The elements of English composition; serving as a sequel to the study of grammar

Front matter

88asWngtfl» ftiiftrg

LIBR J±tt^5T

OF THE LATE

Preface

1HE work now presented to the public, is chiefly intended for the perusal of those whose critical studies are yet in their commencement. To younger students, and to such as have not access to more extensive works, it may, perhaps, convey some useful instruction : it is not intruded upon those who are already conversant in polite literature. Should it be found a suitable introduction to this liberal study, the compiler will have attained the summit of his ambition.

Though it was my principal object to treat of prose composition, yet a few observations on poetry incidentally occur. The remarks which have been suggested with regard to the nature of figurative language, apply equally to prose and to poetry : but the poets have furnished me with the most copious and beautiful illustrations.

The rules of criticism are more successfully inculcated by particular examples than by general precepts. I have, therefore, endeavoured to collect abundance of apposite quotations, in order to illustrate every branch of the subject. In many instances this was an easy task ; but in the classification of the different characters of style, it was attended with the utmost difficulty. To refer the compositions of an author to a particular class, and produce examples from t!>^m in support of this decision, will always be found £

hazardous

IV PREFACE.

hazardous attempt. Of this circumstance Cicero and Quintilian seem to have been sufficiently aware. In treating of the general character of a writer's style, they content themselves with referring to the body of his works, in confirmation of their sentence. To such exemplifications as occur in the following treatise, they have never had recourse.

Without pretending to question the propriety of their method, it may be presumed that to the class of readers for whose perusal these Elements of English Compositioji are chiefly intended, a different mode of procedure may, perhaps, be attended with some advantage. It is of importance for the student to be in some measure acquainted with the style of every author of eminence. The variety of examples exhibited in the course of the work will, at least in his view, be found acceptable. Should they fail in their primary design, they may thus be rendered subservient to another purpose.

To iHustrate the progressive improvement of English composition, I have subjoined a variety of quotations from eminent authors. They are arranged nearly according to the priority of publication in the works from which they are selected. This selection commences where that of Dr. Johnson closes. It includes the most distinguished writers of our own times, except those who still live to enjoy the reputation which their talents have secured.

The volume concludes with a few miscellaneous observations on epistolary composition. To be able to maintain a friendly correspondence with propriety and elegance is assuredly a very desirable accomplishment*

PREFACE. V

plishment. This branch of composition ought therefore to be assiduously cultivated, especially by every younger student.

Ife may, perhaps, be alleged thai in my critical, .strictures I have often betrayed too much severity of censure, and that in general I have been too solicitous to expose the faults of eminent writers. But let it be remembered, that in a work of this kind it was necessary to expose defects, as well as to extol beauties. Those errors which have received the sanction of great names ar'i always dangerous ; as they frequently become the object of absurd imitation.

Towards living merit t am unconscious of having been guilty of the slightest instance of disrespect. If I have occasionally taken the libertyof pointing out a few trivial errors, this circumstance can afford no reasonable cause of offence. In exhibiting examples of the faults, as well as of the beauties, of composition, I have invariably had recourse to such works as seemed in some respect entitled to praise. If I have not treated living authors with all the delicacy and ten - derness recommended by St. Re*al, I h» l, e at least retrained from every wanton attack.

VI PREFACE.

In the following pages the reader need not expect 10 discover any originality of observation : I desire to be regarded in no other light than that of a mere compiler. Concerning every critical subject which has fallen under my review, I have endeavoured to collect the most rational opinions of writers distinguished for their learning and judgment. For any valuable instruction which this compilation may exhibit, the reader is principally indebted to Dr. Blair's Lectures on Rhetoiic, Dr. Campbell's Philosophy of Rhetoric, Lord Karnes's Elements of Criticism, Bishop Lowth's Introduction to English Grammar, and Mr. Melmoth's Letters of Fiizosborne. To other occasional sources of information I have been careful to make the proper references ; but when I availed myself of the treasures amassed by these excellent writers, I forbore to quote their names ; " not that I might appropriate their labours, or usurp their honours, but that I might spare a perpetual repetition by one general acknowledgment."

