number; otherwise, their common relation to these verbs or pronouns is not pointed out. An active verb must, in every language, govern the accusative; that is, clearly point out some substantive noun, as the object to which its action is directed. A relative pronoun must, in every form of speech, agree with its antecedent in gender, number, and person; and conjunctions, or connecting particles, ought always to couple like cases and moods; that is, ought to join together words which are of the same form and state with each other. I mention these, as a few exemplifications of that fundamental regard to syntax, which, even in such a language as ours, is absolutely requisite for writing or speaking with any propriety.

Whatever the advantages or defects of the English language be, as it is our own language, it deserves a high degree of our study and attention, both with regard to the choice of words which we employ, and with regard to the syntax, or the arrangement of these words in a sentence. We know how much the Greeks and Romans, in their most polished and flourishing times, cultivated their own tongues. We know how much study both the French, and the Italians, have bestowed upon theirs. Whatever knowledge may be acquired by the study of other languages, it can never be communicated with advantage, unless by such as can write and speak their own language well. Let the matter of an author be ever so good and useful, his compositions will always suffer in the public esteem, if his expression be deficient in purity and propriety. At the same time, the attainment of a correct and elegant style, is an object which demands application and labour. If any imagine they can catch it merely by the ear, or acquire it by a slight perusal of some of our good authors, they will find themselves much disappointed. The many errors, even in point of grammar, the many offences against purity of language, which are committed by writers who are far from being contemptible, demonstrate, that a careful study of the language is previously requisite, in all who aim at writing it properly.*

QUESTIONS.

Of the verb, what is observed? In verb from other parts of speech? Hence, it, what appears; and therefore, what what follows; and why? What has follows? Why will our author avoid arisen from this sort of eminence? dwelling longer on this subject, than is Why must verbs have been coeval absolutely necessary? What property with men's first attempts towards the has the verb, in common with the ad- formation of language? What, is it jective? In all verbs, what three things probable, was its radical form; and are implied at once? How is this re- why? What did such verbs afterwards mark illustrated? Of the particle shi- become, and into what did they branch ning, what is remarked? What may out? For what are the tenses contrithe infinitive mood, to shine, be called; ved? Why must notice be taken of and why? Hence, what resemblance does the infinitive mood often carry? What examples are given? What is that which chiefly distinguishes the

these? Of what divisions of time do we naturally think? Under what circumstances might we imagine that no more were needful? But how does language

* On this subject, the reader ought to peruse Dr. Lowth's Short Introduction to English Grammar, with Critical Notes; Dr. Campbell's Philosophy of Rhetoric; and Dr. PriestJy's Rudiments of English Grammar.

proceed; and into what does it split what relations, do they serve? For time? How does it consider it; and connecting what, are conjunctions emhence, what follows? How may the ployed; and what examples are given? present be considered? What examples In what manner do prepositions connect are given? How many past tenses are words; and what examples are given? found in the poorest languages? How When was the force of these epoken of? many has ours? Define each, and give From what is it evident that all these the illustrative examples. Here, what connective particles must be of the do we, with pleasure, observe? What greatest use in speech; and, therefore, tense have they not? In both cases, what follows? As a nation improves in what must they say? How is the ad-science, and as its language becomes vantage of our language illustrated? more perfect, what may we expect? Define the two varieties of the future, and Accordingly, what language contains give examples of each. Besides tenses, the greatest quantity of them; and what other distinction do verbs admit? why? On what does much of the beauFor what are moods designed? Define ty and strength of every language dethe indicative, the imperative, and the pend? What depends on the right or subjunctive moods; and give examples wrong management of them? Before of each. What does this manner of ex- he dismisses the subject of language, pressing an affirmation, &c. form? what observation does our author reWhat now clearly appears? How is quest to be allowed to make; and this fully illustrated? What is a curi- why? How is this subject illustrated in ous and remarkable fact? In what a quotation from Quintilian? What languages is conjugation esteemed most subject do we next approach? Of the perfect? What is said of the tenses of language which is at present spoken oriental tongues? How is this deficien- throughout Great Britain, what is obcy supplied? What example is given? served? What was the language of Of the tenses and moods of the Greek the first inhabitants of the island? Of language, what is remarked? Of the this Celtic tongue, what is remarked, Latin, what is observed? What is the and where did it obtain? Of what state of conjugation, in modern Euro- countries was it the language; and till pean tongues? In what do they admit what period? Where, only, does it now few varieties; and to what have they subsist? What evidence have we of constant recourse? To what is the this? How long did this continue to be change which language has undergone the language of the island? in conjugation, similar? What illus- How did the Saxons treat the Britration of this remark is given? How tons? Of what was the Saxon tongue may the alteration be easily under- a dialect; and of what did it lay the stood? Of the auxiliary verbs, what is foundation? How long did it continue remarked? What do they imply? to be spoken throughout the southern With what, in the early state of speech, part of the island? What language would their import be incorporated? did he introduce? Of what, then, is the In what manner was it afterwards English which is now spoken a mixfound that these auxiliaries might sup-ture? What language is spoken in the ply the place of most of the moods and low countries of Scotland? For what, tenses? Hence, what followed? What can we not easily account? What are, examples of illustration are given? still, uncertain and contested points? What few varieties were retained? What appears, from what has been What was the consequence of this said, to be the basis of our present practice? What effect had it on lan-speech; and how has it been imported guage? What are the remaining parts among us? From what ancient lanof speech called? Of these, what are guage are many of our words, also, the first that occur? To what are they derived; and how did we receive them? reducible; and why? For the most What evidence have we of this? With part, what are they; expressing what? what language has the French always Hence, of them, what may be con- continued to have a very considerable ceived; and accordingly, whence are affinity; and hence, what follows? the great body of them derived? From the influx of so many streams, What class of words do prepositions what naturally follows? What can and conjugations form; and to express we not expect from it? Why is its

