as applied to Zoological and Botanical Terms. 487 



e.g. having written Machaon, write, as its derivative, Machaonidce 

 — i. e. if the word be wanted. 



This is the utmost for which the signs of quantity are wanted 

 for Enghsh Latin. I do not say that they are wanted even for 

 this. 



One of the mechanical inconveniences arising from the use of 

 the signs of quantity is this — when a long syllable is accented, 

 two signs fall upon it. To remedy this, the work before \is con- 

 siders that the stress is to be laid on the syllable preceding the 

 accent. Yet, if an accent mean anything, it means that the 

 stress fall on the syllable which it stands over. 



A few remarks upon words like Plerida, where the accent was 

 omitted. — Here two short syllables come between two long ones. 

 No accent, however, is placed over either. Evidently, quantity 

 and accent are so far supposed to coincide, that the accentuation 

 of a short vowel is supposed to make it look like a long one. It 

 is a matter of fact, that if, on a word like Cassiope, we lay an 

 accent on the last syllable but one, we shock the ears of scholars, 

 especially metrical ones. Does it, however, lengthen the vowel ? 

 The editors of the work in question seem to think that it does, 

 and, much more consistent than scholars in general, hesitate to 

 throw it back upon the preceding syllable, which is short also. 

 Metrists have no such objection ; their practice being to say 

 Cassiope without detriment to the vowel. The entomologists, 

 then, are the more consistent. 



They are, however, more consistent than they need be. If an 

 accent is wanted, it may fall on the shortest of all possible 

 syllables. Granting, howevei', that Cassiope (whether the o be 

 sounded as in note or nut) is repugnant to metre, and Cassiope 

 to theory, what is their remedy ? It is certainly true that 

 Cassiope is pronounceable. Pope writes — 



" Like twinkling stars the miscellanies o'er." 



No man reads this miscellanies ; few read it miscellanies. The 

 mass say mis' cellanies . Doing this, they make the word a quadri- 

 syllable ; for less than this would fall short of the demands of 

 the metre. They also utter a word which makes Cas'siope pos- 

 sible. Is Cassiope, however, the sound ? Probably not. And 

 here the authors must speak for themselves : — 



"Take, e.g., Cassiope and Coi'ticea : in words like the former 

 of these, in which the last syllable is long, there is no greater 

 difficulty of pronunciation in laying the stress upon the first 

 syllable than upon the second." 



True ! but this implies that we say Cassiope. Is -e, however, 

 one bit the longer for being accented, or can it bear one iota 



No. Take -at from peat, and 



