Tafel.] 3*^5 [October. 



2. When one continuant or explodent is medial^ and this is pre- 

 ceded b}^ a long or reduced vowel, the following continuant or explo- 

 dent belongs to the second syllable, e.g., pa'-per, sce'-ne-ri/, me'-Uo- 

 rate, re-Uef , me-chan'-ic, me-dic'-i-nal. When it is preceded by a 

 short vowel, or by a vowel with the secondary accent, it belongs to 

 the preceding vowel, e. g., rap'-id, el'-e-gance, pref'-a-tor'-ij, et'-y- 

 mol'-o-gij, cem'-e-ter'-y. 



3. When two continuants or explodents are medial, the first belongs 

 to the preceding, and the second to the succeeding syllable, e. g., ac- 

 tor, cit-run, al-pine, fur-nish ; except when a long vowel precedes 

 the combination of an explodent followed by a continuant, e. g., ma- 

 tron ; and also when it precedes the combination st in Hastings, &c. 



4. When three continuants and explodents are medial, the first 

 always belongs to the preceding, and the two others to the succeeding 

 syllables, \iz., Jil-t rate, loh-ster. 



5. When four continuants and explodents are medial, the first be- 

 longs to the preceding, and the remaining three to the following syl- 

 lable, e.g., minstrel. 



[Rem. — A great disagreement prevails among the orthoepists and 

 grammarians on the subject of syllabification. Murray, Walker, &c., 

 hold, that when one consonant or semi-vowel is medial, it always be- 

 longs to the following vowel; thus, the former diVidi^s gra-vel, ji-nisli, 

 me-lon, hro-ther, ho-dij, ici-doio, prison, a-va-rice, e-ve-ry, o-ran-ges, 

 e-ne-my, me-di-cine, re-present, reso-lu-tion, Ellis, on the other 

 hand (Essentials of Phonetics, page 67), holds that when one vowel 

 is found between two vowels, it ought to be taken with the first syl- 

 lable, when it is either long or short, and with the second when it is 

 reduced. Goold Brown (Grammar of English Grammars, page 180) 

 says : "Consonants should generally be joined to the vowels or diph- 

 thongs which they modify in utterance, as An-ax-ag-o-ras, ap-os-tol- 

 i-cal f^ and in some other places he divides riv-er, fe-ver, or-thog-ra- 

 pJiy, tlie-ol-o-gy, di-vis-i-hil-i-ty. His mode of syllabizing seems to 

 agree in general with the principles laid down by myself; but, as his 

 examples are limited to the above words, I do not exactly know whe- 

 ther we both agree with regard to the attractive power of a preceding 

 reduced vowel; so, for instance, I would divide An-a-xag-o-ras, and 

 not An-ax-ag-o-ras. The great difference between English syllabi- 

 cation and that of all other languages arises from its great number 

 of reduced vowels, which exercise but a small attractive power on the 

 following consonants. Unless we clearly point out this feature in 

 spelling, we cannot give a correct idea of the articulation of English 

 words, and; consequently, of their pronunciation.] 



