quia Grace Φαίδρωμος. Item quia Φίλιππος dicitur Accentu in prima, eodem modo mediam corripit. Et nunquam aliter invenies apud Plautum, quin mediam in nomine Philippus corripuerit. Quod mirum eft in pofitione. Sed quærenti caufam Accentum femper prætexet.'

"The Reader will do me the juftice to obferve, that I do not produce this to justify such a practice, but to fhew that the antients did not think that the acute Greek accent was a mere elevation of the voice. Though I think it proves a great deal more. For how can it be conceived, that Latin Writers could lay fuch a ftrefs upon acuted Greek fyllables as made the fhort fyllable with which it [the Author means the accent] was joined, long, and the following long fyllable fhort, unless the Greeks of their times did fo? But whether thefe were faults in a language that could fupport itself upon its own natural quantity, is another thing. However, it is not improbable, that our ftrong acute accent took its rife from that practice. And the use of it, with fuch a power, was confirmed from the confideration of the nature of modern languages, which, without fuch an accent, are not capable of affording any tolerable harmony.

"I take this to be generally true as to mok, if not all, modern languages, For when this acute accent is placed indifferently on all fyllables, whether they be naturally fhort or long, and the short fyllables are then pronounced long, this can proceed from nothing but the power and force of the acute accent.

"But without launching out into unneceffary difcuffions, I keep, in the prefent argument, to the fingle point of our own acute accent; which is the accent we ufe in pronouncing the Greek language. Though I cannot but obferve here, that Mr. Fofter is mistaken when he fays, that this practice is entirely our own, owing to the nature of our English pronunciation, p. 149. for foreigners do the fame. Voff. de Art. Gram. 1. ii.

c. to.

"This Mr. Fofter calls an abufe.--But when one speaks of an abufe, this must refer to a ftandard, which is fixed and allowed. For nothing can be reckoned wrong, but what departs from what is allowed to be right. But where is this standard? has it ever been fixed? Has Mr. Fofter difcovered it? One ought to think he has. For he all along fpeaks upon a fuppofition, that an acute accent may be founded in fuch a manner as will not make the fhort fyllable upon which it is laid, appear long to the ear. This then must be deemed the standard accent: and in reference to this it is that our accent, upon account of its carrying a greater ftrefs, is an abufe. I will not carry this

fo

fo far as to fay, that Mr. Fofter would have us alter our accent in the pronunciation of our own language. But then I must fay, that he would have us pronounce our own language by one accent, and the Greek language by another. If he does not mean this, he means nothing. And if he means this, he faith nothing against those who are not for pronouncing the Greek language according to accent. For all of them, by this, mean the prefent modern acute accent, which carrieth fuch a ftrefs as makes the fyllable upon which it is laid, found long to the ear: and it is by this found that the ear judges of [meafures] quantity."

Thus hath the learned and judicious Author of the fecond Differtation brought fufficient proof from ancient authorities, &c. that the acute accent implied quantity, or extenfion of found; and, perhaps, this method of proof is more fatisfactory than if he had entered into a philofophical difcuffion of founds, and proved, that elevation of voice muft neceffarily imply continuance of time. That, however, he might have done demonftrably enough.

He next proceeds to ftate the case of the debate concerning accentual pronunciation.

"To form a just notion of the true ftate of the debate between us, who are against pronouncing the Greek language according to accents, and those who are for it, it will be neceffary to confider in what we agree, and in what we difagree. Both fides allow the ufe of accents in the pronunciation of the Greek language. Both fides allow, that the elevation and depreffion of the voice are, in their nature, diftinct from the continuance of fuch elevation or depreffion; i. e. from quantity. [Here our Author feems to be inconfiftent with himself.]-Both fides allow, that each accent, confidered of itself, is capable of two modifications in point of time; and may be varied to the compafs of four or five notes. And both fides allow, that in pronouncing the Greek language accents are not to interfere with or fpoil quantity: but we differ in this: that we affert, that fo far as the argument from accent goes, our acute accent carrieth fuch a ftrefs with it, as makes every fyllable over which it is placed, found long to the ear, and fo fpoils the quantity: and Mr. Fofter afferts, that the acute accent ought, when it is placed over a fhort fyllable, to carry with it but half the ftrefs, or time, which it carrics with it, when it is placed over a long one, and that by this the quantity would be preferved.

"Now, upon this ftate of the debate, which is the only true one, it is very obvious to obferve, that by the acute accent we mean that accent which we moderns ufe in pronovi cing our own

anguage

language, and which doth, in all cafes, found the fyllable over which it is placed, long; and that Mr. Fofter means an accent which is not in ufe with us. In relation, therefore, to the accent which we mean, and which we all use, I really cannot fee that there is any difference between us and Mr. Fofter, if he abides by the principles which he hath laid down, and the conceffions which he hath made. For he alloweth, that the accent we use, doth make all fyllables found long to the ear, and that if the voice is retarded in feme fyllables, by what caufe foever that delay be occafioned, there is truly and formally long quantity. But this is the very thing we contend for; and from which we strongly conclude, that the Greek language ought not to be pronounced according to accents, meaning our acute accent. As for thofe accents which Mr. Fofter mentions, and which are to be lengthened or fhortened, we have nothing to do with them in the prefent debate. They are quite another thing. Whatever becomes of them, our pofition is proved upon this principle, which we both admit, viz. that our acute accent maketh all fyllables long, and that this fpoils the Greek quantity."

