Yes!

— It is one singular advantage of our modern tongues over Latin, to which they all owe so much, that we have plain affirmative and negative particles of answer. The Latin ita, the only word Rome had for “ yes,” or anything like “yes,” seems to have been rather a vulgarism, like “ that ’s so.” In fact, the Romans borrowed the Greek affirmative, and wrote it ne, so that it must have sounded amazingly negative, just as it does now to hear a modern Greek assent to you by what sounds precisely like “ nay, nay.” In some Romance languages, the affirmative is still the word for “so,” with a stronger accent, just as our negative is the adjective “ no ” with a stronger accent. But oui, ja, yes, are themselves, and nothing else. Sir Thomas More indeed distinguishes “yea” and “ yes ” as equivalent to oui and si. “ Yea,” be it remarked, has become “ yay ” rather lately. The Shaker pronunciation, noted by Mr. Scudder as “yee,” is only antique, not wrong.

Now, when English has such a crisp, plain, definite word as “ yes,” why do so many people clip or annihilate it ? I am not speaking of the gamin’s “ yep ” or the dude’s “ yaas,” which have become commonplace. But, dear reader, who of course never say anything but “yes,” how many of your friends do? Run them over mentally; how many accept your proposals with the dictionary word ? Is there not rather an infinity of corrupt substitutes ? I have it from a very eminent schoolmaster that his revered predecessor and master, one of the four or five “ Arnolds of America,” never said anything but “ cha.” A former secretary of a very important religious organization says “yuss.” An eminent business and society man in our city, I am told, says “ hess,” with a strong effusion of breath.

When poor Queen Caroline came to England, absolutely ignorant of English, the question was raised in society what one word should be taught her to begin with. Most persons were for “ yes,” but one very accomplished lady advised “ no,” on the ground that it often stood for “yes.” If the English court did not speak with better articulation a hundred years ago than we do now, “no ” might be recommended as much more likely to be recognized.