it's because there are none there. Sometimes you dig down to about the
time when NOAH went on his little sailing excursion, and strike what
seems to be a first-class sockdolager of root, but what is the use?
Unfortunately the philology business is overdone; it's chock full of
first-class broken down pedagogues and unsuccessful ink-slingers, and,
as soon as you offer a curious specimen in the way of roots, they write
a book to prove that the root don't exist, or, if it does, that it
should not.

However, there is an advantage in knowing the roots of words, and the
use to which they were put in former years. Everybody, you know, is very
anxious to read CHAUCER and SPENSER. Now, after you have studied this
subject about forty-two years, you will be able to read CHAUCER with the
aid of an old English dictionary and an Anglo-Saxon grammar.

Many so-called philologists, who have preceded me, have ignorantly
derived words from improper sources. Thus, the compound word, shoofly,
has been traced by some to the Irish word _shoe_, meaning a
hoof-covering, and the French word _fly_, meaning an insect, when it is
apparent to even the casual observer that it comes from the Guinea word
_shoo_, meaning get out, and the English word _fly_, meaning a tripe
destroyer. I propose, therefore, to show you the origin of a few words,
in order that you may use them properly, and in order that you may
subscribe freely for my book on this subject, which will shortly be
placed before an admiring public.

_Theatres_. When the players were servants of the king, they were
compelled to be proficient in reading, riting, rithmetic, rhyming,
riddling, reciting, rehearsing, and romping. These accomplishments were
grouped together and called _the 8 r's_, which name naturally enough was