A Dictionary of Cont..

esought 60
ably, but today they mean different things.
Beside now means “next to” and always has an
object, as in standing beside me. In some situations,
of course, “next to” is not near enough,
as in beside the mark and beside himself. The
form besides now means “in addition to” and
may or may not be followed by an object, as in
three people were there, besides me and she is
stunid. and ualv besides. When besides is followed’by
an object, it is called a preposition;
when it is not, it is called an adverb.
Besides may be followed by the -ing form of
a verb, as in what has he done, besides reading
the paper? The simple form of a verb may also
be used after the verb do, and is generally preferred
in this construction, as in what has he
done besides read the paper?
besought. See beseech.
bespeak. The past tense is bespoke. The participle
is bespoken.
best. See good.
bestial. See brutal.
bestir is always used reflexively (Zf he would bestir
himself he would soon finish the fob). Kent’s
sneer at Oswald, in King Lear (You have so
bestirr’d your valor), would not be used today.
best laid schemes o’ mice an’ men. Usually distorted
to the best laid plans of mice and men,
Burn’s poignant line is usually given with a
jocular lilt when some trifle has gone awry. The
damage is done and even as a quotation it
should now be let alone.
bestride. The past tense is bestrode or bestrid.
The participle is bestridden or bestrid.
Bestrode is the preferred form for the past
tense. Bestridden is preferred for the participle,
but bestrid is also standard in both cases. The
participle had bestrode is also used in Great
Britain.
bet. The past tense is bet or betted. The participle
is also bet or betted.
In the United States bet is preferred for both
the past tense and the participle, but betted is
also heard and is acceptable. Both forms are
also heard in Great Britain. It is said that bet is
used when speaking of a specific event, as in
I bet $500, and betted when speaking in a more
general manner, as in they betted a great deal
in those days.
bBte noire. If you must describe some particular
bugbear, some object of extreme aversion, in
French, the term is b2te noire, not be^te noir or
bete noir.
betimeq before it is too late, soon, early in the
morning, and so on (Up betimes, and after a
little at my viol, to my ofice-Pepys; Unless he
net betimes, all will be lost), while standard
usage, now smacks of the consciously literary
and would be regarded as an affectation.
better. See good.
between indicates a relation involving two things,
and only two. But it does not follow that we
cannot use the word whenever more than two
things are mentioned. We say the difference between
the three men when we are thinking of
each man compared with each of the others,
separately and individually. But we would say
the three men quarreled among themselves because
we are then thinking of them as a group
of three, and not as a series of pairs. For further
discussion of the difference between between
and among, see among.
Between cannot be followed by a subjective
pronoun. Logically, it cannot be followed by a
word or group of words that is singular. But it
may be followed by each or every with a singular
noun, as in between each house, between
every pause, where the meaning is “between
each one and the adjoining.” Some grammarians
object to this, but the construction is used by
many great writers, including Shakespeare,
Pope, Fielding, Goldsmith, Scott, Eliot, Dickens,
and is acceptable to most educated people
today.
When the two items are mentioned after
between, they must be joined by and, and not
to. We say between the ages of five and twelve,
and not between the ages five to twelve.
between the devil and the deep sea (sometimes
the deep blue sea and sometimes [formerly]
the dend sea) as a term for being between two
difficulties equally dangerous is a proverb of
great age and much use. Like many sayings, it
may owe its vitality to its alliteration. It is now
spoken humorously and deserves to be retired.
between you and I is not standard English, but
this particular expression has such a long and
honorable history and has been used by so many
great writers that it cannot be classed as a
mistaken attempt to speak “elegant” English.
betwixt and between. English is rich in pairs of
rhythmical, often alliterative, synonyms, joined
by and: kith and kin, safe and sound, might and
main. Often, as in bag and baggage (q.v.), there
is, or once was, a difference in the meaning of
the two words. But one suspects that scholarship
has sometimes been overzealous-and oversuccessful-in
discovering these differences. They
probably got fixed in our speech more because
of their rhythm and alliteration than because of
any combination of fine shades of meaning.
Some of them, especially those from the English
translations of the Bible, may have been the
fruit of the translators’ uncertainty in the face
of their desire to be exact. Where they were not
sure of the meaning of a word, they often used
synonymous pairs to be sure of getting the full
meaning somewhere between the two meanings
(defender and keeper, meek and lowly, gladden
and delight). Similarly in legal phraseology
there are many synonymous repetitions (metes
and bounds, ways and means, will and testament)
which were no doubt intended to make
the meaning absolutely clear and-also no doubt
-in many instances led to endless quibbling and
controversy.
Betwixt and between is such a phrase. It is
now a cliche and says nothing that is not said
in between. It would be wrong, however, to call
it an error. In informal speech its rhythm might
be just what was needed, or its additional syllables
might afford the speaker just the pause or