sions are employed, and what impression is, by that means, made on your mind. Critically analyze each figure, that you may understand to what extent it has contributed to the embellishment of the author's sentiments. The most striking of these figures should be lodged in your memory, and be made the topic of conversation with some intelligent friend; or, at least, entered and duly classified in some memorandum book reserved for that purpose. Simply marking them in the margin of the author, except as subsidiary to the memory, will be found insufficient.

4. In your own composition, be very sparing, for a time, in the use of Figurative Language, till extensive reading and careful critical practice, combined with sound judgment, shall have taught you on what occasions, and to what extent, this most difficult kind of language can with advantage be employed.

VERBAL CRITICISM.

LESSON 88.

585. VERBAL CRITICISM is the art of judging, by determinate principles, of the correctness or incorrectness of a writer's expression both with regard to the choice and arrangement of his words and sentences.

586. LITERARY CRITICISM extends to the examination both of thought and taste, as well as expression; and depends on the application of extensive knowledge, sound judgment, and correct taste, in estimating how far a writer adheres to truth and nature in his delineations. The subsequent Rules and observations will be principally restricted to the former of these branches, namely, verbal criticism.

587. Verbal Criticism may be considered under the two following heads:

1. The Nature and Laws of Language.

2. Style.

I. NATURE AND LAWS OF LANGUAGE.

588. Language is the utterance of intelligible sounds, and forms the medium by which the mind communicates its thoughts. It is either articulate or inarticulate. The former is confined to man, the latter is common to other animals as well as to man.

589. Inarticulate language consists of those instinctive sounds or cries by which animals express their sensations and desires.

Thus, the neighing of the horse, the barking of the dog, the chirping of fowls, &c., are sounds perfectly understood by the animals uttering them.- Man, also, has a natural language intelligible to the whole of the human race. This, however, is extremely defective, being confined entirely to the general expressions of joy, grief, fear, and the other passions or emotions of the mind; it is, therefore, wholly inadequate to the purposes of rational intercourse, and the infinitely diversified ideas of an intelligent being. Hence, the necessity of articulate language.

590. Articulate language is that system of expression which is composed of simple sounds, variously modified by the organs of speech, and combined into words as signs of our ideas.

The organs of speech are the lips, the teeth, the tongue, the palate, the throat, and the nose.

591. a. WORDS, though closely connected by frequent use with the things signified, have no natural affinity with them. Thus, the word fire might have denominated the substance which we call ice, and the word ice might have signified fire, &c. It is, therefore, custom only, or the tacit consent of a people, that affixes to certain things a certain word or sound by which it may be known.

b. There are many words, it is true, the sounds of which are imitations of the noise produced by the things signified. Thus, one wind is said to whistle, another to roar, a serpent to hiss, a fly to buzz, &c. But instances of this kind are only few in number. Words, therefore, may be considered principally as symbols, and not as imitations; as arbitrary or instituted, and not as natural signs of ideas. - The correctness of this mode of considering the nature of speech in general, will be more apparent if we attend to the manner by which children are taught a language. Suppose a book is held out to a child for the first time, an impression or idea is thus conveyed to his mind by the organ of sight. While this impression continues, suppose farther that the sound book is distinctly uttered, he will then have an impression or idea of the sound conveyed through the sense of hearing, which will be rendered more distinct, if he himself be taught to enunciate it. The two ideas, namely, that of the object, and that of the sound, will then, if long continued, or often repeated, coalesce in his mind, and become so strongly connected, that the idea of the object will suggest that of the sound book; and, on the other hand, the I sound will recall the idea of the object. The principle on which this coalition is founded, is a law of the human mind, known under the name of association of ideas; and the progress of the learner in connecting other ideas with other sounds, is only a repetition of the operation, till the whole language is acquired.

592. a. THE ORIGIN OF LANGUAGE. We learn from the Scriptures that Adam named all creatures, and hence we naturally infer that language must have been the gift of heaven.

b. Indeed, what can be more rational, as well as more probable, than to suppose that He, who formed the organs of man, should at first instruct him in the proper use of them? Not, however, that we suppose the language of our first parents was as copious as most modern languages; or, that the identical language which they used is now in existence. Many of the primitive radical words may, and probably do exist in various languages, but observation teaches us, that languages must improve and undergo considerable changes as knowledge increases, and be subject to continual alterations, from other causes incident to men in society.*

593. a. Articulate language is either oral or written. Oral language is the expression of our ideas by intelligible

*Horne Tooke's assertion, that language is of human invention is, like some other of his assertions, very untenable. "This method of referring words," says he, "immediately to God as their framer, is a short cut to escape inquiry and explanation. It saves the philosopher much trouble, but leaves mankind in much ignorance, and leads to great error." But what ignorance, we would ask, can the supposed divine origin of language perpetuate among mankind? or how can it lead to great error? Unless we can ascertain the true origin of language, we are just where we were as to ignorance or error, whether we assume a Divine or a human

sounds or words. Written language is the representation of significant sounds by letters or characters.

b. Oral language, we have reason to suppose, continued long to be the only medium by which knowledge could be imparted, or social intercourse maintained. But, in the progress of knowledge, various methods, such as hieroglyphics, pictures, &c. were devised for attaining a more permanent and extensive vehicle of thought. At length, words were reduced to their simple articulate sounds, and marks or letters were adopted to denote those sounds. Hence, letters are marks for certain sounds; and, by a combination of these elementary marks or letters, all words, or signs of thought, are made visible in writing, and again transferred from the eye to the mind. By oral language we communicate our thoughts only to those that are present; but, by means of written language, we can convey them to the most distant regions, as well as to future generations.

