- fully preconceived. Whereas, in Burke, whatever may have been the preconception, it receives a new determination or inflection at every clause of the sentence. Some collateral adjunct of the main proposition, some temperament or restraint, some oblique glance at its remote affinities, will invariably be found to attend the progress of his sentences, -like the spray from a waterfall, or the scintillations from the iron under the blacksmith's hammer. Hence, whilst a writer of Dr. Johnson's class seems only to look back upon his thoughts, Burke looks forward, — and does in fact advance and change his own station concurrently with the advance of the sentences. This peculiarity is no doubt in some degree due to the habit of extempore speaking, but not to that only." 1 A writer may connect his sentences or paragraphs by repeating an idea or a word; or he may make the connection plain by means of a conjunction or other particle. The more he varies his methods, the less likely he is to call attention to them. If he achieves the result, without betraying the processes, he is justly said to have "a flowing style." "In Shakspere one sentence begets the next naturally; the meaning is all inwoven. He goes on kindling like a meteor through the dark atmosphere." 3 A style characterized by the corresponding demerit is well described by the homely French metaphor as décousu,a thing of shreds and patches; or, to change the figure, "the sentences in a page have the same connection with each other that marbles have in a bag; they touch without adhering."3 In every sentence, paragraph, or essay, regard should be had to Unity of composition. However numerous and varied the parts, they should Unity of composition. be made to appear as parts of one whole, should be subservient to one principal end. Every sentence should contain but one principal assertion; every paragraph should discuss the subject in hand from but one point of view; every essay or discourse should treat of but one subject, and of but one proposition relating to that subject at a time, - digressions, if indulged in at all, being clearly marked as digressions, and distinctly subordinated to the main purpose.1 “Every man, as he walks through the streets, may contrive to jot down an independent thought; a short-hand memorandum of a great truth. . . . Standing on one leg, you may accomplish this. The labor of composition begins when you have to put your separate threads of thought into a loom; to weave them into a continuous whole; to connect, to introduce them; to blow them out or expand them; to carry them to a close." 2 Blair's rules for preserving the unity of the sentence, which with his examples have been copied by succeeding writers, are as follows: "I. In the course of the same sentence not to shift the scene. "After we came to anchor, they put me on shore, where I was welcomed by all my friends, who received me with the greatest kindness.' Here the putting on shore completes one act, and what follows changes the scene, and should have made a new sentence." Another example may be given: 66 I received the letter you wrote from Chicago yesterday, and, without a moment's delay or waiting for dinner, proceeded at once to Mr. Bunsby's office, though it was raining at the time, and the clerk said he had just telegraphed his acceptance." "II. To avoid crowding into one sentence heterogeneous ideas. “Tillotson died in this year. He was exceedingly beloved both by King William and Queen Mary, who nominated Dr. Tenison, Bishop of Lincoln, to succeed him.' The last clause, having no 1 See also pp. 164, 186. 2 De Quincey: Essay on Style. Examples of the evil effects of evading this "labor of composition are to be found in De Quincey's own writings. natural connection with the leading proposition, ought not to have been included in the same sentence. "Their march was through an uncultivated country, whose savage inhabitants fared hardly, having no other riches than a breed of lean sheep, whose flesh was rank and unsavory, by reason of their continual feeding upon sea-fish.'"' Another example may be given: "Coningsby who had lost the key of his carpet-bag, which he finally cut open with a pen-knife that he found on his writing table, and the blade of which he broke in the operation, only reached the drawing-room as the figure of his grandfather, leaning on his ivory cane, and following his guests, was just visible in the distance. He1 was soon overtaken." 2 The details about Coningsby's carpet-bag do not belong in the same sentence with the details of his arrival in the drawingroom. It would have been better to divide the sentence into two: the first enumerating the circumstances that detained Coningsby; the second ending with a general statement about the lateness of his arrival. This, of course, on the supposition that the particulars about the carpet-bag were worth mentioning at all.3 This sentence may also be deemed objectionable under Blair's first rule.4 "III. To avoid excess of parenthetical clauses. "IV. Not to add members after a full and perfect close. "Temple says of Fontenelle, 'He falls so grossly into the censure of the old poetry, and preference of the new, that I could not read his strains without indignation; which no quality among men is so apt to raise in me as self-sufficiency.' This last clause is an extraneous addition to the sentence, which is naturally closed at indignation." Another example may be given: "Passing 5 now to the wind instruments, the exhibit of the French makers stands first, although it is small, they having sent none but first-class instruments; and they have captured nearly, every prize, which is worthy of note, even if it is not a circumstance which is very creditable to native industry and intelligence.”▾ 1 See p. 72. 8 See p. 124. 6 See pp. 44, 72. 2 Disraeli: Coningsby, chap. v. 7 See p. 115. See also p. 187. A writer who has mastered the foregoing rules will find that they will aid him to secure Unity in paragraphs and in the still longer divisions of a composition, as well as in sentences; but he cannot expect to acquire this difficult excellence in large measure, without making himself familiar with authors distinguished for method, and giving himself much practice in composition conducted with special reference to arrangement. The four requisites of good composition. CHAPTER IV. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. THUS we have seen that to the efficiency of communication by language four things are necessary: Grammatical Purity (or Correctness), — the use of those expressions and those only which are accepted by the consentient practice of the speakers or writers of the present time who enjoy the best national reputation; Clearness (or Perspicuity), — the quality in style by which the meaning is conveyed to the person addressed, in appropriate words, as few as are compatible with completeness of statement, and arranged as nearly in the order of the thought as the language permits; Force, the quality that selects the most effective expressions and arranges them in the most effective manner; and Elegance (or Beauty), — conformity to good taste. While engaged in the act of composition, a writer should think little about Force, and not at all about positive Elegance; but he should constantly aim to make himself intelligible, sure that if he does not succeed in doing this, other merits will be of little avail, and that if he does succeed, other merits will be likely to come unsought. To this end, he should obtain as extensive a command of language as possible. "When discoursing in public, let your choice of words be neither tainted with indelicacy, nor tarnished with affectation. Let your word bear the express image of your thought, and transmit it com |