« PreviousContinue »
true of both. The distinction, however, is in many instances a distinction without a difference.
Allegory is most frequently considered as a species of metaphor, differing in no degree therefrom, except in the length thereof. There is one essential difference, however, between the metaphor and allegory, which is thisthat whereas metaphor presents to view the two things compared, the allegory presents only one, and that the secondary object. Thus, in the 80th Psalm, we have a most beautiful instance of the allegory, wherein the Israelites, without being ever spoken of, or presented literally to our view, are likened to a vine.
The heathen mythology is all an allegory; and Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress ” is considered as one of the finest (if not the finest) allegories in the English language.
The other figures of speech most ordinarily used, and therefore of most importance, are-Irony, Hyperbole, In
, terrogation, Climax.- Irony is resorted to when a sense is intended to be expressed different from that which the words made use of would literally convey ; there is no possibility, however, of mistaking the sense intended, as the circumstances of each case are sufficient to indicate what is really meant. Irony is a most powerful engine in the hands of a subtle disputer, who would bring home conviction of error to the mind of an opponent. Of this there is a notable, example in the address of Elijah to the Prophets of Baal, intended to convince them of the incapability of their God to hear and assist them :-“ Cry aloud, for he is a God; either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or he is in a journey, or peradventure he sleepeth, and must be awaked.”
Hyperbole is the language of exaggeration; it represents things in a degree greater or less than the truth would literally admit of; the party using it, however, does not intend to deceive, and resorts to it by way of more strongly assuring. When a man represents a person as being stronger than a lion, he uses a hyperbole, and is said to speak hyperbolically; so also the opposite—“As weak as a cat." The language, in which Moses represents God as promising a numerous posterity to the Patriarchs, is the language of hyperbole, by which they were likened
to the stars of heaven and the grains of sand on the sea-shore.
Interrogation.--Of this there are two kinds: one belonging to grammar, implying doubt or ignorance on the part of the questioner; the other to rhetoric, implying the strongest conviction on the part of the speaker, who exhibits his confidence in the truth of what he asserts by challenging investigation; thus the Angel to Abraham “Is anything too hard for the Lord ?”
Climax is a figure by which the attention is fixed on a series of things rising every one above the preceding in importance. Of this there is a beautiful specimen in the language in which the messenger announced to the aged Eli the defeat of the Israelites by the Philistines : “ And the messenger answered and said, Israel is filed before the Philistines; and there hath been also a great slaughter among the people; and thy two sons also, Hophni and Phinehas, are dead; and the ark of God is taken.” So also St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans: "For I am persuaded that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God.”
Other figures of speech, of less importance, and not so striking in character as those already instanced, areMetonymy, Euphemism, Synecdoche, Onomatopæia, Oxymoron, Periphrasis, and Usteron proteron.
By Metonymy, which implies a change of name, one word is substituted for another, when both are names for individuals so intimately related that the sense is readily understood. Thus: “ All London (meaning the inhabitants) came down to see Greenwich fair; “ He is fond of the bottle" (meaning the contents thereof); “He is reading Virgil,”' 2.e. his works.
The Euphemism is a figure whereby what is disagreeable is softened by expression, so as not to suggest the idea in all its harshness. Thus~"A man is not,” for, “A man is dead ;” “ He breathed his last;
" " He fell asleep,” as is said of Stephen in the Acts of the Apostles, are examples of this figure, which the Latins and Greeks carried so far as to give names to things implying a property in them
10. An adverb of place frequently stands in the position of the relative : thus—“He now entered the chamber, where he found the letter" =“ in which.”
11. In the introductory remarks on Syntax, it was laid down that the relative should follow its antecedent as closely as possible. Of this principle the following will serve as an illustration :—“Philip, the father of Alexander, who founded the Macedonian Empire.” Here it is impossible to discover grammatically which noun-Alexander or Philip is the antecedent to who. Latham defends such phraseology, by supposing such an expression as “Philip, the father of Alexander," a single many-worded name, serving as the antecedent of who. To this defence it may be objected, Who is to determine when the writer intends such an expression to be so understood ? There are many ways of avoiding such obscurities–“ Philip, who was the father of Alexander, and who founded the Macedonian Empire,” will serve as a specimen.
12. The words that ask and answer a question should be in the same case.
Norm --The answers to the foregoing questions are supplace by pronouns, in order that the case of the answering Wer war the more easily be discerned ; the same principle To this to the case of the noun used to answer a ques
1& "Sacere body. I don't know who told me." In such 12 min, not hom, is correet. hon must not be
**** phorale it were the object of the transitive verb Even More the wheet of this verb is understood; and the sen
Whou titly run, would read thus:-“Somethe Rue de mers who tvit me, told me.” Or MAT Puntos premis debut oli me; I don't know $6 du er ute. ""ti ED***** death to riveler would oppose
Blushe kuni porement by the preposition to is Tondi w wandet veya pacing the Duminative to the
the ruwa za strong one, and used
the very opposite to that which they really possessed. Thus the Furies, demons who took delight in torturing human beings, were called Eumenides, which implies benevolently disposed in mind. Such names are said to be formed by the figure Antiphrasis.
The Synecdoche puts a part for the whole: thus—“Fifty sail appeared in the horizon," meaning fifty ships, of which the sails are but a part ;—“Seventy souls in all went down with Jacob into Egypt,” meaning seventy human beings, of whom the souls were but a part.
The Onomatopæia forms words so that by their sound they may express the sense; of such words are gurgle, tickle, rattle, hiss, &c. &c. This figure is coeval with the formation of language itself, and instances of it are to be found in every language that is spoken.
The Oxymoron is a figure of which but few examples occur in the English language; it deals in uniting terms which imply opposition of meaning; as, “A cruel kindness ;" “Ā laborious idleness.
The Periphrasis is a kind of circumlocution, which abounds in classical languages, and is copied, in some instances, by the English ; thus—“He spoke with his mouth;"
“He heard with his ears.” Such expressions are more usually assigned to the figure called Pleonasm, and are said to be pleonastic; whilst such as, “From the rising to the setting of the sun" From east to west, belong, it is said by grammarians, more properly to the periphrasis.
The Usteron proteron, i.e. the last first, inverts the logical order of things, by placing an event last which should come first, and vice versã. Of this there is a well-known instance in Virgil's Æneid, wherein the poet represents the shipwrecked mariners as baking the corn they had rescued from the deep, and afterwards grinding it. Livy speaks of a town as taken “primo impetu et clamore”-at the first onset and battle shout- .-as if the shout succeeded the onset. The English language has an imitation of this in the expression, “ He was bred and born;" and it is used with considerable rhetorical effect in the question of Joseph to his brethren, “ Is your father well ? the old man of whom ye