syntax narrow? What remark fol- what is remarked? What has Mr. She lows? How are these disadvantages, ridan, in his lectures, shown? Of our if they be such, balanced? In what consonants, what does he observe; and subject is our language particularly why? After all, what must be admitcopious? How has this been produced? ted? To what do we, in general, inIn what also are we rich; and in what cline; and agreeably to this, what is a does it differ from prose? What does remarkable peculiarity of our pronunthis show; and to what language are ciation? How does the English differ we, in this respect, infinitely superior? from the Greek and Latin in this reOf their poetical language, what is re- spect? What is the general effect of marked? Where does our language this practice? What peculiar property chiefly display its power of expression? does the English language possess? How many words are we said to have Illustrate this, fully. What opinion of to denote the varieties of the passion of Dr. Lowth is here introduced? Why anger? Repeat them. Where is our were ancient languages an object of tongue less fertile? In what does the art? What do we take for granted; French tongue surpass ours? How and hence, what follows? For what may any one be convinced of this? are grammatical rules insufficient; and For what is the French, of all lan- what in this case must be the stanguages, the most copious; and for dard? What will not follow from this; what is it the happiest language in the and why? Why cannot all the rules of world? But where does ours excel it? Latin syntax be applied to our lanWhence does language receive its pre- guage? But what is always to be redominant feature? What must we, membered; and for what reason? however, not expect; and why? What How is this fully illustrated? What do evidence, however, have we that na- these exemplifications show? What tional character will always have some remark on the English language folinfluence on the turn of language? lows? How is this illustrated? Who From the genius of our language, what will find themselves much disappointmay it be expected to have? To what ed? What affords a sufficient proof that is its prolixity owing; and what is its a careful study of the language is reeffect? How is this illustrated? Why quisite ? may our language still be esteemed to possess considerable force of expression? Of what is the style of Milton a sufficient proof? What is a quality of great importance in speaking or writing; and 1. Verbs. on what three things does it depend? What tongue most eminently possesses this quality? What advantages did it possess? What is the character of the Latin tongue in this respect? Of the Italian language, what is remarked? By considering whose style, may one be convinced that our language is not destitute of flexibility? With what has our language been most taxed? What alone is sufficient to prove that our language is not unmusical? Of our verse,

STYLE.

ANALYSIS.

A. Their nature and importance.
B. Tenses.

c. Voices.

D. Moods.
E. Conjugation.
2. Auxiliary verbs.
3. Adverbs.
4. Prepositions.
5. Conjunctions.

6. The origin of the English language.
A. Its character.
B. Its syntax.

LECTURE X.

PERSPICUITY AND PRECISION

HAVING finished the subject of language, I now enter on the consideration of style, and the rules that relate to it.

