Kgnlída rùv Toλúμvlov, &c. Callimachus. Brunck, i. p. 474... Crethis, young prattler, full of graceful play, Sleeps here, that sleep, from which none born can flee. It is astonishing what a turn the Greeks had for epitaphs, of domestic feeling, as I may call them. In our language I believe there is none of any merit. That of Callimachus on Crethis was a great favorite with the late Dr. Cyril Jackson." F. H. I will add one other suggestion, of a change of punctuation only, in the Orestes: ἑκοῦσαν, οὐκ ἄκουσαν ἐπισείσω πόλιν, ver. 605.& 6. of Porson. Porson says "Souvas díxnv, quod alibi fere sonat panas pendere, judicium subire, hic rarissimo usu ponitur pro eodem prope quod Latine dicitur jus dare vel reddere." It seems odd then that he should not have read, (especially with ver. 249. in his mind,) ἑκοῦσαν, οὐκ ἄκουσαν ἐπισείσω πόλιν, σοὶ σῇ τ ̓ ἀδελφῆ, λεύσιμον δοῦναι δίκην. scil. ὥστε ὑμᾶς δοῦναι. Επισείειν has an accusative and dative in the same manner in the well known passage, ver. 249. ὦ μῆτερ, ἱκετεύω σε, μὴ ἐπίσειέ μοι τὰς αἱματωποὺς καὶ δρακοντώδεις κόρας. REMARKS ON DR. GÖTTLING's Essay on the Theory of Greek Ac centuation. No. II. [Concluded from No. LXIV.] As the accent is so important for the prosody of modern languages, we indulge ourselves so much the more in a digression on this interesting subject, now that we have once entered on a comparison of the modern languages with the Greek, respecting the general principles of pronunciation. The metrical prosody of the modern languages is established on the accent; it has, consequently, for its foundation, a principle entirely diverse from that, on which the Greek prosody was built. The prosodiacal element of the syllables in the Greek language rested, as we have remarked, in the quantity, i. e. in the natural shortness or length of time comparatively required for the utterance of the syllables; but the prosody of modern languages rests on the accent, i. e. on the stress (acute elevation) of the voice, by which one syllable is energetically distinguished from the rest. Now it is certain, to be sure, that the modern languages also have syllables, naturally long and short; but in respect of prosody, every thing depends on the tone (accent); and a syllable, which, naturally, is short, (v. c. ùp in uproar) is long in prosody, if it bear the accent; and again, a syllable, which, by nature, is long, is short in prosody if it be destitute of the accent (v. c. roar in uproar). If we speak, therefore, in prosody, of short and long syllables, we imitate the Greek custom of speaking, without having the same thing which is designated by it. We should say strong and weak; or, without ceremony, accented and unaccented syllables. Again, this accent itself, (there at least where it is systematically determined by principles,) which governs throughout the prosodiacal capacity and value of the syllables, depends on the signification of the syllables, whereas with the ancients this prosodiacal capacity was fixed by the musical value of the syllables, their signification (logical value) being subordinate. In the German language, for instance, that syllable which contains the principal element of the notion, obtains at the same time prosodiacal length; nay, several words, joined together, (v. c. monosyllables with polysyllables) obtain their respective metrical power, according to their respective logical weight and intrinsic importance in speech; and it is obvious that the rhetorical declamation is identified with the metrical. We have proved how different the case was with the Greeks: the whole compass of ancient versification, and the representation of feelings by means of it, rested upon a musical basis, which is wanting in modern languages; and an ancient Greek, could he perceive them, would, even in the most successful imitations of ancient metre, nevertheless miss this musical basis.' However, it is justly proposed as a mark, at which the modern It is worthy of being discussed, for we are not aware that it has yet been adverted to, why, in the Roman language, the metrical art was more modified by the grammatical accent, than in the Greek, which is quite independent of it. languages should aim, by availing themselves of all the euphonic means within their reach, endeavoring to approach at least the perfection of ancient poetry and versification. This attempt will, of course, be successful in proportion as the prosody is regulated by steady principles, and perfected to systematical unity and consistency. Now as the prosody of modern languages is guided by accent, there may be delineated, a priori, according to the greater or less regularity in the principle of accentuation, a scale to the respective perfection of the prosody in these languages; and with this scale experience perfectly agrees. Guided by this standard, let us cast a glance at the German, English, and French prosody. In the German language, the accentuation, consistently with the above-mentioned principle for primitive languages, exhibits the most perfect unity and regularity: there has been fixed consequently, on the principle of logical power, a steady and regular prosodiacal relation of the syllables and words, to a perfection found in no other modern language. On this foundation Voss, in his work entitled, "Zeitmessung der Deutschen Sprache," has reared the German versification, and raised it to the dignity of a scientific system; especially by taking into consideration all the advantages which may be derived for prosody, from the principle of accentuation in primitive languages, and which, raising versification above a bare rhyme-metre, enables the poet to imitate, in spite of the different foundation, to an illusive resemblance, the harmony of ancient versification. Much of this art consists in drawing, by means of full sounds, the prosody, which rests on accentuation, near to the ancient prosody, which rests on length of time; without, however, in any