« AnteriorContinuar »
When we say,
falls upon “much, more, beyond," "vegetative, affective, intellectual," "sensibility, relation, dependance, plurality, intellectual faculties, organs," and so forth, (though the words are not marked as emphatick,) may be styled emphasis of specification, according to Rule 2, and it would not be improper so to style the emphasis placed upon the marked words, “ one, two, three,'' "first, secondly," ** second, third, fifth, last," " fourth, eighth, twenty-ninth," and so forth; but it is more precise and systematick to denominate the emphatick force given to these last-mentioned words, emphasis of enumeration, according to Rule 3.
Again, though not so simple and easy, yet it would be neither impossible nor improper to explain the emphasis on all these words, according to Rule 1, as antithetick: thus, we might consider “two men” as forming a contrast with man," "three men,” with “two," and so on.
“ One man can do much;" “ Two can do more;" “ In the first chapter;" and so forth, in the first place, the words one and two specify how many are alluded to, and first, specifies which chapter: hence, here is emphasis of specification : and secondly, the phrases, one man," " two men," “the first chapter,” and so forth, by specifying the particular number of men, and the ordinal rank of the chapter, contradistinguish that number from any other number of men that might be supposed or mentioned, and that chapter from any other chapter, and thus indirectly form an antithesis between the number expressed, and an imaginary number understood.
“This section is found in chapter fourth, page two-hundred and eighty-fifth ;" that is, “ It is not found in chapter first, second, third, or any other chapter, but in chapter fourth; and on page two-hundred and eighty-fifth, and not on page ninetieth, one-hundredth, two-hundredth, or any other page that you might imagine."
“ In the first chapter, I shall speak of sensibility; and not of consciousness, irritability, or any other property of organick or animal nature.”
Illustrations of this kind, might be extended; but it is believed that the good sense of the reader will render farther remarks, under this head, unnecessary.
For examples of emphasis of specification, the learner is referred to the words, “ friend, ambitious, honourable ; captives, crown, refuse, know, love, cause, and mourn," "parchment, will, tears, mantle, FELL, mutiny,” and so forth, on pages 316 and 317; and, also, to the words, “ child, husband, friend, lover, look, word, and action," on page 179. For examples of anti
thetick emphasis, to pages 180, 205, 297, 298, 299, 300, 316, 317, and to almost
other pages in the second part of this Mork.
II. Emphasis is sometimes divided into Simple and Compound.
SIMPLE AND COMPOUND EMPHASIS.
When the emphatick force falls on only one word in a phrase, it is sometimes called Simple Emphasis ; but when it falls on more than one word in succession, it is denominated Compound Emphasis.
EXAMPLES—of Simple Emphasis.
Their vines a shadow to their race shall yield,
EXAMPLES-of Compound Emphasis. Napoleon would have en-slave-d the land to make the o-cean free ; and he wanted only power to enslave both.
It is easier to forgive the weak, who have injured us, than the powerful, whom we have injured.
Ped-antry prides herself on being wrong by rules; while com-mon sense is contented to be right with-out them.
The contem-pla-tion of death as the wa-ges of sin, is ho-ly and re-lig-ious; but the fear of it as a trib-ute due to na-ture, is weak.
In proportion as the ancestors of the profligate are distinguished for their virtues, are the latter disgraced by their vices.
O death! the good man's dearest friend ; (but the bad man's greatest tit-emy.)
Ill fares the land, to hast-ning ills a prey,
It has been mentioned, that emphasis, considered in refer. ence to the different words on which it falls, admits of various degrees of percussive force, as well as of various qualities in regard to inflection and intonation. This difference in emphatick force, which, according to their meaning and rhetorical relations, is demanded by the various, emphatick words of a sentence or discourse, has induced some writers to adopt another division of emphasis, distinguished by the terms Superiour and Inferiour. This division of the subject, however, like that of Simple and Compound, can by no means be regarded as remarkable for precision or scientifick accuracy; but, as it is considered by many who have not leisure for scientifick research and philosophical accuracy, as a convenient distinction, answering all ordinary, practical purposes, it may be proper to notice it.
