The English Language Part 34

_y_ (formerly _g_), _ough_, as _buy_, _bought_.

_igh_=_ei_ to _ough_, as _fight_, _fought_.

_eek_ to _ough_, as _seek_, _sought_.

It must be noticed that the list above is far from being an exhaustive one.

The expression too of the changes undergone has been rendered difficult on account of the imperfection of our orthography. The whole section has been written in ill.u.s.tration of the meaning of the word _permutation_, rather than for any specific object in grammar.

-- 230. In all the words above the change of sound has been brought about by the grammatical inflection of the word wherein it occurs. This is the case with the words _life_ and _live_, and with all the rest. With the German word _leben_, compared with the corresponding word _live_, in English, the change is similar. It is brought about, however, not by a grammatical inflection, but by a difference of time, and by a difference of place. This indicates the distinction between the permutation of letters and the transition of letters. In dealing with permutations, we compare different parts of speech; in dealing with transitions, we compare different languages, or different stages of a single language.

{161}

CHAPTER V.

ON THE FORMATION OF SYLLABLES.

-- 231. In respect to the formation of syllables, I am aware of no more than one point that requires any especial consideration.

In certain words, of more than one syllable, it is difficult to say to which syllable an intervening consonant belongs. For instance, does the _v_ in _river_, and the _v_ in _fever_, belong to the first or the second syllable? Are the words to be divided thus, _ri-ver_, _fe-ver_? or thus, _riv-er_, _fev-er_?

The solution of the question lies by no means on the surface.

In the first place, the case is capable of being viewed in two points of view--an etymological and a phonetic one.

That the _c_ and _r_ in _become_, _berhymed_, &c. belong to the second syllable, we determine at once by taking the words to pieces; whereby we get the words _come_ and _rhymed_ in an isolated independent form. But this fact, although it settles the point in etymology, leaves it as it was in phonetics; since it in nowise follows, that, because the _c_ in the _simple_ word _come_ is exclusively attached to the letter that follows it, it is, in the _compound_ word _become_, exclusively attached to it also.

To the following point of structure in the consonantal sounds the reader's attention is particularly directed.

1. Let the vowel _a_ (as in _fate_) be sounded.--2. Let it be followed by the consonant _p_, so as to form the syllable _[=a]p_. To form the sound of _p_, it will be found that the lips close on the sound of _a_, and arrest it. Now, if the lips be left to themselves they will not _remain_ closed on the sound, but will open again, in a slight degree indeed, but in a degree sufficient to cause a kind of vibration, or, at any rate, to allow an {162} escape of the remainder of the current of breath by which the sound was originally formed. To re-open in a slight degree is the natural tendency of the lips in the case exhibited above.

Now, by an effort, let this tendency to re-open be counteracted. Let the remaining current of breath be cut short. We have, then, only this, _viz._, so much of the syllable _[=a]p_ as can be formed by the _closure_ of the lips. All that portion of it that is caused by their re-opening is deficient. The resulting sound seems truncated, cut short, or incomplete.

It is the sound of _p_, _minus_ the remnant of breath. All of the sound _p_ that is now left is formed, not by the _escape_ of the breath, but by the _arrest_ of it.

The _p_ in _[=a]p_ is a _final_ sound. With initial sounds the case is different. Let the lips be _closed_, and let an attempt be made to form the syllable _pa_ by suddenly opening them. The sound appears incomplete; but its incompleteness is at the _beginning_ of the sound, and not at the end of it. In the natural course of things there would have been a current of breath _preceding_, and this current would have given a vibration, now wanting. All the sound that is formed here is formed, not by the _arrest_ of breath, but by the _escape_ of it.

I feel that this account of the mechanism of the apparently simple sound _p_, labours under all the difficulties that attend the _description_ of a sound; and for this reason I again request the reader to satisfy himself either of its truth or its inaccuracy, before he proceeds to the conclusions that will be drawn from it.

The account, however, being recognised, we have in the current natural sound of _p_ two elements:--

1. That formed by the current of air and the closure of the lips, as in _[=a]p_. This may be called the sound of breath _arrested_.

2. That formed by the current of air and the opening of the lips, as in _p[=a]_. This may be called the sound of breath _escaping_.

Now what may be said of _p_ may be said of all the other consonants, the words _tongue_, _teeth_, &c. being used instead of _lips_, according to the case. {163}

Let the sound of breath arrested be expressed by [pi], and that of breath escaping be expressed by [varpi], the two together form the current natural sound _p_ ([pi]+[varpi]=_p_).

Thus _[=a]p_ (as quoted above) is _p_ - [varpi], or [pi]; whilst _pa_ (sounded similarly) is _p_ - [pi], or [varpi].