Chapter I

I HE great and important object of language is, to express the various wants and affections of those by whom it is spoken. In the earlier stages of civil society, man is contented with such comforts as are easily procured, and the operations of the human mind are circumscribed within narrow limits. His vocabulary is consequently scanty, though, at the same time, »t may be fully adequate to every purpose to which ia is applied. But as luxury and refinement advance in their gradual progress, the language of the community becomes more copious and elegant: it not only oversteps its ancient boundaries, but hastens to lay aside its ancient rudeness and barbarism. Material improvements, however, cannot be introduced by any sudden exertion ; they must be the result of that experience which a length of time only can bestow.

Before the elegancies of literature can lay claim to any considerable share of attention, a spirit of general improvement must have begun to pervade the state. Accordingly, we find that vigour and originality of thought have always preceded beauty and accuracy of expression. In the first efforts of untutored genius the harmony of periods is little regarded : such words as most readily occur to the recollection of the writer, are almost indiscriminately adopted ; and these are generally arranged without much attention to elegance or propriety.

Thus, if we take a retrospective view of English lite— tature at no very remote period, we shall often find the

beaut/

2 INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

beauty of the thought obscured by the meanness of the expression. Its pages are frequently deformed with uncouthness and vulgarity. Nor is it altogether untainted with these faults in its present state.

Propriety and beauty of style seem often to have been considered beneath the attention both of an author and a reader. The ancients, however, regarded this subject in a different point of view : to be skilled in their native tongue, was esteemed among the number of the politest accomplishments. Julius Caesar, who was not only a great warrior, but also a man of fashion, was desirous of adding this accomplishment to his other shining qualities : and we are informed that he studied the language of his own country with much application, as we are sure he possessed it in the highest degree of purity and elegance. The literary world cr.nnot sufficiently regret that the treatise which he wrote upon this subject, has perished along with many other valuable works of the same age. But although we are deprived of the bene6t of his observations, we are happily in the possession of an illustrious instance of their effects ; and his own Commentaries will ever remain as the brightest exemplar, not only of true generalship, but also of fine writing. He published them, indeed, only as materials for the use of those who might be disposed to enlarge upon that remarkable period of the Roman history : yet the purity and gracefulness of his style are such, that no.judicious writer afterwards dared to attempt the same subject. Cicero frequently mentions it as a very high encomium, that the clebrated Roman orators possessed the elegance of their native language. He introduces Brutus, declaring that he should prefer

the

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER. 3

the honour of hsing esteemed the great master and improver of Roman eloquence, even to the glory of many triumphs.

Beauty of composition tends to heighten the native charms of truths it therefore ought never to be regarded as an object of small importance. — But it may be alleged that truth requires not the foreign aid of ornament. It is not indeed necessary that she should be exhibited in a glaring habit ; but she ought certainly to be clothed with decency and propriety. A beautiful woman in careless and sordid apparel, can never appear to great advantage.

To Locke, Cudworth, Clarke, and Butler, philosophy owes the most serious obligations: but would those great authors have diminished the utility of their literaTy labours by employing more smooth and polished language ? Never, indeed, does the force of reason more effectually subdue the human mind, than when she is supported by the powerful assistance of manly eloquence } as, on the contrary, the most legitimate arguments may be rendered unavailing by being attended with a feeble and unanimated expression. There is as much difference between comprehending a thought clothed in the language of Cicero, and that of an ordinary writer, as there is between viewing an object by thi light of the sun and by the light of a taper.

Malebranehe has assuredly fallen into a very strange conceit when he insinuates, that the pleasure arising from tire perusal of a beautiful composition is of a criminal nature, and has its source in the weakness and effeminacy of the human mind. That man must possess a very uncommon severity of temper, who can find

any

4 INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.

any thing to condemn in the practice of embellishing truth with additional charms, and winning the heart by captivating the ear; in uniting roses with the thorns of science, and joining pleasure with instruction. The mind is delighted with a fine style, upon the same principle that it prefers regularity to confusion, and beauty to deformity. A taste for the beauties of composition is so far from being a mark of any depravity of our nature, that I should rather be inclined to consider it as an evidence of the moral rectitude of our mental constitution, since it furnishes a direct proof that we retain some relish of order and harmony.

