« PreviousContinue »
Yet the sentence has a different effect, if you are supposed to have laid your stress upon the words, from that which it will have if only I am supposed to call your attention to those words. Therefore the Underlinings mislead, or may mislead. For, if the rule be not considered as taking place, the reader must guess whether you or I underlined the words. Stronger instances might easily be adduced:—as, from the sentence already given, “Will you walk” &c.” “ Italics are not uncommon in books. An Author (suppose) writes a sentence, and puts a word in Italics. A Quoter gives (we will hope) the Author’s Italics; but he adds some of his own. What reader can tell which of these Italics is by the Author, which by the Quoter: I readily allow there are many instances in which I should feel no doubt in my own mind, that the Italics were by the Quoter. But there are others in which I think I might defy any man to make a well-founded guess, whether it was Author or Quoter. Therefore the practice misleads; or, in its nature, must ever be liable to mislead. I once talked on the subject with the late Rev. Mr. Twining, well known amongst literary persons, and much, (and, I believe, deservedly) esteemed by them ; known also, in particular, by his Translation of Aristotle's Treatise on Poetry, with very copious Notes. He was inclined to allow a Quoter to add Italics. I believe I asked him, whether, if he met with Italics in a quotation, he should suppose them put by the Author or by the Quoter; and that he answered by the Quoter. Afterwards, in the Monthly Review for December 1790, I saw a sermon of his reviewed; and, in a quotation of eleven lines, eight words (or expressions) in Italics, and no others. I looked into the printed Sermon, and there found the same eight in Italics, and no others. Had Mr. Twining read (as an indifferent person) this review of his own sermon, he would (according to his own mode of judging) have been misled eight times in eleven lines. I am not sure that I should not wish your Work suppressed, rather than printed with this blemish, as I call it.” - w On farther reflection, these remarks appeared to me to be so very just, and to bear with so much force upon works of controversy in particular, that I thought it but justice to the author whose works I criticised to remove the additional underlinings which I had inserted, and to leave those only which were the author’s. In doing this, I found great difficulties present themselves, and endeavoured to form some rules
by which I might regulate my quotations; but this required more time and consideration than I could give the subject; and all that I have been able to do in the present instance has been to adopt such modes of calling the reader's attention to particular words and passages as the case seemed best to admit; sometimes by repetition, and sometimes by printing particular words in Italics, when I was not using inverted commas, the professed marks of quotation or faithful copying. But, as it is more disficult to remedy a fault than to guard against it in the first instance, I feel some apprehension that I may not have done this effectually in all cases. I can only say, that it has been my intention in every instance to represent my author faithfully, and that I re-compared my quotations with the originals, both in the manuscript and in correcting the proofs. Had I been aware of my friend’s objections to this very common practice before I began my work, it would have saved me much additional labour. It may be remarked, however, that in making quotations from Scripture, as there are no Italics there, except the small added words, (and which no one I believe ever distinguishes in quoting,) if Italics are introduced by the Quoter, they will, of course, be understood as being his.
In quoting from THE LITERARY Misc ELLANY, I have, indeed, deviated from the rule of strict copying, in having begun each line with a capital Letter, as is usual in poetry; it being a deviation, in the first instance, in the Editor of that work, in not introducing capitals, except at the beginning of a sentence, and in proper names, as in prose. Had that work been original, I should have thought it my duty to follow the author in this particular, apprising the reader that it was a faithful copy.
There is another practice very common with authors in these days, which is, in my estimation, as great a fault as that of not strictly accurate quotation; and that is the not giving references to the authors, and the places in their works whence quotations are made. It frequently prevents the reader's turning to them to see if they are faithfully given, and to consult the context to ascertain whether the passages are intended by the authors to bear the meaning attributed to them by the Quoter. The motive with the author for this omission is frequently to spare himself trouble at the time of writing, in referring to the passages; especially when scripture is quoted from memory. But how often does it happen that the reader wishes to refer to the passages, and how often
does the quoting an excellent passage from some author, before unknown to the reader, make him wish to see, not only what he says upon the subject in question, but to read the whole of his works. He is precluded from both of these, if neither the passage nor even the author be mentioned. To many valuable writings have I been introduced by a single quotation; and many disappointments have I suffered, and to much trouble have I frequently been put, for want of a reference, or from an imperfect one. But the Printer is, I believe, sometimes the person in fault. His object is to produce what he considers to be a neat, clear page to the purchaser who takes up the work in the bookseller's shop; and he wishes, as much as possible, to avoid all notes, references and figures. But, as soon as the reader becomes interested in a work, and wishes to refer from one part to the other, or to another author, the deficiency is distressing. Having mentioned this subject, it were injustice to Mr. Hodson, the Printer of this Volume, not to make my acknowledgements for the great readiness with which he has acceded to all my wishes in giving References, Titles, Indexes and Contents. It will not, I trust, be deemed invidious if I