In this view, the harmony of pronunciation differs widely from that of music properly fo called. In the latter are discovered many founds fingly agreeable, which in conjunction are extremely difagreeable; none but what are called concordant founds having a good effect in conjunction. In the former, all founds, fingly agreeable, are in conjunction concordant; and ought to be, in or der to fulfil the purposes of language. Having difcuffed fyllables, we proceed to words; which make the third article. Monofyllables belong to the former head: polyfyllables open a different scene. In a curfory view, one would imagine, that the agreeableness or disagreeableness of a word with refpect to its found, fhould depend upon the agreeablenefs or difagreeablenefs of its component fyllables: which is true in part, but not entirely; for we must also take under confideration, the effect of fyllables in fucceffion. In the first place, syllables in immediate fucceffion, pronounced, each of them, with the fame, or nearly the fame aperture of the mouth, produce a fucceffion of weak and feeble founds; witness the French words dit-il, pathetique: on the other hand, a fyllable of the greatest aperture fucceeding one of the smallest, or the contrary, makes a fucceffion, which, because of its remarkable difagreeableness, is diftinguished by a proper name, hiatus. The most agreeable fucceffion is, where the cavity is increased and diminished alternately VOL. II. within B within moderate limits. longevity, pufillanimous. Examples, alternative, fifting wholly of fyllables pronounced flow, or of fyllables pronounced quick, commonly called long and bort fyllables, have little melody in them; witness the words petitioner, fruiterer, dizziness: on the other hand, the intermixture of long and fhort fyllables is remarkably agreeable; for example, degree, repent, wonderful, altitude, rapidity, independent, impetuofity*. The cause will be explained afterward, in treating of verfification. Diftinguishable from the beauties above mentioned, there is a beauty of fome words which arifes from their fignification: when the emotion raised by the length or fhortnefs, the roughness or smoothness, of the found, resembles in any degree what is raised by the fense, we feel a very remarkable pleasure. But this fubject belongs to the third fection. The foregoing obfervations afford a standard to every nation, for eftimating, pretty accurately, the comparative merit of the words that enter into their own language: but they are not equally use Italian words, like thofe of Latin and Greek, have this property almost universally: English and French words are generally deficient. In the former, the long fyllable is removed from the end, as far as the found will permit; and in the latter, the last fyllable is generally long. For example, Senator in English, Senator in Latin, and Senateur in French. ful ful in comparing the words of different languages; which will thus appear. Different nations judge differently of the harshness or smoothness of artieulate founds; a found, for example, harfh and difagreeable to an Italian, may be abundantly fmooth to a northern ear: here every nation must judge for itfelf; nor can there be any folid ground for a preference, when there is no common ftandard to which we can appeal. The cafe is precifely the fame as in behaviour and manners: plaindealing and fincerity, liberty in words and actions, form the character of one people; politenefs, referve, and a total disguise of every fentiment that can give offence, form the character of another people: to each the manners of the other are disagreeable. An effeminate m nd cannot bear the least of that roughness and severity which is generally esteemed manly, when exerted upon proper occafions: neither can an effeminate ear bear the harshness of certain words, that are deemed nervous and founding by thofe accustomed to a rougher tone of fpeech. Muft we then relinquish all thoughts of comparing languages in point of roughness and fmoothness, as a fruitlefs inquiry? Not altogether; for we may proceed a certain length, though without hope of an ultimate decifion. A language pronounced with difficulty even by natives, muft yield to a smoother language and fuppofing two languages pronounced with equal facility by natives, the rougher language, B 2 guage, in my judgment, ought to be preferred, provided it be also stored with a competent share of more mellow founds; which will be evident from attending to the different effects that articulate found hath on the mind. A smooth gliding found is agreeable, by calming the mind, and lulling it to rest: a rough bold found, on the contrary, animates the mind; the effort perceived in pronouncing, is communicated to the hearers, who feel in their own minds a fimilar effort, roufing their attention, and difpofing them to action. I add another confideration: the agreeableness of contrast in the rougher language, for which the great variety of founds gives ample opportunity, muft, even in an effeminate ear, prevail over the more uniform founds of the fmoother language*. This appears all that can be fafely determined upon the prefent point. With refpect to the other circumstances that conftitute the beauty of words, the ftandard above mentioned is infallible when apply'd to foreign languages as well as to our own: for every man, whatever be his mother-tongue, is equally capable to judge of the length or shortnefs of words, of the alternate opening and closing of the mouth in speaking, and of the relation that the found bears to the fense: in That the Italian tongue is too fmooth, feems probable, from confidering, that in verfification, vowels are frequently fuppreffed, in order to produce a rougher and bolder tone. thefe these particulars, the judgment is fufceptible of no prejudice from cuftom, at least of no invincible prejudice. That the English tongue, originally harsh, is at prefent much softened by dropping in the pronunciation many redundant confonants, is undoubtedly true: that it is not capable of being further mellowed without fuffering in its force and energy, will scarce be thought by any one who poffeffes an ear; and yet fuch in Britain is the propensity for dispatch, that, overlooking the majefty of words compofed of many fyllables aptly connected, the prevailing taste is to shorten words, even at the expence of making them disagreeable to the ear, and harsh in the pronunciation. But I have no occafion to infift upon this article, being prevented by an excellent writer, who poffeffed, if any man ever did, the true genius of the English tongue *. I cannot however forbear urging one observation, borrowed from that author: feveral tenfes of our verbs are formed by adding the final fyllable ed, which, being a weak found, has remarkably the worse effect by poffeffing the most confpicuous place in the word: upon which account, the vowel in common speech is generally fuppreffed, and the confonant added to the foregoing fyllable; whence the following rugged founds, * See Swift's propofal for correcting the English tongue, in a letter to the Earl of Oxford. |