An inftance of an antithefis, perhaps, ftill lefs obvious, we have in the following line of Richard the Third, where Prince Edward apologizes for his brother's farcaftic ridicule on the duke of Glocefter:

I hope your grace knows how to bear with him.

Richard, A&t iii.

The bear, in this fentence, is the emphatical word, and always pronounced with the rifing inflexion; but though we perceive, at first hearing, the propriety of adopting this inflexion, we cannot fo readily difcover the antithetic object intimated by it; it is not till we confider the definition of the neuter verb to bear, that we find out what is opposed to it; the word bear, in the paffage alluded to, indicates fupporting a degree of difpleafure, fo as to feem pleased when we are not really fo; the antithetic object, therefore, muft be, being really pleafed, and the paraphrase intimated by this emphafis will be this: I hope your grace knows how to bear, or to feem pleafed with him, though not to be really pleafed with him.

Sometimes the fenfe of a paffage makes it difficult to determine whether we must use the emphasis with the rifing or falling inflexion; and in this cafe, (though it feldom happens) we may adopt either the one or the other indifferently. Thus when Horatio, in the Fair Penitent, tells Califta that he came to her as a friend, fhe answers,

You are my husband's friend, the friend of Al'tamont! The words husband and Altamont, in this line, are emphatical; if they are both pronounced with the falling inflexion, it imports an abfo

lute denial of the antithetic object, which is the friendship of Horatio to her; if we pronounce them with the rifing inflexion, it only infinuates that he is not her friend: and this latter emphasis seems the moft fuitable to the fituation of Califta, as at that time fhe has not fo far broke terms with Horatio as abfolutely to deny that he is her friend; and, therefore, the inflexion which affirms fomething in the emphafis, without denying the antithefis, is the inflexion fhe ought to adopt.

Thus have I been led infenfibly by my fubject into intricacies and diftinctions, whither, perhaps, but few of my readers will be able to follow me: I might, indeed, have contented myfelf with lefs minutenefs and precifion, but the fpeculation appeared too curious and useful to be flightly treated. If what has been obferved of thefe emphatic inflexions be true, we may take occafion to contemplate how few are the principles on which Divine Wifdom conftructs operations of the greatest extent and variety: and it may be prefumed, that by being acquainted with these principles, we fhall be better enabled to enter into the views of Providence in the gift of fpeech, by perfecting and regulating it according to thefe views. By a knowledge of the principles of grammar, we are enabled to exprefs our thoughts with greater force, precifion, and perfpicuity; and it cannot be doubted, that a knowledge of the grammar of pronunciation, if it may be called fo, will powerfully tend to the fame useful purpose.

Practical System of Emphafis.

HAVING AVING endeavoured to fhew the nature of emphafis, properly fo called, and attempted to diftingu fh it into its feveral kinds, according to the inflexion of voice it adopts; having made fome efforts to afcertain the peculiar character of each emphatic inflexion, and by this means afforded fome affiftance to a difcovery of the true emphafis in doubtful cafes; it will be neceffary, in the next place, to endeavour to reduce what has been faid into a practical fyftem, and to extend the former obfervations on emphatic inflexion to the pronunciation of every different fpecies of emphafis. Hitherto we

have treated chiefly of that emphafis, which may be called single; that is, either where the two emphatic words in antithefis with each other are expreffed; or where but one of them is expreffed, and the antithefis to it is implied or understood, But befides thefe, there are inftances where two emphatic words are oppofed to two others, and fometimes where three emphatic words are oppofed to three others in the fame fentence. Let us take a view of each of thefe different kinds of emphafis in its order:

I

:{

2

3

4

{

Exercife and temperance ftrengthen even an indifferent conftitution.

You were paid to fight against Alexander, and not to ráil at him.

f The pleafures of the imagination are not fo grofs as those of fénfe, nor fo refined as thofe of the understanding.

In the first example, we find the emphatic word indifferent fuggeft an antithefis not expreffed, namely, not a good conftitution; this may be called the fingle emphafis implied.

In the fecond example, the words fight and rail are in antithefis with each other, and do not fuggeft any other antithetic objects; and this may be called the fingle emphafis expressed.

In the next example, the emphatic words grofs and refined are oppofed to each other, and contrafted with fenfe and understanding; and this mutual correfpondence and oppofition of four parts to each other may not improperly be termed the double emphafis.

When three antithetic objects are opposed to three, as in N° 4, we may call the affemblage the treble emphafis.

Single Emphafis implied and expressed.

In the fingle emphafis implied, we find the inflexions are fo ftrictly appropriated to the nature of the emphafis, that ufing one instead of the other would inevitably alter the fenfe: This has been abundantly proved in the preceding chapter. The fame may be obferved (as we shall fee presently) of the fingle emphafis expressed; but this appropriation of inflexion to sense does not feem to hold fo ftrictly where the emphasis is double, or treble; for here, as the antithetic objects are almoft always expreffed, and there is feldom any danger of a mistake in the sense, we shall not wonder to find harmony claim her indifputable rights in making this sense moft agreeable to the ear.

But though the inflexions of the double and

treble emphasis frequently yield to the harmony of arrangement, the fingle emphafis expreffed requires its specific inflexion on each part; for in the second example:

You were paid to fight against Alexander, and not to ráil at him.

Here, if we were to place the rifing inflexion on fight, and the falling on rail, as the harmony of cadence would intimate, we should foon find, that in the fingle emphafis expreffed, there is as strict an appropriation of inflexion to the sense of the emphafis as when but one part of the antithefis is expreffed in the fingle emphafis implied. As the inflexions in this fpecies of emphafis, therefore, are of much more importance, and much more difficult to fettle, than those of the double and treble emphafis, it may not be improper, before we enter on the latter, to extend our fpeculations a little on the former.

Whatever may be the reafon why the positive member of a sentence should adopt the emphafis with the falling inflexion, and the negative member the rifing; certain it is, that this appropriation of emphatic inflexion, to a pofitive or negative fignification, runs through the whole fyftem of pronunciation. Agreeably to this arrangement, we conftantly find good readers finish negative sentences with the rifing inflexion, where ordinary readers are sure to use the falling inflexion, and to drop the voice; and, perhaps, this different pronunciation forms one of the greatest differences between good and bad readers: Thus, in the following fentence from the Oration of Demofthenes on the Crown, tranflated by Dr. Leland: