1611 
 
 W15g 
 
 1774a 
 
 03 
 Ol 
 
 oi 
 
 81 
 31 
 01 
 
 8l 
 
 4; 
 8' 
 
 WALKER 
 
 A GENERAL IDEA OF A 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY 
 OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 
 OF 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY 
 
 OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 LOS ANGELES
 
 A 
 
 ^G E K E 11 A L IDEA 
 
 O F A 
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY 
 
 O !•• T II 
 
 ENGLISH L A N G U A G E,, 
 
 O N A r L A iM " E N T i R F L Y N E W. 
 
 V/ I T H 
 
 'O B S E R V A i' I O N S or. fevcrai V7 O R. D S that iire varioufi}- 
 pronounced, as a S P £ C I M Z:. N of the W O i< K. 
 
 D E I> 1 C A 'i F. D TO 
 
 DAVID G A R R i C K, EK; 
 
 
 
 .--t<y 
 
 
 
 
 
 pv 
 
 y. 
 
 W A 
 
 T 
 
 K 
 
 ill 
 
 K, 
 
 7 
 
 
 b^ ,, . ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 'Qojre, fi fieri poKft, & verba omnia, & vox, hujus aluninnm 'jrbls oImuI : uco/ai'c 
 Romana'^lancvurratui-, Ti'.n civitavc^ohati. Qi-iNTit/.'^.v. 
 
 L O >< D ^> N. 
 
 Vy\Mdiorr.-^t^:<ir, Comer of t;>^ A<'i;lr"'. Str'-o , J. P'r;...!:V, PstlMsIl; J.Ronsov^ 
 r^ew Ik-ivJ-Strwt i T. .Oav:es, antt T. Lewis. Ci-,mc KaXelSi.-.a, Ccycut-Carvien ■ 
 »■;. I>in.v,Poul'j-y t G, iXoBi.NiOM,.PaU;>noaer.ios>'i and G. K.rARSLiiV, i-licti'- ^v,
 
 T O 
 
 DAVID G A R R I C K, Efq., 
 
 S I R„ 
 
 '^^ylT'HEN you permitted" mc to prefix your name- to tlie following- 
 flieets, I did not apprehend how dangerous a favouryou had 
 granted me. I underflood your diftindion with the public, and. 
 thought a perfon of your talents the propereft patron in the world 
 for an efTay on pronunciation j I did not forelce, by thexhoice I bad- 
 made, that 1 was raiiing tlie demands of the pubUc upon me, nor did 
 I refledt that expedlation, when too much excited by promifing ap- 
 pearances, is fure to revenge itfelf in proportion to its difappointment. 
 The approach of pubhcation. Lncreafed my fears, and I already 
 faw myfelf arraigned at that tribunal, fo fatal to the merit of 
 manufcripts, while under the obliging infpedion of our friends.. 
 My mind mifgave me that I had involved my patron in. my guilt j-. 
 and that in this, as well as other inftances,- you had been lefs atten- 
 tive to your charader as a judicious critic, than a ready promoter.- 
 of whatever bears the leaft relation to the entertainment or imcrove— 
 mcnt of the public. The goodnefs of your intention I plainly fore- 
 law would never be fufficient to fcreen you from cenfure; for no 
 gcncrofity can iliicld a man, who has committed the unpardonable.- 
 crhnc of excelling others; and the^ppfleiEon. of. various talents in an. 
 
 eniinent:
 
 IV 
 
 DEDICATION. 
 
 eminent degree, afFords envy a happy comparifon to the difadvantagc 
 of fome of them; as there is nothing fo mean to which our vanity 
 will not floop, wlien it is flattered by depreciating others : but, hap- 
 pily for the human race, thefe faihngs are only to be found in indi- 
 viduals ; the public at large are ever generous and juft ; and what- 
 cver'be the fate of the following iheets, will ftill confider Mr. Gar- 
 rick, both fi-om his perfonal abilities, and the unwearied afhflance 
 he is fond of affording to the fainteft efforts of genius, not only as 
 an ornament, but a real advantage to his country. • 
 
 I am, with the utmoft refped, 
 SIR, 
 
 your obliged and moil obedienE 
 
 humble fervant) 
 
 J. W A L K E Rv
 
 GENERAL IDEA 
 
 Or A 
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. 
 
 1 E W fubjetts have more employed the pens of every clafs of critics thaii 
 : I "i the irregularity of the Englifii language. Foreigners have ranked the Engli/h 
 "~*- among the moft barbarous fpeakcrs of Europe, and Englifhmen have 
 'fL-cmcd to dcfpair of reducing their language to any rule. Drydcn owns that he 
 •was frequently obliged to tranflate his Englifh into Latin before he could anfwer 
 for the grammar of it, and Swift complains that our greateft authors are in dan- 
 j];er of becoming obfolete, from the want of fomething like a ftandard to prefcrve it 
 in its prefent form. Johnfon, v/ho faw farther into this fubjecSt than any author 
 'before him, feverely experienced the diforder and confufion among our writers; 
 •and though Lowth and Prieftlcy contend warmly for the fimplicity of the prin- 
 ciples of our language, yet, with peculiar juftnefs and accuracy, they exhibit the 
 mod ftriking proofs of the uncertainty of its ufages. Indeed every En^Iifhman 
 who enters into an examination of his language, mu/l, in fome meafure, confirm 
 -the charge fo often trought againft it ; and there are none who have a rclifh for 
 thofe pcrfciSlions which are peculiar to it, but wifh they were lefs difgraced by fo 
 ■numerous a catalogue of defedls as fometimes reduces it to a level with the equivo- 
 cal gibbcrifh of gypfies. 
 
 Eut if the mere cffcntial and permanent parts of language, conftruiflion and' 
 ortliography, arc confeficdiy in this flare of barbarity and confufion, what are we 
 to think of its orthoepy ? It is fcarccly probable that thofe who are fo licentious 
 in writing, where fomething remains for examination, will be more cautious in 
 fpeaking, where language is neceflarily inflantancous and fugitive. Written lan- 
 guage, without any confidcrable variation, extends to the remotcft diftanccs, and 
 
 C is.
 
 2 GENERALIDEAOFA 
 
 is, for a certain time at Icaft, tolerably uniform ; but fpeaking not only difFers wlde>- 
 ]y in diiFcrcnt places at different times, but in the fame place, and at tlie famc- 
 timc. The dialctfls not only of every quarter of the kingdom, but almoll of 
 every county, are diflinguiflinblc to the inhabitants of London ; and the coarfer 
 and more ruflic pronunciations of the North and Weft, adlually go fo far from the. 
 ■line of orthography as fcarccly to be intelligible. Nay, as Swift obfcrvcs, we 
 have in London itfelf three different dialcifls, by which an inhabitant of the fuburbs,. 
 the city, and the weft end of the town may be diflinguiflied ; and there are few,, 
 I believe, who cannot add to this, divcrfuy by their: own experience, that the 
 very fame words, in the fame place, in the coiirfe of a few years, confidcrably alter 
 in their pronunciation. 
 
 If this be the cafe then, what hopes are there that any method can be difcover- 
 cu to bind this varying Proteus, and make different ages and places fpcak the fame 
 language ? If, by the fame language, we underftand a perfedl uniformity in every 
 refpcvSl, I confcfs fuch cxpeSations arc groundless ; but, that fpeaking may ba 
 rendered much more uniform than it is ; that, like every other human art, it may 
 approach nearer to its obje£t, can hardly be doubted by thofe who judge of Ian-- 
 guage philofophically. There was -a time when our language was lefs uniform and' 
 general than it is at prefcnt, when their, v/as much greater divernty both in writing 
 and pronunciation i and why may we not advance to ftill greater pcrfeiSl ion, when 
 v/e are invited to it by the religious tcCpc£t we bear the authors of our country, 
 and that fentiment of order and fimplicity which is congenial to the mind of; 
 man ? 
 
 It muft be confeffcd indeed, that accurate pronunciation is the leaft important: 
 part of language. The grand ncccffitics of nature are anfwercd, and even, 
 great advances in fcicncc accompliflicd by language in a rude and impcrfc£l ftatc.. 
 OrthoTaphv, with all its varieties, is fufRciently uniform for the great. purpofes- 
 of life ; and pronunciation has ever refources within itfcif to obviate any difHcul-. 
 ties that may arifc from its divcrfity. Thcfe pretences^.! know, are conftantly in thc- 
 luou'.lis ofihofc v^ho neither eftccm nor unJeril.ind the delicacies of language; and we 
 mi'ht fur the f^mc rcafons negleci: every decent elegance and embellifliment of life^. 
 The fordid and ungenerous behold with diftafte every improvement of the mind, 
 becaufc it is not abfolutely neccffary to the exiftence of man ; but let fuch confir. 
 der, that they form a wrong cftimatc of nr^ture, if they fuppofe that becaufe the- 
 fcnfi..-\l appetites arc the firft calls of our condiiion, they are therefore the end andi 
 ob^ci^ of it. They arc the baiis indeed of every thing we poffcfs, but feem entire- 
 ly fubfcrvicnt to our intellectual enjoyments, thofe ideas of decency, elegance,, 
 and order, which are fure to take place in the mind. of man the moment he has. 
 provided againft the common neccffities of nature. 
 
 If, therefore,' every argument (or the improvement of language were waved,. 
 but what arifcs from the fuperior haruiony and beauty of an uniform a!;d wellr 
 
 poIifiie4.
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. j, 
 
 poliflicii tongue, \vc njiglit witli rcafon conclude, that fuch cultivation and im- 
 proveriicnt is as dcfirable in this, as any other of tlie fine arts; but when wc con- 
 fidcr that perfpicuity and cafe in the communication of our thoughts arc fo nearly 
 concerned in the lan^-uatre and delivery we adopt ; when we call to mind that ideas, 
 arc fo intimately connected with words as to receive their force and colouring, their 
 delicacy and preclfion, not only from the verbal exprcflion, but the mode of con- 
 veying it, wc muft tlien confefs, that an improvement in this department of know- 
 ledge is not only adding to the elegancies, but the benefits of life. 
 
 The importance of precifion in language once undcrftood, every thing which- 
 has a tendency to promote that precifion cannot but be a ufeful employment. It- 
 is the bufinefs of the logician to define and appreciate the true value of words, bat 
 that of the grammarian to refcuc language from folecifms, and prepare it for the 
 orator and mctaphyfician. There is a lower kind of knowledge,, the mechanifin 
 of language, which is undoubtedly kfs liberal than the higher clafs of arts, but as 
 cfTential to their perfeiSiion as well proportioned materials are to the execution of. 
 rj-chitcdure. The mind of man, which has capr.city futTicient to contemplate an uni« 
 vcrfe, is loft in the minute confideration ofoncof its fmalleft parts ; no wonder, there- 
 fore, if thefublimeft geniufcs have not always been attentive to- thofe fubordinate. 
 rxcuracies which feem the proper employment of inferior talents. A mind in pur- 
 fuit of higher truths would be retarded in its flights by the niceties of grammarians ;, 
 but grammarians, by whofe labours the load of l.inguage is lightened, who, by 
 rcijulntin" andanalo-^izino: the reprefentaiives of ideas, make ideas themfelves m.ore. 
 caf.Iy acquired and conveyed, aie certainly entitled to a degree of praife, as they,. 
 in fomc meafurc, contribute to the acouiring of laurels, which by the fate of letters- 
 they arc doomed never to wear. 
 
 Whatever arguments arc adduced for a correcft and grammatical orthography, by 
 the cafieft tranfition imaginable prove the ncccffity of a juft and accurate prn- 
 juinciation. The moft perfeil language in the world is, in fomc mcafure, d.-ad,. 
 linlcfs delivered with the fame precifion and propriety with which it is written. 
 The fame didinflnefs is necefiary to prefcrve our words from confufion in fpeaking. 
 as in writing; and, though tlie latter has the advantage of permanence and exacl- 
 j-.ffs, the former is as fuperior to it as life is to a ftatue. Wc need not enter into- 
 the cjueftion, whether written words arc more immediately related to the ideas they 
 roprcfcnt than the founds they fignlfy? It is certain, a language might be written, 
 without the Icaft reference to pronunciation : but fuch a language would be as im- 
 perfciSl as a human creature without hearing; for thofe emotions of the foul which, 
 like the graces of a maftcrly mufician, can only bi conveyed by found, muft for ever 
 be excluded from a merely ocular language. PvL-atliind mufi: converfev.'ith each other 
 by a lefi intimate correfpondence, and the niceft fh^ides of thought and fentimcnt 
 iroift be quite imperceptible. There are few but muft obferve, how much the import. 
 «f w.or.ds.dei)cnds on their delivery, even in the moft familiar intercourfe; the very 
 
 fame.-
 
 if GENERALIDEAOFA 
 
 fame cxprCilioiis fhall be granting or refufing, approving or fufpciling, praifinn- 
 or dctradiiig, according to the tincture of the palUcn they receive from the tone ; 
 .and the fingle words ^'« and no are fufccptible of a thoufand varieties from a vari- 
 ous utterance. 
 
 To vvliat elfe can we attribute thofe aftoniiliing efFe£ls which arc faid to be pro- 
 duced by the oratorial compofitions of antiquity ? Thefe, like their ftatucs, remain 
 unrivalled by the moderns, but. are evident proofs how much of their merit muft be 
 placed to the account of their delivery. We hear at this diilance but a faint echo of 
 that thunder inDemofthenes which fhook the tlsrone ofMaccdon to its foundations, 
 and arc fomctim.es at a lofs for that convidion in the arguments of Cicero, which ba- 
 lanced in the midil of convuIf;ons the tottering republic of Rome. This dilFc- 
 rence, however, may be ealily comprehended by a comparifon with the produ(Stions. 
 of our own times. We all remember when Europe trembled at a (jpeech from the 
 Britifli fcnatc, but the divine rage that infpircd the orator was \n vain attempted to 
 be traced when the oration funk upon paper. Another fpecics of elocution, 
 which is more immediately under our notice, will abundantly iiluflrate this 
 doiSirine. Many of our dramatic writings, which warm and aftonifli us on the ftage, 
 -ire cold and lifclefs in the clofet. Let thofc who would fee the importof ajuft 
 delivery, view a charaifler in the hand? of a judicious a£lor. In this point of view 
 they will difcovcr a thoufand beauties in the v/ritcr which arc fcarcc vifible in any 
 other fituation. A good atSlor glows with the fame fire that infpircs his author; 
 and, like a friendly and judicious critic, heightens by his comment the moll ftrik- 
 ing beauties, and gives a finifliing to whatever is impcrfciSt. He flrews with 
 iiowcrs and verdure thofe verypaflages that arc the moft barren and dcfart to a com- 
 mon reader, and fcle^ls the finefl fenfc from thofe which fcem to admit of a va- 
 riety. The judgment of a confummatc atStor feems to rife to invention, and to con- 
 flitutc him in reality an author; for it is to a difcovery of the happieft attitudes of 
 the pafiions we owe that interefting, but tranfient cxpreflion, which can neither be 
 arrcfted nor imitated. So that, if the ai£lor is indebted to the writer for the 
 bafis and materials of his art, the writer owes a difplay of his finefl- feelings 
 to the addrefs and powers of the atSlor. How many latent beauties have 
 been brought to view on the fragc, which lie interred, as it were, in a Johnfo.n 
 and a Fletcher .'' How many flafhes of foul, if the expre/FiOn will be allowed me, 
 have been ilruck from the rudefl pafTages of a Shakcfpcarc by the maflerly aiSion. 
 of a Garrick i 
 
 Eut I findmyfclf by infenfible gradations engaged in oratorial and dramatic pro- 
 nunciation, when the fole point I had in view, v/as ti.at which may be flyled 
 grammatical. As the former, however, io necefiarily depends on the latter, as in- 
 difpcnfably to (hare its impcrfcilions and improvemenls, 1 hope the digreflicn will 
 be more cafily pardoned. To wave every plea from the roflrum or the ftage, 
 the common intcrcourfe of life will furnifli fufucicnt reafons ioT corrc(5lnefs and ac- 
 curacy
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. 5 
 
 curacy in fpcaking; and, if the plcafurc wc derive from it in our mod agreeable 
 focial communications were entirely overlooked, the neceflity of pcrfpicuity in our 
 common, as well as more important concerns, would render a jufl: and accurate 
 pronunciation of the utmoft: confequencc. If written words arc liable to be mil- 
 taken by a carelcfs orthography, living words are no Jcfs fubjcdt to ambiguity 
 from improper pronunciation ; and a rational intercourfe with our fellovv-crcaturcr 
 requires nearly the fame agreement between the founds of words and the letters they 
 arc compofcd of, as between tl;e written words and their correfpondcnt ideas. 
 
 The French and Englifli critics have been for centuries endeavourin"- to ap- 
 proximate their orthography and pronunciation, but to very little efteiSl ; nor is 
 it very furprifing : while two contrary powers are ading on the fame body, it 
 will necelTarily yield as cither of thefe powers predominate. The correfpondence of 
 'written words to thofe founds which arc actually annexed to them, is fuppofed of 
 'ths utmoft confcquence by fomc writers, while others vvifli to make the ear fub^ 
 "rnit implicitly to the analogy of derivation. Neither of the parties perhaps is fuf- 
 f.cicntly attentive to the end of communication while they arc fo warmly engaged 
 in the means. To make our fpelling cringe to every caprice of the car would 
 'foon deflroy the very ftamina of our tongue j as altering fixed and fettled modes 
 of found or wri:in;r, in order to bring us nearer to the languages we derive from, 
 would be turninrr tlie flream of lan£rua2:c backwards, and invertin<r the order of 
 nature. Derivative languages, like planets, have their own fphere of attra(Slion ; 
 and an attempt to reduce them nearer to their primary tongues, muft difturb their 
 ■peculiar tendencies, and hurt their proper energy and influence. 
 
 Equally abfurd and impradicable therefore muft it be to endeavour cither at a 
 change of pronunciation in compliance with orthography and etymology, or to 
 facrifice thefe boundaries of language to a precarious temporary pronunciation. 
 The general tendencies of any language to certain inflexions or omifiions of found 
 are fo many laws that fufficiently demonftrate their authority by the obedience 
 that is paid them, and thefe fhould be held facred till abrogated by the power that 
 ordained them. Some iate innovators in the French language^ with Voltaire a: 
 their head, have changed the in the verbal termination ois, oh, and oim:, into 
 a, becaufe more agreeable to pronunciation ; but this the authors of the Encyclo- 
 pedic have fhown to be contrary to the analogy of the French language, and liable 
 to more exceptions than the cflabliflicd orthography. The Engliih have had as 
 many reformers as the French, but none fo fuccefsful as Voltaire. In England a 
 judicious critic obferves, that not only every author, but every printer has his 
 particular fyilem of orthography ; and thefe fyfiems having fomctimes etymology, 
 and fometimes pronunciation for their objefl-, muft neceilarily difturb and con- 
 found the language they endeavoured to correfl. Pronunciation is, perhaps, little 
 concerned in the change that has been made in words from the Latin ending in 
 Mur, as lo/tfi; Jiiver, &c. but there are many alterations in orthography which are 
 
 C not
 
 ■<> G E:N. E R A L r D E A Q F A. 
 
 . not quite fo innocent. The v,-oids proceed, fucceed, &c. have their lafi: fyllab!c: 
 pronounced exactly like the noun feed, but if written precede, fuccedc, &c. thcfc- 
 fyllablcs will rhyme with bead, mead, hcc. and though the difFcrcnccbe delicate, it is 
 real. The alteration oi foverelgnXjafovrun, in compliance with Spaniih etymology,, 
 iriikcs a racicaJ alteration in the found of the laft fyllable, and the e in chemij!, 
 "inftead of the y of our forefathers, either changes the pronunciation of the word,, 
 or augments the number of our anomalies. 
 
 An unnatural partiality to every language but our own, has Ied:us into the moft- 
 difgraceful imitations of the pronunciation of other nations,, and infected the ge- 
 •neral found of our language as much as a fcrvile adherence to derivation has its 
 orthography. The French and Englifli languages arc as radically different both, 
 in their conftruilion and. pronunciation as the genius of the people,, and yet fuch, 
 is the infatuation of mimicking the nation we affedl to defpife, that we arc daily 
 adopting their words and phrafes to the exclufion of our own, which are often, 
 more fignificant, and always more analogical. Dr. Johnfon fuppofes this to arife- 
 from that deluge of indifferent tranflations from the French, which are fo greedily- 
 read by the undcr-graduates of a circulating library, who are fo numerous and: 
 xcfpciflable a body in this kingdom, as to have no fmall.fliare in the legiflation of. 
 our language. This may undoubtedly be one caufc of the.corruptioa of Englifhi.. 
 but trifling, when compared with the immenfc importation of foreign words by 
 news papers. To this fource we evidently trace the firft efforts of folly to diftinr- 
 guilh itfelf by a French expreiTion : the lifpings of affc£ted fhallow writers arc: 
 heard firft in the news papers, and by a contagious mimickry, to which humati; 
 nature is prone, become infciSious to the language of the whole nation. 
 
 But whatever imputations of irregularity our language is branded with, none ■ 
 arc fo juftly R>unded as thofc which relate.to pronunciation; for though v/e are daily 
 borrowing words and phrafes from the French, yet, thanks to the ffubborn genius of 
 our tongue, we are by this means rather painting the face, of our language than air 
 tcring its features. The fimilitude of languages does not fo much confifl in makr. 
 ing ufc of the fame words as ufmg them in the fame manner. The. phrafeology 
 or vernacular mode of producing the thought has a ftriking difference ; a difference- 
 by no means fo perceptible v/hcn we were lefs fervile imitators in pronunciation. . 
 The French of Franqis the Firff's days, and the Englifh of that jera, were nearer .- 
 each other with refpcd to idiom than the two languages, of the prcfent,day. The ; 
 words we now adopt from the French are fo fcrupuloudy dIRinguifljcd from our 
 ov/n, that it is the flrongeft mark of vulgarity to pronounce thcni as if they were 
 Eno-liih ; but fo numerous are they grown of late, that v.'C have reduced our- 
 fclvcs to the ridiculous nece/Iity of learning the French as well as EngliCi pro-, 
 nunciation, in order to fpeak our own language with propriety. 
 
 The Romans, near the decline of their empire, facrificcd the an.alogies of their 
 ovm language to thofe of the Gxcck i, nor could there be afurer proof of their infc^. 
 
 liority..
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY." 7 
 
 rioritv. The Eiiglifh have long been chcrifliiiig almoft every language but their 
 own J and, but for fomc gcniufcs of the firfl magnitude, muft have remained un- 
 known to the world, while the French, with a race of authors confcficuly infe- 
 rior, have, by the cultivation of their language, excited the admiration and envy 
 of Europe. The prefcnt age indeed fcems fenfible of the importance of this point,, 
 and has produced grammarians as unequalled aa our poets and philofophers. With 
 what Attic tafte and geometric rigour had univerfaJ grammar been delineated by 
 Harris? With what Herculean labour and ciaflical. precifion has every word in 
 the Englifli language been fclcfled, diflributed, and defined by Johnfon ? How 
 happily has Lowth joined tlic talents of a Prifcian to thofe of a Tully in his elegant 
 difplay of the inaccuracies of our befl authors ? The more important refearches of 
 2 Prieilley have not deprived us of his attention to grammar; and we have the pri.^- 
 ciples of our own language by Elphinflon on. a more enlarged aiid liberal plan- 
 than the moft polifbcd nations of Europe can. produce. 
 
 Eut though every other part of grammar h.is made a rapid improvement, andt 
 we find Johnfon and Lowth infenfibly operating on the orthography and prafeo- 
 logy of our language, yet its pronunciation,, as if too infignificant, has been 
 little noticed by any author except Mr. Elphinfton.. This gentleman has attempt- 
 ed to reform our pronunciation on the moft: rational principles ; and, by pointing; 
 out the analogies of the language, has 'fliown its excellencies and errors in the 
 flrongeft light ; but fhows,. at the fame time,, that the analogy of orthoepy is by 
 much the mofl abflrufe and delicate part of grammar. Cuftom,. which frequently 
 indulges a variety in conftrudion, in pronunciation grows wanton and ungovern- 
 able. The plainefl analogies are often no boundaries, and inconfiftency in pre— 
 nui;ciation being lefs fuhjeJl to detedlon than falfe concord in fyntax, the moft 
 Jifrraceful irregularities arc daily fcrcened under the fpecious authority of 
 cuftom. 
 
 Here then we fecm. arrived at the great law of language^ a law which arifes out 
 of the very nature of fpeech, and is pcrfeftiy adapted to the ends of fecial ir.ter- 
 courfe. As language is no more than the totality of fuch ufages as form a relation 
 between figns and ideas, thcfe relations can only be underftood as ufage or cuflom . 
 hns explained them. So that cuHom is not only the law of language, but flridly • 
 fpenking it is language itfclf. But as the venerable garb of cuftom is often borrowed to ■ 
 cover the wantonncfs, or ignorance of innovators, it will be highly necefTary to > 
 vicv/ this IcgiiLitor in language as clofely as polTible, that wc may not miftake him ■ 
 for novelty or caprice. 
 
 If v.'e attend to the fcntimcnts people generally bring, with them into verbal 
 difputes, wc fhall perceive that cudom is ever fubmitted to with reluclance ■ 
 when it violates confiftency. It is with a fort of referve we bow to arbitrary ■ 
 power, and fccnx to cuter a protcft in favour of fitncfs and propriety. The known.; 
 rule of Horace,
 
 5 GENERALIDEAOFA 
 
 Q^iem penes arbitrium eft et jus ct norma loqucndi, 
 
 23 general!)' aflcnted to as foon as uttered ; but we hardly ever find a perfon Co 
 thoroughly fatisfied with it, as not to think an appeal from the tyrant cuftom law- 
 ful when the obvious rights of language arc violated. In fpite of fo great an au- 
 thority for the defpotifm of ufage, we plainly perceive every perfon has a fenfe of 
 order, fimplicity, and copfiftenGy, that revolts in fentiment, though it acquiefces in 
 praflice ; and that accurate fpeakers blu(h at tlie facrifices they make, unlefs to 
 fuch cuflom as time has indelibly fanftified. Nay, the very lazy abettors of mere 
 cufiom themfelves fcem fomctimcs to forget their deity, and difpute, as if a right and 
 Tvrong in language exiftcd entirely independent on it. 
 
 ^Vhat then is cufiom in language ? Is it the ufage of the greater part of 
 fpeakers, whether good or bad ? This has never been aflerted by the mod fanguine 
 abettors of its authority. Is it the ufage of the majority of the ftudious in fchools 
 and colleges, with thofc of the learned profeffions : or of thofe who from their 
 elevated birth and ftation give laws to the refinements and ele;Tancies of a court ? 
 Xo confine propriety to the latter fituation, which is too often the cafe, fcems au 
 injury to the former; who, from their literary acquirements, appear to have a na- 
 tural right to a {hare at leafl: in the leglflation of language, if not to an abfolute fo- 
 vcrcignty. The poliflied attendants on a throne as often depart from fimplicity ia 
 language, as in drcfs and manjicrs, and novelty inftead of cuftom, is the Jus et nor- 
 ma loquciidl of a court. 
 
 If we trace cuflom to its origin, we fliall find that it is no more than the method 
 adopted by the mind for the attaining and conveying of knowledge. As ideas are aflb- 
 ciatcd or fcparated according to their agreement or diiFerence, fo words, which arc the 
 types of ideas, are framed nearly in corrcfpondence to them. If the mind forms ab- 
 ilraiSl ideas, we arc fure to find in language the fameabftraflion, as it were, in the form 
 of the words that exprcfs them. As ideas uncombined by analogy would be unfit for 
 rcafoning, fo words, if regulated by no common relations and fimilitudes, would be 
 incapable of conveying ideas. The necelTity therefore of conveying knov/ledge with 
 prccifion and difpatch obliges the mind to fuch combinations in words as are nearly 
 anfwcrable to thofe combinations of ideas they ftand for. Thus every language has 
 certain principles which are common to all, and thefe principles areas invariable 
 as the nature of things. 
 
 As all languages have fomcthing in common, fo every one has fomething pe- 
 culiar. A general analogy runs through every language in the world, as a par- 
 ticular analogy diftinguiflies each language from the reft. Cuftom therefore, 
 which is no ir.ore than the mind operating by the Ihorteft ways, may, like nature 
 be fometimes diverted from her path, but can never oppofe the ends of nature, 
 whofc reprefcntative fhe is; and though language, as Quintilian obfervcs, is not 
 
 fent
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. 9 
 
 fc:U us from heaven perfciElIy regular and analogical, there is flill a fufiicicnt ana- 
 logy and regularity to convince us with Plato, that its principles are involved in 
 the human mind j and that the analogy we perceive in cufiom arifes from the very 
 nature of language, and not the analogy of language from cuftom. 
 
 Here then is the flandard to v.hich the mind utimatcly recurs when confounded 
 by the contrarieties of cuftom : a flandard by which cuftom itfclf is imperceptibly 
 regulated, and p.ccording to its conformity or deviation pronounced right or 
 wrong. But as the great end of language is to communicate knovkrledge, wc find 
 cufiom always more attentive to the end of communication than the means ; and 
 therefore if once clear ideas are annexed to the mofl irregular cxpreflions, cuftom 
 has then obtained her principal dciign ; as every alteration in favour of grammar 
 or analogy that is not. equally clear, would tend to counteracSl and defeat it; but 
 as analogy and grammar are but other words for perfpicuity, when once this per- 
 fpicuity is fccured, that mode of cxpreffion is certainly the bcft which is moft 
 agreeable to grammar and anaio:rv. This feems to draw the line between that 
 nii"e(rteQ cafe which marks the literary fop, and the fliff prccifion of the tallelefs pe- 
 dant ; for as no good writer or fpeaker would hazard being obfcure for the fake of 
 fuch analogies as are not received, fo none would prefer irregular 'and barbarous 
 confi:ru(5lion when the regular is equally underftood. If prefcription in language 
 be fo facred as not to admit of the leaft alteration, there is an end to all improve- 
 ment, and Dr. Lowth has mifcrably employed his time in pointing out the im- 
 propriciics of our moft celebrated authors; but if our reafon was given us to co- 
 operate with nature, we ought to take all occafions to render our language more 
 agreeable to her general intention, by purging it of fuch anomalies as fruflrate in fome 
 decree the very end and defign of it. At this point however the difHculty begins. 
 
 If making ourfelves intelligible by the fliorteft and Icafi: equivocal means were 
 the folc end of language, moft of our verbal criticifm would be at an end ; but 
 unfortunately for the future fame of authors, cxprcfiions muft not only be clear and 
 concife, but fafliionable ; and as neither novelty nor antiquity muft enter into the 
 phrafeology of perfc£l compofuion, fo elegant pronunciation muft be fuch as ex- 
 actly fuits the prefcnt mode, without the leaft tindure of cither of thefe extremes. 
 Pope has happily comprifcd what the public expcd from us in four lines. 
 
 In words, as fafliions, the fame rule will hold, 
 
 Alike fantaftic if too new or oid : 
 
 Be not the fir ft by whom the new are tried, 
 
 Nor yet tlic laft to lay the old afide. Efiay on Grit. 
 
 jHit, to purfuc the fimile ; as no cui^om can alter tV.e nature of things, or make 
 ail fnfliions in drefs equally fuilabic to the human figure ; fo every mode ot c;:- 
 premon, though equally in vogue, is not equaily agreeable to the genius of a 
 language: but as it is the fate of language and drcfs to be flavcs to the reigning 
 
 D ■ mode.
 
 10 GENERALIDEAOTA 
 
 mode, even the abufcs of cufloin muft be fubmitted to, to avoid fuigiilarity. Good 
 tadc however in both cafes fliows a fupcriofity to mere cuflom, when flie feems the 
 mofl iniplieitly to bow to it; for as the fccret of dreffing gracefully conHfts in 
 thofc flciulcr variations that ilo not fccm to dcfcrt the fafliron, and yet approach 
 nearer to the complexion and i.nport of the countenance, fo a correctnefs and de- 
 licacy ofexpreiTion lies in that gentle departure from the vices of cuftom, which 
 fhov.-s wc arc neither ignorant of the laws of our language, nor too folicitoufly em- 
 ployed about words. 
 
 Language then is both dependent and independent on cuftom. There are cer- 
 tain principles common to all languages which no cuivom can fubvert; thefe prin- 
 ciples may be called primary : there are others that form the particular and dif- 
 tinguifningcharadcr of each language, and v.'hich, though not entirely out of the 
 power of cuflom, are fufficiently permanent to be confidcred as independent on it ; 
 thcfc may be called fecondary principles. Thus the Chinefe and favagc languages 
 mufl have nouns and verbs, with their difFerent adjun(51s, to exprefs diverilty of 
 number, time, or fituation, and though thefe adjunds or fecondary principles 
 partake of that vari.-ty which is obfervablc in every adventitious circumftance in 
 nature, they have llil] a general uniform tendency that terminates in a fyucni, and 
 wiiich may be jufJly called tiie particular genius of each language. 
 
 I3cfides thefe parts of language which are permanent and durable, there is a thircf 
 divifion of words, v.'hich confifts of thofe that are floating on the furface of almoft 
 every living language, and foim the moft er^uivocal and difHcult part of them: thefe 
 are fuch as cuftom has not worn into uniform ufage, and are therefore produifiive of 
 a iliverfjty which is both ridiculous a.Td cmbarraffing; not that this part of lano-uat'c 
 is Co very dubious in its nature as to be entirely unrelated to the more regular and 
 fyfliaiatic parts of fpcech. There are few words which are not more akin to one 
 analogy than another, aud the whole diiEculty lies in tracing out the relation. This 
 however is far from being unfurmountable, and it is fcarcely to be doubted that 
 if the analogies of the language were fufScientJy known, and fo near at hand as 
 to be applicable on infpei^ion to every word ; I fay, if this were the cafe, it is 
 highly probable that not only many words which are wavering between contrary 
 ufiges, but many which are fixed by cuftom to an improper pronunciation, would 
 by degrees grow regular and analogical ; and, thofe which are already fo would be 
 fee u red in their purity by a knowledge of their regularity and analogy. 
 
 If the analogies of language had been better underftood, it is fcarcely conceiv- 
 able that f) nianyu'ords in polite ufefhould be fo difilrently pronounced by the bcf: 
 fpcakcrs. Ori/j^^rap/jy, advctt'.femcnt-, fc.t'icty^ convcrfant, Lio-u-ledgi, acadciuyy autbo- 
 i':!'.-, and a thoufar.d otI;crs, are daily flucluaiin" bet.vcen contrary ufa:'c<: 
 without ii;e leaft profpciSl of being fixed cither by cuilom or analogy. The 
 c.ir, always partial to tliat found v/hich it is moft accumfiomed to, n-.ufi: ever 
 fancy a prpnricty in one mode of pronunciation, v/ithout any proof of ks being 
 
 prcferabie
 
 P R O N O U N C I N G D r C T I O N A R Y. ir ; 
 
 prcfciT.bIc to another; nor docs euphony operate fo powerfully in language, j 
 
 as fomc have afTertcd, as always to incline the organs to the fofteft found. i 
 
 What duller of confonants can be more deteftable to the ear thali thofc 
 
 plurals that are formed from llngulars ending in JI, as pcjis, fijls^ Sic. and yet | 
 
 what is Co ridiculous and contemptible to adifciplined Englifh ear, zs po/I-cs, Ji/I-es, ' 
 
 Sec. and yet the latter is a termination frequently met wich in the Latin and j 
 
 Greek languages, and the former only to be found in the Englifli, . and fomc ot j 
 
 the mofl uncultivated languages of Europe, Rcflaut complains that in Paris j 
 
 it is a fault as grofs as it is common, to pronounce yj/AV, fcxc, fixe, as if written \ 
 
 fsfque, fcfl'uc, f-jque, ' when the true pronunciation of thefc words is fi'^fit I 
 
 Jccfii f.cfc. Our grammarians complain of the contrary vice talcing place ! 
 
 2mo;;g the lov.-er psople of London, in the word ofi, which is frequently ; 
 
 pronounced as if written ax; and the ingenious and accurate Mr. Steevens 
 
 in his notes upon Shakefpcare, has obfcrvcd, that this tranfpofuion of letters ' | 
 
 frequently takes place among old writers in the word tafi.', which was often | 
 
 by them written :ax. This remark, however, may be fubjoined, that the fame ar- \ 
 
 rangcmcnt of letters may be eafy or difficult, as it is more or Icfs fuitable to the ' 
 
 general current of pronunciation ; but though the vulgar, by a vernacular inftin£t. 
 
 as i: may be called, may frequently glide into the eaficfl and mofl fuitable founds, . 
 
 it would be high trealon in language to follow th:m ; and as it will ever be more j 
 
 reputable to err v.-ith the learned, than be right with tlie vulgar, kvf will choofe , 
 
 to inow their knowledge in (o critical a point as by the majority' of judges will be 
 
 imput.-d to tlicir ignorance, I 
 
 But befides thofc varieties in pronunciation, which difgu'ft every ear not accuflomed: 1 
 
 to tiicm, there arc a thoufand infenfiblc deviations in the more minute parts of 
 language, as fyllables may be called, that do not flrike the car fo forcibly as to mark any 
 direci impropriety in particular words, but occahon fuch a general imperfcdlion only 
 
 as gives a bad imprcflion on the whole. Such fpeakcrs pafs very well through com- , 
 
 •mon difcourfe, but when required to pronounce with cmphafis, and for that purpofe 
 to hay a connderablc ftrefs on feveral particular fyllables, here their ear fails them:-, 
 they have been accufiomcd only to loofc curfory . fpeaking, and for want of the- 
 
 principles of pronunciation, are like tiiofe painters who attempt to draw the mul- j 
 
 cular c.\erti;.n of the human body without any kno.vlcdge of an.;tomy. For this 
 rea.'br. i: is that we find the pronunciation of fo few people agreeable when they 
 
 rc.-d or fpCik to an aikmbly, while fo fcv/ ofFcnd by their utterance in common. ! 
 
 convcrfation. A thoufand fai;!:s lie concc.-.lcd in a miniature v^hich a microfeope 
 produces to viev/, and it is only by pronouncing on a larger fcale, as public fpeak- 
 in"- may be called, that we prove the propriety of our elocution : as therefore there 
 are ccrt.Vin deviations from propriety, that are not at any rate tolerable, there are 
 cihc: s too minute for general infpcclion, and in v,-hich the bed: fpeakcrs fomctimcs. 
 
 differ, riot only from each other but from thcmfclves. There are few who have, I 
 
 turned their thoughts on pronunciation that have not obfcrved they fomctimcs pro~ ; 
 
 oouncfi; <
 
 li GENERAL, IDEA OFA 
 
 iiouncc the fame word or fyllablc in a different manner, and as neither cf thcfc 
 manners ofTcnd the car, they arc at a lofs to which they fliall give the preference. 
 A difplay of the general tendencies of the K-inguagc would inimcdiatcly remove this 
 uncertainty, and on this view of the variety, we fiiould difcovcr a fitncfs in one 
 mode of fpeaking that before was fcarccly perceptible. Let us take a few examples. 
 A perfon who has but a confufed idea from the car of the repetition of accent in 
 fomc of our longer polyfyllables, will frequently waver in his pronunciation of 
 the firft fyllablcs of words where the accent is on the third. Thus rcfurreSiioii, ;v- 
 (olh-nion, prcpoftthn. Sec. are without heutatlon pronounced as if divided into 
 rcf-ur-rcc-tton., rcc-d-kc-tion, prcp-o-fit-ion \ but recantation, relaxation, predllcc- 
 t'loi'.y &c. are frequently heard as if divided \t\to re-can-ta-tion, rd-lax-a-thn, pre- 
 di-h'c-tion. At the firft fight of thefe words we are tempted to pronounce the pre- 
 pofitioa in one fyllable, as fuppofing that mode to convey more diftimflJy each 
 part of the word j but cuftom at large, the bcft interpreter of nature, foon lets 
 us fee that thefe prepofitions coalefce with the v.-ord they arc prefixed to, for rea- 
 fons greatly fupcrior to thofc which prefent themfelves at firft. If we obfcrve the 
 tendency of pronunciation with rcfpeiSl to infcparable prepofitions, we fnall End 
 that compound words which we adopt whole from other languages v/e confider as 
 radicals, and pronounce without any refpefl to their compor.ent parts ; but thofe 
 compounds which we form ourfclves, retain the traces of their formation in the 
 diflin£tion which is obfervable between the prepofitive and radical part of the word. 
 Thus predileSliou, recantation, relaxation. Sic. coming compounded to us from the La- 
 tin, ought undoubtedly to fink the prepofition in the root, while re-cB?n»:ii, re-csnvcy, 
 cic. being compounds of our own, muft preferve it: but as many words, though 
 formed on Latin analogy, arc not adually found compounded in the bcfl authors of 
 antiquity, and many of thefe words have either been adopted from the latter Latin, - 
 or received from the Latin through the French, we fliall find no criterion out of 
 our ov/n tongue to fettle this pronunciation of the prepofitions, and mull therefore 
 view the occonomy of our language in this rcfpetSt a little more clofely. 
 
 When we adopt the Latin/ir^anJ ;v, and form compounds with them inEngliflT, 
 they are intended to mark priority of time or iteration of adion. When the word 
 to which they are prefixed is of Saxon original, or fo Anglicifed from the Latin 
 or French as to be ufed in the fame fenfe when finglc as when compounded, 
 here the prepofition is difiinguiflicd from the root of the word by a pro- 
 longation of the vowel that terminates it: but if the word be either from the 
 Latin, or in the Latin analogy of formation, and fo dependent on the prepofition as 
 not to be allowably ufed without it, then the prepofition fhortcns the vowel, and flrikcs 
 in With the root of the word fo as to form one whole undiftinguiflied compound. 
 Or, in other words, where the compound retains the primary fenfe of the fimples, 
 and the parts of the word are the fame in every refpcd, both in and out of com- 
 pofaion, then the prepofition is pronounced in a difiimSh fyllable j but when the 
 , compound
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. 13 
 
 compound departs ever fo little fioiii the literal fciifc of the fimplcs, the fame de- 
 parture is obiervable in the pronunciation ; for the word is then confidcrcd as in- 
 dependent on its parts, and the prepofition is mingled with tiie word, and with 
 rcfpcit to iound entirely loll: in it. That tliis is quite agreeable to the nature of 
 the language, appears from the fliort pronunciation of the vowel in the firft of 
 prelate-, pro'.c^uc, prelude. Sec. as if div'idcd into prcl-ate, prol-ogue, prel-ude, &c. 
 but this manner of pronouncing thefe words depending on reafons not very obvi- 
 ous, the reader muft be referred for fatisfavSlion on this point to the article ortha- 
 grapky at the latter end of this Plan. In the mean time, it will be neceflary to ob- 
 icisic, that the foregoing rules fuppofe a double accent on polyfyllables, and that 
 when the principal accent is on the third fyllable there is always a fubordinatc 
 accent on the firlt. This is agreeable to the opinion of our beft grammarians, and 
 is a clue to the moft puzzling intricacies of pronunciation, fo that in forming a 
 judgment of the propriety of thcfe obfcrvations, the nicefl care muft be taken not 
 to confouiid thofe prepofitions which are under the primary and fccondary accenr, 
 as it may be called, with thofe which immediately precede the ftrcfs, iox preclude^ 
 pretend, i^c. are under a very different predicament from ^r«/«^;^^, /Tc^ff/f/Zaw, &c. 
 
 The fame uncertainty of pronunciation may be noticed in the found of a- and i 
 in the prcpofitivcs ^a- and dh. Exail aflumes the z in the compofition of a-, as if 
 the word were written egzaSl, while the fame letter in exercife prefcrves the found of 
 X pure or hiiTing. The fame may be obfcrvcd of the i in difability and difablty 
 where the firft preferves the s pure as in the firft fyllable of dijlance, while the lalt 
 is [oundcd as if written dlzablc. Here every ear agrees, and a different pronun- 
 ciation would infallibly mark a bad fpeaker ; but in exile, exit, exanimate, dijbelicf, 
 dijlihc, disjoin, Cic. we hear the fharp or flat found of s, that is, the s pronounced 
 pure or impure, without any apparent diftincllon; and yet it is certain from the 
 general tendency of the found of *• or j in this fituation, that there is a choice in 
 the pronunciation of thefe letters, and that one found is more agreeable to the com- 
 mon harmony of the language than the other. The only method ofdifcovering which 
 of thefe is the preferable found, is to compare the language with itfelf ; and, as in 
 other analogies, to explain the obfcure by the clear. On running our eye over 
 the firft fyllables of words, beginning with ex and dis, we immediately find a key 
 to the difficulty; for if either the principal or fecondary accent be on thefe inkpa- 
 rablc prepofitions, the a- or s will ihen be pure or hiiung ; and if the accent be on 
 the fecond fyllable, the a- or s will be pure or impure, according to the nature of 
 the confecutive letter. That is, if a fliarp mute, as p, i. See. fuccced, the pre- 
 cedin"- s or a- muft be pronounced fharp or hiffing ; but if a flat mute, as I', d, ^c. 
 or a vowel or liquid begin the next fyllable, the foregoing x or ; muft be founded liks 
 z. Di/mal, which fcems an objcdion to the firft part of this rule, in reality con- 
 firms it ; for the firft fyllable dis in this word is not a prepofition, the word com- 
 ing from the two Latin words dies mains. The prepofition mis indeed does not 
 
 E . ' coa^.e
 
 I-i- 
 
 GENERAL IDEA OF A 
 
 come under tbcfc rules, as the s in this fyllablc never falls into tl;c z, whether un- 
 der the accent or not; but this is a prcpofuivc of our own, and not borrowed. 
 from the Latin as is the cafe with ex and ^/V, and in our own compounds wc do- 
 not confound the found of the fimplcs as in thofe we borrow from others. This 
 is evident from what has been before obfcrved of tl.e Latin prcpofuion pre, and' 
 is a manlfcft proof of the extent and certainty of tlic rule, Tlius a fitnefs and' 
 propriety arifes out of the midlt of confufion, and by only confulting the tendency 
 of our language, we improve it. 
 
 So great a part of our language being unfettled by cuftom, and the uniformit/- 
 that difcovcred itfelf on a. curfory infpeftion only, gave the firft hint of the Plan 
 here oftered to the public. Being engaged in the inftru£lion of youth, I could not 
 content myfclf with anfwering their queftions on pronunciation by a conflant repeti- 
 ton of the word cujlom, and this put me on tracing the analogies of this part of lan- 
 guage, \o as to be able tofhow where cuftom had terminated in rules and maxims,, 
 and where flie had wandered from the line fhe herfelf may be faid to have drawn. 
 
 The pronunciation of language, like its fignification, I apprehended to be a fyilem 
 of founds ackpowledged by the car for the rcprefentation of words or ideas ; and 
 that thefc found?, like the words and ideas they ftand for, muft neceffarily be 
 fubjcift to fuch regulations as fitted them for the communication of knowledge. 
 Thefe regulations then were the obje<5ts of enquiry, as a knowledge of them would 
 infallibly lead to the tendency and genius of the language; but as thefe could on- 
 ly be difcovcred by an examination of all thofe oral fatSls, as words may be called,, 
 that form the totality of a language, I plainly perceived that it \v?.s necelTary to- 
 enumerate and compare tbefe fads, in order to afcertain the regulations they v.'ere 
 under; every word therefore, nay every fyllablc, if the comparifon be not too hy- 
 perbolical, I found muft be confidered as an experiment in natural phjlofophy, 
 from v/hich general laws are dedueible ; or, in the language of logic, as an indi- 
 vidual under fonie common nature, to which it might be referred for its fpccific 
 quality. The alTociation and arrangement then of fuch oral fafts, as (hould 
 brino' every fimilar fyllable together, feemed the only method of difcovering the 
 general bent and tendency of the language. This I knew muft be an Kcrculean. 
 labour, for it v/as not fufficient to bring fimilar combinations of letters toge- 
 ther, to underftand the general rule of pronouncing them ; the accent I found 
 muft be taken into the account, and this not only as affcding one fyllable, but in 
 reality as InHuencirig every part of the word, cither by its abfence or repetition. - 
 DiiTiCult then, and fecmingly impofilble as this feledion and afTociation appeared, 
 I found it abfolutely neceftary to a pcrfcfl view of the tendencies of the whole; 
 and, therefore, did not hefitate a moment to undertake it, in order to acquire 
 the fpecif.c quality, if I may call it fo, of every fyllablc in the language. 
 
