ufing no words but fuch as were of native growth: and his language may, indeed, be confidered as a standard of the ftri&teft Purity and Propriety in the choice of words. At ftandard. A multitude of Latin words have, of late, been poured in upon us. On fome occafions, they give an appearance of eleva tion and dignity to Style. But often, alfo, they render it ftiff and forced: and, in gene tifms, or low expreffions; and to words and phrafes, which would be lefs fignificant of the ideas that we mean to convey. Style may be pure, that is, it may all be strictly English, without Scotticifims or Gallicifms, or ungram-prefent, we feem to be departing from this matical, irregular expreffions of any kind, and may, nevertheless, be deficient in propriety. The words may be ill chofen; not adapted to the fubject, nor fully expreffive of the author's fenfe. He has taken all his words and phrafes from the general mafs of Eng-ral, a plain, native Style, as it is more intellilifh Language; but he has made his felection among these words unhappily. Whereas Style cannot be proper without being alfo pure; and where both Purity and Propriety meet, befides making Style perfpicuous, they afo render it graceful. There is no standard, either of Purity or of Propriety, but the prac tice of the best writers and fpeakers in the country. When I mentioned obfolete or new-coined words as incongruous with Purity of Style, it will be cafily understood, that fome exceptions are to be made. On certain occafions, they may have grace. Poetry admits of greater latitude than profe, with respect to eming, or, at leaft, new-compounding words; , even here, this liberty fhould be ufed with a fparing band. In profe, fuch innovations are more hazardous, and have a worfe effect. They are apt to give Style an affected and creceited air, and should never be ventured Fon, except by fach, whofe eftablished reputan gives them fome degree of dictatorial Power over Language. The introduction of foreign and learned wards, unless where neceffity requires them, hould always be avoided. Barren Languages may need fuch affiftances; but ours is pot one of thefe. Dean Swift, one of our moft correct writers, valued himself much on gible to all readers, fo, by a proper management of words, it may be made equally ftrong and expreffive with this Latinized English. Blair, §7. On PRECISION. The exact import of Precision may be drawn from the etymology of the word. It comes from " precidere," to cut off it imports retrenching all fuperfluities, and pruning the expreffion, fo as to exhibit neither more nor lefs than an exact copy of his idea who uses it. I obferved before, that it is often difficult to feparate the qualities of Style from the qualities of Thought; and it is found so in this inftance. For, in order to write with Precifion, though this be properly a quality of Style, one muft poffefs a very confiderable degree of diftinétnefs and accuracy in his manner of thinking. The words which a man ufes to exprefs his ideas, may be faulty in three refpects: They may either not exprefs that idea which the author intends, but fome other which only refembles, or is a-kin to it; or, they may exprefs that idea, but not quite fully and completely; or, they may exprefs it, together with fomething more than he intends. Precifion ftands oppofed to all these three faults; but chiefly to the laft. In an author's writing with propriety, his being free from the two former faults feems implied. The words which he uses are proper; that is, they exprefs that idea which he intends, and they exprefs it fully; but to be precife, fignifies, that they exprefs that idea, and no more. There is nothing in his words which introduces any foreign idea, any fuperfluous, unfeasonable acceffory, fo as to mix it confufedly with the principal object, and thereby to render our conception of that object loofe and indiftinct. This requires a writer to have, himself, a very clear apprehenfion of the object he means to prefent to us; to have laid fast hold of it in his mind; and never to waver in any one view he takes of it; a perfection to which, indeed, few writers attain. Blair. §8. On the Ufe and Importance of PRECISION. point of view, and make me fee fometimes the object itself, and fometimes another thing that is connected with it; you thereby oblige me to look on several objects at once, and I lofe fight of the principal. You load the animal you are fhewing me with fo many trappings and collars, and bring fo many of the fame species before me, fomewhat refembling, and yet fomewhat differing, that I fee none of them clearly. This forms what is called a Loofe Style: and is the proper oppofite to Precision. It generally arifes from using a fuperfluity of words. Feeble writers employ a multitude of words, to make themselves understood, as they think more diftinctly; and they only confound the reader. They are fenfible of not having caught the precife expreffon, te convey what they would fignify: they do not, indeed conceive their own meaning very preThe ufe and importance of Precision may cifely themselves; and, therefore, help it out, be deduced from the nature of the human as they can, by this and the other word, which mind. It never can view clearly and dikinet- may, as they fuppofe, fupply the defect, and ly, above one object at a time. If it must bring you fomewhat nearer to their idea: look at two or