Imagens das páginas




XHE favourable reception of the first edition of this work has induced me to attempt to make it still more worthy of the acceptance of the Public, by the addition of several critical observations, and particularly by two Terminational Vocabularies, of Greek and Latin, and Scripture, Proper Names. That so much labour should be bestowed upon an inverted arrangement of these words, when they had already been given in their common alphabetical order, may be matter of wonder to many persons, who will naturally inquire into the utility of such an arrangement. To these it may be answered, that the words of all languages seem more related to each other by their terminations than by their beginnings; that the Greek and Latin languages seem more particularly to be thus related; and classing them according to their endings seemed to exhibit a new view of these languages, both curious and useful: for as

their accent and quantity depend so much on their termination, such an arrangement appeared to give an easier and more comprehensive idea of their pronunciation than the common classification by their initial syllables. This end was so desirable as to induce me to spare no pains, however dry and disgusting, to promote it; and if the method I have taken has failed, my labour will not be entirely lost if it convinces future prOsodists that it is not worthy of their attention.

[merged small][ocr errors]


The pronunciation of the learned languages is much more easily acquired than that of our own. Whatever might have been the variety of the different dialects among the Greeks, and the different provinces of the Romans, their languages now* being dead, are generally pronounced according to the respective analogies of the several languages of Europe, where those languages are cultivated, without partaking of those anomalies to which the living languages are liable.

Whether one general uniform pronunciation of the ancient languages be an object of sufficient importance to induce the learned to depart from the analogy of their own language, and to study the ancient Latin and Greek pronunciation, as they do the etymology, syntax, and prosody of those languages, is a question not very easy to be decided. The question becomes still more difficult when we consider the uncertainty we are in respecting the ancient pronunciation of the Greeks and Romans, and how much the learned are divided among themselves about it* Till these points are settled, the English may well be al

* Middleton contends that the initial c before e and i ought to be pronounced as the Italians now pronounce it; and that Cicero is neither Sisero, as the French and English pronounce it; nor Kikero, as Dr. Bentley asserts; but Tehitthere, as the Italians pronounce it at this day. This pronunciation, however, is derided by Lipsius, who affirms that the c among the Romans had always the sound of k. Lipsius says too, that of all the European nations, the British alone proBounce the i properly; but Middleton asserts, that of all nations they pronounce it the worst. Middleton De Lot. Liter. Pronun Dissert.

Lipsius, speaking of the different pronunciation of the letter G in different countries, says:

Nos hodie (de litera G loquente) quam pcccamus? Italorum enim plerique nt Z exprimunt, Galli et Belgiae ut J consonantem, Itaque illorum est Lezere, Fuzere; nostrum, Leiere, Fuiere (Lejere, Tuyere). Omnia imperite, inepte. Germanos saltern audite, quorum sonus hie germanus, Legere, Tegert; ut in Lego, Tcgo, nee unquam variant: at nos ante /, E, JE, Y, semper dicimusque Jemmam, Jatulos, Jiujivam, Jyrum; pro istis, Gemmam, Gtetulos, Gingivam, Gyrum, Mutcmus aut vapulemus.—Lipsius. De Red. Pron. Ling. Lot. page 71.


« AnteriorContinuar »