No object has ever appeared of greater importance to wise men, than to tinct.ure the young and susceptible mind with an early relish for the pleasures of taste. Easy in general is the transition from the pursuit of these to the discharge of the higher and more important duties of human life. Sanguine hopes may be entertained of those whose minds have this liberal and elegant turn. It is favourable to the growth of many virtues : whereas to be devoid of taste for the fine arts, is justly regarded as an unpromising symptom in youth, and raises suspicions of their being prone to low gratifications, or destined to drudge in the more vulgar and illiberal pursuits of life. There are few good dispositions of any kind with which the improve • ment of this faculty is not in some degree connected. A cultivated taste increases sensibilty to all the tender and humane passions, by giving them frequent exercise ; while, on the other hand, it tends to weaken the more violent and fierce emotions, by exciting in us a lively sense of decorum.

From

PURITY OF STYLE. O

From these observations it will appear that the charge of Malebranche is not only ill founded, but absolutely ridiculous. One would however be apt to suspect that certain writers among us had considered the subject in the same gloomy point of view : or at least that tlvey had studiously ^avoided every refinement in style, as unbecoming a lover of truth and wisdom. Their sentiments are debased by the lowest expressions ; they seem condemned to the curse of creeping upon the ground all the days of their life.

But there is another extreme, which ought also to be carefully avoided. Language may be too pompous, is well as too mean. Some authors mistake pomp for dignity; and with the view of raising their expressions above vulgar language, elevate them above common apprehension. They seem to consider it as a mark of their genius that it requires some ingenuity to discover their meaning, but when their meaning is discovered, it seldom repays the labour of the search.

Chap. II

OF PURITY OF STYLE, gTYLE has been defined to be the peculiar manner in which a man expresses his conceptions through the medium of language. It differs from mere language or words. Though the words which an author employs be unexceptionable, yet his style may be chargeable with great faults ; it may be dry, stiff, feeble, affected. The style of an author is always intimately connected with his manner of thinking : it

is

O PURITY OF STYLE.

is a picture of the ideas which arise in his mind, and of the manner in which they do arise. Hence the difficulty of drawing an exact line of separation between the style and the sentiment.

All that can be required of language is to convey our ideas clearly to the mind of others, and, at the same time, to clothe them in an advantageous dress. The two general heads of perspicuity and ornament, therefore, comprehend all the qualities of a good style. Perspicuity demands our chief care ; for, without this quality, the richest ornaments of language only glimmer through the dark ; and puzzle, instead of pleasing, the reader. An author's meaning ought always to he obvious, even to the most careless and inattentive reader ; so that it may strike his mind, as the light of the sun strikes our eyes, though they are not directed towards it. We must study, not only that every reader may understand us, but that it shall be impossible for him not to understand us. If we are obliged to follow a writer with much care, to pause, and to read over his sentences a second time, in order to comprehend them fully, he will never please us long. Mankind are too indolent to relish so much labour. They may pretend to admire the author's depth, after they have discovered his meaning ; but they will seldom he inclined to bestow upon his work a second perusal.

In treating of perspicuity of style, it will be proper, in the first place, to direct our attention to single words and phrases, and afterwards to the construction of sentences.