Having thus ftated the cafe of the debate, and defended his own pofition, the Author proceeds to confider, that accent which Mr Fofter defends, and would fubftitute in the place of the modern Greek accent.

"The accent of Mr. Fofter is to be high, quick to the sense, fharp, inftantaneous, and even when it is joined with a long fyllable, tho' the duration of the found be long, the power and effect of the acute is fhort and quick to the fenfe, occafioned by a high note fucceeding a low one, or rifing above the grave tone of voice; the perception of which tranfitionis fudden and inftantaneous, before the continuance of the note is determined one way or the other, for long or short. And this, Mr. Fofter faith, he clearly perceives, and more clearly than he can perhaps exprefs. But men of common understandings will not, I am apt to think, clearly perceive what an accent this is; and much lefs will they be able to make any use of it in Speaking.

"To make out the former part of his defcription of the acute accent, Mr: Fofter hath fubjoined a long note, to fhew that us in its confequential figurative fenfe, fignifieth fometimes quick and hafty. But he might have fpared himself the trouble of proving what no body does or will deny. It will also be readily allowed, that us, in its peculiar mufical fenfe, is used for an high tone, without any confideration of length. But then we muft remember, what I mentioned before, that vocal utterance is not finging. And becaufe words, borrowed from mufic, are used to expreis the tones of the voice in fpeaking, we are

not

not therefore to conclude, that they are to be taken in their original strict fenfe, when they are used in this way. For every thing that is mufical is not mufic; as every thing that is poetical is not poetry.

"When Mr. Fofter faith, that tho' the duration of the found of the accent, when joined with a long fyllable, be long, the power and effect of it is fhort, to me, and, I am apt to think, to every Reader, this is the fame as if he had faid, that though the found of it be long, yet the found of it is fhort. For I take it, that the found of the accent is the fame with the power and effect of it; or, however, that they are infeparable. A vowel that is followed by two half vowels, as in contemnit, the inftance produced by Mr. Fofter, is not, indeed, in ftrictness, so long, as if it were followed by two mute confonants; but ftill if it be in the order of long fyllables, the acute accent that is over it, or joined with it, cannot have both a long and a fhort found, but muft neceffarily be founded long throughout the whole body of the fyllable.

"What makes Mr. Fofter's defcription of his accent the less intelligible, is, that he alloweth it to have one measure of time*. For, upon this, one cannot avoid asking, how an accent that hath one measure of time can, on the one hand, be quick, fhort, and inftantaneous? and, on the other hand, how the duration of the found of it can be long? For it should feem, that in the former cafe, it would not have one time; and in the latter, that it would have two times. And befides all this, if this acute of one measure of time, be placed over a long fyllable; as it will then reach and operate over but one half, and the first half of it, what is to become of the remaining half? Is it to have no accent? Yes, it must certainly have fome accent. But this cannot be another acute. It must then be a grave, but an acute and grave over a long fyllable are a circumflex.

"If in any other instance I have mistaken the meaning of Mr. Fofter, I ought to produce fome excufe of my own. But in the present case, I do not apprehend there is any need of doing this. For I cannot but think, that my inability to comprehend his meaning, if I do not comprehend it, is fufficiently excufed by his confeffion of his inability to express it."

After thefe ftrictures on Mr. Fofter's definition of the accentual tone, the Author of the Differtation acknowleges, that the fub'ject is ftill incumbered with difficulties, which he knows not how to remove, and thinks it better to make this acknowlege

Effay, page 190.

ment,

ment, than with a profeffion of removing difficulties, to fuggeft what he cannot clearly exprefs. He then fums up, by way of corollary, the principal points he has had in view, viz. that the ear is the proper judge of founds; that the acute accent which we ufe, makes all fyllables with which it is joined, found long to the ear; and, therefore, the Greek language ought not to be pronounced according to it; becaufe, by this every fhort fyllable that has an acute accent will found long.

Having thus brought before our Readers the principal arguments on which this debate is founded, and reduced them within as fhort a compass as the nature of the thing would admit, we shall difmifs the article with the following obfervations, which we recommend to the Difputants, and fubmit to the Public.

It is obvious, that in all living languages the pronunciation is perpetually changing; and though cuftom is the jus et norma dicendi, yet in this there are continual innovations arifing from various caufes. The cant of foreigners, the jargon of mercantile converfation, and the mixture of provincial dialects, will overcome all the efforts of the learned to preferve the usual accentuation of their language, and to keep it agreeable to nature and time. If we attend to the polyfyllables in our own language, we fhall find that numbers of them have changed their accent within the course of one century: for inftance, the words acceptable, corruptible, &c. are now acceptable, córruptible, notwithstanding that this accentuation is inconfiftent with analogy and quantity. Numbers of inftances to the fame purpose might be produced. And is it not to be fuppofed, that the fame caufes would produce the fame change of pronunciation in Greece, in fo long a period, as from the days of Homer to the seventh century? Is it not to be fuppofed, that the Greeks of the lower empire, in teaching foreigners their language, would place the accent agreeably to the pronunciation which then prevailed? and that this pronunciation muft differ widely from that of former times ?-Hence, in fome measure, may arise that inconfiftency between the laws of quantity and the present mode of

accentuation.

Conclufion of the Compleat Hiftory of England. By T. Smollett, M. D. Vols. III. and IV. Article continued from page 256.

IN

N our introduction to the review of the two preceding volumes, we took notice of the many difficulties with which a Writer

3