Abbildungen der Seite

In this example, the ear perceives the necessity of adopting the rising inflection on the word sense; and, for the sake of variety, lays the falling inflection on gross; and, by the same anticipation, perceiving the period must have the falling inflection on imagination, adopts the rising inflection on refined; by these means, the greatest variety is obtained, and the sense inviolably preserved; for if we were to repeat this passage with contrary inflections on the first member, we should soon perceive the impropri. ety :

The pleasures of the imagination, taken in their full extent, are not so gross as those of sense, nor so refined as those of the un. derstanding.

Here we perceive the whole sentence is monotonous, by adopting the same inflections in the same order on the first and last members; and the sense is manifestly injured by laying the strong emphasis and falling inflection in the middle of the sentence, contrary to the general rule.

The nature of the double emphasis expressed, respecting the inflection of voice which each antithetick part adopts rather in compliance with the ear than for the purpose of enforcing the sense, will be farther illustrated by the treble emphasis.

Treble Emphasis.

The treble emphasis, where all the parts are expressed, occurs but seldom ; and when it does, there is seldom any difficulty in pronouncing it; for as each part has its correspondent part expressed, there is scarcely any necessity to enforce one more than the other, and they easily fall into a just and harmonious arrangement, Thus, in the following lines :

Shé in her girls again is courted;

I'go a wóoing with my bòys: Every emphatical word adopts that inflection which the harmony of the verse would necessarily require, if there were not an emphatical word in the whole couplet. This arrangement of emphatick inflections almost always takes place when every part of the treble emphasis is expressed ; but when the double emphasis has two of its parts so emphatical as to imply two antithetick objects not expressed, and so to form a treble emphasis implied only ; in this case, I say, it is not so easily determined how we are to place the emphatick inflections. Thus in the following passage of Milton, (Paradise Lost, Book I. v. 262.)

To reign is worth ambition, though in hell ;
Better to reign in hell than serve in heaven:

The words heaven and hell, in the last line, besides the common antithesis which they form to each other, seem to have each of them an antithetick object distinct and separate, and so to form a treble emphasis, instead of a double one ; for the emphasis with the falling inflection on hell, seems to intimate, that to reign is so desirable, that it is better to reign, not only where it is attended with its usual cares, but even in hell, where it is attended with torments; and the same emphatick inflection on heaven implies, that servitude is not only detestable where it has its usual inconveniences, but even in heaven, where it is attended with pleasures. These paraphrases, implied by the emphases with the falling inflection, seem not only to agree with the sense of the author, but necessarily to belong to it; and yet so agreeable is a contrary arrangement of inflection to the ear, that we seldom find this passage pro. nounced in this manner.

Let a whole assembly be desired to read these lines in Milton, and a single person will scarcely be found whose ear will not draw him into the common arrangement of emphatick inflection, though contrary to the strongest sense of the passage:

To reign is worth ambition, though in hell ;
Better to rèign in héll than sérve in heaven.

Most readers, I say, in repeating these lines, will pronounce the last line as it is marked ; that is, they will lay the falling inflection on reign, and the rising inflection on hell, in order to diversify it from the two concluding branches of the antithesis ; that is, the line will be exactly the same with respect to inflection and emphasis, as the following :

Not so gross as those of sense, nor so refined as those of the understànding.

But if we attend to the sense of Milton, we shall find that the word hell, though in the middle of the antithesis, seems necessarily to require the falling inflection ; for, as we have observed, Satan's ambition to reign is so great, that he wishes to reign even in hell; that is, not where reigning has its usual cares attending it, but even in hell, where it is accompanied with torments suited to his superiour wickedness. If we wish to convey this sense strongly, which the words of the author will certainly admit of, we must necessarily place the emphasis with the falling inflection on the word hell, and neglect the musick of the line, which would require another arrangement: For if it is an invariable maxim, that where force and harmony are inconsistent, the preference must be given to the former; without all question, this passage ought to be read, not as it commonly is, in this manner:

*To reign is worth ambition, though in hell;

Berter to rèign in béll than sérve in béaven :
But in this :

To reign is worth ambition, though in hell ;
Better to réign in hell than sérve in heaven.

An emphasis of exactly the same kind is found in a saying of Julius Cæsar, who, when he was passing through an obscure village in Gaul, made use of these words :

I would rather be the first man in that village than the séc. ond in Ròme.

The general harmony of pronunciation invariably inclines us, at the first reading of this passage, to lay the emphasis with the falling inflection on first ; that with the rising on village; the rising likewise on second, and the falling on Rome ; but if we wish strongly to enforce the sense of the words, we must necessarily lay the rising inflection on first, and the falling on village, in the following manner:

I would rather be the first man in that village than the sécond in Röme.

For in this pronunciation we strongly enforce the desire he had for superiority, by making him prefer it, not only in a common place, but even it that village, to inferiority, even in Rome. If this latter mode of reading this sentence seems too turgid and emphatick for the historick style, what are we to think of that general rule that seems universally to be acknowledged by all readers; namely, that the sense of an author ought always to be enforced to the utmost, let the harmony be what it will ? This maxim, however, I take to be rashly adopted ; for, as we have before observed, reading seems to be a compromise between the rights of sense and sound. Obscurity is the greatest possible defect in reading ; and no har. mony whatever will make amends for it : But if the sense of a passage be sufficiently clear, it seems no infringement on the rights of the understanding to give this sufficiently clear sense an harmonious utterance. In this case, it is, perhaps, necessary to distinguish between clear sense and strong sense ; the first is that which puts the author's meaning beyond the possibility of mistake; the latter, as it were, adds something to it, and places the sense in such a point of view as to give it, though not a different, yet a greater force than what the words immediately sug, gest; but if this additional force becomes harsh, quaint, or affected, the ear claims her rights in favour of harmony ; and good taste will always admit her claim, when the rights of the understanding are sufficiently secured.

* Mr. Garrick, upon being asked to read these lines, repeated them at first in the former mode of placing the emphatick inflections; but, upe on re-considering them, approved of the latter.

Thus, in that noble sentiment of Cato :

A day, an hour, of virtuous liberty
Is worth a whole eternity of bondage.

To pronounce this passage with the greatest force, we ought to lay the emphasis with the falling inflection on eternity, as this would suggest a paraphrase perfectly illustrative of the sense, which is, that a day or an hour of virtuous liberty is not only worth more than the longest finite duration in bondage, but even a whole eternity. This pronunciation, however, would necessarily give the rising inflection to bondage, which would conclude the passage so inharmoniously, that the ear finds itself obliged to neglect this so forcible expression, and content itself with placing the rising inflection on eternity, for the sake of the harmony of the cadence : and as the plain import of

« ZurückWeiter »