Page images
PDF
EPUB

which would generally be used in addressing a superior, while the latter is that which the superior would probably himself employ.

It is to be observed also, that when a question of this kind, uttered with a falling inflexion, has not been distinctly apprehended, or, from any cause, is echoed by the person to whom it was addressed, it receives, in this repetition, the rising inflexion.

Example." Whence arise these forebodings, but from the consciousness of guilt ?"

"Whence arise these forebodings?"

“From the consciousness of guilt?" implying, “Did you say ?”

This is generally the case also when we have not heard or understood with certainty the answer returned to our question, and consequently repeat the interrogative word.

Example." When were you there last ?"

ANSWER,.. ....(Not distinctly apprehended).

......

implying > "Will you oblige me by repeating that?"

"WHEN?,, {apologetically)

But when the feeling of the questioner is not of the apologetic kind, he may throw petulance and authority into the repeated question, and use the falling inflexion. Thus a brow-beating barrister to an equivocating witness.

“When?”—implying" Answer directly and distinctly, sir, without evasion.”

In all these illustrations we may trace the working of the two simple fundamental principles of inflexion,-which, among many varieties of application, require no category of Exceptions.

for

In the following sentence, the elliptical questions, "for whom?" and " thee?" illustrate the two classes of interrogations,—the former being equivalent to "for whom shall we break it?" and the latter to the verb question, “shall we do so for thee?"

"All this dread order break,- for whom ?-for thee?

Vile worm! O madness! Pride! Impiety!"

FINAL PAUSE OR PERIOD.-Here, as the sense is generally complete, a falling inflexion is naturally prescribed by all Elocutionists. The degree in which the sense is completed exclusively of what follows, corresponds to the approach the voice makes to a perfect rest. As the members of a Loose Sentence are severally complete, yet have a mutual dependence, as parts of the same period; so a succession of periods, each containing perfect sense, and grammatically complete, may have a mutual dependence as parts of one thought or chain of ideas: and the reader of taste and discernment will show this dependence or relationship, by reserving the perfectly conclusive inflexion for the termination of the periodic series, and giving its members such a modified fall as may indicate continuativeness as well as completeness. Sometimes a directly connective, or rising inflexion, may be demanded at the period; but it will only be when suggestive

force is required, or when such a degree of connexion with the next sentence must be shown, as might have been appropriately indicated by a less disjunctive form of punctuation.

Some additional classes of sentences require to be noticed, in order to complete our illustration of the applicability of the two fundamental rules to every kind of composition, and their sufficiency for the government of inflexion.

PARENTHESIS.—Parenthetical matter introduced into the body of a sentence must be so pronounced as not to interfere with the current of the inflexions in that sentence. Thus, whether the parenthesis is inserted at a point where the rising or falling inflexion takes place, the parenthesis must terminate with the same kind of inflexion, to maintain the same connectedness or disjunction between the parenthesis and what follows, as exists between the latter and the clause before the parenthesis: but the final parenthetical inflexion must be pitched lower, and the whole parenthesis must be more feebly and (generally) more quickly uttered, to show its subordination to the sentence it divides. Sometimes, from peculiar emphasis, the parenthesis requires to be made more prominent than the rest of the sentence. In this case it will be raised to a higher level, instead of being sunk to a lower; but the direction of its final inflexion will still be regulated by the same principle. When a parenthesis, introduced where a sentence is incomplete, terminates with what is so positively emphatic as to require a falling inflexion, it must of course have one; but either of the continuative, non-exclusive kind, or else followed by a rise-forming a rising wave-that the necessary connectedness of the subsequent with the antecedent clause may not be lost sight of. We may, then, briefly state as the rule, that a different pitch,-generally lower, but it may be higher, and a different rate of utterance,—generally quicker, but it may be slower-are required to distinguish the parenthesis: while the direction of its ultimate inflexion must be correspondent to that of the clause preceding it.

The usual marks of parenthesis () are often omitted, and sometimes a break or dash (-) before and after the parenthetic clause is substituted; but, however the typographic sign may be dispensed with, the vocal sign can never be omitted. Words or phrases in Apposition, and nearly all explanatory or relative clauses are of the nature of parentheses, and require to be similarly delivered.

ELLIPTICAL MEMBER.-When a complemental word or clause is equally related to two contrasted governing words, as, "an estate by gaming," in the following sentence, it is called the elliptical member:-"A good man will love himself too well to lose an estate by gaming, and his neighbour too well to win one." The elliptical member may be placed after either of the antithetic words, but it must not interfere with the order of their inflexions. Thus, the preceding sentence might be written as follows:-"A good man will love himself too well to lose, (or lose,) and his neighbour too well to win an estate by gaming." In the first case, the complemental clause is pronounced with a

N n

rising tone, and in the latter, with a falling: it must follow the direction of the governing emphatic word which it immediately succeeds.

VERB QUESTIONS OF TWO PARTS CONNECTED BY Or.-To prove the necessity of invariably recurring to the rule of sense for the mode of inflecting any sentence, we need only instance questions of this class. By varying the tones with which we pronounce the same words, we ask, by them, two totally different questions. Thus :-" Are you going to Liverpool or Manchester ?"if the voice rise at the end of this sentence, it is a question as to the fact of going, referring equally to either place, and may be answered by yes or no; being equivalent to "Are you going to either of these places?" But if the voice fall at the end of the sentence, it then becomes no question as to the fact of going, but refers only to the place, being equivalent to "To which of these places are you going?"—assuming that you are going to one or other. Questions of this kind, of which the verb is the subject, may always be resolved into "Is it either ?"-can be answered by yes or no, and must have the rising inflexion; and those of which the verb is not the subject, may always be resolved into "which is it?"-cannot be answered by yes or no, and require the falling inflexion at the end.

