Ian Iracheta

Facultad de Filosofía y Letras

Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

The Transformation of Reality in Andrew Marvell’s Mower Poems

“For there is nothing

Either good or bad but thinking, but thinking makes it so.”
(Hamlet II, ii, 249-50)

One of the most noticeable characteristics of Marvell’s “mower poems” is the way in which

Damon the mower is able to describe the landscape around him and his own emotional state

simultaneously. In these poems, metaphor ceases to be a mere tool for description to

become something more, i.e. a way through which the speaker is able to project his

interiority onto his surroundings. Such a process means that Damon is actually able to have

an effect on the reality outside of him, even if that transformation is confined to his own

perception of it.

In this essay I will analyse the process through which Damon merges his emotional

state with his description of the landscape, and how that same process, via the forming

powers of the mind effects change in his environment. For this, I will divide this essay in

two parts: first of all, I will talk briefly about the theory behind metaphor criticism, a

relatively new school of rhetorical analysis that places metaphor at the very core of the

creative exercise of description. For this, I will mainly focus on its pragmatic uses

according to Lakoff, Johnson and Rorty. Secondly, I will conduct an analysis of Damon’s

rhetoric, focussing primarily on “The Mower to the Glow-Worms”, “The Mower’s Song”

and “Damon the Mower.”

Metaphor, along with the several figures of thought thereto related, such as simile,

metonymy or synecdoche, works primordially by the symbolic substitution of a concept or

idea for another (Johnson 2). This exchange can be partial, or incomplete (as in the case of

simile) or symbolically complete (as in the case of metonymy). Because of such a quality

1
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

any object described is invested with dual meaning: on the one hand we can appreciate a

decisively literal signification, and on the other a figurative one. Because of this, we can

confidently say that all metaphors are concerned with a certain degree of ambiguity.

According to Emerson, “any verbal nuance, however slight, which gives room to

alternative reactions to the same piece of language” (in Eagleton 45) is a case of ambiguity;

such semantic instability, therefore, entails polysemy. To illustrate this concept, let us think

of how the glow-worms are called “country comets” in “The Mower to the Glow-Worms”.

If we are to believe fireflies are represented by their abdomens, then we are talking about a

synecdoche that is simultaneously transformed into a metaphor (thus glow-worms turn into

their bioluminescent abdomens, and then these turn into comets). The ambiguity I

referenced before is evidenced here. This metaphor operates by dint of a symbolically

complete substitution: the glow-worms are not like comets, but are called comets.

However, in “reality” we know they continue to be glow-worms. Polysemy takes place in

every metaphor because in a single image we can sense at least two different levels of

semiotics at play: on the one hand we have a literal meaning, and, on the other, a symbolic

one. The latter, however, can only take place in language, while the former finds its

expression in reality.

In more abstract terms, this idea is expressed in the first classical law of thought: A

is A. A thing does not change its nature simply by virtue of being called by another name. 1

This is so obvious that it is almost not worth mentioning, however, it is important to

Plato takes this a step further in his Cratylus and implies that the name of an object is inherent to its essence.
1

As Borges succinctly explains his “Golem”,

Si (como afirma el griego en el Cratilo)
el nombre es arquetipo de la cosa
en las letras de ‘rosa’ está la rosa
y todo el Nilo en la palabra ‘Nilo’ (1-5).

2
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

express such a view to properly introduce its opposite. In their essay Metaphors We Live

By”, Lakoff and Johnson argue that metaphors do not merely constitute a linguistic

reappraisal of reality, but, in fact, they build a conceptual one. Conservatively speaking,

this implies that, while, metaphors cannot change reality, they at least do change the way in

which we think about it. Lakoff and Johnson even take it one step further by saying that

“Our conceptual system thus plays a central role in defining our everyday realities […] the

way we think, what we experience, and what we do every day is very much a matter of

metaphor” (124). American philosopher Richard Rorty calls this “the concept of world-

making as metaphoric re-description (Leypoldt 145).2

If one’s worldview, or “world-making” depends then on that individual’s perception

of his surroundings, this would entail that reality is therefore subordinated to our

conception of it. Following this logic, it can be said that we never encounter the world in its

“natural” form but rather filtered as through a canopy of our own personal ideology. Our

thoughts on our environment are therefore less determined by reality itself than by internal

psychical processes, or, as Hamlet so eloquently put it, “there is nothing / Either good or

bad, but thinking makes it so” (II, ii, 249-50).