 I need not enlarge on the infupportablc fatigue of fuch an undertaking; .the 
 reader's imagination will readily conceive the extent and intricacy of the enquiry. 
 
 The 
 
 o
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. 15 
 
 The beginning, however, was mofl irkfome. Light broke in by degrees, that fa- 
 cilitated thcprogrcfs. Ambiguities, by being cLaflcd and compared, explained each 
 o:hcr, and almoft every obfcurity vaniflied before the alphabet was exhaufled. 
 Syllabication, which has fo much embarraned thofe who have flrove to unite ety- 
 mology and pronunciation, when dlredlcd by tht found and accent, became eafy and 
 obvious ; and as various truths mutually illuftrate each other, fo compofition and 
 rcfolution, when guided by accent, coincided iii determining the quantity of the 
 vowel as accent in its turn became the unerring index to a jufl: and uniform 
 diviUon of fyllables. This profpecl and retrofped of the whole language in its 
 niinutcft parts, afforded a key to infinite difficulties, and furnifhed mc with fuch 
 analogies as enabled mc, not only to decide peremptorily where cuftom was doubtful, . 
 but to arraign even the authority of cuflom itfclfwhen it was too wantonly excr- 
 cifed. In fliort, fo much confiflcncy and regularity appeared at the bottom of 
 our pronunciation in the courfe of this infpedion, that, immenfe as tha 
 labour was,. I thought my pains amply rewarded by the fatisfadion it af- 
 forded mc. 
 
 Struck with the idea of fo much regularity in the moft irregular part of Ian-- 
 guage, my next wifh was to convey it to others in fuch a manner as to become 
 ufeful. Every dltSllonary I faw was prefaced with the pompous alTurance of the accen- 
 tuation of every, word according to the politeft ufage j but not one had formed an 
 idea of giving fuch rcafons for the pronunciation of every word as might facisfy us, 
 if cuftom fiiould be equivocal. By the infpedtion of thcfc diilionaries, one would 
 fuppofc thcro wns not .1 word in the whole language that was not unalterably fix- ^ 
 cd in its found, till we come to compare them ; and then we find thefc oracles 
 differ fo widely among themfelves, that we are left in the darkeft fufpenfe to which- 
 of thefc polite ufages we fhould incline j and though we have one di«5lionary whofe 
 authority in this matter is infinitely fuperior to every other, yet as the author pro- 
 fcffwdly gave pronunciation the leaft part of his attention, and a very confiderable 
 altcraaon has taken place in the language, perhaps in confcquence of the improve- 
 ment it has received from this very didionary, a rcvifal of this part of our tongue 
 fecmcd abfolutcly neccfiary, that while we write with an elegant uniformity, we may 
 nor fpcak with barbarous variety. 
 
 While I was thus indulging the vanity of a difcovcry in letters, a thoufand 
 agreeable vifions prefented themfelves, which I in vain ftrove to realize. Theidea-- 
 of a didiionary that to every word, which admitted of the leaft variety, fliould ei- 
 ther annex fuch explications of its found, or refer to fuch explications as would 
 determine its pronunciation, as far as analogy or confiftency could determir.e it, 
 v/as rather the objed of my wi/lics than expedations. And yet fuch a fchcnr.e, 
 vifionary as it was, fcemcd the only expedient for fixir^g the language in its pro- 
 nunciation, as f.ir as it was capable of being fixed ; for analogy and confiilcncy 
 being the bafis of language, as well as every other fyftem of knowledge, on this 
 
 foundatiou
 
 35 GENETn-ALIDEAOFA 
 
 foundation cuftom muft reft, or for ever be vague and dcfultory. Not that 
 I was fo romantic as to imnsinc any difplay of the analogies would alter the 
 fixed and fettled modes of fpeaking, or even recover us from thofe irregularities 
 which time and authority had indelibly ftamped on us. All I e.xpcacd from fuch 
 an improvement, was preventing that vicious change which wc fee daily creeping 
 •in upon us ; drawing thofe words that are varioufiy pronounced to the fide of ana- 
 locy, and inclining any future alterations that may be made to what is mofl agree- 
 able to the genius or general turn of the language. 
 
 The idea of fuch adiSlionary fecmcd to promife the fame fatisfaaion with rc- 
 fpe<a to particular words as parts of a language, that a didionary of fcienccs docs 
 with refpea to fuch things as form parts of general knowledge. I often with re- 
 gret reflcaed, that we had not a diaionary of the pronunciation of words, that, 
 like other diaionaries, might lead us from any given part to the vvho]e ; and ima- 
 gined that as wc may know the definition and diirerence of an ifofcelcs and .cale- 
 nous trianMc by infpcaion, and without fiudying the Elements 0/ Euclid, we 
 mi<>ht in the fame manner undcrftand the rules and reafons for the pronunciation ot 
 f.nojc words without being obliged to read over z wlfole body of orthoepy. Such a 
 diaionary, I fancied, would invite us to the rtudy of our pronunciation, by the 
 immediate fatisfaaion wc might receive in the point we had in view, and lay facn 
 a foundation for the inveftigation of every word, as would "be cafily fufccptib.e of 
 improvement, and produaive of the moft lafting advantages to the language. 
 
 Flatte.-ing and praaicable as the firft profpea of fuch a work appeared, a pur- 
 fuit of the thought foo.i preicnted fuch mountains, wilJs, and labyrinths, as per- 
 fuadcd me I had been wandering on enchanted ground, and grafping at phantoms 
 that vaniihed from my touch ; for though I was fufEciently convinced of the exift- 
 ence of fuch rules and analogies as would throw prodigious light on the difputab.c 
 part of our pronunciation, the method of conveying thefe rules to every word and 
 fyllable without endlefs repetition was the myftery. To repeat that explication 
 in every word, which was common to a thoufand, was impoffible on the faceo. it. 
 To fix a common mark upon every letter and fyllabU intended to be explained 
 and to fuppofe the infpeaor pre-acquaintcd with the intention ot thefe marks, and 
 that oarlof the work to which thefe applications were referred would certainly render 
 the execution lefs laborious, but this I imagined would be a radical Jefca. Eveiy 
 diaionary I fuppofed {hould be fufficient to itfelf, without recurring to preliminary 
 difcourfes to make it intelligible. The fole intent of the diaionary of any fc.ence ap- 
 peared to be the facility of difcovering the whole by an eafy and alphabetical mfpeaion 
 into every part, and calculated rather for an occafional view of feparate paits, than 
 an nnalytica! profpea of the whole body; and to fay nothing of any other defcas to 
 which affixing marks are liable, the cafe with which one may be miftaken for an- 
 other both by printer and author, makes the reader eternally infecure. ^uar^s arc 
 very fufficient to acquaint us with the quantity of a Latin fyllable, as la a Grndus
 
 P R O N O U.N C I N G DICTIONARY. j; 
 
 they arc r.Iways accoinpaiiicJ \viih quotations fioni "authors tlut ilhilLatc: tlicm, '\nd 
 in a;MO.\t lUcaliMO iciuhr ihc inaiLs ikiJIcIs ; hut in :i \Vi>; k nt lliis kiiiJ, w'ujf i:')C 
 ojily die proiuiiiciatioii oi wovJs and Syllables, but the rules auJ reai'ur.j lor 
 tl-.at pronunciation arc to be con\cyciJ, a more fuitabic and explicit. mode of con- 
 veyance mull be adopted ; for as fyllables are fonietimcs under various predicaments, 
 as the ibur.d of their letters, their pofition with rcfpcdl to_ accent,' the varieties to 
 wliich thcfc arc fometimes fubjct^, and the analogies that render one of thefe 
 varieties preferable to another j as all thcfc confideraiions fometimes unite on the 
 fame fyliable, and all are to be diftindly noticed, here marks feem unequal to the 
 tafic ; for in order to refer difliniSlly to every explaiiation they muft be fo multi- 
 plied and Jivcrfiiicd as would render a laborious ftudy of them a pre-rcquifite to a 
 knowledge of their ufe. 
 
 In lliorr, after weighing and comparing every poiuble method with the utmoft 
 care and circumfpeiStion, none appeared fo eligible as the affociation of fimilarfyl- 
 lablcs by a reference to each other ; and where a feries of fyllables were perfectly 
 alike, to make choice of one as the rcprcfentative of the rell. This I knew would 
 enable mc to fay every thing that was rcquifite on the fyliable to be explained, and 
 by referring every llmilar fyliable to this, I at once explained the whole clafs ; 
 but tliis, however cafy In theory, was involved in a thoufand difficulties v.'hen re- 
 duced to pradice. Had I been Jefs fcrupulous in defining the pronunciation of 
 words, I might have fpared infinite trouble. I could not content myfelf with the 
 common refource of grammarians, who excufc thcmfclves from explaining founds 
 by calling them obfcure : this obfcure found confcffcdiy refembles fome one found 
 more than others, and if the nearcft refciribbncc can be given, the explanation 
 of this found is fo much nearer one that is clear and diftincS, and conf.'qucntly 
 more definite and intelligible. 
 