In the formation of syllables, I consider that the sound of breath arrested belongs to the first, and the sound of breath escaping to the second syllable; that each sound being expressed by a separate sign, the word _happy_ is divided thus, _ha[pi]-[varpi]y_; and that such is the case with all consonants between two syllables. The _whole_ consonant belongs neither to one syllable nor the other. Half of it belongs to each. The reduplication of the _p_ in _happy_, the _t_ in _pitted_, &c, is a mere point of spelling, of which more will be said in the chapter on orthography.

{164}

CHAPTER VI.

ON QUANt.i.tY.

-- 232. The dependent vowels, as the _a_ in _fat_, _i_ in _fit_, _u_ in _but_, _o_ in _not_, have this character; _viz._ they are all uttered with rapidity, and pa.s.s quickly in the enunciation, the voice not resting on them. This rapidity of utterance becomes more evident when we contrast with them the prolonged sounds of the _a_ in _fate_, _ee_ in _feet_, _oo_ in _book_, _o_ in _note_; wherein the utterance is r.e.t.a.r.ded, and wherein the voice rests, delays, or is prolonged. The _f_ and _t_ of _fate_ are separated by a longer interval than the _f_ and _t_ of _fat_; and the same is the case with _fit_, _feet_, &c.

Let the _n_ and the _t_ of _not_ be each as 1, the _o_ also being as 1: then each letter, consonant or vowel, shall const.i.tute 1/3 of the whole word.

Let, however, the _n_ and _t_ of _note_ be each as 1, the _o_ being as 2.

Then, instead of each consonant const.i.tuting 1/3 of the whole word, it shall const.i.tute but .

Upon the comparative extent to which the voice is prolonged, the division of vowels and syllables into _long_ and _short_ has been established: the _o_ in _note_ being long, the _o_ in _not_ being short. And the longness or shortness of a vowel or syllable is said to be its quant.i.ty.

-- 233. The division of _vowels_ into long and short coincides _nearly_ with the division of them into independent and dependent. Mark the word _vowels_, and mark the word _nearly_. In the length and shortness of vowels there are degrees. This is especially the case with the broad vowels. The _a_ in _father_ is capable of being p.r.o.nounced either very quickly, or very slowly. It may be attend most rapidly and yet preserve its broad character, _i.e._, become neither the _a_ in _fat_, nor the _a_ in _fate_. {165}

In the independence and dependence of vowels there are no degrees.

Subject to the views laid down in the next section, the vowel _ee_ in _seeing_ is long, and it is certainly independent. Whether the _syllable see-_ be long is another question.

1. All long vowels are independent, but all independent vowels are not long.

2. All dependent vowels are short, but all short vowels are not dependent.

Clear notions upon these matters are necessary for determining the structure of the English and cla.s.sical metres.

-- 234. The qualified manner in which it was stated that the _vowel_ in the word _seeing_ was long, and the attention directed to the word _vowels_ in the preceding section, arose from a distinction, that is now about to be drawn, between the length of _vowels_ and the length of _syllables_.

The independent vowel in the syllable _see-_ is long; and long it remains, whether it stand as it is, or be followed by a consonant, as in _seen_, or by a vowel, as in _see-ing_.

The dependent vowel in the word _sit_ is short. If followed by a vowel it becomes unp.r.o.nounceable, except as the _ea_ in _seat_ or the _i_ in _sight_. By a consonant, however, it may be followed, and still retain its dependent character and also its shortness. Such is the power it has in the word quoted, _sit_. Followed by a _second_ consonant, it still retains its shortness, _e.g._, _sits_. Whatever the comparative length of the _syllables_, _see_ and _seen_, _sit_ and _sits_, may be, the length of their respective _vowels_ is the same.

Now, if we determine the character of the syllable by the character of the vowel, all syllables are short wherein there is a short vowel, and all are long wherein there is a long one. Measured by the quant.i.ty of the vowel the word _sits_ is short, and the syllable _see-_ in _seeing_ is long.

But it is well known that this view is not the view commonly taken of the syllables _see_ (in _seeing_) and _sits_. It is well known, that, in the eyes of a cla.s.sical scholar, the _see_ (in _seeing_) is short, and that in the word _sits_ the _i_ is long. The cla.s.sic differs from the Englishman thus,--_He measures his {166} quant.i.ty, not by the length of the vowel but, by the length of the syllable taken altogether._ The perception of this distinction enables us to comprehend the following statements.

I. That vowels long by nature may _appear_ to become short by position, and _vice versa_.

II. That, by a laxity of language, the _vowel_ may be said to have changed its quant.i.ty, whilst it is the _syllable_ alone that has been altered.

III. That, if one person measures his quant.i.ties by the vowels, and another by the syllables, what is short to the one, shall be long to the other, and _vice versa_. The same is the case with nations.

IV. That one of the most essential differences between the English and the cla.s.sical languages is that the quant.i.ties (as far as they go) of the first are measured by the vowel, those of the latter by the syllable. To a Roman the word _monument_ consists of two short syllables and one long one; to an Englishman it contains three short syllables.