instance, deviating from the principle of modern prosody. We must here rest satisfied with a few observations. Every primitive language, unless another principle interfere, as with the Greeks, developes itself in such a manner, that most frequently the radical syllables which express the principal notion, and bear consequently the accent, have also comparatively the most distinct and sonorous sound. Monosyllables are common, and only obtain their metrical value by their logical dignity in connexion; and thus it is in the power of the poet to afford, by means of the connexion, the accent to the most sonorous of them. For compounds, there arises from the fundamental principle a very determinate law of a strong secondary accent; for all words, made up out of two parts of speech, nearly equal in intrinsic significancy, bear a double weight of accent, and thus are produced the 1 spondee, palimbacchius, antispast, &c.; v. c. Kräft-voll, Welt-kreise, Gerichts-donner. What an extensive latitude for the poet, seeing the aptitude of the Germanic languages for compositions! By these and similar refinements, Voss has produced his celebrated imitations of the ancient versification. Consider, for instance, the following verse, which Gibbon, though ignorant of the German language, and judging only by the artificial combination of the sounds, could not cease admiring: αὐτὰς ἔπειτα πεδόνδε κυλίνδετο λᾶας ἀναιδής· T Hurtig_mit | donnĕr-gép|olter en | trolltě děr | tückischě | Mar mōr; or the catalectic diiambic, from the Antigone, translated by Solger: " στόνω βρέμουσι δ' ἀντιπληγὲς ἀκται T die fluth-geschlagnen Küsten dūmpf ĕrbrüllen.' The English language is by no means possessed of that regularity of accentuation which distinguishes the German. That part indeed, which is of Germanic (Saxon) origin, adheres closely to the rule which governs the primitive languages; but the Latin element follows no certain principle, and what is borrowed from the French too frequently participates in the pitiable complaint of the French accentuation. The secondary accent, of course, is equally destitute of such a certain law as regulates it in the German. But notwithstanding this, the English language has, partly by the Germanic element, which forms the ground-work of the whole edifice, partly by an analogical management of the foreign additions, so much regularity and variety, that the prosody is certainly susceptible of a lawful arrangement, though not on one principle. But that such a steady and precise arrangement has been wanting hitherto, is obvious, not only from the fluctuating use of the poets, and the inconsistency in prosodiacal directions, but from the complaints of the most eminent grammarians on this point, who, only to mention one circumstance, prove that the greatest poets most commonly pay no regard at all to accent in the use of long and short syllables, whereby, obviously, arbitrariness assumes the Not only the Germans, but also other northern nations, whose idioms are rather dialects of the German language, have lately attempted, and partly succeeded in, imitations of the ancient metres. place of law and rule. Whether the English prosody is qualified for imitations of pentameter and hexameter verse, and the complicated lyric metres, is a very disputed point: attempts have been made, though not very successfully. It appears to us, however, very precipitate, to decide the point by these attempts, and to pronounce that the English language revolts at these metres.' The French language, as a purely derivative language, proceeded not at all by the organic process of internal developement; but being entirely made up by an external mechanical formation, is, of course, possessed of an accentuation, which has no logical reference at all: the accent is placed on the tail of the words, and indicates "le costume Francais," in which the Latin language is dressed out. But this accent, poetry, in respect of prosody, cannot take as a rule: it has consequently no rule or principle at all, and uses every syllable, just as it happens, long or short. Nothing, therefore, is more ridiculous, than the essays and treatises of the French on their prosody; because nothing is more ridiculous than to speak at large respecting that which does not exist. After this digression, we return to the Greek accent and Mr. Göttling. All inquiry concerning Greek accentuation, says Mr. Göttling, must set out from the general law which rules the accent of primitive language, viz. that the tone is laid on the radical syllable, or that which (by determination in compositions) specifies or alters the primitive notion of the word: all other syllables are accentless, or, according to a strange term of the grammarians, they have the gravis (Bapsia πp.). There is no possibility of proceeding systematically with this subject, without commencing with this law, though, as the sequel will show, we have only the Eolic dialect for a sure guidance. To this we subscribe fully. It is to be lamented, that, whilst English poetry towered to such a majestic height, the poets neglected to ascertain the prosodiacal system. The innate prosodiacal powers of the language are, certainly, as eminent and extraordinary as in any language. With regard to the expedients resulting from organic formations out of roots and compound words, these indeed were neglected, and it yields herein to the German system; and this circumstance obviously arose from the tendency to incorporate foreign words into the body of the language. But in the approximation to the musical quantity of the ancients, by short and long vowels, in the capacity of producing, by the greatest variety of sounds, rhythmical beauty, melody, and imitative harmony, (we refer to Milton,) it surpasses the German language. We think, one day, a true poetical genius, availing himself of the prosodiacal treasures of this language, will solve the problem, and imitate the music of Homer, Virgil, and Theocritus. |