England, or at least somewhere current within the British pale.

Obs. The only material difference between them is, that the one is more usually the error of the learned, the other of the unlearned. But if, in this view, the former is entitled to greater indulgence from respect paid to learning; in another light, it is entitled to less, from its being more commonly the result of affectation.

Corol. Thus, two essential qualities of usage, in regard to language, have been settled, that it be both reputable and national.

86. PRESENT USE is that which falls within the knowledge or remembrance of men now living, and which, in fact, regulates our style. (Art. 76.)

Illus. 1. If present use is to be renounced for ancient, it will be necessary to determine at what precise period of antiquity, we are to obtain our rules of language. But one might be inclined to remove the standard to the distance of a century and a half, while another may, with as good reason, fix it three centuries backwards, and another six. Now as the language of any one of these periods, if judged by the use of any other, would, no doubt, be found entirely barbarous ; either the present use must be the standard of the present language, or the language does not admit of any standard: but experience proves, that critics have not the power of reviving at pleasure old fashioned terms, inflections and combinations, and of making such alterations on words, as will bring them nearer to what they suppose to be the etymon; and hence we infer, that there is no other dictator here but use. Nor will it ever be the arbitrary rules of any man, or body of men whatever, that will ascertain the language; yet words are by no means to be accounted the worse for being old, if they are not obsolete; neither is any word the better for being new. On the contrary, the sovereign dominion of custom over language, evinces, that some time is absolutely necessary to constitute that custom or use, on which the establishment of words depends. Yet it is certain, that when we are in search of precedents for any word or idiom, there are certain mounds, over which we cannot leap with safety. The authority of Hooker or of Raleigh, how great soever their fame be, will not now be admitted in support of a term or expression not to be found in any good writer of a later date.

2. But the boundary must not be fixed at the same date in every species of composition. Poetry, which hath ever been allowed a wider range than prose, enjoys, in this respect, a singular indulgence to compensate for the peculiar restraints which she is laid under by the measure. And this indulgence is fraught with a twofold advantage; convenience to the poet, and gratification to the reader. Diversity in the style relieves the ear, which hath little delight from sameness of metre. But still there are limits to this diversity. The authority of Milton and Waller remains unquestioned; and our best poets of the present day rarely venture to introduce words or phrases, of which no example could be produced, since the times of Spenser or Shakspeare.

3. And even in prose, the bounds are not the same for every kind of composition. In matters of science, for example, the terms of which, from the nature of the subject, are not capable of such accuracy as those which belong to ordinary compositions, and are within the reach

of ordinary readers, there is no necessity of confining an author within a narrow circle. But in composing pieces which come under this last denomination, as history, romance, travels, moral essays, familiar epistles, and the like, it is safest for an author to consider those words and idioms as obsolete, which have been disused by all good writers, for a longer period than that to which the age of man extends.

Obs. 1. The expressions, recent use, and modern use, have been purposely avoided, because they seem opposed to what is ancient; and the word present has been chosen, because, in respect of place, it is opposed to absent, and in respect of time, to past or future, which have now no existence. When, therefore, the phrase present use occurs in this volume, its proper contrary is-obsolete, not ancient.

2. Though we have acknowledged language to be a species of fashion or mode, as doubtless it is;* yet being much more permanent than those things to which the words fashionable and modish are applied, the former phrases are not meant to convey the ideas of novelty and levity, but recur to the standard already assigned, (Art. 77. Illus. and 80. Illus.); the writings of a plurality of celebrated authors. Thus have we established, as general principles,

I. That use is the sole mistress of language.

II. That her essential attributes are reputable, national, and present. III. That grammar and criticism are but her ministers; and though, like other ministers, they would sometimes impose upon the people, the dictates of their own humor as the commands of their sovereign, they are not so often successful in such attempts, as to encourage the frequent repetition of them.

IV. That what has been said of the English, applies to every tongue whatever; it is founded in use or custom,

And, V. That it is not by ancient, but by present use, that the style of every language must be regulated.

CHAPTER III.

THE NATURE AND USE OF VERBAL CRITICISM, WITH ITS PRINCIPAL RULES OR CANONS, BY WHICH, IN ALL OUR DECISIONS, WE OUGHT TO BE DIRECTED.

87. ALL the various qualities of elocution, have their foundation in PURITY, and the great standard of purity is use. (Art. 76, 77. and 86.)

Obs. 1. The essential properties of use, as regarding language, have been considered and explained in the preceding chapter; and in this we purpose to establish certain canons or rules, whereby the student may be enabled to detect the fallacy of that fluent and specious, but superficial method, of verbal criticism, which passes current for a deliberate examination, into the principles on which the structure and genius of our language are built. (Illus. 1. Art. 86.)

2. Grammar and criticism, though in a different sphere, are of similar benefit to language, that a succinct, perspicuous, and faithful digest of the laws of the Empire is to society, in comparison of the labyrinths of statutes, reports, and opinions, which have emanated, through a long succession of ages, from legislators, counsellors and judges. (III. p. 55.)

3. The grammarian compiles the laws, which custom gives to language; the critic seasonably brings before the public tribunal the abuses of innovation. The one facilitates the study of our native tongue, advances general use into universal, and gives at least a greater stability, if not a permanency, to custom, the most mutable and capricious thing in nature; the other, stigmatizing every unlicensed terin, and improper idiom, teaches us to suppress them, and to give greater precision, and consequently more perspicuity and beauty, to our style. (Obs. 1. and 2. Art. 76.)

88. GOOD USE, which, for brevity's sake, shall hereafter include reputable, national, and present use, is not always uniform in her decisions.