2
The very existence of the metaphysical poets can be regarded as an argument for Lakoff and Johnson’s
theory. One of the probable reasons for the inclusion of farfetched metaphors or “conceits” in the
metaphysical poetry of Marvell, Donne, Cowley, and Herbert, to name a few poets, is that the more normal
metaphors of their time had been used to the point of their becoming clichés. Heirs as they were to
inescapable Petrarchan imagery (the lady’s teeth being pearls, her skin as white as ivory, her lips as red as
coral, etc.), it was necessary to innovate if one did not want to be laughed out of the coterie. How does this
corroborate Lakoff and Johnson’s theory of the metaphor as a central apparatus by the aid of which we can
cope with reality? The fact that a metaphor becomes a cliché is indicative that it has been completely
absorbed into the Zeitgeist and “cultural canon” of a people. As Lakoff points out, when we talk about
“winning an argument” (125) we are seldom aware we are using a warfare metaphor. When a metaphor has
been so wholly absorbed into the linguistic sphere as to become an idiom or a phrase, it loses its efficacy and
undergoes a semantic reconfiguration. When one, to paraphrase Lakoff again, “defends one’s argument
against one’s attacker”, one does not think of an invading army and a besieged castle. The metaphor loses its
power because the signified, to use Saussure’s terminology, has changed while the signifier remains the same.
The two concepts previously distinguished from one another before the application of the metaphor have
melded into one, and in doing so, have destroyed the metaphor’s effectivity.

3
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

If we accept such proposition, then we must consider a further point. If our thoughts

determine our approach to the world around us, then what determines our thoughts? The

structuralists would be all too eager to say that the answer to this is “language”. Human

thought is expressed most effectively through language, but because language is a system

that, as Saussure was wont to point out, is absolutely arbitrary, then a set of binary

opposites comes immediately into place: natural reality vs our linguistic representation of

it. In the same way that the signifier “tree” is only connected to its signified by cultural

concessions, and is actually not a tree, we can draw a distinction between our concept of

reality and what is really outside of the sphere of language. As Hawkes points out,

“Language, in the end, constitutes its own reality” (25). This “linguistic” reality is not

merely an abstract concept with which we never interact, but, rather it proves our only way

of connecting with the world:

Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of
social activity as ordinarily understood. […] It is quite an illusion to imagine one
adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely
an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection.
(Sapir 162).

In literature the use of language is even more complex than in everyday speech

because in the former every individual word and sentence is (ideally) intended to give a

particular, (frequently accumulative) effect. In Marvell’s mower poems, one of the most

striking language features is the use of a conceit that concatenates the landscape with

Damon’s internal emotions. A binary division is created from the very start: outside vs

inside, also expressible as objective vs subjective reality. In the poem, this the line between

the two is constantly crossed, in both directions. However, there is seldom a way of

4
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

knowing what constitutes diegetic3 objective reality, and to what degree is the description

of it faithful. We must consider a further point: any poetic voice or narrator, simply by dint

of describing his diegetical world, can be said to be interpreting it, and once the reader

comes into contact with it, he interprets that interpretation.4

In poets like Marvell this process is enhanced even further, as his style works by

dint of accumulation. As Eliot states, Marvel’s poetry is fraught with “concentrated images,

each magnifying the original fancy” (253), and therefore wreaking havoc on what was once

diegetic reality. In that sense, “the meaning ‘unrolls’ as each word follows its predecessor

and is not complete until the final word comes into place” (Hawkes 15). This is exactly one

of the poetical mechanisms that make the Damon poems so interesting to read. While an

accumulative effect can be found in just about any good poem that has ever been written,

