Page images
PDF
EPUB

Theory of Emphatic Inflexion.

HAVING AVING thus endeavoured to give a clear and diftinct idea of the two different kinds of emphafis, and attempted to prove, that emphasis, properly fo called, always fuppofes contradistinction or antithefis, either expreffed or understood; it will now be neceffary to show that every emphatic word, properly fo called, is as much distinguished by the inflexion it adopts, as by the force with which it is pronounced.

We have seen already, that where there is noemphasis, the moft fignificant words in a fentence adopt a different inflexion of voice for the fake of variety and harmony: for, provided the fentence reads well, it is of no confequence on which words the different inflexions are placed. Thus in the following sentence:

Exercife and témperance ftréngthen the conftitution. In this fentence, I fay, the words temperance and ftrengthen have the rifing, and exercife and conftitution the falling inflexion; but if this fentence were lengthened by the addition of another member, we should find the inflexions shift their places. Thus in the following fentence: 'Exercife and temperance ftrèngthen the conftitútion and fwéeten the enjoyments of life.

Here, I say, the words exercise and conftitution have the rifing, and temperance and ftrengthen the falling inflexion, as most agreeable to the harmony of the whole fentence: but if a word really emphatical had been in the firft fentence, no additional member would have obliged it to

alter its inflexion. Thus in the following fen

tence:

Exercife and témperance ftrengthèn even an indifferent conftitution.

Here the word indifferent, which is really emphatical, has the falling inflexion; and this inflexion it will ftill preferve, though we lengthen the sentence in imitation of the former by an additional member. For example:

'Exercife and temperance ftréngthen even an indifferent conftitútion, and supply in fóme measure the imperfections of nà

ture.

Here we find that, however the inflexion may change place on the rest of the words, the word indifferent must always have the falling inflexion, or the fenfe of the fentence will not be brought perfectly out. In the fame manner we may obferve, that the fame word in another fentence, when it requires the rifing inflexion, cannot alter that inflexion to the falling, without injuring the fenfe. Thus in the following fentence:

He that has but an indifferent constitution ought to strengthen it by exercise and temperance.

Here the word indifferent muft neceffarily have the emphafis with the rifing inflexion, whatever may be the inflexion on the other words.

As a farther proof that emphatic words cannot alter their inflexion, we need only attend to the pronunciation of a line in Milton, where two emphatic words are opposed to each other; fpeaking of Nimrod, he fays,

Hunting (and men not béafts shall be his game.) B. xii. v. 30.

1

In pronouncing this paffage, we shall find every reader lay the falling inflexion on men, and the rifing on beafts, as giving them a contrary pofition, that is, pronouncing men with the rifing, and beafts with the falling inflexion, would foon convince us that the former arrangement is precisely what the fenfe demands.

From thefe obfervations this maxim arifes, that as the emphafis of a word depends on the sense of a sentence, fo the inflexion of voice which this emphatic word adopts, depends on the fenfe likewife, and is equally invariable: from whence it will evidently follow, that where there are two emphatic words in the fame fentence, the fenfe alone can decide which is to have the rifing, and which the falling inflexion of voice.

It has been already proved, that emphasis always implies antithefis; and that where this antithefis is agreeable to the sense of the author, the emphasis is proper; but that where there is no antithefis in the thought, there ought to be none on the words; because, whenever an emphafis is placed upon an improper word, it will fuggeft an antithefis, which either does not exift, or is not agreeable to the fenfe and intention of the writer. Here fome new light seems to be thrown on the nature of emphafis, and a line drawn to diftinguifh emphatic words from others; but ftill we are at a lofs for the reason why one emphatic word fhould adopt the rifing inflexion, and another the falling: from the foregoing examples, it appears, that every emphatic word requires either the one or the other of these inflexions, and that the meaning of an author entirely depends on giv

ing each emphatic word its peculiar inflexion. It does not seem therefore entirely useless, fo far to inquire into the nature, or fpecific quality, if I may be allowed to call it fo, of these two emphatic inflexions, as to be able to decide which we fhall adopt where the sense of the author does not immediately dictate. Thus in a former quotation from Milton, when speaking of Nimrod, he fays,

Hunting (and mèn not béafts shall be his game.)

Here I fay, the ear and understanding are both immediately fatisfied upon pronouncing men with the falling, and beasts with the rifing inflexion; but in another line of the fame author, when speaking of Satan, he calls him,

The tempter ere th' accufer of mankind.

Here, I fay, it is not quite fo clear how we fhall difpofe of these two inflexions on the two emphatic words tempter and accufer; and an inquiry into the nature of thefe inflexions, fo as to fix the peculiar import of each, may, perhaps, affift us in deciding with precifion in this and fimilar inftances.

It has been observed, that emphasis is divifible into two kinds, namely, into that where the antithefis is expreffed, and that where it is only implied; or, in other words, into that emphasis where there are two or more emphatic words correfponding to each other, and that where the emphatic word relates to fome other word, not expreffed but understood; an inftance of the first is this:

When a Perfian foldier was reviling Alexander the Great, his officer reprimanded him by faying, Sir, you were paid to fight against Alexander, and not to rail at him. Spectator.

Here we find fight and rail are the two emphatic words which correfpond to each other, and that the pofitive member which affirms fomething, adopts the falling inflexion on fight, and the negative member, which excludes fomething, has the rifing inflexion on

rail.

An inftance of the latter kind of emphasis is this:

By the faculty of a lively and picturefque imagination, a man in a dungeon is capable of entertaining himself with scenes and landskips, more beautiful than any that can be found in the whole compafs of nature. Spectator, N° 411.

Here we find the word dungeon emphatical, but it has not any correfpondent word as in the other fentence. If we pronounce this emphatic word with the falling inflexion, the correspondent words which belong to this emphasis may be imagined to be nearly thefe, not merely abfent from beautiful fcenes; which, if added to the word dungeon, we fhould find perfectly agreeable to the fenfe fuggefted by the emphasis on that word; if we draw out this latter sentence at length, we fhall find it confift of the fame pofitive and negative parts as the former, and that the pofitive part affumes the falling, and the negative the rifing inflexion in both.

EXAMPLES.

When a Perfian foldier was reviling Alexander the Great, his officer reprimanded him by faying; Sir, you were paid to fight Alexander, and not to rail at him.

By the faculty of a lively and picturefque imagination, a man in a dungeon, and not merely ábfent from beautiful scenes, is capable of entertaining himself with fcenes and landskips, more beautiful than any that can be found in the whole compass of nature.

P

« PreviousContinue »