Part 12

My life’s companion, and my bosom-friend, One faith, one fame, one fate shall both attend. _Dryden, Translation of Æneid._

There is obviously a sensible defect in neatness when uniformity is in this case totally neglected[84]; witness the following example, where the construction of two members connected by a copulative is unnecessarily varied.

For it is confidently reported, that two young gentlemen of real hopes, bright wit, and profound judgment, who upon a thorough examination of causes and effects, and by the mere force of natural abilities, without the least tincture of learning, have made a discovery that there was no God, and _generously communicating_ their thoughts for the good of the public, were some time ago, by an unparallelled severity, and upon I know not what obsolete law, broke for blasphemy[85]. [Better thus]: Having made a discovery that there was no God, and having generously communicated their thoughts for the good of the public, were some time ago, _&c._

He had been guilty of a fault, for which his master would have put him to death, had he not found an opportunity to escape out of his hands, and _fled_ into the deserts of Numidia.

_Guardian_, Nº 139.

If all the ends of the revolution are already obtained, it is not only impertinent to argue for obtaining any of them, but _factious designs might be imputed_, and the name of incendiary be applied with some colour, perhaps, to any one who should persist in pressing this point.

_Dissertation upon parties, Dedication._

It is even unpleasant to find a negative and affirmative proposition connected by a copulative.

Nec excitatur classico miles truci, Nec horret iratum mare; Forumque vitat, et superba civium Potentiorum limina. _Horace, Epod. 2. l. 5._

If it appear not plain, and prove untrue, Deadly divorce step between me and you. _Shakespear._

An artificial connection among the words, is undoubtedly a beauty when it represents any peculiar connection among the constituent parts of the thought; but where there is no such connection, it is a positive deformity, because it makes a discordance betwixt the thought and expression. For the same reason, we ought also to avoid every artificial opposition of words where there is none in the thought. This last, termed _verbal antithesis_, is studied by writers of no taste; and is relished by readers of the same stamp, because of a certain degree of liveliness in it. They do not consider how incongruous it is, in a grave composition, to cheat the reader, and to make him expect a contrast in the thought, which upon examination is not found there.

A light wife doth make a heavy husband. _Merchant of Venice._

Here is a studied opposition in the words, not only without any opposition in the sense, but even where there is a very intimate connection, that of cause and effect; for it is the levity of the wife that vexes the husband.

---- Will maintain Upon his bad life to make all this good. _King Richard II. act. 1. sc. 2._

_Lucetta._ What, shall these papers lie like tell-tales here?

_Julia._ If thou respect them, best to take them up.

_Lucetta._ Nay, I was taken up for laying them down.

_Two Gentlemen of Verona, act 1. sc. 3._

To conjoin by a copulative, members that signify things opposed in the thought, is an error too gross to be commonly practised. And yet writers are guilty of this fault in some degree, when they conjoin by a copulative things transacted at different periods of time. Hence a want of neatness in the following expression.

The nobility too, whom the King had no means of retaining by suitable offices and preferments, had been seized with the general discontent, and unwarily threw themselves into the scale, which began already too much to preponderate.

_History of G. Britain, vol. 1. p. 250._

In periods of this kind, it appears more neat to express the past time by the participle passive, thus:

The nobility having been seized with the general discontent, unwarily threw themselves, _&c._ [or], The nobility who had been seized, _&c._ unwarily threw themselves, _&c._

So much upon conjunction and disjunction in general. I proceed to apply the rule to comparisons in particular. Where a resemblance betwixt two objects is described, the writer ought to study a resemblance betwixt the two members that express these objects. For it makes the resemblance the more entire to find it extended even to the words. To illustrate this rule, I shall give various examples of deviations from it. I begin with the words that express the resemblance.

I have observed of late, the style of some great _ministers_ very much to exceed that of any other _productions_.

_Letter to the Lord High Treasurer. Swift._

This, instead of studying the resemblance of words in a period that expresses a comparison, is going out of one’s road to avoid it. Instead of _productions_ which resemble not ministers great or small, the proper word is _writers_ or _authors_.

If men of eminence are exposed to censure on the one hand, they are as much liable to flattery on the other. If they receive reproaches which are not due to them, they likewise receive praises which they do not deserve.

_Spectator._

Here the subject plainly demands uniformity in expression instead of variety; and therefore it is submitted whether the period would not do better in the following manner:

If men of eminence be exposed to censure on the one hand, they are as much exposed to flattery on the other. If they receive reproaches which are not due, they likewise receive praises which are not due.

I cannot but fancy, however, that this imitation, which passes so currently with _other judgements_, must at some time or other have stuck a little with your _Lordship_[86]. [Better thus:] I cannot but fancy, however, that this imitation, which passes so currently with others, must at some time or other have stuck a little with your Lordship.

