Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub

not the force of the marked words, are still to have a sufficient degree of force to express their meaning. But this is the very error I am combating: this is the vague indefinite rule that echoes through all our books of this kind: this is the old asylum of ignorance and idleness, the constant resource of those who, for want of ideas, pay us with words. The truth is, we must necessarily give these words the same force as the other words, or only the force of unaccented syllables; between these two forces there is no medium. The line is drawn by nature between accent and no accent; and unless we studiously strive to do it, we cannot help striking the two forces in exact proportion to each other. If we pronounce the accented syllable stronger, the unaccented will be stronger likewise, and inversely. Those, therefore, who pronounce the accented syllable too feebly, will be too feeble in those that are unaccented; but we need only make them enforce the former, and the latter will be infallibly rectified.

An Examination of the Propriety of marking the Words in the foregoing Passage.

THE word this, in the first line, is certainly entitled to as much force as worth and approved and show, in the next line, to as much as virtue and moved. Honest scorn, in the third line, is impassioned, and will admit of emphasis above the accented words, as it may, very agreeably to the sense, be supposed to have this antithesis: not merely with dislike, but with scorn. The word first, in the same line, may be said to be emphatical in the same manner, as it points

out Cato the Censor, in opposition to Cato of Utica, the hero of the prologue. In the fifth, the words precariously subsists must necessarily have more force than so many unaccented syllables, and ought therefore to have been in Italics, as well as the words too long. The sixth line needs no comment; every significant word is in opposition to another word, and is therefore emphatical. But in the next line, the word yourselves, which is opposed to others, not expressed (see pp. 139, 140, 141, &c.) and therefore highly emphatical; this word, I say, is not distinguished from the word sense, or any other words that have common force, and is therefore confounded with them; whereas this word ought to have as much more force than the accented words as they have more than the unaccented. The next line affords us an error of the same kind: the word native is emphatical, as it is opposed to foreign, not expressed, and therefore ought to have extraordinary force. The word rage, which is the elliptical word (see pp. 141, 142, 143, &c.) common both to foreign and native, ought no more to have the force of native, than if the antithesis had been expressed at length, in this manner: "Be justly warmed, not with foreign rage, but with your own native rage:" nor can we possibly pronounce rage with the same force as native without depriving native of its emphasis. Let it not be objected that rage is too significant a word to be sunk into an unaccented syllable of native; for if native be pronounced with its proper force, rage, though unaccented, will be more forcible than an unaccented syllable of a merely accented word. The last line affords an

opportunity of strengthening the former observations, by some which are very similar, and founded on the same reasons. The word self, in this line, is highly emphatical, as such an emphasis suggests this meaning: "Such plays alone should please a British ear, not only as a person of good sense and nice morals would approve, but such as even Cato himself would approve;" for this meaning is not only agreeable to the sense of the author, but greatly enforces and illustrates it.

A new Method of marking the different Forces of Words.

FROM the analysis given in the last Lesson of a passage from Pope, we plainly perceive how delicate a thing it is to mark the emphatic words properly, and how easily we may be misled by the generality of books in use. Advocate, therefore, as I am for the occasional use of marks, I am far from recommending them on all occasions. Many things may be useful at certain times and on certain occasions, which, if used indiscriminately, would be incommodious and embarrassing. Dividing words of difficult pronunciation into syllables may sometimes be use ful, even to those who read well; but dividing every word into syllables, would be so far from assisting such a reader, that it would be the surest way to embarrass and perplex him. Italics, therefore, may be very usefully employed in printing, to mark emphasis, where it is not obvious, or where the sense of a passage might be mistaken for want of knowing it: but where the language is plain, and the meaning obvious, Ita

lics are not only useless, but distressing to the reader. From the want of a clear idea of the nature of emphasis, and of the difference between accented and unaccented force, those who mark books for pronunciation, think they have never done enough till they have put every single significant word into Italics. For as no distinction of force is settled between these words, and as every one is supposed to have a certain indefinite degree of force, the writer imagines he has done wonders in showing how much force a few words are susceptible of; and the reader, who is struck with the sight of so much force in so small a compass, has not the least doubt of the emphasis of every one of these words, if he did but know how to pronounce them: thus, by endeavouring to give every word an emphatic force, he deprives those words that are really emphatical of the force which belongs to them, and distorts and adulterates the meaning by a quaint and unnatural pronunciation.

But had we once a clear and distinct idea of emphasis, did we consider how few words are so emphatical as to require a greater force than accented words, that every accented word has an equal degree of force, and that those that are not accented have exactly the force of unaccented syllables; with these principles in view, I say, we might construct a notation, which, it is presumed, would convey a clearer idea of the several forces of speaking sounds than any that has hitherto been hit upon. Let us, for example, take the foregoing passage from Pope; let us consider the less significant words as unaccented syllables of the others, and associate

them together accordingly: and let us mark these words only, which have emphasis sronger than accent, with a different character:

Britons, attend! beworth likethis approv'd,
Andshow youhavethevirtue tobemov'd.
Withhonest scorn thefirstfam'dCatoview'd
Rome learningarts from Greece, whomshesubdu'd,
Ourscene precariously subsists too long
OnFrench translation and Italian song.
Dare tohavesense yourselves; assert thestage;
Bejustly warm'd withyourown nativerage.
Suchplays alone shouldplease a Britishear,
AsCato's self hadnot disdain'd tohear.

But if writing words in this manner should be found troublesome, or appear too much to disguise them, we need only but a hyphen between the accented and unaccented words, and the same effect will be produced; that is, the whole assemblage will seem but one word; by which means we shall have an exact idea of the relative force of each. Thus, the foregoing past sage may be marked in the manner following: Britons, attend! be-worth like-this approv'd, And-show you-have-the-virtue to-be-mov'd. With-honest scorn the-first-fam'd-Cato-view'd Rome learning-arts from-Greece, whom-she-subdu'd, Our-scene precariously subsists too long On-French translation, and-Italian song.

Dare to-have-sense-yourselves; assert the-stage;
Be-justly warm'd with-your-own native-rage.
Such-plays alone should-please a-British-ear,
As-Cato's self had-not disdain'd to-hear.

Let it not be imagined that this mode of print. ing is proposed as a model in all cases for teaching to read: no; such unusual combinations might, instead of improving some pupils, perplex and retard them; but there are others, to whom this association may be highly useful in

« PředchozíPokračovat »