to what Extent, and how most readily attainable?” 247 
a long syllable were really so delivered—are you not compelled 
to infer, that, agreeably to ancient practice, the naturally long 
anemphatic vowels were seldom extended equally with the long 
emphatic ones? 
7th. Have you learned from the 14th section of Dionysius of 
Halicarnassus, that the short vowels of the ancients were not, 
like our short ones, incapable of prolongation without consti- 
tuting a novel sound?—but that the narrowness or effeminaey 
[oxatovixov] of those vowels rendered them comparatively in- 
eligible for extension ? 
Sth. Have you ever been informed that a syllable naturally 
short, as the first in Jodkin, may be considered as extended by the 
addition of that trifling interruption which is perceptible between 
the d and &; in the ratio of about 4 to 3: or in other words, 
that this interruption or rest may, in the case of syllables equally 
short with Lod, be accounted equivalent to the one-third of every 
such syllable ?—and do you not imagine that on several occa- 
sions a delicate extension of the vowel itself *, as well as of pro- 
longable consonants, did likewise take place, for the additional 
assistance of the rhythmus ? 
9th. Do you imagine that in reading the Classics, or even in 
speaking vour own language, you ever iterate (in the same word) 
an immediately preceding consonant, as the din goddess? And 
yet that it can be sounded, you must acknowledge by attending 
to your own pronunciation of the two d@’s in bad day, good day, 
&c. You may possibly allege that such mode of pronunciation— 
requiring as it does the distinct delivery of every written charac- 
ter, and which would clearly and strongly articulate even the 
second syllable in imperfection or tolerate—must have rendered 
the Classical languages much slower than our own. I grant it. 
But will you insist that our speaking more slowly and intelligibly 
than we do, could render us more imperfect as orators, or lessen 
our dignity as a nation ? 
* In reading the ancient languages, I do not argue for any unnecessary 
innovation in our present manner of sounding all kinds of vowels, when 
metre is not in question, It is judicious, in my opinion, to conform in every 
possible manner to the usage of our native tongue; but certainly, if an 
ancient Greek had proposed the abolition of his noblest vowel 2aga, and 
the substitution of our narrow ee for his open 47a, L should compare him, 
and deservedly, to a musician who having in his possession five different 
bells, should demolish the noblest, and choke the second for the im- 
provement of his melody. But with respect to our rhythmus; why not 
substitute the /ong vowel sound for that of the short in all position cases 
where the ear shall actually require such substitution? And would not the 
consequent melody which such reading would produce, materially influence 
our national elocution? Thus would the ancient Hexameter be restored to 
its original sublimity, and the metre of Horace, while sufficiently rough, be 
ne longer stigmatized by the illiterate as the jargon of a Hottentot, Oth 
10th. 