Perspicuity, considered with respect to Words and

phrases, phrases, require the qualities of purity, propriety, and precision. The two first of these are often confounded with each other ; and, indeed, they are very nearly allied. A distinction, however, obtains between them. Purity of style consists in the use of such words, and such constructions, as belong to the idiom of the language which we use ; in opposition to words and phrases which are imported from other languages, or that are obsolete, or new-coined, or used without proper authority. Propriety of style consists in the selection of such words, as the best and most established usage has appropriated to those ideas which we employ them to express. It implies the correct and happy application of them, according to that usage, in opposition to vulgarisms, or low expressions ; and to words and phrases that would be less significant of the ideas which we intend to convey. Style may be pure, that is, it may be strictly English,, without Scoticisms or Gallicisms, or ungrammatical and unwarranted expressions of any kind, and may nevertheless be deficient in propriety. The words may be unskilfully chosen, not adapted to the subject, nor fully expressive of the author's sentiments. He may have taken his words and phrases from the general mass of the English language ; but his selection may happen to be injudicious.

Purity may justly be denominated grammatical truth. It consists in the conformity of the expression to the sentiment which the writer intends to convey ; as moral truth consists in the conformity of the sentiment intended to be conveyed, to the sentiment actually entertained ; and logical truth in the conformity of

the

H PURITY OP STYLE.

the sentiment to the nature of things. The opposite to logical truth is error ; to moral truth a lie ; to grammatical truth a solecism.

The only standard by which the conformity implied in grammatical truth must be ascertained in every language, is the authorised, national, and present use of that language.

Grammatical errors, foreign idioms, and obsolete or new-coined words, were mentioned as inconsistent with purity of style. It will not be improper to collect a few hints concerning each of these faults.

I. GRAMMATICAL ERRORS.

i

It is not in consequence of any peculiar irregularity or difficulty inherent in the English language, that the general practice, both of speaking and writing it, is chargeable with inaccuracy. That inaccuracy proceeds rather from its simplicity and facility ; circumstances which are apt to persuade us that a grammatical study of our native tongue is altogether superfluous.* Were the language less easy and simple, we should find ourselves under a necessity of studying it with greater care and attention. But we commonly take for granted, that we possess a competent know-

• " Another will say, it wanteth grammar. Nay, truly, it hath that praise, that it wants not grammar ; for grammar it might have, but it needs it not, being so easy in itself, and so void of those cumbersome difference of cases, genders, moods and tenses ; which, I think, was a piece of the tower of Babylon's curse, that a man .•hcn!<i br> put to school to learn his mother tongue.'' — Sidney's Deftnce of Fcesy.

ledge

PURITY OP STYLE. 9

ledge of it, and are able on any occasion to apply our knowledge to practice. A faculty, solely acquired by use, conducted by habit, and tried by the ear, carries us on without the labour of reflection : we meet with no obstacles in our progress, or we do not perceive them ; we find ourselves able to proceed without rules, and we never suspect that they may be of any use. A grammatical study of our own language forms no part of the ordinary course of instruction ; and we seldom apply to it of our own accord. This, however, is a deficiency which no other advantages can supply. Much practice in the polite world, and a general acquaintance with the best authors, must undoubtedly be considered as excellent helps ; but even these will hardly be sufficient. A critical knowledge of ancient languages, and an intimate acquaintance with ancient authors, will be found still less adequate to the purpose. Dr. Bentley, the greatest critic and most able grammarian of the age in which he lived, was notoriously deficient in the knowledge of his native tongue.

Grammatical errors are so plentifully scattered over the pages of our eminent writers, that it will be no difficult task to select a sufficient number of instances.

1 . Grammatical Errors in the Use of Pronouns.

We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to the same proportion more than u*.— Swift's Conduct of the Allies.

King Charles, and more than him, the duke, and the Popish faction, were at liberty to form new schemes .~-Bcline;broke's Dissertation on Parties.

Phalaris, who was so much older than hir t ~—Bentley's Dissertation on Phalaris.

The

The drift of all his .sermons was, to prepare the Jews for the re* ception of a prophet, mightier than him, and whose shoes he was not worthy to hear. — Atterbwy's Sermons.

If the king gives ns leave, you or I may as lawfully preach, as them that do.— Hobbrs's History of Civil Wars.

In all these examples, the nominative cases of the pronouns ought to have been used. This will more plainly appear from the following resolution of the first illustration : " We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to the same proportion more than we were obliged to."

