Page:The grammar of English grammars.djvu/842

This page needs to be proofread.

long Syllable is twice as long in pronouncing as a short one; as, Hate, Hat. This mark (¯) set over a Syllable, shows that it is long, and this (˘) that it is short; as, rēcord, rĕcord.

"Q. How do you know long and short Syllables ? A. A Syllable is long or short according to the Situation of the Vowel, i.e. it is generally long when it ends with a Vowel, and short when with a Consonant; as, Fā- in Favour, and Măn- in Manner."—Fisher's Practical Gram., p. 34.

Now one grand mistake of this is, that it supposes syllabication to fix the quantity, and quantity to determine the accent; whereas it is plain, that accent controls quantity, so far at least that, in the construction of verse, a syllable fully accented cannot be reckoned short. And this mistake is practical; for we see, that, in three of his examples, out of the four above, the author himself misstates the quantity, because he disregards the accent: the verb re-cord, being accented on the second syllable, is an iambus; and the nouns rec'-ord and man'-ner, being accented on the first, are trochees; and just as plainly so, as is the word fāvŏur. But a still greater blunder here observable is, that, as a "due pronunciation" necessarily includes the utterance of every syllable, the explanation above stolidly supposes all our syllables to be accented, each "according to its Quantity, (whether it be long or short,)" and each "with a stronger Force or Stress of Voice, than the other Syllables!" Absurdity akin to this, and still more worthy to be criticised, has since been propagated by Sheridan, by Walker, and by Lindley Murray, with a host of followers, as Alger, D. Blair, Comly, Cooper, Cutler, Davenport, Felton, Fowler, Frost, Guy, Jaudon, Parker and Fox, Picket, Pond, Putnam, Russell, Smith, and others.
Sheridan was an able and practical teacher of English pronunciation, and one who appears to have gained reputation by all he undertook, whether as an actor, as an elocutionist, or as a lexicographer. His publications that refer to that subject, though now mostly superseded by others of later date, are still worthy to be consulted. The chief of them are, his Lectures on Elocution, his Lectures on the Art of Reading, his Rhetorical Grammar, his Elements of English, and his English Dictionary. His third lecture on Elocution, and many pages of the Rhetorical Grammar, are devoted to accent and quantity—subjects which he conceived to have been greatly misrepresented by other writers up to his time.^[1] To this author, as it would seem, we owe the invention of that absurd doctrine, since copied into a great multitude of our English grammars, that the accent on a syllable of two or more letters, belongs, not to the whole of it, but only to some one letter; and that according to the character of this letter, as vowel or consonant, the same stress serves to lengthen or shorten the syllable's quantity! Of this matter, he speaks thus: "The great distinction of our accent depends upon its seat; which may be either upon a vowel or a consonant. Upon a vowel, as in the words, glóry, fáther, hóly. Upon a consonant, as in the words, hab'it, bor'row, bat'tle. When the accent is on the vowel, the syllable is long; because the accent is made by dwelling upon the vowel. When it is on the consonant, the syllable is short;^[2] because the accent is made by passing rapidly over the vowel, and giving a smart stroke of the voice to the following consonant. Obvious as this point is, it has wholly escaped the observation of all our grammarians and compilers of dictionaries; who, instead of examining the peculiar genius of our tongue, implicitly and pedantically have followed the Greek method of always placing the accentual mark over a vowel."—Sheridan's Rhetorical Gram., p. 51. The author's reprehension of the old mode of accentuation, is not without reason; but his "great distinction" of short and long syllables is only fit to puzzle or mislead the reader. For it is plain, that the first syllables of hab'it, bor'row, and bat'tle, are twice as long as the last; and, in poetry, these words are trochees, as well as the other three, glo'ry, fa'ther, and ho'ly.
The only important distinction in our accent, is that of the primary and the secondary, the latter species occurring when it is necessary to enforce more syllables of a word than one; but Sheridan, as we see above, after rejecting all the old distinctions of rising and falling, raising and depressing, acute and grave, sharp and base, long and short, contrived a new one still more vain, which he founded on that of vowels and consonants, but "referred to time, or quantity." He recognized, in fact, a vowel accent and a consonant accent; or, in reference to quantity, a lengthening accent and a shortening accent. The discrimination of these was with him "the great distinction

