A Dictionary of Cont..

lend. The past tense is lent. The participle is also
lent.
lend an ear, to. Whether one means simply to
listen or to listen with sympathetic interest, to
lend an ear is a clich6.
lengthways; lengthwise. These forms are equally
acceptable.
lengthy; long. Long is the everyday serviceable
word to describe that which is not short. Lengthy
is largely restricted to speeches and writings and
carries the reproachful suggestion that they are
longer than they need be (The lengthy proceedings
had disgusted the nation which had hoped
for a speedy decision favorable to the plaintiff).
Before the nineteenth century, by the way,
lengthy was used only in America and was condemned
by many British writers as an Americanism,
but by the end of the nineteenth century
the British had adopted it.
lent. See lend.
less; lesser. These words are both comparative
forms of the word little. Lesser is a double comparative
made from the comparative form less
and is grammatically equivalent to more smaller.
It first appeared around 1450. By 1600 it was
standard English and was used in the King
James Bible, as in the greater light to rule the
day and the lesser light to rule the night. During
the eighteenth century Dr. Johnson, and a great
many others after him, condemned the form as
pleonastic. But it has survived and today is considered
a more “literary” word than less.
Lesser is now used as the comparative of little
in the sense of smaller in value or importance,
as in the lesser poets. It may be used in comparing
things that differ only in size, as in the lesser
circle, the lesser distance, but it cannot be used
alone to mean smaller in size as the word littler
can. We cannot say the lesser child. Similarly,
it may be used in comparing things that differ
only in amount, as in the lesser sum, the lesser
weight, but it cannot be used to mean smaller
in amount. We cannot speak of lesser money or
lesser sugar. Lesser is always an adjective. It
may be used before a singular or a plural noun,
as in a lesser man, lesser men, or without a
noun when a comparison is implied, as in the
lesser of the two and which is the lesser. It cannot
be used in any other construction.
When less is used as an adjective it means
smaller in amount and we can speak of less
money, less sugar. It may be used in this sense
to qualify words that themselves show size,
value, or importance, as in less length, less value,
less importance, but in itself it always refers to
the amount. Less can be used in any way that
an adjective can be used. It can be used as a
predicate adjective without the article the, as in
which is less? It may be used after a noun, with
the force of minus, as in ten less two. Less may
also be used as if it were a noun, as in the less
said the better. The less may stand before another
noun and mean the less of. This is not true
of lesser.
Less may also be used as an adverb and mean
to a smaller degree or in a smaller amount. It
272
may qualify a verb, as in he complains less, or
an adjective, as in it is less expensive, or another
adverb, as in he moves less quickly. It may be
used with the word than, as in it is less than I
expected and he is less a fool than I thought.
The adjective lesser cannot be used in any of
these ways.
When the word little means small in amount
it is a singular and qualifies only singular nouns,
as in we had little trouble. When used with a
plural noun it loses this meaning and refers to
size or significance, as in we had little troubles.
Many grammarians claim that less, being the
comparative of little in this sense, cannot be
used to qualify a plural noun, as in less men,
less complaints. They say that the word fewer
is required here. Some go so far as to say that
less should never be treated as a plural, even
when it is used with than and not with a plural
noun, as in less than twenty were invited. They
claim that we must say less than twenty was or
fewer than twenty were. At one time less was
used freely as a plural. So there is no question
here of logic or tradition. It is simply a question
of present-day usage. And there is no doubt that
less than is treated as a plural in standard English
today. Less before a plural noun, as in less
men, is not as widely accepted. A great many
people object to it. But a great many others,
whose education and position cannot be questioned,
see nothing wrong in it. In the United
States a college president might speak of less
men or less courses.
lessee; lessor. A lessee is one to whom a lease is
granted. A lessor is one who grants a lease (The
lessor often requires a large deposit to prevent
the lessee from breaking the lease and moving
to less expensive accommodations).
lest. This is a conjunction and indicates that the
following words express something that the
speaker does not want to see happen. It may
have the force of “in order that - - not,” as in
be with us yet, lest we forget. It may also be
used to introduce a clause explaining fear or
doubt. In the United States, lest is always followed
by a subjunctive verb, as in they were in
a panic lest they be overtaken by the police or
thev were in a uanic lest the maid leave. But the
word itself is considered bookish and that followed
by a subjunctive substitute, such as would
or should, is generally preferred.
let. The past tense is let. The participle is also let.
This word, which now means allow, once meant
prevent, and still means that in the expression
without let or hindrance. At one period let had
both meanings at the same time, which must
have been confusing.
When used in its ordinary sense of allow, let
must be followed by the simple form of a verb,
as in let me go, let me do it. Let is never followed
by a to-infinitive, even when it is used as
a passive, as in the grass was let grow and I was
let know. As a rule we avoid this passive let and
find some other word to use, as in the grass was
allowed to grow and I was informed.
Let is used in a number of idiomatic expres-