Page images
PDF
EPUB
[ocr errors]

LECT. and the variety and beauty of the found of thofe words, fo as to correfpond to many different fubjects. Never did any Tongue poffefs this quality fo eminently as the Greek, which every writer of genius could fo mould, as to make the ftyle perfectly expreffive of his own manner and peculiar turn. It had all the three requifites, which I have mentioned, as necessary for this purpose. It joined to these the graceful variety of its different dialects; and thereby readily affumed every fort of character which an author could wifh, from the moft fimple and most familiar, up to the most majestic. The Latin, though a very beautiful Language, is inferior, in this respect, to the Greek. It has more of a fixed character of ftateliness and gravity. It is always firm and mafculine in the tenor of its found; and is fupported by a certain fenatorial dignity, of which it is difficult for a writer to diveft it wholly, on any occafion. Among the modern Tongues, the Italian poffeffes a great deal more of this flexibility than the French. By its copiousness, its freedom of arrangement, and the great beauty and harmony of its founds, it fuits itfelf very happily to moft fubjects, either in profe or in poetry; is capable of the auguft and the ftrong, as well as the tender; and feems to be, on the whole, the most perfect of all the modern dialects which have arifen out of the ruins of the antient. Our own Language, though

not

IX.

not equal to the Italian in flexibility, yet is LECT. not deftitute of a confiderable degree of this quality. If any one will confider the diverfity of style which appears in fome of our claffics; that great difference of manner, for inftance, which is marked by the Style of Lord Shaftefbury, and that of Dean Swift; he will fee, in our Tongue, fuch a circle of expreffion, fuch a power of accommodation to the different tafte of writers, as redounds not a little to its honour.

WHAT the English has been moft taxed with, is its deficiency in harmony of found. But though every native is apt to be partial to the founds of his own Language, and may, therefore, be fufpected of not being a fair judge in this point; yet, I imagine, there are evident grounds on which it may be shown, that this charge against our Tongue has been carried too far. The melody of our verfification, its power of fupporting poetical numbers, without any affiftance from rhyme, is alone a fufficient proof that our Language is far from being unmufical. Our verfe is, after the Italian, the moft diverfified and harmonious of any of the modern dialects; unquestionably far beyond the French verfe, in variety, fweetness, and melody. Mr. Sheridan has fhown, in his Lectures, that we abound more in vowel and diphthong founds, than most Languages; and thefe too, fo divided into

Long

IX.

LECT. long and short, as to afford a proper diverfity in the quantity of our fyllables. Our confonants, he obferves, which appear fo crowded to the eye on paper, often form combinations not difagreeable to the ear in pronouncing; and, in particular, the objection which has been made to the frequent recurrence of the hiffing confonant s in our Language, is unjuft and ill-founded. For, it has not been attended to, that very commonly, and in the final syllables especially, this letter lofes altogether the hiffing found, and is transformed into a z, which is one of the founds on which the ear refts with pleasure; as in bas, thefe, thofe, loves, bears, and innumerable more, where, though the letters be retained in writing, it has really the power of z, not of the common s.

AFTER all, however, it must be admitted, that smoothnefs, or beauty of found, is not one of the diftinguishing properties of the English Tongue. Though not incapable of being formed into melodious arrangements, yet ftrength and expreffiveness, more than grace, form its character. We incline, in general, to a fhort pronunciation of our words, and have fhortened the quantity of most of those which we borrow from the Latin, as orator, Spectacle, theatre, liberty, and fuch like. Agreeable to this, is a remarkable peculiarity of English pronunciation, the throwing the accent farther back, that is, nearer the beginning of

the

IX.

the word, than is done by any other nation. LECT. In Greek and Latin, no word is accented farther back than the third fyllable from the end, or what is called the antepenult. But, in English, we have many words accented on the fourth, fome on the fifth fyllable from the end, as, mémorable, convéniency, ambulatory, prôfitableness. The general effect of this practice of hastening the accent, or placing it fo near the beginning of a word, is to give a brisk and a fpirited, but at the fame time a rapid and hurried, and not very mufical, tone to the whole pronunciation of a people.

THE English Tongue poffeffes, undoubtedly, this property, that it is the most fimple in its form and conftruction, of all the European dialects. It is free from all intricacy of cafes, declenfions, moods, and tenfes. Its words are subject to fewer variations from their original form, than those of any other Language. Its fubftantives have no diftinction of gender, except what nature has made, and but one variation in cafe. Its adjectives admit of no change at all, except what expreffes the degree of comparison. Its verbs, inftead of running through all the varieties of antient conjugation, fuffer no more than four or five. changes in termination. By the help of a few prepofitions and auxiliary verbs, all the purposes of fignificancy in meaning are accomVOL. I, plished

[ocr errors]

LECT. plished; while the words, for the most part, IX. preferve their form unchanged. The disad

vantages in point of elegance, brevity, and force, which follow from this structure of our Language, I have before pointed out. But, at the fame time, it must be admitted, that fuch a ftructure contributes to facility. It renders the acquifition of our Language less laborious, the arrangement of our words more plain and obvious, the rules of our fyntax fewer and more fimple.

I AGREE, indeed, with Dr. Lowth (Preface to his Grammar), in thinking that the fimplicity and facility of our Language occafion its being frequently written and fpoken with less accuracy. It was neceffary to ftudy Languages, which were of a more complex and. artificial form, with greater care. The marks of gender and cafe, the varieties of conjugation and declenfion, the multiplied rules of fyntax, were all to be attended to in Speech. Hence Language became more an object of art. It was reduced into form; a ftandard was established; and any departures from the ftandard became confpicuous. Whereas, among us, Language is hardly confidered as an object of grammatical rule. We take it for granted, that a competent fkill in it may be acquired without any ftudy; and that, in a fyntax fo narrow and confined as ours, there

« PreviousContinue »