Marvell takes it a stage further by dint of the amount of movement in his poem. Virtually

every element of reality is transformed in Damon’s mind, the landscape, the weather, the

wildlife, the grass, etc. As we can see, Damon’s worldview is constantly in flux. Each new

metaphor modifies the last, and their cumulative effect ends up altering Damon’s subjective

reality completely. The mower poems make a point on relying on such rhetorical devices in

order to transform reality intellectually, and thereby give the reader a sort of focalised

perception of the speaker’s psyche. Let us start exemplifying the more theoretical part of

this essay. The poem “The Mower to the Glow-worms” begins with the lines:

Ye living lamps, by whose dear light

The nightingale does sit so late,

3
Though the term is usually only applied to narrative, the Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms defines it as “a
narrative world”, which means that it is likewise applicable to poetry.
4
A process perhaps reminiscent of the reason why Plato bans poets from his republic. If all poetry is imitation
and our human reality is an imitation of the Topus Uranus, then it follows logically that all poetry is a
counterfeit of a counterfeit.

5
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

And studying all the summer night,

Her matchless songs does meditate. (1-4)

What we must notice here is the symbolic transformation that the glow-worms

undergo from the very first words of the poem. If we understand symbol as “a letter or sign

which is used to represent something else” (Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms), we can

see that the glow-worms become a symbol for living lamps. However, we must note that

Damon does not recognise their existence in strictly “biological” terms. While he does

concede that they are living beings, by calling them “lamps” he practically turns them into

furniture, and in doing so, he takes a rather utilitarian view towards them. The glow-worms

only exist to provide illumination for the nightingale’s song, which, at the same time is only

relevant because the speaker can hear it. It is no wonder that the speaker makes reference to

the most blatant characteristic of the nightingale; after all, the nightingale’s song as a

backtrack for a meditative exercise is a commonplace that dates to long before the

composition of Keats’ famous ode.

Though living, these lamps are only relevant because of the almost ergonomic 5

relationship they establish with the speaker. Following this logic, we can say that they only

exist for Damon’s sake; because he is there to see them, and to gain something by them, as

man is, after all, as Protagoras said, “the measure of all things” (Guthrie 45). At the same

time, outside of what I call the “poetic diegesis”, the glow-worms and nightingale only

exist to us because they are immortalised in the poem. This fact makes them even more

ontologically subservient to Damon.

5
“Ergonomics: the study of people’s efficiency in their working environment” (ODE). Damon’s work (ergon)
environment is obviously the outdoors, and the glow-worms are therefore turned into lamps for his sake,
almost as if they were but part of the furniture in an office building.

6
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

After this first image is introduced, Marvel immediately unites it with a brand new

conceit. The glow-worms stop being living lamps to become country comets. By using such

an image, Marvell elevates the tone of the poem. The allusion to Shakespeare is

immediately apparent. In act two of Julius Caesar, upon having described her prophetic

dream to him, Calphurnia warns her husband that “When beggars die, there are no comets

seen6 / The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes” (29-30). By dint of such an

allusion, Marvell relates a poem about gardens and fireflies to such a transcendental issue

as the Roman civil wars of the Late Republic. However, he quickly dismisses such

impression by adding that these country comets,

[…] portend
No war nor prince’s funeral,
Shining unto no higher end
Than to presage the grass’s fall (5-8).

