BK MARKS ON THE USE OF NAMES. 



n 



ng ; as ni 

 I; docs not 



igrnph ph, 

 :)S8iblc, to 

 [ids. For 

 (Is for the 

 iCon / and 

 [)i rates Ui, 

 correspond 



It would 



I power in 



lijme with 

 at/nce, not 

 IS to avoid 

 r example, 



ic English 



3 is rarely 



ocephalus. 

 uble letter 

 .rticulatcd. 



ersons and 

 ve decided 



It seems 

 plan to its 

 then some 

 we have 

 jrn proper 



words of 



in quasi- 

 scce. We 



diacritical 

 llablcs are 

 3uld be in 



Accentuation. 



This is a matter of prime importance. For elegant, oven for bearable, pronun- 

 ciation, it is essential to place the accent or stress of voice on the right 8yIIal)lc. 

 Fortunately tiie rules arc simple, with comparatively few exceptione. 



Accent the penult when it is long. 



Accent the antepenult when the penult is short. 



Tiiesc two rules will carry us safely across the great majority of Latin words. 

 In many cases lengthening tlie syllable, whether penult or antepenult, is actually 

 equivalent to accenting it. We can scarcely recall a case of a short accented peiuilt ; 

 but many short antepenults take the accent, which is simply because it cannot be 

 thrown still further back. Modern proper names of three syllables with the accent 

 on the first, keep it there after addition of the i of tlie genitive case ; as, aud'uboni, 

 rich' nrdsoni. 



So important is the matter of accent, that were all other diacritical marks dis- 

 pensed with, we could still pronounce the words with measurable accuracy, knowing 

 where to put the stress of voice. 



The tendency in Knglish is constantly to throw the accent back as far as possi- 

 ble ; and there is much of this same practice in the usual pronunciation of Latin. 

 For the latter language, and especially for words derived from the Greek, we con- 

 sider it vicious and undesirable. It seems to us much more sensible and natural 

 in the case of a word compounded of two (J reek words, to keep the stress of the 

 voice on the stem of each, than to throw it, for sake of glibncss, on the most insig- 

 nificant syllable, often the mere connective vowel, and a short one at that. Take 

 for example TiogJodyles, Lop/iopfimies, PhyUoscopus, or anj' similar words of four 

 syllables, compounds of two words of two syllables each. It is glib to accent the 

 antepenult, but it is done at the sacrifice of the strength and dignity of the stem 

 which stands penult, and which we should prefer to accent, even if short. Where 

 we have found it i)racticable on etymological grounds to lengthen and accent 

 such penults, we have done so ; in general, however, we have closcl3' conformed 

 to routine custom, especially as there is to be strongly set before the inexperienced 

 student the necessity of avoiding the glaring impropriety of accenting the penult 

 of erylhrocephaUts, for example. Tlie tendency of all persons who find it dillicult to 

 handle a long new word, is to dissect it. with two or even three accents ; an(l per- 

 haps the inclination of the scholar to show his erudition has unconsciously led him 

 to the opposite extreme. Any " rule" or custom aside, the natural accent of poly- 

 syllabic words is rhetorical — as if each syllable were a word. It may bo seen in 

 those words whose looseness of composition, so to speak, leaves them like sen- 

 tences ; as ne'i'ertfieless", not'withstaHd"ing. The naturalness of a'naly"lic, gti'o)net"ric 

 contrasts favorably with the conventionality of ana'lysis, geo'metry ; and there is 

 nothing in the quality of the final syllables to account for the ditrerences in accent. 

 l>ut we are aware that our views of this matter will not pass current, even if they 

 escape adverse criticism. 



£ 



