with: 'The English language would not have been what it...respecters of the liberties of each individual and iI everybody had not been free to strike out new paths for himself.' (Jespersen 1938/1982: 14). And...