Printers and proof-readers must often reason from analogy in deciding how to spell. They have not the time to look up every word, and so they often differ from their authority in spelling. Every one knows how to spell _referee_, and, because of the similarity of the words, many have rightly printed _conferee_. A letter to the editor asked why a certain paper did this, and the editor answered that he would see that it did not happen again--because Webster and Worcester had the abominable spelling _conferree!_ Why Webster ever spelled it so is a mystery, especially as it violates his common practice. Why Worcester copied Webster in this instance is a deeper mystery, since he had been employed on the Webster dictionary and made his own as much different in spelling as he could with any show of authority. The revisers of the Webster work have corrected the misspelling, and the other new dictionaries spell the word correctly.
Word-divisions are a source of much annoyance. Here again we have the lexicographers to thank, for no one of them has given us a practical guide. There are many classes of words that should be treated alike in this respect, and not one of these classes is so treated in any dictionary. Here is a short list from the “Webster’s International”:
ac-tive contract-ive produc-tive conduct-ive baptiz-ing exerci-sing promot-er aëra-ted pi-geon liq-uid depend-ent resplen-dent
The one thing needed here is simplification. We should be at liberty to decide, without contradiction by our highest authorities, that if _conductive_ is divided after the _t_, _productive_ should have the same division. The difference arises from a false etymological assumption. One of the words is held to be made of two English elements--a word and a suffix--and the other is treated like its Latin etymon. True science would take the Latin etymon as the source of every word ending in _ive_, and divide every one of them between the consonants, regardless of the fact that some such words did not exist in Latin. It is sufficient that they all follow the Latin model, as _conductivus_. Many other terminations are properly on the same footing, as _ant_, _ent_, _or_; they are not real English formative suffixes. In every word like those mentioned ending in _tive_ after another consonant, the division should be between the consonants. This would be truly scientific, as no real scholarly objection can be made, and it leaves the right division in each instance unmistakable, no matter how little may be known of Latin or etymology.