meaning be agreeable, it must of course be agreeable to find the fame order or ar rangement in both. Hence the beauty of a plain or natural ftyle, where the order of the words correfponds precifely to the order of the ideas. Nor is this the fingle beauty of a natural style: it is alfo agreeable upon account of its fimplicity and perfpicuity. This obfervation throws light upon the fubject. For if a natural ftyle be in itself agreeable, a tranfpofed ftyle cannot be fo. And therefore, it cannot otherwife be agreeable, but as contributing to fome pofitive beauty which is excluded in a natural ftyle. To be confirmed in this opinion, we need but reflect upon fome of the foregoing rules, which make it evident, that language, by means of inverfion, is fufceptible of many beauties that are totally excluded in a natural arrangement of words. From these premiffes it clearly follows, that inverfion ought not to be indulged, unlefs in order to reach fome beauty fuperior to that of a natural style. It may with great certainty be pronounced, that every inversion which is not governed by this rule, will appear harsh and strained, and be difrelished by every one of taste. Hence the beauty of inverfion when happily conducted; the beauty, not of an end, but of means, as furnishing opportunity for numberless ornaments that find no place in a natural style. Hence the force, the elevation, the harmony, the cadence, of fome compofitions. Hence the manifold beauties of the Greek and Roman tongues, of which living languages afford but faint imitations, SECT. III. Beauty of language from a refemblance betwixt found and fignification. THE refemblance betwixt the found and fignification of certain words, is a beauty, which has escaped no critical writer, and yet is not handled with accuracy by any of them. They have probably been erroneously of opinion, that a beauty fo obvious in the feeling, requires no explanation planation in the understanding. In order to fupply this defect, I fhall give examples of the various refemblances betwixt found and fignification; and at the same time fhall endeavour to explain why such refem-blances are beautiful. I begin with examples where the resemblance betwixt the found and fignification is the most entire; proceeding to others, where the refemblance is lefs and lefs fo. T There being frequently a ftrong refemblance betwixt different founds, it will not be surprising to find a natural found imitated by one that is articulate. Thus the found of a bow-ftring is imitated by the words that express it. The string let fly, Twang'd fhort and sharp, like the fhrill swallow's cry. Odyssey xxi. 449, The found of felling trees in a wood : Loud founds the ax, redoubling strokes on strokes; On all fides round the foreft hurls her oaks Headlong. Headlong. Deep echoing groan the thickets brown, Then rustling, crackling, crashing, thunder down, Iliad, xxiii. 144 But when loud furges lafh the founding fhore No perfon can be at a lofs about the caufe of this beauty. It is obviously that of imi tation. That there is any other natural refemblance betwixt found and fignification, muft not be taken for granted. There is evidently no refemblance betwixt found and motion, nor betwixt found and fentiment. In this. matter, we are apt to be deceived by artful reading or pronouncing. The fame paffage may be pronounced in many different tones, elevated or humble, fweet or harfh, brifk or melancholy, fo as to accord with the thought or fentiment. Such concord, depending on artful pronunciation, must be distinguished from that concord betwixt found and fenfe, which is perceived in fome expreffions independent of artful pronun ciation. རཐཱ། ciation. The latter is the poet's work the former must be attributed to the reader. Another thing contributes ftill more to the deceit. In language, found and sense are fo intimately connected, as that the propera ties of the one are readily communicated to the other. An emotion of grandeur, of fweetness, of melancholy, or of compaffion, though occafioned by the thought solely, is transferred upon the words, which by that means resemble in appearance the thought that is expreffed by them. I have great reason to recommend thefe obfervations to my reader, confidering how inaccurately the present subject is handled by critics. Not one of them distinguishes the natural refemblance of found and fignification, from the artificial resemblance now described. Witnefs Vida in particular, who in a very long paffage has given very few examples, but what are of the latter kind statuto ..That there may be a resemblance betwixt + natural and artificial founds, is self-evident; |