Fail to understand " I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less"

Forums: Grammar, Esl, English
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Especially, what does "with less" mean? Does "conclude" mean "complete?"

Context:

Samuel Johnson's letter to Lord Chesterfield
(7th February 1755)
To The Right Honourable The Earl Of Chesterfield
My Lord,
I have been lately informed, by the proprietor of The World, that two papers, in which my Dictionary is recommended to the public, were written by your lordship. To be so distinguished is an honour which, being very little accustomed to favours from the great, I know not well how to receive, or in what terms to acknowledge.

When, upon some slight encouragement, I first visited your lordship, I was overpowered, like the rest of mankind, by the enchantment of your address, and could not forbear to wish that I might boast myself Le vainqueur du vainqueur de la terre;—that I might obtain that regard for which I saw the world contending; but I found my attendance so little encouraged, that neither pride nor modesty would suffer me to continue it. When I had once addressed your Lordship in public, I had exhausted all the art of pleasing which a retired and uncourtly scholar can possess. I had done all that I could; and no man is well pleased to have his all neglected, be it ever so little.

Seven years, my lord, have now passed, since I waited in your outward rooms, or was repulsed from your door; during which time I have been pushing on my work through difficulties, of which it is useless to complain, and have brought it, at last, to the verge of publication, without one act of assistance (1), one word of encouragement, or one smile of favour. Such treatment I did not expect, for I never had a patron before.

The shepherd in Virgil grew at last acquainted with Love, and found him a native of the rocks.

Is not a patrons my lord, one who looks with unconcern on a man struggling for life in the water, and, when he has reached ground, encumbers him with help? The notice which you have been pleased to take of my labours, had it been early, had been kind; but it has been delayed till I am indifferent, and cannot enjoy it: till I am solitary, and cannot impart it; (2) till I am known, and do not want it. I hope it is no very cynical asperity not to confess obligations where no benefit has been received, or to be unwilling that the public should consider me as owing that to a patron, which providence has enabled me to do for myself.

Having carried on my work thus far with so little obligation to any favourer of learning, I shall not be disappointed though I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less; for I have been long wakened from that dream of hope, in which I once boasted myself with so much exultation,

My Lord,
Your lordship's most humble,
most obedient servant,
SAM. JOHNSON. (3)

More:
http://civilisationis.com/smartboard/shop/johnsons/patron.htm

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 1,269 • Replies: 12

No top replies

I think "though I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less" should be "though I should conclude it; if less be possible, with less."

A typo in that link.

In that case, "if less be possible, with less" would probably mean " if less favor to be received by me was possible, I will be less disappointed when my work is nearly finished."

Do you agree?

0 Replies

Oh, bloody hell, he's got hold of Doctor Johnson! We're in for some fun, now, boys!

The doctor has written an address (a kind of formal letter) to his patron, Lord Chesterfield. In those days scholars and artists could apply to rich and prominent people for patronage. This was financial support, often in order for the recipient of the patronage to create or complete a piece of work. Applying for such support was not equivalent to begging; the patronage of a prestigious work reflected considerable credit upon the patron, whose reputation as a refined and educated person would be enhanced. When starting his famous dictionary, Johnson approached Chesterfield (among others) for patronage and received from that person a relatively small sum £10 (ten pounds) but no further help from him during the seven years that it took to complete the work.

When the dictionary was published, Chesterfield published a review of it, in which he criticised the structure of Johnson's English. Johnson was angered by this, the more so because of Chesterfield's lack of further support after the first £10 so long before. He therefore wrote the address that you quoted from. Although addressed to Chesterfield it was for general publication.

The section that you ask about:

"Having carried on my work thus far with so little obligation to any favourer of learning, I shall not be disappointed though I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less; for I have been long wakened from that dream of hope, in which I once boasted myself with so much exultation"

Having come this far with my dictionary with so little support from any patron [strongly implying Lord Chesterfield] I shall not now be disappointed [because I no longer hope for it, due to my experiences] though [if] I conclude it with less [support], if it is possible to have less than such a very small amount of support [i.e. it was practically zero].

1 Reply

@contrex,

Thanks.

But most of information you offtered has been known to me. Just tell me "if less be possible, with less = ?" will be okay.

PS. it seemed that you've explained "with less" meant "with less support." But I've not got a clear idea about it.

1 Reply

@oristarA,

less obligation = less support that he would be obliged to be grateful for.

"if less were possible" is a sarcastic reference to the small amount of support that he received from Lord Chesterfield. He is implying that Chestefield's support was so small that it was nearly the same as no support at all. It is not possible to have less than nothing.

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

less obligation = less support that he would be obliged to be grateful for.

"if less were possible" is a sarcastic reference to the small amount of support that he received from Lord Chesterfield. He is implying that Chestefield's support was so small that it was nearly the same as no support at all. It is not possible to have less than nothing.

Thanks.

"With less" = ?

1 Reply

@oristarA,

oristarA wrote:

"With less" = ?

With less obligation.

Having carried on my work thus far with so little obligation to any favourer of learning, I shall not be disappointed though I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less

An exercise for you:

Last week I had little money; next week I shall have less.

What do you think I shall have less of next week?

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

oristarA wrote:

"With less" = ?

With less obligation.

Having carried on my work thus far with so little obligation to any favourer of learning, I shall not be disappointed though I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less

An exercise for you:

Last week I had little money; next week I shall have less.

What do you think I shall have less of next week?

Thanks.

The exercise is too easy to be worthy playing. It is totally different. The letter was written more than two hundred years ago with its atrocious grammar, while you're a modern man addicted to modern English. Very Happy

1 Reply

@oristarA,

Impart = share? (till I am solitary, and cannot impart )

See the letter.

0 Replies

@oristarA,

oristarA wrote:

The exercise is too easy to be worthy playing. It is totally different.

The exercise directly addresses the particular incomprehension you displayed by asking the preceding question.

Quote:

The letter was written more than two hundred years ago with its atrocious grammar, while you're a modern man addicted to modern English.

The letter was written in impeccably grammatical modern English by a writer who was one of the greatest masters of the language, and someone who made such a remark must be a person whose ignorance is equal in magnitude to their vanity and laziness.

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

oristarA wrote:

The exercise is too easy to be worthy playing. It is totally different.

The exercise directly addresses the particular incomprehension you displayed by asking the preceding question.

Quote:
The letter was written more than two hundred years ago with its atrocious grammar, while you're a modern man addicted to modern English.

The letter was written in impeccably grammatical modern English by a writer who was one of the greatest masters of the language, and someone who made such a remark must be a person whose ignorance is equal in magnitude to their vanity and laziness.

Well. First, SALUTE to Mr Johnson. Second, the usage "modern" here refers to "contemporary;" indeed, I was too lazy to use the big word and was thus caught by your sharp eye.

But beware: lazyness does not rise to equal ignorance. Very Happy

1 Reply

@oristarA,

oristarA wrote:

First, SALUTE to Mr Johnson.

He was, and is, universally known as DOCTOR Johnson. He is probably the most famous person, alive or dead, entitled to use that title.

1 Reply

@contrex,

contrex wrote:

oristarA wrote:
First, SALUTE to Mr Johnson.

He was, and is, universally known as DOCTOR Johnson. He is probably the most famous person, alive or dead, entitled to use that title.

KUDOS go to Doctor Johnson!

0 Replies

Fail to understand " I should conclude it, if less be possible, with less"

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know