 Let us take an example : unaccented vowels in final fyllables terminated by a 
 confonant, but cfpecially r, have an obfcure found that nearly approaches the 
 flicrt :i. Thus //V?;', //Vr, maysr, martyr, <Scc. provided the accent were carefully 
 retained on the firfi fyliable, might be v/rittcn and pronounced liur, llur, iiuyur, 
 martttr. Sec. without any perceptible change in the found of the words; nor can 
 any letter be fo properly fiibftituted to point out this obfcure found to foreigners or 
 provincials as that here made ufe of. Delicate cars may fancy as many difFerenccs 
 as they pleafe in the lall fyllables of thefe words, but as nothing but a diftin>Sl and 
 permanent found can convey any idea of thefe differences, let them try if they can 
 dwell on the radical founds of the a, e, o, and j, in thefe words without departing 
 from common and received pronunciation. This approximation however I did not 
 conhdcr as exempting me from the tailc of fliov/ing the radical found oi thefe let- 
 ters, or that which they would have if the accent v/etc on them, as both thcfc 
 fecmcd ncce/Tary to give a complete idea of the fyliable. 
 
 F On
 
 iS GENERALIDEAOFA 
 
 On the contrary, vowels Immediately before the accent have a tendency to. 
 lengthen, as in e-va:t', e-b,/, umtt\ kc. Now though the « in «;;//c- is evcr 
 pronounced as dittinaiy as when the accent is on it in ««;Vj yet ihe ^ in /z/t-n/, 
 and the o in cb^-y, are in rapid pronunciation liable to a Tmall degree of obfcuritv; 
 but this obfcurity immediately vani/lics at the approach of the lc3,1 orecifion or fo- 
 Jcmnity; and the radical found of thefc vowels, or that to v/hich they may be re- 
 duced by being dwelt on, is their long open found ; for as it would be in vain to 
 think of painting diftin^Iy the delicate fliades of colloquial pronunciation v/here the 
 accent is not concerned, the only method to convey any idea of them, muft be to, 
 give that found which approximates the nearcft, and which by being dwelt on will 
 admit of dil^in£i perception and comparifon ; for the obfeure found, as it is called, 
 Vould in this place be but ill defcribed, as in our modern diaionaries, by likenino- 
 it to the fliort found of thofc vowels, as if the v.'ords were fpelled ev-vait, 
 cb-bcy, &c. The only found therefore which feems a proper index to the vov/els 
 in qucftion is that long open found heard in evm, open, Sec. thefc we can fully 
 conceive and diftinguifh from every other ; and every critical ear will o-rar.t a, 
 greater propriety, even if they are .pronounced as long and open as when the 
 accent is on them, than as if Shortened by being pronounced clofe to the confo- 
 nant : for that delicate abatement of found in eafy pronunciation which diflia- 
 guiflies elegant fpeakero, can only be conveyed by pronunciation Itfclf j a found,, 
 which is too fugitive to be arreted for examination, and which eludes the nicefj 
 organs that attempt to fcize and afcertain it. 
 
 In order therefore to exhibit a'perfe<5l view of the pronunciation, of every wcrd^ 
 I found itnecelTary to confidcr the fyllables of which it was compofed either as dif- 
 tini£tly or obfcurely, as folcmnly or familiarly pronounced. With rcfpe5: to the 
 obfcurity of vowels, or that departure from their radical found which is called col-^ 
 Joquial, I found no vowels fubje£t to it but fuch as were not under the accent, and; 
 great part of thefe too I perceived might be pronounced asdiftindly and agreeably, 
 to the radical found of the letters as if the accent were on them ; and that there was. 
 no unaccented vowel however obfcure but. what might be likened to fome difiincl. 
 permanent found to which it evidently tended ; but as this tendency could not be- 
 called pcrfeilly finular, it was neceflary to annex to thefe vowels their radical and- 
 diftinc: as well as colloquial found. Solemn and familiar pronunciation I found-. 
 exaclly agreed in the found of all thofe fyllables that were accented, and in multi- 
 tudes that were not fo; for no folemnity I faw would authorize the radical found. 
 of fome unaccented vowels^ nor any familiarity but what was culpable, admit the 
 leafl abatement of diflinflnefs in fuch as were accented; fo that the terms foJem--:. 
 and familiar pronunciation, when ufed as equivalent to diftindl and obfcure, I found, 
 were confufed and inaccuratej and that the folemn pronunciation which did nof 
 fwell into pedantry, differed but in very few inflances from the colloquial which 
 did not defccnd to vulgarity. Small however as this difference v/as, it was indif- 
 
 penfably
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. 19 
 
 pcnfr.bly ncccflarj' to take notice of it when it occurrcJ, that the boundaries of 
 thcfc dialccls, if they may be called fo, might be prcciicly marked. 
 
 But not only the founds of letters were to be conveyed with diflin£lnefs ansL 
 precifion, the accent muft alfo be fixed according to the pureft ufage, and where 
 this was various, the genius and tendency of language muft be confulted and ex- 
 hibited. The common analogy of dilTylhble nouns and verbs,, the former having, 
 the accent on tlic firll and the latter on the lafl fyliable, muft be carefully pointed 
 out wherever it occurred, and any deviations ftom this rule as far as poilible ac- 
 counted for. Thus the fubilancives ally and furvcy wcro both till very lately 
 accented on the lafl: fyliable, yet the greateft perfonage, as well as the moft 
 accurate pronouncer of Englifh in tl-.e kingdom, places tiie accent on the iirll of-, 
 a'.'y when a I'-oun, and the beft fpeakcrs in the Englifii fenate follow the example 
 In furvey. .This is. reducing thefc words to the analogy of their feveral clalTes, but 
 violating another rule refpcdting the found of their iafl: f)llable ; for if we examine 
 the terminations in _>> and ey, when unaccented, v/e fliall find them uniformly fink 
 into ti-.c found of<f, as VAvalUy, alley, fully, tally, i<c. So ihzi al'ly And fur vey with the 
 sccent on the firil fyliable break the general rule of pronouncing final fyllables of" 
 this form, and to avoid, this perhaps was the rcafoa of their being pronounced' 
 othcrwife formerly. But when we attend to the more important laws of language, 
 we ihall find this alteration nerfeflly agreeable to good fenfe. In English, con- 
 trary to the analogy of the learned -languages, nouns are frequently changed 
 into verbs, and verbs into nouns, without any alteration in their form ; and as a 
 diftin£lion of thefc parts of'fpeech is neceflary to avoid obfcurity, it is cer- 
 tainly more agreeable to folid criticifni to indulge a tendency where fenle than- 
 where found only is concerned. Thus we fee every general propenfity of a. 
 language is dirciSlcd by utility, and this diverfity of accent in diflyllable nouns and 
 verbs is a fort of compcnfation for the want of different forms; bcfides, keeping 
 the accent on the laft fyliable of fuch a. number of words, in fome meafure coun— 
 tcraifbs the too great tendency of our language to a barytone accentuation. 
 
 By tlsis fpecimen the reader may judge of the weight and intricacy, of the tafk I 
 was undort.ik.ing, and v/hat little profpcift I had of ever feeing an. end to my I.1- 
 bour; but the fame inveftigation that fliowcd me the extent and perplexities of my 
 fchcme, difcovercd the clue to prevent my being loft in it. Language, from a^ 
 minute infpection of it, appeared much more regular than I had imagined,. By 
 diftinguifhing general rules from exceptions, I faw a thoufand difficulties vanifh.. 
 which made a frigiuful appearance when confufcd and unfcparated. Like the dif- 
 fjrent fpccies of anim.ils in the ark of Noah,, tho deviations of lang.u.nge fcirn,-. 
 innumerable until we reckon them, and then we are furprifed at their paucity. 
 
 Tl'.e only difriculty that remained was how to convey the found of every word 
 in fuch a manner as to make it impoiTiblc for an Englifhman to miilake one four.dl 
 .ibr anotiicr.. In the nrll place, I faw it neccfTary to form. an alphabet. of all the 
 
 ppnibifc
 
 70 G E N E R A L I D E A O F A 
 
 pofiiblc founds of every letter, and a tabic of diphthongs, comprehending the vari- 
 ous founds of every pofiiblc combination of vowels, though apparently thcfe f.rCx 
 principles llood in need of fome known and acknowledged founds to realize and 
 deteririinc their power. 
 
 Nov.", the mofl permanent founds in the language, and thofc which were readicfl 
 ■t'orthc ofiicc of explaining others, I conceived to be the monofyllablcs. Thcfcwlicn 
 clafled together fo as perfectly to rhyme, 1 looked on as the hinges of pronunciation. 
 I iTiagined if thefe principles of language were but carefully aflbciated according to 
 their fimilar founds, they would mutually fix and illudrate each other. I faw 
 plainly that Ictrers, in order to have their founds defined and dillinguillied, were 
 conftantly referred to familiar monofyllables, and that beyond thefe it v/as impoili- 
 blc to go, unlefs into the obfcurities of organic formation. 
 
 Alonofyllables then as the ftamina of language were firll to be felccted and 
 compared, that fuch as were perfciSt rhymes might be clajTed together, and one 
 of the fcries referred to the alphabet of powers for the found of ail its letters ; this 
 arrangement at once determined the found of a whole fcries of monofyllablcs, and 
 fitted them for the office of explaining compounds, or v/ords that were divifible 
 into parts. This diviUon was the next operation ; and as conveying the precife 
 found of words was t!ie folc oiije£t of it, Dr. Lowth's advice v.'as implicitly fol- 
 lowed, and the words difiblved into parts, " as they are naturally divided in a 
 " right pronunciation, without regard to their derivation, or the po.'ilble combina- 
 -" tion of confonaiits at the beginning of a fyllablc.'' 
 
 For if the found of the word etymology were to be conveyed, and we fhould di- 
 vide the word into the fyllables c-iy-ino-lo-gy., as it is generally divided, fliouJd v/c 
 by this divifion give the lead idea of the found of the middle fyllable on which the 
 accent is placed ? Would not this divifion of the word be rather an impediment to 
 its pronunciation than a help? Indifputably. The flighted: refleciion on the found 
 of thefe fyllables when united will make us prefer their divifion into ct-y-mol-o-gy. 
 As here, not only the accented vowel has its true quantity pointed ojt, but that 
 in the firft fyllable alfo, which by the accent called fccondary, is as much fliortened 
 and united in found to the fuccceding confonant, as the o in the third. 
 