The second line of this stanza brings the tone of the poem back from the seemingly

grand and solemn.7 It is not the fall of princes we are talking about, but simply the fall of

grass; the same relationship between the glow-worms and an extraneous element that we

appreciated in the first conceit is apparent here. Just like the light they produced was used

by the nightingale to “meditate her song”, now the auguring abilities of the comets relate

exclusively (or so are we led to think) to the grass. However, another process is at play in

both images. As I explained earlier, even if the fireflies are said to glow for the

6
As I will explain further on, Damon does see the comets that augur his own fall, which would seem to imply
that he is, or rather thinks himself to be, a prince. If we consider this other passage in “Damon the Mower”, “I
am the Mower Damon, known / Through all the Meadows I have mown” (41-42), we can even consider
Damon to be a rather boasting figure, filled with delusions of something quite resembling grandeur. After all,
a person becoming famous on account of his mowing skills is rather ludicrous.
7
A similar process that elevates the tone of the poem just to bring it down again happens at various points
throughout the mower poems. Compare this passage with “[this heat] which mads the dog and makes the sun /
Hotter than his own Phaëton” (“Damon the Mower” 21-2), and “With this golden fleece I sheer / Of all these
closes every year” (53-4). An analysis of the use of allusions to the matter of Rome would be an interesting
follow-up to this essay.

7
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

nightingales, this is not the case, as at the end of the day, everything we are told about is

actually seen through Damon’s eyes, and happens, consequently, for Damon’s sake.8 If we

trace an hypothetical (narrative) timeline across the mower poems, with perhaps, “The

Mower Against Gardens” right at the beginning9, followed by “The Mower’s Song”, “The

Mower to the Glow-Worms”, with “Damon the Mower” at the end, we can see a reiteration

of the same process that takes place in “The Mower to the Glow-Worms”. Damon believes

that these country comets only presage the grass’ fall; however, the next to last stanza of

“Damon the Mower”, shows us how “By his own scythe, the Mower [is] mown.” If we

establish a connection between these two images, then we learn that the country comets

were not presaging the grass’ fall, but Damon’s. By that logic, we can see yet another

allusion to Shakespeare in the mower poems, as Damon misinterprets the augur, much in

the same way in which Caesar misinterprets Calphurnia’s dream as relating “to the world in

general” (II, ii, 30), instead of as pertaining to himself. In Julius Caesar this establishes the

presence of dramatic irony, a concept that at least in this case is perfectly translatable into

the sphere of poetry.

8
A relationship can be established between this process and Berkley’s “subjective idealism.” In his
Principles, Berkley claims that “esse is [sic] percipi” (to be is to be perceived) (15). Even if we consider the
fact that Berkley (1685-1753) and Marvell (1621-1678) are not exactly contemporaries, we must bear in mind
that the relationship between subject and object has been one of the great philosophical debates of mankind
since the dawn of times. That Marvell was interested in it is beyond debate as shown by the almost ergonomic
relationship between nature and man in the mower poems, and nature being defined and reconfigured in
human terms. It is important to emphasise that Berkley’s subjective idealism differs from radical empiricism
mainly in the sense that Berkley believes everything in existence to be perceived by a higher conscience. In
his Principles he dismisses the idea of say, a chair disappearing the moment eye contact with it is broken, by
placing absolute perception outside of the human sphere and putting it in the allocation of divinity. We can
even apply this idea to the interpretation of the poem were we to consider Damon as a literary demiurge who
by perceiving and describing everything around him, is able to either change it or speak it into existence.
9
While the figure of the mower is present from the very title, the name Damon does not appear in this poem.
All four mower poems are said to have been written ca. 1650-52, (Norton Anthology), but the fact that
Damon does not appear under that name in “The Mower Against Gardens” suggests that is the first of the
series. However, the actual order of appearance of these poems is not relevant, as what I am trying to do here
is establish a narrative order.

8
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

We must bear in mind that a description of the original state of an object is a

condicio sine qua non we cannot gauge the extent of a metamorphosis. Because of this

reason, it is useful to read “The Mower’s Song”, and “Damon the Mower”, as happening

one after the other, in terms of a “before” and an “after.”

