Accuracy of language is one of the things which, in ordinary speech and writing, is but indifferently observed.  The reason, perhaps, is to be sought, not in any general indifference to correctness or precision, but rather in the want of some recognised authority, some specific rules or principles, to which the use of words apparently synonymous, yet of slightly different signification, might be distinctly and easily referred.  It is in regard to the finer shades of meaning, the subtler touches of expression, the application of words and phrases where the strictest exactness and perspicuity are required, that an ordinary English style is apt to become loose and shadowy; and it is precisely here that we are entitled to expect the severest, chastest form of utterance.  Coleridge used to complain of a general confounding of the word ‘notion’ with ‘idea,’ and was often at great pains to point out the distinction between the two, as also between many other words similarly misused.  Archdeacon Hare, too, has remarked upon the common misapplication of such words as ‘education’ for ‘instruction,’ ‘government’ for ‘administration,’ ‘the church’ for ‘the priesthood’ or ‘ministry;’ and indeed holds that such a confounding of terms leads to serious practical misunderstandings and confusions.[3] Any one, upon reflection, will perceive that in the common use of these and numberless other words, there is often a signal lack of clearness and precision, and will hardly fail to notice that the error proceeds from a want of due attention to the nice and peculiar meanings of words which are vaguely presumed to have the same signification.

As a help to those who may wish to attain a somewhat more than common correctness of style and language, Archbishop Whately has recently published a small work on English Synonyms;[4] and the rapidity with which the first edition has been disposed of leads us to infer that the public is to some extent prepared to take an interest in the subject.  The second edition, ‘revised and enlarged,’ is now before us, and it is thought that a brief glance at its contents may not be unacceptable to some of our present readers.

The word ‘synonym,’ as the archbishop observes, is, in strict reality, a misnomer.  ’Literally, it implies an exact coincidence of meaning in two or more words, in which case there would be no room for discussion; but it is generally applied to words which would be more correctly termed pseudo-synonyms—­that is, words having a shade of difference, yet with a sufficient resemblance of meaning to make them liable to be confounded.  And it is in the number and variety of these that, as the Abbe Girard well remarks, the richness of a language consists.  To have two or more words with exactly the same sense, is no proof of copiousness, but simply an inconvenience.  A house would not be called well furnished from its having a larger number of chairs and tables of one kind than were needed, but from its having a separate article for