In this view, the harmony of pronunciation differs widely from that of mufic properly fo called. In the latter are difcovered many founds fingly agreeable, which in conjunction are extremely difagreeable; none but what are called concordant founds having a good effect in conjunction. In the former, all founds, fingly agreeable, are in conjunction concordant; and ought to be, in order to fulfil the purposes of language.

Having difcuffed fyllables, we proceed to words; which make the third article. Monofyllables belong to the former head: polyfyllables open a different scene. In a curfory view, one would imagine, that the agreeableness or disagreeableness of a word with respect to its found, fhould depend upon the agreeablenefs or disagreeableness of its component fyllables: which is true in part, but not entirely; for we must also take under confideration, the effect of fyllables in fucceffion. In the first place, fyllables in immediate fucceffion, pronounced, each of them, with the fame, or nearly the fame aperture of the mouth, produce a fucceffion of weak and feeble founds; witnefs the French words dit-il, pathetique: on the other hand, a fyllable of the greateft aperture fucceeding one of the fmalleft, or the contrary, makes a fucceffion, which, because of its remarkable difagreeableness, is diftinguished by a proper name, biatus. The most agreeable fucceffion is, where the cavity is increased and diminished alternately VOL. II. B within

within moderate limits. longevity, pufillanimous.

Examples, alternative, Secondly, words confifting wholly of fyllables pronounced flow, or of fyllables pronounced quick, commonly called long and short fyllables, have little melody in them; witnefs the words petitioner, fruiterer, dizzinefs: on the other hand, the intermixture of long and fhort fyllables is remarkably agreeable; for example, degree, repent, wonderful, altitude, rapidity, independent, impetuofity. The caufe will be explained afterwards, in treating of verfification.

Diftinguishable from the beauties above mentioned, there is a beauty of fome words which arifes from their fignification: when the emotion raised by the length or fhortnefs, the roughness or fmoothness, of the found, refembles in any degree what is raised by the sense, we feel a very remarkable pleasure. But this fubject belongs to the third fection.

The foregoing obfervations afford a standard to every nation, for eftimating, pretty accurately, the comparative merit of the words that enter into their own language: but they are not equally ufe

ful

Italian words, like thofe of Latin and Greek, have this property almost universally: English and French words are generally deficient. In the former, the long fyllable is removed from the end, as far as the found will permit; and in the latter, the laft fyllable is generally long. For example, Senator in English, Senator in Latin, and Senateur in French.

ful in comparing the words of different languages; which will thus appear. Different nations judge differently of the harshness or smoothnefs of articulate founds; a found, for example, harsh and disagreeable to an Italian, may be abundantly fmooth to a northern ear: here every nation muft judge for itself; nor can there be any folid ground for a preference, when there is no common ftandard to which we can appeal. The cafe is precifely the fame as in behaviour and manners: plaindealing and fincerity, liberty in words and actions, form the character of one people; politenefs, reserve, and a total disguise of every fentiment that can give offence, form the character of another people: to each the manners of the other are difagreeable. An effeminate mind cannot bear the least of that roughnefs and feverity which is generally esteemed manly, when exerted upon proper occafions: neither can an effeminate ear bear the harshness of certain words, that are deemed nervous and founding by thofe accustomed to a rougher tone of fpeech. Muft we then relinquifh all thoughts of comparing languages in point of roughness and smoothnefs, as a fruitless inquiry? Not altogether; for we may proceed a certain length, though without hope of an ultimate decifion. A language pronounced with difficulty even by natives, muft yield to a smoother language: and fuppofing two languages pronounced with equal facility by natives, the rougher lanB 2 guage,

guage, in my judgment, ought to be preferred, provided it be also stored with a competent share of more mellow founds; which will be evident from attending to the different effects that articulate found hath on the mind. A smooth gliding found is agreeable, by calming the mind, and lulling it to reft a rough bold found, on the contrary, animates the mind; the effort perceived in pronouncing, is communicated to the hearers, who feel in their own minds a fimilar effort, roufing their attention, and difpofing them to action. I add another confideration: the agreeableness of contraft in the rougher language, for which the great variety of founds gives ample opportunity, muft, even in an effeminate ear, prevail over the more uniform founds of the smoother language*. This appears all that can be fafely determined upon the prefent point. With respect to the other circumstances that conftitute the beauty of words, the standard above mentioned is infallible when applied to foreign languages as well as to our own: for every man, whatever be his mother-tongue, is equally capable to judge of the length or shortnefs of words, of the alternate opening and clofing of the mouth in speaking, and of the relation that the found bears to the sense: in thefe

* That the Italian tongue is too fmooth, feems probable, from confidering, that in verfification, vowels are frequently fuppreffed, in order to produce a rougher and bolder tone.

these particulars, the judgment is fufceptible of no prejudice from cuftom, at least of no invincible prejudice.

That the English tongue, originally harsh, is at present much softened by dropping in the pronunciation many redundant confonants, is undoubtedly true: that it is not capable of being further mellowed without fuffering in its force and energy, will scarce be thought by any one who poffeffes an ear; and yet fuch in Britain is the propenfity for difpatch, that, overlooking the majefty of words compofed of many fyllables aptly connected, the prevailing taste is to fhorten words, even at the expence of making them difagreeable to the ear, and harsh in the pronunciation. But I have no occafion to infift upon this article, being prevented by an excellent writer, who poffeffed, if any man ever did, the true genius of the English tongue *. I cannot however forbear urging one obfervation, borrowed from that author: feveral tenses of our verbs are formed by adding the final fyllable ed, which, being a weak found, has remarkably the worse effect by poffeffing the most confpicuous place in the word: upon which account, the vowel in common fpeech is generally fuppreffed, and the confonant added to the foregoing fyllable; whence the following rugged founds, drudg'd,

B 3

*See Swift's propofal for correcting the English

tongue, in a letter to the Earl of Oxford.