SERIES.-The ordinary rules for the inflexion of "sentences containing two or more perfectly similar portions in succession,”--a series, show to what extent the habit of framing rules to fit every construction of sentence, instead of referring all sentences to general governing principles, may be carried. Yet, extraordinary as the rules for the series are, they have been copied and recopied, without question, by almost every successive Elocutionary book-maker. "Nothing," says Mr Walker, "can be more various than the pronunciation of a series: almost every different number of particulars requires a different method of varying them; and even those of precisely the same number of particulars admit of a different mode of pronunciation, as the series is either commencing or concluding, simple or compound, single or double, or treble, with many other varieties, too complex to be easily determined." If this theory were correct, no sentence containing a series could be appropriately delivered, till we had first counted the number of particulars in the enumeration: reading at sight would, thus, be impracticable. How far from right-how far from Nature is this principle, and how accurately the rule of sense enables any person of judgment to read at sight, we hope to be able clearly to demonstrate.

A series is said to be simple when it is an enumeration of single words, and to be compound when its members consist of more than a single word. Why a difference should be necessary in the mode of inflecting these serieses is certainly far from obvious; yet all the Walker school of Elocutionists have their separate tables of the simple and of the compound series faithfully copied from the original arrangements of their great leader.

The series is called "commencing" when it begins, but does not end the sentence, and "concluding" when it ends the sentence, whether it begins it or not. The fundamental principle of inflexion would, therefore, demand a rising inflexion at the end of the commencing series, and a falling inflexion at the

end of the concluding series: and so far, Nature and all Elocutionists agree. But with the sing-song, ups and downs, prescribed for the other members, especially of a long series; and, fundamentally, with the principle of having to count the number of members before being able to pronounce the series, Nature is most decidedly at variance. The natural series is, undoubtedly, one of numbers; and in the mode in which numbers are universally counted, we must look for the natural utterance of all enumerations, whether of single words or of sentences.

In the "Practical Elocutionist," a well-known class-book, the first edition of which appeared in 1836, the principle of serial inflexion is thus stated and all experience and observation corroborate its truth.

"To give a practical example that must be understood by the dullest comprehension.—I am to give a person three, four, or five sovereigns. Say, I am to give him five sovereigns. In counting, I must pronounce the numbers up to the fourth with the rising inflexion—that is, the inflexion denoting incompletion,

One', two', three', four',

and the fourth number with a greater degree of the same inflexion, to denote that the next number closes the enumeration;

One', two', three', four", five`.

"Here, then," the author* adds, "is hitting at once the bull's-eye in the Elocutionary target, which has been shot at with various success by all Elocutionists and Guides to Elocution."

Let this be tested in any language, as it has already been in several, and experiment will satisfactorily establish the principle, and demonstrate that this is the natural order of numeral, and consequently of serial inflexions.

The double and treble measures to which the series was originally set by Mr Walker, and to which it has been chanted with but little variation by succeeding Elocutionists, are entirely artificial; coinciding in some few simple instances with the natural arrangements, but fundamentally at variance with the natural principle.

The following Table of Numbers from one to ten exemplifies the order of numeral inflexion with this all serial inflexion must coincide, whether the series is long or short, and whether its members are simple or compound, or a mixture of both.

One.

One, Two.

One, Two, Three.

One, Two, Three, Four.

One, Two, Three, Four, Five.

* Mr Bell, Senior, (London.)

One, Two, Three, Four, Five, six.

One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven.

One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight.

One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine.

One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight, Nine, Ten.

Cover down the concluding numbers in this Table, and the notation shows the inflexion of a commencing series: the Table as it stands shows the ordinary inflexion of a concluding series.

In the concluding series, the reader has a degree of latitude, and an option of inflexion, which, in a commencing series, he cannot have. The effect of a rising inflexion is connective and preparatory, and its adoption on the members of a concluding series carries on the attention of the hearer to the members that follow, so as most forcibly to exhibit them in their concatenation: but if the falling inflexion is adopted, as it may be, with perfect correctness, the sense being formed at the end of each member, then the aggregate of members the series-will in some degree lose force and compactness, but the individual members will gain in emphasis and separate effect.

We have only to add, that as the principle of melody requires an opposite preparatory inflexion before every principal one, the number previous to the last should generally take a modified inflexion upwards or downwards, to introduce the conclusion of the series. But this, like all other rules, is subject to the rule of sense. It would, we conceive, be bad reading, to sacrifice the strongly emphatic effect of the falling inflexion on the penultimate member of the following sentence, for the sake of rendering it preparatory,-as it is marked in Mr Ewing's Elocution,-to the comparatively weak member that concludes.

"Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong."

In this and similar sentences, the radical point of the inflexions gradually rises as the series proceeds, and the effect of a climax is produced. Thus,—

[blocks in formation]

The habit of reading with other than natural tones, with limited inflexions, and with monotonous repetitions of the same radical or pitch-notes, which is so very common, will be most readily broken by the practice of strong and varied inflexions on single words, either from vocabular arrangements, or as they occur in ordinary composition. The latter will at first afford the easier

« EelmineJätka »