Dr. Latham on the Use of the Signs of Accent and Quantitij. 483 



XLIX. — Remarks on the use of the Signs of Accent and Quantity 

 as Guides to the Pronunciation of Words derived from the 

 Classical Languages y with particular reference to Zoological and 

 Botanical Terms. By R. G. Latham, M.D., F.R.S. &c. , 



The text upon which the following remarks have suggested 

 themselves is the "Accentuated List of the British Lepidoptera," 

 with Hints on the Derivation of the Names/' published by the 

 Entomological Societies of Oxford and Cambridge; a useful 

 contribution to scientific terminology — useful, and satisfied 

 with being so. It admits that naturalists may be unlearned, 

 and provides for those who, with a love for botany or zoology, 

 may have been denied the advantage of a classical education. 

 That there are many such is well known ; and it is also well 

 known that they have no love for committing themselves to the 

 utterance of Latin and Greek names in the presence of investi- 

 gators who are more erudite (though, perhaps, less scientific) 

 than themselves. As a rule, their pronunciation is inaccurate. 

 It is inaccurate without being uniform — for the ways of going 

 wrong are many. Meanwhile, any directions toward the right 

 are welcome. 



In the realities of educational life there is no such thing as 

 a book for unlearned men — at least no such thing as a good 

 one. There are make-shifts and make-believes ad infinitum , 

 but there is no such an entity as an actual book. Some are 

 written down to the supposed level of the reader — all that are 

 so written being useless and off'ensive. Others are encumbered 

 with extraneous matter, and, so encumbered, err on the side of 

 bulk and superfluity. Very rarely is there anything like con- 

 sistency in the supply of information. 



The work under notice supposes a certain amount of igno- 

 rance — ignorance of certain accents and certain quantities. It 

 meets this ; and it meets it well. That the work is both a safe 

 and reliable guide, is neither more nor less than what we expect 

 from the places and persons whence it has proceeded. 



It is likely, from its very merits, to be the model on which a 

 long line of successors may be formed. For this reason the 

 principles of its notation (for thus we may generalize our expres- 

 sion of the principle upon which we use the signs of accent and 

 quantity as guides to pronunciation) may be criticised. 



In the mind of the present writer, the distinction between 

 accent and quantity has neither been sufficiently attended to 

 nor sufficiently neglected. This is because, in many respects, 

 they are decidedly contrasted with, and opposed to, each other ; 

 whilst, at the same time — paradoxical as it may appear — they 

 are, for the majority of practical purposes, convertible. That 



31* 