“The Mower’s Song” begins with the lines:

My mind was once the true survey

Of all these meadows fresh and gay,
And in the greenness of the grass
Did see its hopes as in a glass; (1-4)

What we must notice here is quite simply the verb tense. Damon’s mind was once prone to

seeing his surroundings as positive. The poem is fraught with images characteristic of a

locus amoenus. The meadows are said to be so

luxuriant still and fine,

That not one blade of grass you spy’d
But had a flower on either side. (8-10)

The exuberant meadows are finally also identified with “companions of my [Damon’s]

thoughts more green”; however, all this imagery is contrasted with the mower’s sorrow at

being scorned by his love interest, Juliana. In “The Mower’s Song”, Damon vows to seek

revenge for the meadows’ lack of commiseration for him, as he threatens to bring “flow’rs,

and grass, and I and all”10 to “one common ruin.” (21-2) In this case, his “revenge” would

amount to little else than actually doing his job, and furthermore, as he never threatens to

salt the land, in all probability all the flora would be back in a few days.

If we now turn to “Damon the Mower”, we can find that another type of revenge has

taken place, one, I must add, of a psychological nature. The landscape described in this

10
Here we can appreciate another instance of “dramatic” irony, as Damon threatens, probably just brandishing
empty words, that he will cut down both the grass and himself.

9
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

poem is diametrically opposed to the one we see in “The Mower’s Song”. The day is

scorching, the grass is withered, the meadows seared, the grasshoppers quiet, and both the

fields and mower are sunburnt. In “Damon the Mower”, we can appreciate how the outside

landscape corresponds to Damon’s emotional state, and once again the relationship we first

saw in “The Mower’s Song”, (Damon’s mind as fresh and gay as the meadows) is

replicated, however, this time shown under a negative light.

Damon appears to exist in a mutually-beneficial symbiotic relationship with nature.

He keeps the gardens neat and trimmed, and in return, “the Morn her dew distils [on him]”

(43), and “the Ev'ning sweet / In cowslip-water bathes my [his] feet,” (47-8) to keep him

fresh. Furthermore, “the sun himself licks off my [Damon’s] sweat” (46) to keep him dry,

etc. This symbiotic relationship, however, is broken when the figure, or rather, the idea of

Juliana irrupts into Damon’s mind (and therefore into the landscape). When Juliana enters

the picture, Damon is disturbed, and therefore Nature suffers a transformation. In “Damon

the Mower”, Nature is described as almost unnatural with lines such as: “Oh, what

unusual11 heats are here, / Which thus our sunburned meadows sear!” (9-10), and “This

heat the sun could never raise, / Nor Dog Star so inflame the days” (17-8).

Assuming that both “The Mower’s Song” and “Damon the Mower” are set in the

same month, an assumption that the presence of Juliana along with the unavoidable relation

to her Gregorian calendar namesake does seem to corroborate, then we must ask ourselves

why the imagery between both poems differs so greatly. If the time frame is too small for

such a drastic change in Damon’s environment, then the only possible solution is that it was

his perception of it that changed.

11
Emphasis added.

10
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

The almost nostalgic opening lines of “The Mower’s Song” 12 establish the fact that Damon

is used to comparing his emotional state of being with what is around him; when that state

of being changed, so did the landscape, and as a consequence of this, Damon’s metaphors

changed as well. If his mind was once “fresh and gay” (2) like the meadows in “The

Mower’s Song”, now his sorrow is as sharp as his scythe (7) in “Damon the Mower”. An

even better example of this transformation comes right after the image of the scythe. If in

“The Mower’s Song”, Damon’s mind is able to see “in the greenness of the grass its hopes

as in a glass” (3-4), in the second poem, his hopes are “withered as the grass.” (8). These

two images evidence the transformation of the landscape because they rely on the same

choice of words to describe completely different scenes. The nouns “hope” and “grass” are

used in much the same way in both poems; however, the predicate adjective “withered” is

in direct opposition with the noun “greenness.” By homogenising most of the components

of Damon’s metaphor, Marvell highlights the discordance between such binary opposites as

living and dead. The fact that Damon is able to look on the same natural image and contrive

form it two completely different emotional states corroborates the idea that “there is

nothing / Either good or bad but thinking, but thinking makes it so” (Hamlet II, ii, 249-50).