The Goths, the Vandals, the Gepidae, the Burgundians, the Alemanni wasted each other's strength, and whosoever vanquished, they vanquished the enemies of Rome. — Gibbon's Hist. <tf the Roman Empire.

Who is the poet, but lately arrived in Elysium, whom I saw Spenser lead in, and present him to Virgil ? — Lyttleton's Dialogues of the Dead.

Here the pronouns they and him are redundant. In

the latter example, the accusative whom is understood

before the verb present : m whom I saw Spenser lead

in, and whom I saw Spenser present to Virgil."

We are alone ; here's ncne but thee and I. — Shakspeart.

Instead of thee it should be thou.

For ever in this humble cell,

Let thee and / my fair one dwell. — Prior.

The construction requires me instead of /.

He, whom ye pretend reigns in heaven, is so far from protecting the miserable sons of men, that he perpetually delights to blast the sweetest flowerets in the garden of Hope. — Hawkesumtld Adventurer.

It ought to be who, the nominative case to reigns, not whom, as if it were the accusative or objective case governed by pretend.

Whim

PURITY OF STYLE. 1 I

Whom do men say that I am ? — St. Matth< ir. Whom think ye that I am ? — Acts of the J pasties.

In both these passages it ought to be who; which is not governed by the verb, say, or think, but by the verb am.

These feasts were celebrated to the honour of Osirii, whom the Grecians called Dionysius, and is the same with Bacchus.— Sic*/* on the Meehun. Oper. of the Spirit.

Here the relative pronoun of the objective case must be understood as the nominative to the verb is. The passage ought to have stood thus : "These feasts were celebrated to the honour of Osiris, whom the Grecians called Dionysus, and who is the same with Bacchus."

Who should I meet at the coffee-house t'other night, but my old friend ? — Steele, Spectator.

Is it another pattern of this answerers fair dealing-, to give us hints that the author is dead, and yet to lay the suspicion upon somebody, I know not who, in tlue country. — Sicift's Tate of a Tub.

Here the construction requires whom.

Some writers have used ye as the accusative plural of the pronoun thou. This is an infringement of the rules of grammar.

His wrath, which one day will destroy ye both. — Milton. The more shame for ye ; holy men I thought ye. — Shakspenrt. I feel the gales that from ye blow. — Gray. But tyrants dread ye> lest your jnst decree Transfer the power and set the people free. — Prior.

This mode of expression may perhaps be allowed in the comic and burlesque style, which often imitates a vulgar and incorrect pronunciation. But in the serious and solemn style, no authority is sufficient to justify 10 manifest a solecism.

I heard

12 PURITV OF STYLE.

I heard it first observed by an ingenious and learned old gentle* man lately deceased, that many of Mr. Hobbes his seeming new opinions are gathered from those which Sextus Empiricus exposed. — Dry dens Life of Plutarch.

My paper is Ulysses his bow, in which every man 6f wit or learning may try his strength. — Addison, Guardian.

This by the calumniators of Epicurus his philosophy was objected m one of the most scandalous of all their sayings.— Cowley's Essays.

The pronoun his is here employed to denote the possessive case of the noun which it accompanies. The writers have erroneously imagined that the 's which generally marks this case, is a contraction of the possessive pronoun ; whereas it is only a contraction of the ancient Saxon genitive termination es.

2. Grammatical Errors in the Use of Verbs.

And Rebekah took goodly raiment of her eldest son Esau, which xeert with her in the house, and put them upon Jacob her |youngest son. — Genesis.

The number of the names together were about an hundred and twenty.— Acts of the Apostles.

If the blood of bulls, and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ purge your conscience from dead works. — St, Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews.

I have considered what have been said on both sides of the controversy — Tillotson's Sermons.

One would think there teas more sophists than one had a finger in this volume of letters. — Bentley's Dissert, on Socrates's Epistles.

There's two or three of us have seen strange sights. — Shakspeare. These instances require no elucidation, the reader will easily perceive where the error lies.

