O F CRITICISM. THE SEVENTH EDITION. WITH THE AUTHOR'S LAST CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS. VOLUME II. EDINBURGH: LONDON. M,DCC,LXXXVIII. ELEMENTS O F CRITICISM. CHAP. XVIII. BEAUTY OF LANGUAGE. Ο F all the fine arts, painting only and sculpture are in their nature imitative. An ornamented field is not a copy or imitation of nature, but nature itfelf embellifhed. Architecture is productive of originals, and copies not from nature. Sound and motion may in fome measure be imitated by mufic; but for the most part mufic, like architecture, is productive of originals. Language copies not from nature, more than mufic or architecture; unless, where, like mufic, it is imitative of found or motion. Thus, in the defcription of particular founds, language fometimes furnisheth words, which, befide their customary power of exciting A 2 exciting ideas, resemble by their softness or harfhnefs the founds defcribed; and there are words which, by the celerity or flowness of pronunciation, have fome resemblance to the motion they fignify. The imitative power of words goes one ftep farther: the loftinefs of fome words makes them proper symbols of lofty ideas; a rough fubject is imitated by harfh-founding words; and words of many fyllables pronounced flow and fmooth, are expreffive of grief and melancholy. Words have a feparate effect on the mind, abstracting from their fignification and from their imitative power: they are more or less agreeable to the ear, by the fulness, fweetnefs, faintnefs, or roughness of their tones. Thefe are but faint beauties, being known to thofe only who have more than ordinary acuteness of perception. Language poffeffeth a beauty fuperior greatly in degree, of which we are eminently fenfible when a thought is communicated with perfpicuity and fprightliness. This beauty of language, arifing from its power of expreffing thought, is apt to be confounded with the beauty of the thought itself: the beauty of thought, tranfferred to the expreffion, makes it appear more beautiful. But thefe beauties, if we wish to think Chap. 2, part 1. fect. 5. Demetrius Phalereus (of Elocution, fect. 75.) makes the fame obfervation. We are apt, fays that author, to confound the language with the fubject; and if the latter be 'nervous, we judge the fame. of think accurately, must be distinguished from each other. They are in reality fo diftinct, that we fometimes are conscious of the highest pleasure language can afford, when the subject expreffed is difagreeable: a thing that is loathfome, or a fcene of horror to make one's hair ftand on end, may be described in a manner fo lively, as that the difagreeableness of the fubject thall not even obfcure the agreeableness of the defeription. The 'caufes of the original beauty of language, confidered as fignificant, which is a branch of the present subject, will be explained in their order. I fhall only at prefent obferve, that this beauty is the beauty of means fitted to an end, that of communicating thought and hence it evidently appears, that of feveral expreffions all conveying the fame thought, the most beautiful, in the fenfe now mentioned, is that which in the noft perfect manner answers its end. The feveral beauties of language above mentioned, being of different kinds, ought to be handled feparately. I fhall begin with those beauties of language that arife from found; after which will follow the beauties of language confidered as fignificant: this order appears natural; for the found of the former. But they are clearly diftinguishable; and it is not uncommon to find subjects of great dignity dressed in mean language. Theopompus is celebrated for the force of his diction; but erroneously: his fubject indeed has great force, but his ftyle very little. |