ed; we are astonished at what is vast or great; we are amazed at what is incomprehensible; we are confounded by what is shocking or terrible.

Pride, vanity. Pride makes us esteem ourselves; vanity makes us desire the esteem of others.

Haughtiness, disdain. Haughtiness is founded on a high opinion of ourselves; disdain on a low opinion of others.

To weary, to fatigue. Continuance of the same thing wearies us; labour fatigues us. A man. is wearied by standing; he is fatigued by walking.

To abhor, to detest. To abhor imports simply strong dislike; to detest imports likewise strong disapprobation. We abhor being in debt; we detest treachery.

To invent, to discover. We invent things. which are new; we discover what was hidden. Galilæo invented the telescope; Harvey discovered the circulation of the blood.

Entire, complete. A thing is entire, when it wants none of its parts; complete, when it wants none of the appendages which belong to it. A man may occupy an entire house; though he have not one complete apartment.

Enough, sufficient. Enough relates to the quantity, which we wish to have of a thing. Sufficient, relates to the use that is to be made of it. Hence enough commonly signifies a greater quantity than sufficient does. The covetous man never has enough; though he has what is sufficient for nature,

These are a few among many instances of words in our language, which by careless writers are apt to be mistaken for synonymous. The more the distinction in the meaning of such words is regarded, the more accurately and forcibly shall we speak and write,

STRUCTURE OF SENTENCES.

A PROPER construction of sentences is of such importance in every species of composition, that we cannot be too strict or minute in our attention to it. For, whatever be the subject, if the sentences be constructed in a clumsy, perplexed, or feeble manner, the work cannot be read with pleasure, nor even with profit. But by attention to the rules, which relate to this part of style, we acquire the habit of expressing ourselves with perspicuity and elegance; and, if a disorder happen to arise in some of our sentences, we immediately see where it lies, and are able to rectify it.

The properties most essential to a perfect setence are the four following. 1. Clearness. 2. Unity. 3. Strength. 4. Harmony.

Ambiguity is opposed to clearness,and arises from two causes; either from a wrong choice of words, or a wrong collocation of them. Of the choice of words, as far as regards perspicuity, we have already spoken. Of the collocation of them we are now to treat. From the nature of our language a capital rule in the arrangement of our sentences is, that words or members

most nearly related,should be placed as near to each other as possible, that their mutual relation may clearly appear. This rule is frequently neglected even by good writers. A few instances will show both its importance and application. In the position of adverbs, which are used to qualify the signification of something, which either precedes or follows them, a good deal of nicety is to be observed. " By greatness," says Addison," I do not only mean the bulk of any single object, but the largeness of a whole view." Here the place of the adverb only makes it limit the verb mean. "I do not only mean." The question may then be asked, what does he more than mean? Had it been placed after bulk, still it would have been wrong, for it might then be asked, what is meant beside the bulk? Is it the colour or any other property? Its proper place is after the word object: "By greatness I do not mean the bulk of any single object only;" for then, when it is asked, what does he mean more than the bulk of a single object; the answer comes out precisely as the author intends, "the largeness of a whole view." "Theism," says Lord Shaftsbury, "can only be opposed to polytheism or atheism." It may be asked then, is theism capable of nothing else, except being opposed to polytheism or atheism? This is what the words literally mean through the improper collocation of only. He ought to have said, "Theism can be opposed only to polytheism or atheism." Inaccuracies of this kind occasion little ambiguity in common discourse, because the tone and emphasis, used by the speaker,generally make the meaning per

spicuous. But in writing, where a person speaks to the eye, he ought to be more accurate; and so to connect adverbs with the words they qualify, that his meaning cannot be mistaken on the first inspection.

When a circumstance is interposed in the middle of a sentence, it sometimes requires attention to place it in such manner as to divest it of all ambiguity. For instance," are these designs," says Lord Bolingbroke, "which any man, who is born a Briton, in any circumstances, in any situation, ought to be ashamed or afraid to avow ?" Here we are in doubt whether the phrases, "in any circumstances, in any situation," be connected with" a man born in Britain" or with that man's avowing his designs." If the latter, as seems most likely, was intended to be the meaning; the arrangement ought to be this, "are these designs, which any man, who is born a Briton, ought to be ashamed or afraid in any circumstances, in any situa tion, to avow?"

Still more attention is requisite to a proper disposition of the relative pronouns who, which, what, whose; and of all those particles, which express the connection of the parts of speech. As all reasoning depends upon this connection, we cannot be too accurate with regard to it. A small error may obscure the meaning of a whole sentence; and even where the meaning is apparent, yet if these relatives be misplaced, we always find something awkward and disjointed in the structure of the period. The following passage in Bishop Sherlock's Sermons will exemplify these observations: "It is

folly to pretend to arm ourselves against the accidents of life, by heaping up treasures, which nothing can protect us against, but the good providence of our Heavenly Father." Which, grammatically refers to the immediately preceding noun, which here is "treasures;" and this would convert the whole period into nonsense. The sentence should have been thus constructed; "It is folly to pretend, by heap-` ing up treasures, to arm ourselves against the accidents of life, against which, nothing can protect us, but the good providence of our Heavenly Father."

We now proceed to the second quality of a well arranged sentence, which we termed its unity. This is a capital property. The very nature of a sentence implies one proposition to be expressed. It may consist of parts; but these parts must be so closely bound together, as to make an impression of one object only upon the mind.

To preserve this unity,we must first observe, that during the course of the sentence, the subject should be changed as little as possible. There is generally in every sentence some person or thing, which is the governing word. This should be continued so, if possible, from the beginning to the end of it. Should a man express himself in this manner; * after we came to anchor, they put me on shore, where I was saluted by all my friends, who received me. with the greatest kindness." Though the objects in this sentence are sufficiently connected; yet, by shifting so often the subject and person, we, they, I, and who, they appear in so