rangement of these words or materials. I begin with rules that direct us to a right choice of words, and then proceed to rules that concern their arrangement.

:

And with respect to the former, communication of thought being the principal end of language, it is a rule, That perfpicuity ought not to be facrificed to any other beauty whatever if it should be doubted whether perfpicuity be a pofitive beauty, it cannot be doubted, that the want of it is the greatest defect. Nothing therefore in language ought more to be studied, than to prevent all obfcurity in the expreffion; for to have no meaning, is but one degree worse than to have a meaning that is not understood. Want of perfpicuity from a wrong arrangement, belongs to the next branch. I fhall here give a few examples where the obfcurity arifes from a wrong choice of words; and as this defect is too common in the ordinary herd of writers to make ex-· amples from them neceffary, I confine myself to the most celebrated authors.

Livy, fpeaking of a rout after a battle,

Multique in ruina majore quam fuga oppreffi obtruncatiL. 4. § 46.

que.

This author is frequently obfcure by expreffing but part of his thought, leaving it to be comple

ted by his reader. His defcription of the feafight, L. 28. cap. 30. is extremely perplexed.

I am in greater pain about the foregoing paffages than about any I have ventured to criticise, being aware that a vague or obfcure expreffion, is apt to gain favour with those who neglect to examine it with a critical eye: to fome it carries

that fenfe which they relish the moft; and by fuggesting various meanings at once, it is admired by others as concife and comprehensive: which by the way fairly accounts for the opinion generally entertained with refpect to most languages in their infant state, of their expreffing much in few words. This obfervation cannot be better illuftrated than by a paffage from Quintilian, tranfcribed in the first volume for a different purpose, and which is in the following words,

At quæ Polycleto defuerunt, Phidiæ atque Alcameni dantur. Phidias tamen diis quam hominibus efficiendis melior artifex traditur: in ebore vero, longe citra æmulum, vel fi nihil nifi Minervam Athenis, aut Olympium in Elide Jovem feciffet, cujus pulchritudo adjeciffe aliquid etiam recepta religioni videtur; adeo majeftas operis Deum aquavit.

The fentence in the Italic characters appeared always to me extremely expreffive, before I gave it 1 peculiar attention. And yet if one examine it independent of the context, its proper meaning is not what is intended: the words naturally import, that the beauty of the ftatues mentioned, appears to add fome new tenet or rite to the eftablifhed religion, or appears to add new dignity to it; and we must confult the context before we can gather the true meaning; which is, that the Greeks were confirmed in the belief of their eftablished religion by thefe majestic ftatues, fo like real divinities,

There

There is want of neatnefs even in an ambiguity fo flight as what arifes from the conftruction merely; as where the period commences with a member conceived to be in the nominative cafe, and which afterward is found to be in the accufative. Example: "Some emotions more pecu"liarly connected with the fine arts, I propofe to "handle in separate chapters *." Better thus: "Some emotions more peculiarly connected with "the fine arts, are proposed to be handled in feแ parate chapters."

I add another error against perfpicuity; which I mention the rather because with fome writers it paffes for a beauty. It is the giving different names to the fame object, mentioned more than once in the fame period. Example: Speaking of the English adventurers who first attempted the conqueft of Ireland, "and instead of reclaiming "the natives from their uncultivated manners, "they were gradually affimilated to the ancient "inhabitants, and degenerated from the customs "of their own nation." From this mode of expreffion, one would think the author meant to diftinguish the ancient inhabitants from the natives; and we cannot discover otherwife than from the fenfe, that these are only different names given to the fame object for the fake of variety. But perfpicuity ought never to be facrificed to any other beauty, which leads me to think that

Elements of Criticifin, vol. I. p. 43. edit. I.

the paffage may be improved as follows: "and

degenerating from the customs of their own. "nation, they were gradually affimilated to the "natives, instead of reclaiming them from their "uncultivated manners."

The rule next in order, because next in importance, is, That the language ought to correfpond to the subject: grand or heroic actions or fentiments require elevated language; tender fentiments ought to be expreffed in words foft and flowing; and plain language devoid of ornament, is adapted to fubjects grave and didactic. Language may be confidered as the dress of thought; and where the one is not fuited to the other, we are fenfible of incongruity, in the fame manner as where a judge is dreffed like a fop, or a peafant like a man of quality. Where the impreffion made by the words refembles the impreffion made by the thought, the fimilar emotions mix fweetly in the mind, and augment the pleasure *; but where the impreffions made by the thought and the words are diffimilar, the unnatural union they are forc'd into is difagreeable †.

This concordance between the thought and the words has been obferved by every critic, and is fo well understood as not to require any illuftra. tion. But there is a concordance of a peculiar kind that has been fcarcely touched in works of

Chap. 2. part 4.

+ Ibid.

criticism,

1