Page images
PDF
EPUB

We too often judge of men by the splendour, not by

the merit of their actions.

Or,

ر

We too often judge of men not by the merit, but by

the splendour of their actions.

[ocr errors]

ر

/

When the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness which he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive.

Here the word away is emphatical, and those which immediately follow, namely, from his wickedness which he hath committed, are totally unemphatic, for the subject of them has been virtually mentioned before, namely, in the phrase the wicked man, which means the man who hath committed wickedness; the whole clause must therefore be pronounced parenthetically, and both wickedness and committed receive the rising inflection from away.

These unemphatic words following one which is emphatic, Mr. Smart denominates pronominal, " because they refer to their subjects in the same manner as a pronoun refers to its noun, after the subject denoted by the noun has been regularly introduced, and become an implied topic of discourse;"* and he follows up his rule by the following judicious observations: "In some cases, perhaps, when the subjects are preunderstood, it may not be eligible to read a phrase pronominally, because the harmony of a sentence (where harmony is of consequence) might suffer too much. But these cases are but few; for, generally speaking, one very great feature of significant reading, probably the greatest, is the distinguishing of primary information from what is preunderstood, and therefore secondary. The subjects of discourse, when once introduced, go along with the mind continually; and it betrays inattention to the drift of thought, or incapacity to follow it, or, at least, a very bad habit which prevents the reader from shewing outwardly that he follows it, when he makes no distinction between the words and phrases that refer to those subjects, and such as bring the hearer acquainted with something new. This is a point of the utmost importance, and it is astonishing that writers on Elocution should never have noticed it."

* Theory of Elocution, p. 106.

Hitherto we have treated chiefly of that emphasis which may be called single, that is, where the two emphatic words in antithesis to each other are expressed, or where but one of them is expressed, and the antithesis to it is implied or understood. But besides these, there are instances in which two emphatical words are opposed to two others, and sometimes where three emphatical words are opposed to three others, in the same sentence. The former is called the double, the latter the treble emphasis.

We have an instance of double emphasis in the following sentence:

The pleasures of the imagination, taken in their full extent, are not so gross as those of sense, nor so refined as those of the understanding.

In this sentence the emphatical words sense and understanding are opposed to each other as well as gross and refined, and it is one of the rules under Inflection, in Chap. II., that words in opposition to each other must have opposite inflections. Now, as the first part of this sentence, ending at sense, is negative, the word sense, with which it terminates, must (by Rule II. Ch. II.) have the rising inflection; understanding, therefore, has the falling, and for the sake of a melodious variety, we give the falling inflection to gross, and consequently the rising to refined, as being in opposition to it; thus,

ر

The pleasures of the imagination, taken in their full extent, are not so gross as those of sense, nor so refined as those of the understanding.

The following is an example of treble emphasis:

He raised a mortal to the skies,

[blocks in formation]

In such a sentence as this there is seldom any difficulty in adjusting the inflections, for as each part has a corresponding part expressed, there is scarcely any necessity to enforce one more than another, and the inflections easily fall into a just and melodious arrangement. By reading the sentence as it is here marked, a melodious variety is produced, and the antithetic words are opposed to each other by their inflections as well as in sense.

This may be called the treble emphasis expressed: but sometimes the double emphasis has two of its parts so emphatical as to imply two antithetic objects not expressed, and thus to form a treble emphasis implied only. In this case it is not so easy to determine how we are to place the emphatic inflections. Thus, in the following passage from Milton (Paradise Lost, B. I. 262),

To reign is worth ambition, though in hell;
Better to reign in hell, than serve in heaven.

The words heaven and hell are here opposed to each other, and ought, therefore, if we follow the common rule respecting antithesis, to have opposite inflections; but these opposite inflections we cannot afford to give them, for besides the expressed antithesis which these words have to each other, they seem each of them to have an antithetic object understood, and so to form what may be called a treble emphasis implied. The sense seems to be that to reign is so desirable, that it is better to reign, not only where it is attended with its usual cares, but even in hell, where it is accompanied with torments; and, on

the other hand, that servitude is disagreeable, not only where it has its usual inconveniences, but even in heaven, where it is attended with pleasures. Since, therefore, all words before which even is either expressed or understood, require the falling inflection, (see p. 95,) if we would bring out the sense, we must give this inflection to both heaven and hell, although the music and melody of the line would certainly lead us to place the rising on hell. This will also occasion the words reign and serve, although antithetic, to have both the same inflection, namely, the rising.

ر

ر

Better to reign in hell, than serve in heaven. Melody would lead us to read the line thus: Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven.* There is a saying of Julius Cæsar's, as he was passing through an obscure village in Gaul,

I would rather be the first man in that village, than the second in Rome.

On the first reading of this passage, the melody of pronunciation inclines us to give the falling inflection to first, the rising to village, the rising also to second, and the falling to Rome,; thus,

I would rather be the first man in that village, than the second in Rome.

ر

* Mr. Walker informs us that Garrick, upon being asked to read these lines, repeated them at first in the latter mode, but upon reconsidering, approved of the former.

« PreviousContinue »