Orthoepy, see Pronunciation.

ORTHOGRAPHY
    —­Orthography, of what treats
    —­difficulties attending it in Eng. 
    —­DR. JOHNSON’S improvements in
    —­DR. WEBSTER’S do., in a different direction
    —­ignorance of, with respect to any word used, what betokens in the
      user (See also Spelling.) Orthography, figures of, MIMESIS and
      ARCHAISM
    —­its substantive or pronominal character; (with one.) how classed by
      some; may be preceded by the articles
    —­requires than before the latter term of an exclusive comparison;
      yet sometimes perhaps better takes the prep. besides.  Each other one
      an other, import and just application of,
    —­misapplication of, frequent in books,
    —­DR. WEBST. erron. explanation of other, as “a correlative to
      each,”
    —­One and other, frequently used as terms relative and partitive,
      appar. demanding a plur. form,
    —­An other, in stead of another. Somehow or other, somewhere or
      other, how other is to be disposed of.

Ought, principal verb, and not auxiliary, as called by MURR. et al.,
    —­originally part of the verb to OWE; now used as defec. verb,
    —­its tense, as limited by the infin. which follows.

Ourself, anomalous form peculiar to the regal style,
    —­peculiar construc. of.

Own, its origin and import; its class and construc.,
    —­strangely called a noun by DR. JOH.

P.

P, its name and plur. numb.,
    —­its sound,
    —­when silent,
    —­Ph, its sounds.

Pairs, words in, punct. of.

Palatals, what consonants so called.

Parables, in the Scriptures, see Allegory.

Paragoge, explained.

Paragraph mark, for what used.

Paralipsis, or apophasis, explained.

Parallels, as marks of reference.

Parenthesis, signif. and twofold application of the term,
    —­Parenthesis, marks of, (see Curves.)
    —­What clause to be inclosed within the curves as a PARENTHESIS, and
      what should be its punct.,
    —­Parentheses, the introduction of, as affecting unity.

Parsing, defined.
    —­Parsing, its relation to grammar,
    —­what must be considered in,
    —­the distinction between etymological and syntactical, to be
      maintained, against KIRKH. et al.,
    —­character of the forms of etymological adopted by BROWN,
    —­what implied in the right performance of,
    —­whether different from analysis,
    —­what to be supplied