Knowing that you was my old mastei's good friend, I could not forbear sending you the melancholy news of his death. — Addison, Spectator.

I am just now as well a* when you was here—Pope's Letters.

Desir*

Desire this passionate lover to give you a character of his mistress, he will telt you that he is at a loss for words to describe her charms, and will ask you seriously, if ever you was acquainted with a goddess or an angel. — Hume's Essays.

As the word you is confessedly plural, its correspondent verb, agreeably to the analogy of all languages, ought also to be plural, whether the discourse be addressed to a single person or to more than one. Many other writers of no small reputation have, however, used the ungrammatical expression you was. But if tire singular were at all admissible after you, there would strrl be a violation of grammar in was, which is confined to the first and third persons ; the second being wast.

Thou hangman, thou temple-robber, thou clod of earth, from what brothel did thou come up in patins, munTd up, with thy breath smelling of the stews. — Arbuthnot on the Scolding of the Ancients.

Thou great First Cause, least understood,

Who all my sense confiri'd To know but this, that thou art good,

And that myself am blind ; Yet gave me, in this dark estate,

To see the good from ill; And, binding Nature fast in fate, *

Left free the human will.— Pope.

Nor thou, lord Arthur, shalt escape ;

To thee I often called in vain, Against that assassin in crape ;

Yet thou couldest tamely see me slain ; Nor, when I felt the dreadful blow,

Or chid the dean, or pineh'd his spouse. — Swift.

To correspond with the pronoun thou, all these verbi ought to have been in the second person singular ; instead of which, they are in the second person plural, as if they corresponded with the pronoun you. Writers generally have recourse to this mode of expression,

that

I4« PURITY OF STYLE.

that they may avoid harsh terminations. — The distinct forms of thou and you are often used promiscuously.

The confession is ingenuous, and I hope more from thee now, than I could if you had promised. — Arbuthnut's Notis and Memorandums,

Thy own words have convinced me — (stand a little more out of tlie sun if you please) — that thou hast not the least idea of true honour. — Fielding's Dialogues between Alexander and Diogenes.

Base ungrateful boy ! miserable as I am, yet I cannot cease to love thee. My love even uow speaks in my resentment. lam still your father, nor can your usage form my heart anew. — Goldsmith's Essays.

Though the ministers of a tyrant's wrath, to thee they are faith ful, and but too willing to execute the orders which you unjustly imposed upon them. — fVulpole's Castle of Otranto.

This is not contrary to the rules of English grammar ; but it is certainly inelegant and improper.

Rut the temper, as well as knowledge, of a modern historian, require a more sober and accurate language. Gibbon's History of the Roman Empire.

Magnus, with ftnir thousand of his supposed accomplices, were put to death. Ibid.

Those whom the splendour of their rank, or the extent of their capacity, have placed upon the summit of human fife, have not often given any just occasion to envy in those who look up to them from a lower station. Johwon's Life of Sazage.

He knows not what spleen, languor, or listlessness, are — Blair's Sermons.

Neither death nor torture were sufficient to subdue the minds of Cargill, and his intrepid followers.— Fox's History <tf James the Second.

The above errors have apparently been committed through inattention to the proper signification of the disjunctive particles.

Each of these words imply some pursuit or object relinquished. Blair's Rhetoric.

It

It is requisite that the lauguage of an heroic poem should be both perspicuous and sublime. In proportion as tither of these two qua litics are wanting, the language is imperfect.— Addison, Spectator.

Neithtr ef them are remarkable for precision. — Blair'* Rhetoric.

We should reckon every circumstance which enable them to divide and to maintain themselves in distinet and independent * commu nities. — Ferguson's History of Civil Society.

"tin observable, that every one of the letters bear date after his banishment — Betttlcy's Dissert, on Themi it odes' s Epistles.

Here the distributive pronominal adjectives, each, either, neither, and every, are ungrammatically connected with verbs of the plural number.

None, which is a compound of no one, is manifestly singular : but it is sometimes improperly connected with a plural verb.