* * * * *

A glutton or mere sensualist is as ridiculous as the other two characters.

_Shaftesbury, vol. 1. p. 129._

They wisely prefer _the generous efforts of good-will and affection_, to the reluctant compliances _of such as_ obey by force.

_Remarks on the history of England. Letter 5. Bolingbroke._

Titus Livius, concerning the people of Enna demanding the keys from the Roman garrison, makes the governor say,

Quas simul tradiderimus, Carthaginiensium extemplo Enna erit, fœdiusque hic trucidabimir, quam Murgantiæ præsidium interfectum est.

_L. 24. § 38._

Quintus Curtius, speaking of Porus mounted on an elephant, and leading his army to battle:

Magnitudini Pori adjicere videbatur bellua qua vehebatur, tantum inter cæteras eminens, quanto aliis ipse præstabat.

_L. 8. cap. 14._

It is a still greater deviation from congruity, to affect not only variety in the words, but also in the construction. Describing Thermopylæ, Titus Livius says,

Id jugum, sicut Apennini dorso Italia dividitur, ita mediam Græciam deremit.

_L. 36. § 15._

Speaking of Shakespear:

There may remain a suspicion that we over-rate the greatness of his genius; in the same manner as bodies appear more gigantic on account of their being disproportioned and mishapen.

_History of G. Britain, vol. 1. p. 138._

This is studying variety in a period where the beauty lies in uniformity. Better thus:

There may remain a suspicion that we over-rate the greatness of his genius, in the same manner as we over-rate the greatness of bodies which are disproportioned and mishapen.

Next as to the length of the members that signify the resembling objects. To produce a resemblance betwixt such members, they ought not only to be constructed in the same manner, but as nearly as possible be equal in length. By neglecting this circumstance, the following example is defective in neatness.

As the performance of all other religious duties will not avail in the sight of God, _without charity_, so neither will the discharge of all other ministerial duties avail in the sight of men _without a faithful discharge of this principal duty_.

_Dissertation upon parties, dedication._

In the following passage all the errors are accumulated that a period expressing a resemblance can well admit:

Ministers are answerable for every thing done to the prejudice of the constitution, in the same proportion as the preservation of the constitution in its purity and vigour, or the perverting and weakening it, are of greater consequence to the nation, than any other instances of good or bad government.

_Dissertation upon parties, dedication._

The same rule obtains in a comparison where things are opposed to each other. Objects contrasted, not less than what are similar, require a resemblance in the members of the period that express them. The reason is, that contrast has no effect upon the mind, except where the things compared have a resemblance in their capital parts[87]. Therefore, in opposing two circumstances to each other, it remarkably heightens the contrast, to make as entire as possible the resemblance betwixt the other parts, and in particular betwixt the members expressing the two circumstances contrasted. As things are often best illustrated by their contraries, I shall also give examples of deviations from the rule in this case.

* * * * *

Addison says,

A friend exaggerates a man’s virtues, an enemy inflames his crimes.

_Spectator_, Nº 399.

Would it not be neater to study uniformity instead of variety? as thus:

A friend exaggerates a man’s virtues, an enemy his crimes.

For here the contrast is only betwixt a friend and an enemy; and betwixt all the other circumstances, including the members of the period, the resemblance ought to be preserved as entire as possible.

* * * * *

Speaking of a lady’s head-dress:

About ten years ago it shot up to a very great height, insomuch that the female part of our species were much taller than the men.

_Spectator_, Nº 98.

It should be,

Than the male part.

The wise man is happy when he gains his own approbation; the fool when he recommends himself to the applause of those about him.

_Ibid._ Nº 73.

Better:

The wise man is happy when he gains his own approbation; the fool when he gains that of others.

Sicut in frugibus pecudibusque, non tantum semina ad servandum indolem valent, quantum terræ proprietas cœlique, sub quo aluntur, mutat.

_Livy, l. 38. § 17._

Sallust, in his history of Catiline’s conspiracy:

Per illa tempora quicumque rempublicam agitavere, honestis nominibus, alii, sicuti populi jura defenderent, pars, quo senati auctoritas maxuma foret, bonum publicum simulantes, pro sua quisque potentia certabant.

_Cap. 38._

We proceed to a rule of a different kind. During the course of a period, the same scene ought to be continued without variation. The changing from person to person, from subject to subject, or from person to subject, within the bounds of a single period, distracts the mind, and affords no time for a solid impression. I illustrate this rule by giving examples of deviations from it.

_Honos_ alit artes, _omnesque_ incenduntur ad studia gloriâ; jacentque _ea_ semper quæ apud quosque improbantur.