three together, efpecially ob- they are always going about it, and about it, jects among which there is refemblance or but never juft hit the thing. The image, as connection, it finds itself confused and em- they fet it before you, is always feen double; barraffed. It cannot clearly perceive in what and no double image is diftinct. When an they agree, and in what they differ. Thus, an author tells me of his hero's courage in the were any object, fuppofe fome animal, to be day of battle, the expreffion is precife, and I prefented to me, of whofe ftructure I wanted understand it fully. But if, from the defire to form a diftinct notion, I would, defire all of multiplying words, he will needs praife his its trappings to be taken off, I would require courage and fortitude; at the moment he joins it to be brought before me by itself, and to thefe words together, my idea begins to waftand alone, that there might be nothing to ver. He means to exprefs one quality more diftract my attention. The fame is the cafe ftrongly; but he is, in truth, expreffing two. with words. If when you would inform me Courage refifts danger; fortitude fupports of your meaning, you alfo tell me more than pain. The occafion of exerting each of thefe what conveys it; if you join foreign circum-qualities is different; and being led to think ftances to the principal object; if, by unne- of both together, when only one of them Geffarily varying the expreffion, you fhift the fhould be in my view, my view is rendered unfteady, CLASSICAL AND HISTORICAL. 115 ufteady, and my conception of the object | luftre of the image which he means to exhibit indiftinct. cuous, while But in order to this end, he must be extremely From what I have faid, it appears that an attentive to the choice which he makes of author may, in a qualified fenfe, be perfpi- them. For the bulk of writers are very apt yet he is far from being precife. to confound them with each other; and to He uses proper words and proper arrange- employ them carelefsly, merely for the fake of conceives it himself; and fo far he is perfpi- fifying the Language, as if the fignification ment: he gives you the idea as clear as he filling up a period, or of rounding and divercupus: but the ideas are not very clear in his were exactly the fame, while, in truth, it is therefore, cannot be expreffed with Precifion. is unwarily thrown over Style. own mind: they are loofe and general; and, not. Hence a certain mift, and indiftin&tnefs, All fubjects do not It is fufficient, on many occafions, that we have a general view of the meaning. The equally require Precision. Ibid. § 10. On the general Characters of STYLE. That different fubjects require to be treated fubject, perhaps, is of the known and familiar of in different forts of Style, is a pofition fo kind; and we are in no hazard of mistaking obvious, that I fhall not ftay to illuftrate it. which he ufes be not precife and exact. Blair. for inftance, ought not to be compofed in the fame Style with Orations. Every one fees, alfo, that different parts of the fame compofition require a variety in the Style and In a fermon, for inftance, or any 9. The Caufes of a Loofe STYLE. The great fource of a Loofe Style, in op- manner. pofition to Precifion, is the injudicious ufe of harangue, the application, or peroration adthofe words termed Synonymous. They are mits of more ornament, and requires more called Synonymous, becaufe they agree in ex-warmth, than the didactic part. But what I preffing one principal idea; but, for the most mean at prefent to remark is, that, amidst part, if not always, they exprefs it with fome this variety, we still expect to find, in the verity in the circumftances. They are va- compofitions of any one man, fome degree of ried by fome acceffory idea which every word uniformity or confiftency with himself in introduces, and which forms the diftinction manner; we expect to find fome predominant are there two words that convey precifely the ings, which fhall be fuited to, and fhall mark between them. Hardly, in any Language, character of Style impreffed on all his writfame idea; a perfon thoroughly converfant in his particular genius and turn of mind. The the propriety of the Language, will always be orations in Livy differ much in Style, as they able to obferve fomething that diftinguishes ought to do, from the reft of his history. The them. As they the fame colour, are like different fhades of an accurate writer can em fame is the cafe with thofe in Tacitus. Yet both in Livy's orations, and in those of Ta fos to heighten and finish the picture which guithing manner of each hiftorian: the magploy them to great advantage, by using them citus, we are able clearly to trace the diftin gives us. He fupplies by one what was nificent fulness of the one, and the fententious vinting in the other, to the force, or to the concifenefs of the other. The "Lettres Perfanes," Perfanes," and "L'Efprit de Loix," are the Middle STYLE. Blair. rodotus, Demofthenes, Plato, and (what feems ftrange) Ariftotle. This must be a very wide clafs indeed, which comprehends Plato and Ariftotle under one article as to Style *. Cicero and Quintilian make alfo a threefold divifion of Style, though with refpect to different qualities of it; in which they are followed by moft of the modern writers in Rhetoric; the Simplex, Tenue, or Subtile; the Grave, or Vehemens; and the