PREFACE.

vii

But the utility of a work of this kind is not confined to those parts of language where the im-propriety is gross and palpable; besides such imperfections in pronunciation as disgust everyear not accustomed to them, there are a thousand insensible deviations, in the more minuteparts of language, as the unaccented syllables may be called, which do not strike the earso forcibly as to mark any direct impropriety in particular words, but occasion only such ageneral imperfection as gives a bad impression upon the whole. Speakers with theseimperfections pass very well in common conversation; but when they are required to pro-nounce with emphasis, and for that purpose to be more distinct and definite in their utter-ance, here their ear fails them; they have been accustomed only to loose cursory speaking,and, for want of firmness of pronunciation, are like those painters who draw the muscularexertions of the human body without any knowledge of anatomy. This is one reason, per-haps, why we find the elocution of so few people agreeable when they read or speak to anassembly, while so few offend us by their utterance in common conversation. A thousandfaults lie concealed in a miniature, which a microscope brings to view; and it is only bypronouncing on a larger scale, as publick speaking may be called, that we prove the pro-priety of our elocution. As, therefore, there are certain deviations from analogy whichare not at any rate tolerable, there are others which only, as it were, tarnish the pronun-ciation, and make it less brilliant and agreeable. There are few who have turned theirthoughts on this subject, without observing that they sometimes pronounce the same wordor syllable in a different manner; and as neither of these manners offend the ear, theyare at a loss to which they shall give thfe preference : but as one must necessarily be moreagreeable to the analogy of the language than the other, a display of these analogies, in aDictionary of this kind, will immediately remove this uncertainty ; and in this view of thevariety we shall discover a fitness in one mode of speaking, which will give a firmness andsecurity to our pronunciation, from a confidence that it is founded on reason, and the gene-ral tendency of the language.—See Principles, Nos. 530, 647, 551, &c.

But, alas! reasoning on language, however well founded, may be all overturned by asingle quotation from Horace—

* ■ - — -—-——-US US

Queni penes ai bitrium est, et jus et norma loquendi.”

This, it must be owned, is a succinct way of ending the controversy; and, by virtue ofthis argument, we may become criticks in language, without the trouble of studying it:not that I would be thought, in the most distant manner, to deny that custom is the sove-reign arbiter of language; far from it. I acknowledge its authority, and know there isno appeal from it. I wish only to dispute where this arbiter has not decided; for, ifonce custom speak out, however absurdly, I sincerely acquiesce in its sentence.

But what is this custom to which we must so implicitly submit? Is it the usage of themultitude of speakers, whether good or bad? This has never been asserted by the mostsanguine abettors of its authority. Is it the usage of the studious in schools and colleges,with those of the learned professions, or that of those who, from their elevated birth orstation, give laws to the refinements and elegancies of a court? To confine propriety to thelatter, which is too often the case, seems an injury to the former, who, from their veryprofession, appear to have a natural right to a share, at least, in the legislation of language,if not to an absolute sovereignty. The polished attendants on a throne are as apt to de-part from simplicity in language as in dress and manners ; and novelty, instead of custom,is too often the jus et norma loquendi of a court.

Perhaps an attentive observation will lead us to conclude that the usage which oughtto direct us is neither of these we have been enumerating, taken singly, but a sort of com-pound ratio of all three. Neither a finical pronunciation of the court, nor a pedantickGraecism of the schools,will be denominated respectable usage, till acertain number ofthogeneral mass of speakers have acknowledged them; nor will a multitude of commonspeakers authorize any pronunciation which is reprobated by the learned and polite.

As those sounds, therefore, which are the most generally received among the learned^ P°lite, as well as the bulk of speakers, are the most legitimate, we may conclude that