This page needs to be proofread.
- not be so long as some other long syllables; but, if they are twice as long as the accompanying short ones, they are not short. And, if not short, then that remarkable distinction in accent, which assumes that they are so, is as needless as it is absurd and perplexing. Now let the words, beck'on, lip'ping, cut'ter, be properly pronounced, and their syllables be compared with each other, or with those of lim'beck, fil'lip, Drā'cut; and it cannot but be perceived, that beck, lip, and cut, like other syllables in general, are lengthened by the accent, and shortened only in its absence; so that all these words are manifestly trochees, as all similar words are found to be, in our versification. To suppose "as many words as we hear accents," or that "it is the laying of an accent on one syllable, which constitutes a word," and then say, that "no unaccented syllable or vowel is ever to be accounted long," as this enthusiastic author does in fact, is to make strange scansion of a very large portion of the trissyllables and polysyllables which occur in verse. An other great error in Sheridan's doctrine of quantity, is his notion that all monosyllables, except a few small particles, are accented; and that their quantity is determined to be long or short by the seat or the mode of the accent, as before stated. Now, as our poetry abounds with monosyllables, the relative time of which is adjusted by emphasis and cadence, according to the nature and importance of the terms, and according to the requirements of rhythm, with no reference to this factitious principle, no conformity thereto but what is accidental, it cannot but be a puzzling exercise, when these difficulties come to be summed up, to attempt the application of a doctrine so vainly conceived to be "the easiest and simplest rule in the world!"
- Lindley Murray's principles of accent and quantity, which later grammarians have so extensively copied, were mostly extracted from Sheridan's; and, as the compiler appears to have been aware of but few, if any, of his predecessor's errors, he has adopted and greatly spread well-nigh all that have just been pointed out; while, in regard to some points, he has considerably increased the number. His scheme, as he at last fixed it, appears to consist essentially of propositions already refuted, or objected to, above; as any reader may see, who will turn to his definition of accent, and his rules for the determination of quantity. In opposition to Sheridan, who not very consistently says, that, "All unaccented syllables are short," this author appears to have adopted the greater error of Fisher, who supposed that the vowel sounds called long and short, are just the same as the long and short syllabic quantities. By this rule, thousands of syllables will be called long, which are in fact short, being always so uttered in both prose and poetry; and, by the other, some will occasionally be called short, which are in fact long, being made so by the poet, under a slight secondary accent, or perhaps none. Again, in supposing our numerous monosyllables to be accented, and their quantity to be thereby fixed, without excepting "the particles, such as a, the, to, in, &c.," which were excepted by Sheridan, Murray has much augmented the multitude of errors which necessarily flow from the original rule. This principle, indeed, he adopted timidly; saying, as though he hardly believed the assertion true: "And some writers assert, that every monosyllable of two or more letters, has one of its letters thus distinguished."—Murray's Gram., 8vo, p. 236; 12mo, 189. But still he adopted it, and adopted it fully, in his section on Quantity; for, of his twelve words, exemplifying syllabic time so regulated, no fewer than nine are monosyllables. It is observable, however, that, in some instances, it is not one letter, but two, that he marks; as in the words, "mōōd, hōūse."—Ib., p. 239; 12mo, 192. And again, it should be observed, that generally, wherever he marks accent, he follows the old mode, which Sheridan and Webster so justly condemn; so that, even when he is speaking of "the accent on the consonant," the sign of stress, as that of time, is set over a vowel: as, "Sádly, róbber."—Ib., 8vo, 240; 12mo, 193. So in his Spelling-Book, where words are often falsely divided: as, "Vé nice," for Ven'-ice; "Há no ver," for Han'o-ver; &c.—See p. 101.
- In consideration of the great authority of this grammarian, now backed by a score or two of copyists and modifiers, it may be expedient to be yet more explicit. Of accent Murray published about as many different definitions, as did Sheridan; which, as they show what notions he had at different times, it may not be amiss for some, who hold him always in the right, to compare. In one, he describes it thus: "Accent signifies that stress of the voice, which is laid on one syllable, to distinguish it from the rest."—Murray's Spelling-Book, p. 138. He should here have said, (as by his examples it would appear that he meant,) "on one syllable of a word;" for, as the phrase now stands, it may include stress on a monosyllable in a sentence; and it is a matter of dispute, whether this can properly be called accent. Walker and Webster say, it is emphasis, and not accent. Again, in an other definition, which was written before he adopted the notion of accent on consonants, of accent on monosyllables, or of accent for quantity in the formation of verse, he used these words: "Accent is the laying of a peculiar stress of the voice on a certain vowel or syllable in a word, that it may be better heard than the rest, or distinguished from them; as, in the word presúme, the stress of the voice must be on the second syllable, súme, which takes the accent."—Murray's Gram., Second Edition, 12mo, p. 161. In this edition, which was published at York, in 1796, his chief rules of quantity say nothing about accent, but are thus expressed: [1.] "A vowel or syllable is long, when the vowel or vowels contained in it are slowly joined in pronunciation with the following letters; as, 'Fāll, bāle, mōōd, hōūse, fēature.' [2.] A syllable is short, when the vowel is quickly joined to the succeeding letter; as, 'ărt, bŏnnĕt, hŭngĕr.'"—Ib., p. 166. Besides the absurdity of representing "a vowel" as having "vowels contained in it," these rules are made up of great faults. They confound syllabic quantities with vowel sounds. They suppose quantity to be, not the time of a whole syllable, but the quick or slow junction of some of its parts. They apply to no syllable that ends with a vowel sound. The former applies to none that ends with one consonant only; as, "mood" or the first of "feat-ure." In fact, it