_Cicero, Tuscul. quæst. l. 1._

Speaking of the distemper contracted by Alexander bathing in the river Cydnus and of the cure offered by Philip the physician:

Inter hæc à Parmenione fidissimo purpuratorum, literas _accipit_, quibus ei _denunciabat_, ne salutem suam Philippo committeret.

_Quintus Curtius, l. 3. cap. 6._

Hook, in his Roman history, speaking of Eumenes, who had been beat down to the ground with a stone, says,

After a short time _he_ came to himself; and the next day, _they_ put him on board his ship, _which_ conveyed him first to Corinth, and thence to the island of Ægina.

I give another example of a period which is unpleasant, even by a very slight deviation from the rule.

That sort of instruction which is acquired by inculcating an important moral truth, _&c._

This expression includes two persons, one acquiring, and one inculcating; and the scene is changed without necessity. To avoid this blemish, the thought may be expressed thus:

That sort of instruction which is afforded by inculcating, _&c._

The bad effect of this change of person is remarkable in the following passage.

The _Britains_, daily harassed by cruel inroads from the Picts, were forced to call in the Saxons for their defence, _who_ consequently reduced the greatest part of the island to their own power, drove the Britains into the most remote and mountainous parts, and _the rest of the country_, in customs, religion, and language, became wholly Saxons.

_Letter to the Lord High Treasurer. Swift._

The following example is a change from subject to persons.

_This prostitution of praise_ is not only a deceit upon the gross of mankind, who take their notion of characters from the learned; but also _the better sort_ must by this means lose some part at least of that desire of fame which is the incentive to generous actions, when they find it promiscuously bestowed on the meritorious and undeserving.

_Guardian_, Nº 4.

Even so slight a change as to vary the construction in the same period, is unpleasant:

Annibal luce prima, Balearibus levique alia armatura præmissa, transgressus flumen, ut quosque traduxerat, ita in acie locabat; Gallos Hispanosque equites prope ripam lævo in cornu adversus Romanum equitatum; dextrum cornu Numidis equitibus datum.

_Tit. Liv. l. 22. § 46._

Speaking of Hannibal’s elephants drove back by the enemy upon his own army:

Eo magis ruere in suos belluæ, tantoque majorem stragem edere quam inter hostes ediderant, quanto acrius pavor consternatam agit, quam insidentis magistri imperio regitur.

_Liv. l. 27. § 14._

This passage is also faulty in a different respect, that there is no resemblance betwixt the members of the expression, though they import a comparison.

The present head, which relates to the choice of materials, shall be closed with a rule concerning the use of copulatives. Longinus observes, that it animates a period to drop the copulatives; and he gives the following example from Xenophon.

Closing their shields together, they were push’d, they fought, they slew, they were slain.

_Treatise of the Sublime, cap. 16._

The reason I take to be what follows. A continued sound, if not strong, tends to lay us asleep. An interrupted sound rouses and animates by its repeated impulses. Hence it is, that syllables collected into feet, being pronounced with a sensible interval betwixt each, make more lively impressions than can be made by a continued sound. A period, the members of which are connected by copulatives, produceth an effect upon the mind approaching to that of a continued sound: and therefore to suppress the copulatives must animate a description. To suppress the copulatives hath another good effect. The members of a period connected by the proper copulatives, glide smoothly and gently along; and are a proof of sedateness and leisure in the speaker. On the other hand, a man in the hurry of passion, neglecting copulatives and other particles, expresses the principal image only. Hence it is, that hurry or quick action is best expressed without copulatives:

Veni, vidi, vici.

---- Ite: Ferte cite flammas, date vela, impellite remos. _Æneid._ iv. 593.

Quis globus, O Cives, caligine volvitur atra? Ferte cite ferrum, date tela, scandite muros. Hostis adest, eja. _Æneid._ ix. 36.

In this view Longinus[88] justly compares copulatives in a period to strait tying, which in a race obstructs the freedom of motion.

It follows from the same premisses, that to multiply copulatives in the same period ought to be avoided. For if the laying aside copulatives give force and liveliness, a redundancy of them must render the period languid. I appeal to the following instance, though there are not more than two copulatives.

Upon looking over the letters of my female correspondents, I find several from women complaining of jealous husbands; and at the same time protesting their own innocence, and desiring my advice upon this occasion.

_Spectator_, Nº 170.

I except the case where the words are intended to express the coldness of the speaker; for there the redundancy of copulatives is a beauty.

Dining one day at an alderman’s in the city, Peter observed him expatiating after the manner of his brethren, in the praises of his sirloin of beef. “Beef,” said the sage magistrate, “is the king of meat: Beef comprehends in it the quintescence of partridge, and quail, and venison, and pheasant, and plum-pudding, and custard.”

_Tale of Tub_, § 4.