↑
[495]
1. "Amongst them [the ancients,] we know that accents were marked by certain inflexions [inflections] of the voice like musical notes; and the grammarians to this day, with great formality inform their pupils, that the acute accent, is the raising [of] the voice on a certain syllable; the grave, a depression of it; and the circumflex, a raising and depression both, in one and the same syllable. This jargon they constantly preserve, though they have no sort of ideas annexed to these words; for if they are asked to shew how this is to be done, they cannot tell, and their practice always belies their precept."—Sheridan's Lectures on Eloc., p. 54.
2. "It is by the accent chiefly that the quantity of our syllables is regulated; but not according to the mistaken rule laid down by all who have written on the subject, that the accent always makes the syllable long; than which there cannot be any thing more false."—Ib., p. 57.
3. "And here I cannot help taking notice of a circumstance, which shews in the strongest light, the amazing deficiency of those, who have hitherto employed their labours on that subject, [accent, or pronunciation,] in point of knowledge of the true genius and constitution of our tongue. Several of the compilers of dictionaries, vocabularies, and spelling books, have undertaken to mark the accents of our words; but so little acquainted were they with the nature of our accent, that they thought it necessary only to mark the syllable on which the stress is to be laid, without marking the particular letter of the syllable to which the accent belongs."—Ib., p. 59.
4. "The mind thus taking a bias under the prejudice of false rules, never arrives at a knowledge of the true nature of quantity; and accordingly we find that all attempts hitherto to settle the prosody of our language, have been vain and fruitless."—Sheridan's Rhetorical Gram., p. 52.
↑ [496] In the following extract, this matter is stated somewhat differently: "The quantity depends upon the seat of the accent, whether it be on the vowel or [on the] consonant; if on the vowel, the syllable is necessarily long: as it makes the vowel long; if on the consonant, it may be either long or short, according to the nature of the consonant, or the time taken up in dwelling upon it."—Sheridan's Lectures on Eloc., p. 57. This last clause shows the "distinction" to be a very weak one.—G. Brown.

[1] [495]
"Amongst them [the ancients,] we know that accents were marked by certain inflexions [inflections] of the voice like musical notes; and the grammarians to this day, with great formality inform their pupils, that the acute accent, is the raising [of] the voice on a certain syllable; the grave, a depression of it; and the circumflex, a raising and depression both, in one and the same syllable. This jargon they constantly preserve, though they have no sort of ideas annexed to these words; for if they are asked to shew how this is to be done, they cannot tell, and their practice always belies their precept."—Sheridan's Lectures on Eloc., p. 54.

"It is by the accent chiefly that the quantity of our syllables is regulated; but not according to the mistaken rule laid down by all who have written on the subject, that the accent always makes the syllable long; than which there cannot be any thing more false."—Ib., p. 57.

"And here I cannot help taking notice of a circumstance, which shews in the strongest light, the amazing deficiency of those, who have hitherto employed their labours on that subject, [accent, or pronunciation,] in point of knowledge of the true genius and constitution of our tongue. Several of the compilers of dictionaries, vocabularies, and spelling books, have undertaken to mark the accents of our words; but so little acquainted were they with the nature of our accent, that they thought it necessary only to mark the syllable on which the stress is to be laid, without marking the particular letter of the syllable to which the accent belongs."—Ib., p. 59.

"The mind thus taking a bias under the prejudice of false rules, never arrives at a knowledge of the true nature of quantity; and accordingly we find that all attempts hitherto to settle the prosody of our language, have been vain and fruitless."—Sheridan's Rhetorical Gram., p. 52.

[2] "Amongst them [the ancients,] we know that accents were marked by certain inflexions [inflections] of the voice like musical notes; and the grammarians to this day, with great formality inform their pupils, that the acute accent, is the raising [of] the voice on a certain syllable; the grave, a depression of it; and the circumflex, a raising and depression both, in one and the same syllable. This jargon they constantly preserve, though they have no sort of ideas annexed to these words; for if they are asked to shew how this is to be done, they cannot tell, and their practice always belies their precept."—Sheridan's Lectures on Eloc., p. 54.

[3] "It is by the accent chiefly that the quantity of our syllables is regulated; but not according to the mistaken rule laid down by all who have written on the subject, that the accent always makes the syllable long; than which there cannot be any thing more false."—Ib., p. 57.

[4] "And here I cannot help taking notice of a circumstance, which shews in the strongest light, the amazing deficiency of those, who have hitherto employed their labours on that subject, [accent, or pronunciation,] in point of knowledge of the true genius and constitution of our tongue. Several of the compilers of dictionaries, vocabularies, and spelling books, have undertaken to mark the accents of our words; but so little acquainted were they with the nature of our accent, that they thought it necessary only to mark the syllable on which the stress is to be laid, without marking the particular letter of the syllable to which the accent belongs."—Ib., p. 59.

[5] "The mind thus taking a bias under the prejudice of false rules, never arrives at a knowledge of the true nature of quantity; and accordingly we find that all attempts hitherto to settle the prosody of our language, have been vain and fruitless."—Sheridan's Rhetorical Gram., p. 52.

[2] [496] In the following extract, this matter is stated somewhat differently: "The quantity depends upon the seat of the accent, whether it be on the vowel or [on the] consonant; if on the vowel, the syllable is necessarily long: as it makes the vowel long; if on the consonant, it may be either long or short, according to the nature of the consonant, or the time taken up in dwelling upon it."—Sheridan's Lectures on Eloc., p. 57. This last clause shows the "distinction" to be a very weak one.—G. Brown.

[1]

[2]