Medium, or temperatum genus dicendi. But thefe divifions, and the illuftrations they give of them, are fo loofe and general, that they cannot advance us much in our ideas of Style. I thall endeavour to be a little more particular in what I have to say on this fubjećt. § 12. On the Concife STYLE. Ibid. One of the first and most obvious diftinctions of the different kinds of Style, is what arifes from an author's fpreading out his thoughts more or lefs. This diftinction forms what are called the Diffuse and the Concife Styles. A concife writer compreffes his thought into the feweft poffible words; he feeks to employ none but fuch as are moft expreffive; he lops off, as redundant, every expreffion which does not add fomething material to the fenfe. Ornament he does not reject; he may be lively and figured; but his ornament is in The ancient Critics attended to thefe general characters of Style which we are now to confider. Dionyfius of Halicarnaffus divides them into three kinds; and calls them the Auftere, the Florid, and the Middle. By the Auftere, he means a Style diftinguifhed for ftrength and firmnefs, with a neglect of moothness and ornament; for examples of which he gives Pindar and Æfchylus among the Poets, and Thucydides among the Profetended for the fake of force rather than grace. writers. By the Florid, he means, as the name indicates, a Style ornamented, flowing, and fweet; refting more upon numbers and grace, than ftrength; he inftances Hefiod, Sappho, Anacreon, Euripides, and principally Ifocrates. The Middle kind is the juft mean between these, and comprehends the beauties of both; in which clafs he places Homer and Sophocles among the Poets: in Profe, He He never gives you the fame thought twice. He places it in the light which appears to him the moft ftriking; but if you do not apprehend it well in that light, you need not expect to find it in any other. His fentences are arranged with compactness and strength, rather than with cadence and harmony. The utmoft * De Compofitione Verborum, cap. 25. precifion precifion is ftudied in them; and they are | farther, are Tacitus the hiftorian, and the commonly defigned to fuggeft more to the Prefident Montefquieu in " L'Esprit de reader's imagination than they directly ex-Loix." Ariftotle, too, holds an eminent rank prefs. Blair. 13. On the Diffufe STYLE. among didactic writers for his brevity. Perhaps no writer in the world was ever fo frugal of his words as Ariftotle; but this frugality of expreffion frequently darkens his meaning. Of a beautiful and magnificent diffufenefs, Cicero is, beyond doubt, the most illuftrious inftance that can be given. Addifon, alfo, and Sir William Temple, come in fome degree under this class. Ibid. §14. On the Nervous and the Feeble STYLE. A diffufe writer unfolds his thought fully. He places it in a variety of lights, and gives the reader every poflible affiftance for undertanding it completely. He is not very careful to exprefs it at first in its full ftrength, because he is to repeat the impreffion; and what he wants in ftrength, he propofes to fupply by copioufnels. Writers of this character geterally love magnificence and amplification. Their periods naturally run out into fome The Nervous and the Feeble are generally ength; and having room for ornament of held to be characters of Style, of the fame every kind, they admit it freely. import with the Concife and the Diffufive. Each of thefe manners has its peculiar ad- They do indeed very often coincide. Diffufive Fantages; and each becomes faulty, when writers have, for the most part, fome degree carried to the extreme. The extreme of of feeblenefs; and nervous writers will geconcifenefs becomes abrupt and obfcure; it is nerally be inclined to a concife expreffion. apt alfo to lead into a Style too pointed, and This, however, does not always hold: and bordering on the epigrammatic. The ex- there are inftances of writers, who, in the treme of diffusenefs becomes weak and lan- midst of a full and ample Style, have maingud, and tires the reader. However, to one tained a great degree of ftrength. Livy is her of these two manners a writer may an example: and in the English Language, , according as his genius prompts him: Dr. Barrow. Barrow's Style has many faults. and, under the general character of a concife, It is unequal, incorrect, and redundant; but of a more open and diffufive Style, may withal, for force and expreffivenefs uncompoffefs much beauty in his compofition. monly diftinguished. On every fubject, he For illuftrations of thefe general characters, multiplies words with an overflowing copiI can only refer to the writers who are ex- oufnefs; but it is always a torrent of strong amples of them. It is not fo much from ideas and fignificant expreffions which he detached paffages, fuch as I was wont for- pours forth. Indeed, the foundations of a erly to quote for inftances, as from the cur- nervous or a weak Style are laid in an author's fint of an author's Style, that we are to manner of thinking. If he conceives an obcaleft the idea of a formed manner of writ-ject ftrongly, he will exprefs it with energy: The two moft remarkable examples but, if he has only an indiftinét view of his I know, of concifenefs carried as far as fubject; if his ideas be loofe and wavering; propriety will allow, perhaps in fome cafes if his genius be fuch, or, at the time of his writing, |