CHAPTER II.

OF THE ORAL PROPERTIES OF STYLE.

§ 250. THE oral properties of style include those of EUPHONY and HARMONY.

The ultimate distinction between euphony and harmony as properties of language consists in this; that euphony respects the sound or the phonetic side of language exclusively, while harmony regards the sound only in relation to the thought or to the logical side. Euphony has respect to the sounds of words as they affect the ear, and are regarded merely as sounds, and independently of any signification they may have. In harmony, sounds are regarded in relation to the thought which they express. Hence the effect of euphony is a mere sensation on the outward ear; while that of harmony is an emotion and springs directly from an intellectual perception. Euphony addresses the lowest form of the sensibility the animal sense; harmony the highest- the passive imagination.

Another distinction, growing out of the one already named, is this; — that euphony respects chiefly single words, while harmony respects only a succession of words. In some cases, indeed, euphony is violated in the combination of words, when the effect of the enunciation is disagreeable merely because of the succession of particular sounds. Thus the sentence," The hosts stood still," is in violation rather of euphony than of harmony, the offensiveness to the ear arising out of the difficulty of enunciating the elemental sounds here brought into proximity. The expression of thought, on the

other hand, being ever continuous, harmony appears only in. a succession of words. The sentence," He behaved himself exceedingly discreetly," is faulty in harmony, not in euphony; for while it is offensive to the ear, it is not as mere sounds. "The enunciation of the sentence is easy and the sounds themselves rather pleasant than otherwise. But in the communication of thought, we demand variety and distinctness in the expression of all its various relations. In this sentence, the similarity of sound in the last two words indicates a similarity of relation, and we are disappointed and so far offended in not finding the sense answering to the sound in this respect.

Hence it may sometimes happen that euphony must be sacrificed in order to the most perfect harmony. As in music the fullest harmonious effect of a whole strain requires sometimes the introduction of discords, so in speech, the most perfect expression of the sentiment may demand the selection of words that in comparison with others are more harsh and difficult of utterance.

Practically, whether the fault in a sentence offensive to the ear be one against euphony or one against harmony may be determined by the circumstance that a sentence deficient in euphony is always difficult of enunciation; an inharmonious sentence is not necessarily difficult of utterance.

It should be observed, moreover, that euphony is sometimes a constituent of harmony.

§ 251. The oral properties of style, being founded on the nature of language as consisting of sounds, strictly belong only to spoken discourse. Yet as in the silent perusal of written discourse the mind translates the characters into the sounds which they represent, even such discourse must be pronounced defective unless these properties appear in it.

As the practiced musician instantly detects any defect in

the harmony while his eye runs silently over the pages of written music, so even in silent reading we are unpleasantly affected by any violation of the oral properties of style. We experience a sensation of weariness from the silent perusal of a work deficient in these properties precisely like that felt after an audible reading. Language never entirely conceals this peculiarity of its nature as made up of sounds, or as oral, even when it appears in the form of a visible symbol addressed to the eye alone.

§ 252. The oral properties of style can be best acquired only under the influence of the ear while listening to the audible pronunciation of discourse.

It is difficult to comprehend how a deaf-mute can ever be sensible of the euphony or harmony of discourse; although experience shows that even he may write poetry, which, more than any other form of discourse, as involving at least rhythm and rhyme, seems to require the superintendence and guidance of the ear. It is safe, notwithstanding, to assume that the writer who neglects to cultivate the ear in reference to the construction of his sentences must be liable to fail in these properties of style. The importance of them, even to written discourse, may be seen in the fact that the writings of Addison owe no small part of their attractiveness to the musical structure of his style. The public speaker especially needs to subject himself to much training of the ear, in order to give it such a control over his style of expression that his sentences, without conscious design, shall as it were form themselves in accordance with the principles of euphony and harmony.

Next to the study of discourse as pronounced by living orators, may be recommended recitation from the best poets and orators. Every student of oratory should devote a portion of time daily to this exercise or to that of reading aloud composition excelling in musical properties. The speeches of eminent orators generally possess these excellences in a

higher degree than other classes of prose composition. The various writings of Burke, of Milton, and of Addison furnish, however, excellent studies for the acquisition of these properties. The Greek and Latin languages, also, having been formed, in a preeminent degree, under the influence of the ear, inasmuch as poetry and oratory were the earlier forms in which they developed themselves, may be profitably studied for this purpose.

As studies of this kind respect immediately the culture of the ear alone, it should ever be remembered that they can be prosecuted to best advantage only by audible pronunciation.

CHAPTER III.

OF EUPHONY.

§ 253. EUPHONY in style respects the character of the sounds of words regarded merely as sounds without reference to any thought which they may express.

The sounds of words vary only in four different ways, namely in respect to pitch, force, time, and quality. But it is obvious euphony has nothing to do with variations of pitch, any further at least than this, that it requires the successions of pitch to be not monotonously uniform. This part of the field, however, is so entirely included within the province of harmony that it may here with propriety be wholly passed

over.

Neither has euphony any thing to do with the time of sounds, with quantity, except so far as quantity is a constituent of accent.

The only points to be considered here, therefore, are force as it appears in accent, and quality of sound.

§ 254. Euphony requires the avoidance of such words and expressions as are difficult of utterance on account of the succession of unaccented syllables.

There are many words in our language which it is difficult to enounce on account of the number of unaccented syllables occurring in immediate succession, as, for instance, meteorological, desultoriness, imitativeness, imprecatory. Such words, so far as practicable, should be avoided in all elevated discourse. They are, for the most part, of Greek or Latin origin.