It is also important to mention that the fact that Marvell used the same image of grass in

both poems for such different effects confirms that these two poems must be regarded as

incontrovertibly connected to one another, as a hefty part of their meaning relies on their

12
I call the opening lines of this poem “almost nostalgic” because of the emphasis put on the past as a time of
great happiness, especially when compared with the present. An opposition is emphasised between an idyllic
epoch of yore, when Damon’s “mind was once the true survey / Of all these meadows fresh and gay” (1-2)
and the scalding withered landscape that we see in “Damon the Mower.”

11
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

relation to one another. In that sense, “the images do not have a 'substantial'13 meaning, only

a 'relational' one” (Eagleton 82).

In conclusion, the notion that “man’s process of perception creates the beauty he

thinks he finds” (Kermode 2165) is turned on its head in the mower poems. While the fact

that perception creates beauty is acknowledged almost in passing, Marvell focuses on its

opposite, that man’s process of perception creates the unpleasantness he thinks he finds as

well.

Finally, I must add that an analysis of the creation of a new subjective reality is

particularly illustrative when this process takes place in literature. While it is true that the

“neoplatonic concern with the forming powers of the mind” (Kermode 2165) has been a

subject of philosophical debate since Classical Antiquity, in literature we can see those self-

same powers put to the test in much clearer terms. If from an “objective” point of view, we

can say that one’s perception of reality cannot actually change the world but merely one’s

personal interpretation of it, in literature this may not necessarily hold true. In such works

of literature as the poems herein analysed, diegetic reality is subordinated to the narrator’s

perception of it. In the mower poems, the only thing we get is Damon’s interpretation of his

world. The reader can try to re-construct what Damon’s world “actually” looks like, or

rather, what Damon’s world is, but the problem with such an imaginative attempt is quite

simply that such a place doesn’t exist at all. Therefore, the same mendacity that Plato

condemns in poets, those same flaws in imitation are what makes possible for “reality” to

exist in a constant state of flux, as it does in the mower poems.

13
Or at least, it is downplayed here.

12
 Ian Iracheta
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras
Letras Inglesas, Colegio de Letras Modernas
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Bibliography:

Baldick, Chris. The Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms. New York: Oxford University
Press, 2003. Print.

Berkley, George. A Treatise Concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge.

Al Haines. 2009. Print.

Borges, Jorge Luis, and Rolando Costa Picazo. Obras Completas: Edición Critica.
Buenos Aires: Emecé, 2010. Print.

Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota, 1983. Print.

Eliot, T.S. Selected Essays: New Edition. “Andrew Marvell”. New York: Harcourt, Brace
and World, 1950 pp. 251-263. Print.

Guthrie, W.K.C. Los filósofos griegos. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica,

1994. Print.

Hawkes, Terence. Structuralism & Semiotics. London: Methuen, 1977.

Print.

Kermode, Frank. John Hollander, et al. The Oxford Anthology of English Literature.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1973. Print.

Lakoff, George, Johnson, Mark. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago,
1980. Print.

Leypoldt, Günter. “Uses of Metaphor: Richard Rorty's Literary Criticism and the Poetics
of World-Making” New Literary History Winter 2008 145-63
Vol. 39 No. 1
Web. JSTOR.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/20058058?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents (26/10/15)

Sapir, Edward, and David Goodman Mandelbaum. Selected Writings in Language,

Culture and Personality. Berkeley: University of California, 1949. Print.

Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. New York: Penguin Books,

1997. Print.

Shakespeare, William. Julius Caesar. New York: Penguin Books,

2000. Print.

Soanes, Catherine, and Angus Stevenson. Oxford Dictionary of English New York: Oxford
University Press, 2003. Print.

13