It is not easy to give a precise idea of what is meant by style. The best definition I can give of it, is, the peculiar manner in which

a man expresses his conceptions, by means of language. It is different from mere language, or words. The words which an author employs, may be proper and faultless; and his style may, nevertheless, have great faults: it may be dry, or stiff, or feeble, or affected. Style has always some reference to an author's manner of thinking. It is a picture of the ideas which arise in his mind, and of the manner in which they rise there; and hence, when we are examining an author's composition, it is, in many cases, extremely difficult to separate the style from the sentiment. No wonder these two should be so intimately connected, as style is nothing else than that sort of expression which our thoughts most readily assume. Hence, different countries have been noted for peculiarities of style, suited to their different temper and genius. The eastern natious animated their style with the most strong and hyperbolical figures. The Athenians, a polished and acute people, formed a style accurate, clear, and neat. The Asiatics, gay and loose in their manners, affected a style florid and diffuse. The like sort of characteristical differences are commonly remarked in the style of the French, the English, and the Spaniards. In giving the general characters of style, it is usual to talk of a nervous, a feeble, or a spirited style; which are plainly the characters of a writer's manner of thinking, as well as of expressing himself so difficult it is to separate these two things from one another. Of the general characters of style, I am afterwards to discourse; but it will be necessary to begin with examining the more simple qualities of it; from the assemblage of which, its more complex denominations, in a great measure,result.

All the qualities of good style may be ranged under two heads, perspicuity and ornament. For all that can possibly be required of language is, to convey our ideas clearly to the minds of others, and, at the same time, in such a dress, as by pleasing and interesting them, shall most effectually strengthen the impressions which we seek to make. When both these ends are answered, we certainly accomplish every purpose for which we use writing and discourse.

Perspicuity, it will be readily admitted, is the fundamental quality of style; a quality so essential in every kind of writing, that for the want of it, nothing can atone. Without this, the richest ornaments of style only glimmer through the dark; and puzzle, instead of pleasing the reader. This, therefore, must be our first object, to make our meaning clearly and fully understood, and understood without the least difficulty. Oratio,' says Quintilian, 'debet negligenter quoque audientibus esse aperta; ut in animum audientis, sicut sol in oculos, etiamsi in eum non intendatur, occurat. Quare non solum ut intelligere possit, sed ne omnino possit non intelligere curandum.' If we are obliged to follow a writer with much care, to

*"Nobis prima sit virtus, perspicuitas, propria verba, rectus ordo, non in longum dilata conclusio; nihil neque desit, neque superfluat."

QUINTIL. lib. viii.

"Discourse ought always to be obvious, even to the most careless and negligent hearer so that the sense shall strike his mind, as the light of the sun does our eyes, though they are not directed upwards to it. We must study not only that every hearer may understand us, but that it shall be impossible for him not to understand us."

pause, and to read over his sentences a second time, in order to comprehend them fully, he will never please us long. Mankind are too indolent to relish so much labour. They may pretend to admire the author's depth, after they have discovered his meaning; but they will seldom be inclined to take up his work a second time. Authors sometimes plead the difficulty of their subject as an excuse for the want of perspicuity. But the excuse can rarely, if ever, be admitted. For whatever a man conceives clearly, that, it is in his power, if he will be at the trouble, to put into distinct propositions, or to express clearly to others: and upon no subject ought any man to write, where he cannot think clearly. His ideas, indeed, may, very excusably, be on some subjects incomplete or inadequate; but still, as far as they go, they ought to be clear; and wherever this is the case, perspicuity in expressing them is always attainable. The obscurity which reigns so much among many metaphysical writers, is, for the most part, owing to the indistinctness of their own conceptions. They see the object but in a confused light; and, of course, can never exhibit it in a clear one to others.

Perspicuity in writing, is not to be considered as merely a sort of negative virtue, or freedom from defect. It has higher merit: it is a degree of positive beauty. We are pleased with an author, we consider him as deserving praise, who frees us from all fatigue of searching for his meaning; who carries us through his subject without any embarrassment or confusion; whose style flows always like a limpid stream, where we see to the very bottom.

The study of perspicuity requires attention, first, to single words and phrases, and then to the construction of sentences. I begin with treating of the first, and shall confine myself to it in this lec

ture.

Perspicuity, considered with respect to words and phrases, requires these three qualities in them, purity, propriety, and precision. Purity and propriety of language, are often used indiscriminately for each other; and, indeed, they are very nearly allied. A distinction, however, obtains between them. Purity is the use of such words, and such constructions, as belong to the idiom of the language which we speak; in opposition to words and phrases that are imported from other languages, or that are obsolete, or new coined, or used without proper authority. Propriety is the selection of such words in the language, as the best and most established usage has appropriated to those ideas which we intend to express by them. It implies the correct and happy application of them, according to that usage, in opposition to vulgarisms or low expressions; and to words and phrases, which would be less significant of the ideas that we mean to convey. Style may be pure, that is, it may all be strictly English, without Scoticisms or Gallicisms, or ungrammatical irregular expressions of any kind, and may, nevertheless, be deficient in propriety. The words may be ill chosen; not adapted to the subject, nor fully expressive of the author's sense. He has taken all his words and phrases from the general mass of English language; but he has made his selection among these words unhappily. Where