Of the Usage which constitutes the Law of Language.

594. a. UTILITY OF GRAMMAR. As language is composed of arbitrary words derived from various sources, and subject to numerous modifications and combinations, the necessity of uniformity of expression, in order to be accurately understood, would naturally suggest itself to every reflecting mind. Hence, we find among the Greeks and Romans, as among other nations, attention was early paid to a systematic arrangement of those modes of expression which seemed best calculated to convey the meaning intended. The system which professes to unfold and illustrate the rules and principles by which uniformity or accuracy of expression is secured is called Grammar. Those principles which are applicable to all languages constitute what is termed Universal Grammar; while those which are confined to any one Language, are denominated Particular Grammar.

b. No Grammarian can, of his own authority, alter any mode of expression, or assign to a word a signification different from that which has been allotted to it by established usage. He must take the language as it is, not what he would wish it to be; he is properly the compiler of laws already existing, and not the promulgator of new laws of his own framing. He may, indeed, recommend this or that mode of expression as more agreeable to analogy, but it must remain with the public whether or not his advice be adopted. His business is to observe the agreement or disagreement of words, the similarity or dissimilarity between different forms of expression; to reduce those that are similar under the same class, and, by a careful induction of particulars, establish general propositions. The accuracy of these propositions will, of course, depend upon the soundness and discrimination of his judgment, and the extent of his investigations.

595. A Rule, in Grammar, is an established mode or form to which a large number of particular things is subject, either in inflection, concord, position, &c. ; thus, it is a rule, in English, that the plural of nouns should be formed by adding s to the singular; as, book, books.

596. An Exception from a rule is a deviation from the mode observed by the larger collection; thus, the plural

of beau is formed by adding x instead of s; as, beaux; because it is thus formed in French, from which language it is derived.

b. The exception to a rule arises, either because the word or phrase thus used has been derived from another language, or because custom has assigned that mode; in either case, however, it now forms a law of the language, and must be observed as much as the rule itself.

597. Both the rules and exceptions of a language must have obtained the sanction of established, or, as it is generally denominated good usage; and this usage must be reputable, national, and present.

598. The Usage which gives law to language must, in the first place, be Reputable.

By reputable usage is meant that mode of expression which has been adopted by Authors, distinguished for combining extensive knowledge with the talent of communicating it.

599. a. The conversation of men of rank and eminence will certainly have some influence on language. And in what concerns merely the pronunciation, it is the only Rule to which we can refer the matter in every doubtful case; but, in what concerns the words themselves, or their construction and application, it is of importance to have some certain, steady, and well-known standard to which we can recur, a standard to which every one has access to canvass and examine. And this can be no other than authors of reputation. Accordingly, we find that these are, by universal consent, in actual possession of this authority, and to this tribunal, when any doubt arises, the appeal is always made.-The attempt of Webster to make conversation the sole standard of correctness is most injudicious and unsafe, for the reasons just assigned.

b. By Authors of reputation, we mean (as we have just observed) such as combine extensive knowledge with the talent of communicating it. A writer may thus be valued for the profundity of his knowledge, but if he is deficient in communicat. ing it, he will be considered of no authority with respect to language. The estimation in which a writer is held by the public, must always decide to what class he belongs, or to what eminence he has attained. Some persons, for instance, may prefer, as a poet, Parnel to Milton, but no one will dispute the superior fame of the latter to that of the former.

c. Nor is it upon the authority of a few reputable writers, that any mode of construction can be deemed properly established. In order to become reputable usage, it must have received the sanction of many, if not of the majority of writers of this class. This Rule is applicable also both to verbal Critics and Grammarians.* Though the opinions of such men, formed as they must be, from a careful investigation of the general principles of a language, will have, and ought to have, greater weight than those of any other individuals, yet the single authority of any critic or grammarian, however distinguished he may be, is not of itself sufficient to establish any mode which he may recommend, or to reject what he deprecates. He may point out the analogy of the one and the erroneousness of the other, and his arguments may be founded in truth, but it must depend upon the generality of other writers whether or not his opinions shall be adopted. It is, however, to be presumed, that since our language is now extensively cultivated, the deductions of the learned and judicious critic or grammarian will receive greater attention than formerly, and anomalies and irregularities will, consequently, become much fewer.

600. This Usage must, in the second place, be National,

It must be observed, that the office of the Grammarian and that of the Critic, though frequently combined, are yet distinct. The Grammarian is properly the compiler of the laws of the language, and the verbal Critic is he who notifies the