moderns especially, whofe ftyle, by inverfions too violent, is rendered harsh and obfcure. Sufpenfion of the thought till the close of the period, ought never to be preferred before perfpicuity. Neither ought fuch fufpenfion to be attempted in a long period; because in that cafe the mind is bewildered amidft a profufion of words: a traveller, while he is puzzled about the road, relishes not the finest prospect;

All the rich presents which Aftyages had given him at parting, keeping only fome Median horfes, in order to propagate the breed of them in Perfia, he diftributed among his friends whom he left at the court of Ecbatana.

Travels of Cyrus, book 1.

The foregoing rules concern the arrangement of a fingle period: I add one rule more concerning the distribution of a discourse into different perieds. A fhort period is lively and familiar: a long period, requiring more attention, makes an impreffion grave and folemn *. In general, a writer ought to study a mixture of long and fhort periods, which prevent an irksome uniformity, and entertain the mind with variety of impreffions. In particular, long periods ought to be avoided till the

F 4

Demetrius Phalereus (of Elocution, fect. 44.) observes, that long members in a period make an impreffion of gravity and importance. The fame obfervation is applicable to periods.

the reader's attention be thoroughly engaged; and therefore a difcourfe, especially of the familiar kind, ought never to be introduced with a long period. For that reason, the commencement of a letter to a very young lady on her marriage is faulty:

Madam, The hurry and impertinence of receiving and paying vifits on account of your marriage, being now over, you are beginning to enter into a course of life, where you will want much advice to divert you from falling into many errors, fopperies, and follies, to which your fex is fubject.

Swift.

See another example, ftill more faulty, in the commencement of Cicero's oration, Pro Archia poeta.

Before proceeding farther, it may be proper to review the rules laid down in this and the preceding fection, in order to make fome general obfervations. That order of the words and members of a period is juftly termed natural, which correfponds to the natural order of the ideas that compofe the thought. The tendency of many of the foregoing rules is to fubstitute an artificial arrangement, in order to catch fome beauty either of found or meaning for which there is no place in the natural order. But feldom it happens, that in the fame period there is place for a plurality of thefe

these rules: if one beauty can be retained, another must be relinquifhed; and the only queftion is, Which ought to be preferred? This queftion cannot be refolved by any general rule: if the natural order be not relished, a few trials will difcover that artificial order which has the best effect; and this exercife, fupported by a good taste, will in time make the choice eafy. All that can be faid in general is, that in making a choice, found ought to yield to fignification.

The tranfpofing words and members out of their natural order, fo remarkable in the learned languages, has been the fubject of much fpeculation. It is agreed on all hands, that such tranfpofition or inverfion beftows upon a period a very fenfible degree of force and elevation; and yet writers feem to be at a lofs how to account for this effect. Cerceau afcribes fo much power to inverfion, as to make it the characteristic of French verfe, and the fingle circumftance which in that language diftinguishes verfe from profe: and yet he pretends not to say, that it hath any other effect but to raife furprise; he muft mean curiofity, which is done by fufpending the thought during the period, and bringing it out entire at the clofe. This indeed is one effect of inverfion; but neither its fole effect, nor even that which is the most remarkable, as is made evident above. But waving cenfure,

* Reflections fur la poësie Françoise,

1

1

cenfure, which is not an agreeable task, I enter into the matter; and begin with obferving, that if conformity between words and their meaning be agreeable, it muft of course be agreeable to find the fame order or arrangement in both. Hence the beauty of a plain or natural style, where the order of the words correfponds precisely to the order of the ideas. Nor is this the fingle beauty of a natural style: it is also agreeable by its fimplicity and perfpicuity. This obfervation throws light upon the fubject: for if a natural style be in itself agreeable, a tranfpofed ftyle cannot be fo; and therefore its agreeableness must arise from admitting fome pofitive beauty that 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 susceptible of many beauties that are totally excluded in a natural arrangement. From these premises it clearly follows, that inverfion ought not to be indulged, unless in order to reach fome beauty fuperior to thofe of a natural style. It may with great certainty be pronounced, that every inverfion which is not governed by this rule, will appear harsh and strained, and be disrelished 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 numberlefs ornaments that find no place in a natural style: hence the force, the elevation,

the

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 between Sound and Signification.

A

Refemblance between the found of certain words and their fignification, is a beauty that has escaped no critical writer, and yet is not handled with accuracy by any of them. They have probably been of opinion, that a beauty fo obvious to the feeling, requires no explanation. This is an error; and to avoid it, I fhall give ex-\ amples of the various resemblances between found and fignification, accompanied with an endeavour to explain why fuch resemblances are beautiful. I begin with examples where the resemblance between the found and fignification is the most entire; and next examples where the refemblance is lefs and lefs fo.

There being frequently a ftrong resemblance of one found to another, it will not be furprifing to find an articulate found refembling one that is not articulate: thus the found of a bow-ftring is imitated by the words that express it:

-The