And the author shows great taste in varying the expression in the mouth of Peter, who is represented more animated.

“Bread,” says he, “dear brothers, is the staff of life, in which bread is contained, _inclusivè_, the quintescence of beef, mutton, veal, venison, partridge, plum-pudding, and custard.”

We proceed to the second kind of beauty, which consists in a due arrangement of the words or materials. This branch of the subject is not less nice than extensive; and I despair to put it in a clear light, until a sketch be given of the general principles that govern the structure or composition of language.

Every thought, generally speaking, contains one capital object considered as acting or as suffering. This object is expressed by a substantive noun. Its action is expressed by an active verb; and the thing affected by the action is expressed by another substantive noun. Its suffering or passive state is expressed by a passive verb, and the thing which acts upon it, by a substantive noun. Beside these, which are the capital parts of a sentence or period, there are generally under-parts. Each of the substantives as well as the verb, may be qualified. Time, place, purpose, motive, means, instrument, and a thousand other circumstances, may be necessary to complete the thought. And in what manner these several parts are connected together in the expression, will appear from what follows.

In a complete thought or mental proposition, all the members and parts are mutually related, some slightly, some more intimately. In communicating such a thought, it is not sufficient that the component ideas be clearly expressed: it is also necessary, that all the relations contained in the thought be expressed according to their different degrees of intimacy. To annex a certain meaning to a certain sound or word, requires no art. The great nicety in all languages is, to express the various relations that connect together the parts of the thought. Could we suppose this branch of language to be still a secret, it would puzzle, I am apt to think, the greatest grammarian ever existed, to invent an expeditious method. And yet, by the guidance merely of nature, the rude and illiterate have been led to a method so perfect, that it appears not susceptible of any improvement. Without a clear conception of the manner of expressing relations, one at every turn must be at a loss about the beauties of language; and upon that subject therefore I find it necessary to say a few words.

Words that import a relation, must be distinguished from those that do not. Substantives commonly imply no relation, such as _animal_, _man_, _tree_, _river_. Adjectives, verbs, and adverbs, imply a relation. The adjective _good_ must be connected with some substantive, some being possessed of that quality. The verb _write_ must be applied to some person who writes; and the adverbs _moderately_, _diligently_, have plainly a reference to some action which they modify. When in language a relative term is introduced, all that is necessary to complete the expression, is, to ascertain that thing to which the term relates. For answering this purpose, I observe in Greek and Latin two different methods. Adjectives are declined as well as substantives; and declension serves to ascertain the connection that is betwixt them. If the word that expresses the subject be, for example, in the nominative case, so also must the word be that expresses its quality. Example, _vir bonus_. Again, verbs are related, on the one hand, to the agent; and, on the other, to the subject upon which the action is exerted. A contrivance similar to that now mentioned, serves to express this double relation. The nominative case is appropriated to the agent, the accusative to the passive subject; and the verb is put in the first second or third person, to correspond the more intimately with both. Examples: _Ego amo Tulliam_; _tu amas Semproniam_; _Brutus amat Portiam_. The other method is by juxtaposition, which is necessary with respect to words only that are not declined, adverbs for example, articles, prepositions, and conjunctions. In the English language there are few declensions; and therefore juxtaposition is our chief resource. Adjectives accompany their substantives[89]; an adverb accompanies the word it qualifies; and the verb occupies the middle place betwixt the active and passive subjects to which it relates.

It must be obvious, that those terms which have nothing relative in their signification, cannot be connected in so easy a manner. When two substantives happen to be connected, as cause and effect, as principal and accessory, or in any other manner, such connection cannot be expressed by contiguity solely; for words must often in a period be placed together which are not thus related. The relation betwixt substantives, therefore, cannot otherwise be expressed than by particles denoting the relation. Latin indeed and Greek, by their declensions, go a certain length to express such relations, without the aid of particles. The relation of property, for example, betwixt Cæsar and his horse is, expressed by putting the latter in the nominative case, the former in the genitive; _equus Cæsaris_. The like in English, _Cæsar’s horse_. But in other instances, declensions not being used in the English language, relations of this kind are commonly expressed by prepositions.

This form of connecting by prepositions, is not confined to substantives. Qualities, attributes, manner of existing or acting, and all other circumstances, may in the same manner be connected with the substantives to which they relate. This is done artificially by converting the circumstance into a substantive, in which condition it is qualified to be connected with the principal subject by a preposition, in the manner above described. For example, the adjective _wise_ being converted into the substantive _wisdom_, gives opportunity for the expression “a man _of_ wisdom,” instead of the more simple expression, _a wise man_. This variety in the expression, enriches language. I observe beside, that the using a preposition in this case, is not always a matter of choice. It is indispensable with respect to every circumstance that cannot be expressed by a single adjective or adverb.