the sentence that correfponds to the pofitive part of the declaration: If we would exprefs this choice with emphafis, fo as to fhow that we would not only undergo great difficulties, but that we would even die fooner than mention it, the fame inflexion is preserved on the fame word, with a small addition of emphatic force: If it were understood that we would die fooner than mention it, but, for fear mention fhould be taken in too large a fenfe, we wish to exprefs a refolution of dying before we would discover the smallest part of it; in this cafe, I fay, we fhould lay the strong emphasis and falling inflexion on mention, which would intimate a new antithefis, and be equivalent to faying, I would not only die before I would declare or relate it, but even before I would mention it; and here we find the word die affume the weak emphafis and. rifing inflexion, as the queftion in this cafe is not fo much about dying as about the degree of mention we are refolved not to make.

But if both parts of the comparison be underftood, and therefore to be taken fimply and without emphasis, and it is the intention of the fpeaker to declare, with emphafis, the priority or preferableness only; in this cafe, the comparative word has the ftrong emphafis and falling inflexion, and the word compared has the weak emphasis and rifing inflexion. Thus Gay, in his fable of the Elephant and Bookfeller, makes the latter offer pay to the former for writing fatire; and in order to fhow there is no neceffity to hire beafts to prey on men, while men, by envy, prey on each other, fays,

Envy's a harper fpur than pay.

Here the word sharper has the strong emphafis and falling inflexion, as envy is not faid, with emphafis, to be a fharper fpur than pay; for envy is not here oppofed to any other difpofition, or to a difpofition lefs malevolent; nor is pay opposed to any other, or to a lefs reward; but the emphasis is confined to the comparative word, harper; as if he had faid, Envy is not only a fpur equally sharp, but sharper than pay.

On these principles we may account for the emphasis which a good actor always places on the first part of the antithefis in the following examples:

Ham. What! look'd he frowningly?

Hor. A countenance more in sorrow than in ánger. Shaks.

It is a custom

More honoured in the breach than the obférvance. Ibid.

He is more knàve than fool.

Proverbial phrase.

Oh! the blood mère stirs,

To roufe a lion than to start a hare.

Shaks. Hen. IV. Part I. A&t i.

This laft example is the parallel of that from Gay; and it is prefumed, that a judicious actor would lay the great ftrefs, that is, the emphafis with the falling inflexion, on the word more, and give the words lion and bare the weak emphasis and rifing inflexion. For Hotspur, in this paffage, is talking of dangers, and is not fo much comparing them as the advantages that arife from them; and the paraphrase of this emphasis would be, the refiftance we make to great and fmall danger is not equal; a great danger firs the blood much more than a fmall one.

This paraphrafing or drawing out the fignification of emphatic words feems the best guide where the fenfe is not quite obvious, and will

lead us to decide in many doubtful cafes, where nothing but the tafte of the reader is commonly appealed to. To illuftrate this ftill farther, let us examine a line in Otway's Venice Preferved, where Pierre, expatiating on the wretched ftate of Venice, fays,

Juftice is lame as well as blind among us.

The phrafe, as well as, fignifies nothing more than parity, and is nearly fimilar in fense to the conjunction and, if, therefore, we lay the falling inflexion on blind, it would be equivalent to faying, Justice is not only lame, but blind; and this is a piece of information we did not want : For juftice is always fuppofed to be blind. But the falling inflexion on lame, and the rifing on blind, is equivalent to faying, Juftice is not only blind, as he is every where elfe, but in Venice he is lame as well as blind. And that this is the true meaning of the paffage, cannot be doubted. If the poet had written the line in this manner : Juftice is as lame as fhe is blind among us:

The falling inflexion placed on blind, would imply, that Justice is not only very lame, but even as lame as he is blind. Thus we fee the fenfe varies with the different emphafis we adopt, and is never fully and forcibly difplayed without the kind of emphasis that is peculiarly suited to it.

But it may be asked, fince the fense must be fully conceived before we can adapt the emphafis to the words, of what ufe is it to ring all thefe changes upon the different emphafes, when, though we conceive them ever fo diftinctly, they wilt only fuggeft one particular fenfe, but will never tell us which we shall

adopt as most suitable to the meaning of the author. To this it may be answered, that whatever tends to show the different import of each kind of emphafis, enables us the better to judge of the fuitableness or unfuitableness of each emphafis to the fenfe. This unfolding and difplaying of what is suggested by each emphafis is that affiftance to the understanding which fpectacles are to the eye; magnifying glaffes are not calculated for those whofe powers of fight are fo ftrong and clear as to have no need of them, nor for those who have no fight at all; but for fuch as wish to view objects diftinctly, and with lefs labour than without this affiftance. Where the fenfe is clear, we need no fuch affiftance; but where the fense is obfcure and dubious, it can fcarcely be doubted that difplaying and unfolding it by fuch paraphrases as are fuggefted by the application of different kinds of emphasis, will tend greatly to take away the ambiguity, will fhow which kind of emphasis is moft fuitable to the fenfe, and enable us to pronounce with greater confidence and fecurity.

From what has been faid of the nature of emphafis, it will evidently follow, that pronunciation is a kind of fupplement to written language. As vivacity and force depend greatly on brevity, and brevity borders naturally on obfcurity; in order to preferve the meaning without lofing the force, pronunciation interpofes, and, as it were, fupplies the ellipfis in the written words, by a stress and inflexion of voice, which imply what belongs to the fenfe, but which is not fufficiently obvious without oral utterance. Hence we may conclude, that

language is never perfect till it is delivered. A juft pronunciation brings to view its latent and elliptical fenfes, without clogging it with repetitions which would retard its communication and enfeeble its ftrength. Thus, by pronouncing the following fentence: Exercife and temperance ftrengthen an indifferent conftitution: By pronouncing this fentence, I fay, with the falling inflexion on the word indifferent, I convey as much to the understanding as if I had faid, Exercife and temperance ftrengthen not only a common conftitution, but even an indifferent conftitution. And the inferiority of the latter fentence, from its tautology and pleonaftic tardiness, fufficiently fhows the neceffity of a juft pronunciation to fupply the ellipfes of written language.

Double Emphafis.

The double emphafis, as we have already obferved in page 218, feems most frequently to be regulated by the harmony of the fentence; for as it is a general rule, that the rifing inflexion must take place in the middle of fuch a fentence, the fecond branch of the first member muft neceffarily have the rifing inflexion, and the rest of the branches muft have fuch an emphafis and inflexion as contribute most to the harmony of the period. With this general rule, that the two parts of the antithefis have each of them the two different inflexions, arranged in an oppofite order; that is, as two inflexions in the fame member cannot be alike, if the fecond branch of the first member has the rifing, the first branch muft, of courfe, have the falling inflexion; and as the laft branch of the fecond