Illus. 1. Whenever a considerable number of authorities can be produced in support of two different, though resembling modes of expres sion, for the same thing, there is always a divided use, and he who conforms to either side, cannot be said to speak barbarously, or to op pose the usage of the language. (Art. 80. and Illus.)

89. This DIVIDED USE hath place sometimes in single words, sometimes in constructions, and sometimes in arrangement. In all such cases, there is scope for choice; and it belongs, without question, to the critical art, to lay down the principles, by which, in all doubtful cases, our choice should be directed. (Art. 76. Corol.)

Illus. 1. There are, indeed, some differences in single words, as isle, for" island," mount, for "mountain," which ought still to be retained. They are a kind of synonymies, and afford a little variety, without occasioning any inconvenience.

2. In our arrangement, too, it certainly holds, that various manners suit various styles, as various styles suit various subjects, and various sorts of composition. For this reason, unless when some obscurity, ambiguity, or inelegance, is created, no disposition of words which hath obtained the public approbation, ought to be altogether rejected.

3. In construction, the case is somewhat different. Purity, perspicuity, and elegance, generally require, that in this there be the strictest uniformity. Yet differences here are not only allowable, but even convenient, when attended with correspondent differences in the application.

Corol. In those instances, therefore, of divided use, which give scope for option, the authorities on the opposite sides, in order to assist us in assigning the preference, ought to be equal, or nearly so. When those on one side greatly preponderate, it is in vain to oppose the prevailing usage. Custom, when wavering, may be swayed; but when reluctant, she will not be forced.

90. CANON THE FIRST. When use is divided as to any particular word or phrase, and the expression used by one part hath been pre-occupied, or is in any instance susceptible of a different signification, and the expression employed by the other part never admits a different sense, both perspicuity and variety require, that the form of expression be preferred, which, in every instance, is strictly univocal.

Examples. By consequence, meaning consequently, is preferable to "of consequence," as this expression is often employed to denote that which is momentous or important. Besides and beside serve both as prepositions and conjunctions. Custom assigns to each a separate province; and good writers humour her, by employing only the former as a conjunction, and the latter as a preposition.

Obs. The improper use of adverbs for adjectives, and vice versa, offends against precision, and the authority of present use. In those verbs, also, which have for the participle passive, both the preterite form, and one peculiar, the peculiar form ought to have the preference. For the same reason, some are inclined to prefer that use which makes ye invariably the nominative plural of the personal pronoun thou, and you the accusative, when applied to an actual plurality. When used for the singular number, custom hath determined that it shall be you in both cases.

91. CANON THE SECOND. In doubtful cases, regard ought to be had, in our decisions, to the analogy of the language.

Examples. By this canon, contemporary is preferable to "cotemporary;" because in words compounded with the inseparable preposition con, the n is retained before a consonant, but expunged before a vowel, or h mute; as, con-comitant, co-incide, co-heir. Co-partner is, probably, the only exception. But in dubious cases, we are guided by the rule, not by the exception. The principle of analogy prefers afterwards and homewards, to "afterward" and "homeward;" and would God, is preferable to "would to God," though both these last phrases plead the authority of custom.

92. CANON THE THIRD. When the terms or expressions are, in other respects, equal, that ought to be preferred, which is most agreeable to the ear.

Obs. This rule hath perhaps a greater chance of being observed than any other, it having been, since the days of Addison, the general aim of our public speakers and writers, to avoid harsh and unmusical periods. Nay, a regard to sound hath, in some instances, controlled the public choice, to the prejudice of both the former canons, which, one would think, ought to be regarded as of more importance.

Example. Thus the term ingenuity hath obtained, in preference to

"ingeniousness," though the former cannot be deduced, analogically, from ingenious; and had, besides, been pre-occupied, and consequently would be equivocal, being a regular derivative from the term ingenious, if the newer acceptation had not, before now, entirely supplanted the other.

93. CANON THE FOURTH. In cases wherein none of the foregoing rules gives either side a foundation of preference, a regard to simplicity, in which we include etymology, when manifest, ought to determine our choice.

Obs. Under the name simplicity, we comprehend also brevity; for that expression is always the simplest, which, with equal purity and perspicuity, is the briefest.

Illus. We have several active verbs, which are used indiscriminately, either with or without a preposition; as, accept, or accept of; but the simple form is preferable.

94. CANON THE FIFTH. In the few cases wherein neither perspicuity nor analogy, neither sound nor simplicity, assists us in fixing our choice, it is safest to prefer that mannér, which is most conformable to ancient usage.

Obs. This rule is founded on a very plain maxim-that in language, as in several other things, change itself, unless when it is clearly advantageous, is ineligible. On this principle, some wiiters follow the authority of Milton, in preferring that usage, which distinguishes ye, as the nominative plural of thou. (Obs. Canon First.)

Quotations from Shakspeare, on the side of orthography, are not much to be minded, because his editors have shamefully abused his ancient orthography.

95. Every thing favoured by good use, is not on that account worthy to be retained, though no term, idiom, or application, that is totally unsupported by her, can be admitted to be good.

Obs. This position is necessary in order to establish rules for ascertaining both the extent of the authority claimed by custom, and the rightful prerogatives of criticism.

Illus. 1. Though nothing can be good in language from which use withholds her approbation, there may be many things to which she gives it, that are not in all respects good, or such as are worthy to be retained and imitated. In some instances, custom may very properly be checked by criticism.

2. The latter enjoys a sort of negative, though not a censorian power of instant degradation. She hath the privilege of remonstrating, and, by means of this, when used discreetly, of bringing what is bad into disrepute, and so cancelling it gradually: but she hath no positive right to establish any thing.

3. Her power too is like that of eloquence; she operates on us purely by persuasion, depending for success on the solidity, or, at least, the speciousness of her arguments; whereas custom hath an unaccountable and irresistible influence over us-an influence which is