SUPERIOUR AND INFERIOUR EMPHASIS.
The term SUPERIOUR EMPHASIS is applied to that stronger percussion of the voice which is given to some emphatick words than to others, in order to distinguish it from that less forcible stress which those others take, and which is thence called the INFERIOUR EMPHASIS.
I am tor-tured even to MAD-ness, when I THINK Of the proud vic-tor. In reading this passage, which occurs in Addison's Cato, as the language in which Marcus expresses his indignation at the conduct of Cesar, the superiour emphasis falls on "think," which word is contrasted with the implied word hear or discourse : thus, “I am tortured even to mat-ness, not only when I hear or dis-course of Cesar, but even when I THINK of him." A little attention to the passage, will also show, that the word "madness' requires no very slight degree of percussive force, although a stress inferiour to that given to think ;" and, likewise, that “tortured," " proud," and "victor," require each a degree of force still slighter than that laid upon “madness, but stronger than that which is given to the other words of the sentence.
Various degrees of emphatick force are also requisite in pronouncing the following sentences, in which the different degrees are imperfectly shown by the various sizes of type employed.
Tem-perance, by for-tifying the mind and body, leads to HAP-piness: in-temperance, by e-ner-vating them, generally ends in mis-ery.
Hamlet.-Saw WHOM ?
That brought my an-swer back. STRIKE, as thou didst at CE-sar! for I know, When thou didst hate him WORST, thou lov-dst him BET-ter Than ever thou lov-dst Cas-sius. The distinctive powers and qualities of the voice, described on pages 107, and 108, under the heads of Radical, Vanishing, Compound, and Median Stress, Dr. Rush has analyzed and explained, as applicable in expressing the various degrees and kinds of emphasis. The reader is therefore requested to turn again to those pages, and attentively examine the analysis there given, before he proceeds to a perusal of the following, scientifick division of this subject. This brief specimen is chiefly taken from Dr. Barber's Elocution.
Emphasis of Radical Stress.
False fu-gitive, and to thy speed add wings.
Emphasis of Median Stress. Examples.— I warn you, do not dare to lay your hand on the constitution.
Oh, swear not by the moon, the inconstant moon,
Emphasis of Vanishing Stress.
Brutus.—The name of Cassius honours this corruption,
And chastisement doth therefore hide its head. Cassius.-Chas-tisement!
Emphasis of Compound Stress. Example.-Arm, warriours, arm for fight.
Emphasis of Quality. Examples.
I've seen yon weary winter sun
Twice forty times return;
That man was made to mourn.
But thee-and one above. For a farther development of this subject, see Doctors Rush and Barber on Elocution.
EMPHATICK INFLECTIONS. It has already been hinted, that those words which fall under an emphatick stress, generally require a peculiar and an appropriate inflection, which inflection, or, most commonly, wave of the voice, is not unfrequently controlled by the emphasis.
Examples.—Did you say it? What can I do?
Remarks. If these questions be pronounced in a natural and familiar manner, the words “say" and "do,” will take, the first, the rising, and the second, the falling, concrete slide of a third, with very little or no circumflex in the movements of the voice; but if the second example be properly pronounced, that is, if á strong emphasis be given to both “say" and "do," with the rising inflection given to the close of the first, and the falling to the last, the word "say" will take the inverted unequal wave, and “ do,” the direct unequal wave.
Examples.- Are they He-brews? So am I'. Are they Israelites' ? So am I'. Are they the seed of Ab-raham'? So am I. Are they the ministers of Chrisť ? I am more'.
Remarks. --Agreeably to the general rule, the pronoun “I,”. and the adverb "more," at the close of the four, simple, affirmative sentences here presented, should take the ordinary, falling inflection; but to give them that inflection, in these instances, would render the elocution spiritless and insipid. The emphasis, on these words, controls their inflections, and requires that ". I” should take the inverted unequal wave, which closes with the rising vanish, and “more," the direct unequal wave. For the purpose of increasing the harmony of the sentences by introducing a pleasing variety, some might prefer, however, to give the “ I' in the third sentence, the direct unequal wave.
Examples.-Lord', if thou hadst been here', my brother had not died.