 Words thus divided, are next to be explained as in other dictionaries, after 
 which, every fyllable mufi be fcparatcly afcertained in its found beyond the pcia- 
 bility ofamift.ikc. Thus the firfl fyllable of ct-yinology is faid to rhyme with 
 the noun het, .ind to be fhort, bccaufe it has the fccondary accent on it, with 
 ■ references to futh^articles as treat fully on the fnortcning power of this accent : ;' is 
 faid to be the fourth found of that letter in the ."Alphabet of Pov/ers, rhyming with 
 the word fca : mol is rhymed with the monyfyllables do'U loll, --^'c- •''nd ogy being a 
 termination common to a numerous clafs of words, is referred to the tv/o laft lylla- 
 blcs oi apol-ogy, where the found of the a, immediately following the accent, is at 
 large difcufTcd, the g fliewn to be foft andexjuivalcnt, toy, and the fyilablc ly to 
 
 rhyme
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. ai 
 
 rhyn-.c with fca. Here alfo notice is talccn of the quality of this tcrminntion, 
 whicii is always to throw the accent back on the preceding fyllablc, and for this 
 reafon, may not very improperly be called cncliticsrl. 
 
 Thus w;is every difficulty cither obviated or lefTcncd, and pcrfcvcrcnce hr.d 
 at length formed the whole mafs of pronunciation into fomething like a fyftcm, 
 when I rccolIc£ied a pafTage in Dr. Johnfon's Grammar prefixed to his 
 Dictionary, which fcemcd to preclude tlie very work I had undertaken. " Mod 
 " of the writers of Englifli grammar, fays the DotElor, have given long tables of 
 " words pronounced othervvifc than they are written, and feem not fufllcientiy to 
 " have confidcred, that of Englifh, as of all living tongues, there is a double 
 " pronunciation, one curfory and colloquial, the other re-^ular and folcmn. 
 " The curfory pronunciation is always vague and uncertain, being made dif- 
 " fcrcnc in different mouths by negligence, unikilfulncfs, or a(Fe£t,uion. 
 " The folem.n pronunciation, though by no means immutable and pcrma- 
 " nenc, is yet always lefs remote from the orthography, and lefs liable to 
 " capricious innovation. They have liowcver generally formed their tables 
 " according to the curfory fpcech of thofe with whom they happened to con- 
 " verfc ; and concluding that the whole nation combines to vitiate language in 
 " one manner, have often eftablilhed the jargon of the loweft of the people as the 
 " model of fpcech. 
 
 " For pronunciation the befl general rule is, to confidcr thofe as the mod elegant 
 '' fpcakers wlio deviate leaft from the written words." 
 
 The veneration I paid to the learning and abilities of this gentleman made 
 me at firfl: fufpeil I had been cherifliing a phantom, and that no directions for 
 the pronunciation of words could pofiibly be of any fervice ; on a fecond reading 
 however I found my fears vanifli : I faw it would be doing great injuftics to 
 Dr. Tohnfon'to fuppofe that he meant to exclude all pofubility of conveying the 
 actual pronunciation of many words that depart manifcdly from their orthography, 
 or of tl.ofc that are written alike and pronounced dilTerently, and inverfcly. He 
 has marked thcfe dificrccnes with great propriety himfelf in many places of his 
 did^icnarv, particularly under the words Izio to fiioot v,i;h, and b:w an aiSt of 
 
 -reverence j and it is greatly to be regretted, that he has not extended thcfe 
 remarks farther. It was impofliblc tlierefore lie could f'.ppofe that becaufe the 
 
 •almofi imperceptible glances of colloquial pronunciation v/cre not to be caught 
 a;id dcfcribcd by the pen, therefore the vcrj- perceptible dilFcicnce between the 
 £:;al fyllables of _,'?///.'(• and uifimlc qo\:\^ not be fufTiciently delineated. C^innot we 
 iliow the di.C'crcnt founds of tiie monofyllablc full, ar.d the fifit of fulmir.ati, 
 becaufe in feme very few inflanccs folcmnity will auliiorizc a difTercn't pronun- 
 ciatio;i from t'.imiliarity ? Bcftdes,'7^(7/ colloquial pronunciatio.n which is perfecl is 
 fo m^ch the lan^u.ige of folcmn pronuncia;ion, that perhaps there is no more 
 
 G diiTcrcnce
 
 22 
 
 GENERAL IDEA OFA 
 
 difference than between the fame piaurcs painted to be viewed near ar.d at z- 
 diftance. The fymctry in both is exacflly the fame, and the difiinaion lies only 
 in the colourinj;. The Englifh language in this icfpc^ fccms to have a grcr,: 
 fupcriority over the French, which pronounces many letters in the poctic^'and. 
 folcmn ftyle that are wholly filent in the prolaic and familiar. But if a fo^emn 
 and familiar pronunciation really cx4fts in our language, is it not the bufinefs of a 
 grammarian to mark both ? And if he cannot poffibly point out the precife found 
 of unaccented fyllables, (for thefe only are liable to obfcurity) he may however 
 give thofc founds to which they approach the neareft, and by this means approxi- 
 mate, though he can never arrive at perfcflion. 
 
 It cannot however be denied that there is too much reafon for Dr. Johnfon'i^^ 
 complaint. Our fliops fwarm with books whofe titles announce a ilandard forpro- 
 nunciation, and when we open them, wc nnd nothing bu: a barbarous ortho- 
 graphy and a corrupt pronunciation ; but this does nor prove that every attempt 
 to convey the found of words that differs from the fpclling is equally cefeclive,. 
 or that the written words arc the only cnUria 6{ pronunciation. The old Saxon 
 guttural ^S. is flill preferved with many other rcliques of ancient Englifn among the 
 Scotch and the northern inhabitants of England ; but fhall we, becaufe it is n'earer 
 the orthography, revive the exploded guttural found in /ji^h, nigh, light, ?ni-ht, Sec. 
 or fhall we, becaufe the inhabitants of Scotland and Ireland, in a great 
 many inftances, approach nearer to the written words than the Englifli themfelvcs :. 
 fhall we, I fay, for this reafon, adopt the pcculiaritier of thefe kingdoms, and ac- 
 count thofe the bcft fpeakcrs who abound the mofl in theip ? Certain it is, tlic 
 written words will ever be confidercd by men of fenfc as the great outlines of pro- 
 nunciation, and what muft neceflarily convey a general idea of the v/hole; but* the 
 hand of cufiom alone being capable of filling up and foftening the parts, the mere 
 letters themfelvcs muft often be confidered as cyphers; for the fame good fcnfc 
 which direds us to the written words, when ufagc is obfcure or uncertain, will 
 teach us entirely- to ncglcd them when cuftom is clear and decifive, I plainly 
 perceived, therefore, that I fhouid wrong the fenfe of Dr. Johnfon's general. 
 ruJe of pronunciation, if I underftood it to mean any more than that adherence 
 to the written words which carl only take place when cuftom has not plainly de- 
 termined othcrwife ; for unfortunately for the Englifli language, its orthography 
 and pronunciation arc fo widely different, that Dr. Watts and Dr. Jones lay it 
 down a? a maxim in their treatifes on fpclling, that all words which can be 
 founded different ways, muft be written according to that found which is moft 
 diftant from the true pronunciation. 
 
 The defervcdly extenfive influence of Dr. Johnfon's opinion made me the more 
 careful to obviate any miftake in his fenfe, nor was I a little relieved at f.ndin-^ mv- 
 fclf not included in his ccnfure. I pretended to no fort of credit in pronunciation. 
 
 tu:.
 
 a+ G E N E R A L I D E A O ? 
 
 A 
 
 rcaibn of it fccnis fmiiulcd on that diflinclion which cufiom hzs almofl invariabl/ 
 niaik between the founds of this letter in the termination of a noun and a verb. 
 
 In order to give a fuller idea of the manner of explaining, words and rcafoning 
 on them, I fliall make an cxtraiS of one which is fubjcct to a double pronunciation, 
 and fubniit it to the judgment of the reader. 
 
 ORTHOGRAPHY. 
 
 Or-tkog'ra-phy. i. (A fyflem offpclling ; fpelling v/ith propriety.) 
 Or. as the conjundion or. (under which word the found of o is explained.) 
 th^. ih. as in tkank, rhymes bo^. .(under thank thcfliarp found of //; is explained.) 
 ra. as a in idc-a, articulated by r. (under ithu the a following the accent is ex- 
 plained.) 
 phy. pb. as in phyf:c, rhymes fc-a. (under ph);^c, ph is fhcwn to be founded lilcc/.) 
 
 Thcuncia.Tic.ll propenfity wc have to place the accent on polyfyllables as near the be- 
 ginning as polTible, and the temptation wc are under to di.^coverourknov.'ledgc of tha 
 component parts of v/ords, arc very apt to betray us into a diil'erent accentuation of 
 the word orihrgraphy from that which is here given. We not unfrccuently hear 
 the accent placed on the firfl fyllablc ; and it is nothing but a certain conip-ictncfs cr 
 unity of found in the prefent mode of accentuation that has worn it into ufe. 
 Thofe words, which are derived from the Greek, and are compounded^ of ^oj^sj, 
 have univcruUy given into this enclitical accentuation, if I may call it fo, from the 
 common word apohgy to the learned combination phyftcothcthgy. The. fame reafon 
 appears forafimilar pronunciation of all thofe compounded oi y^uO-^^ v.'hich is that 
 by placing the accent on the antepenultimate og, the word is pronounced as one, a.^.d 
 therefore more agreeably to that unity of idea fuggeftcd by the word, than if the 
 f.refs were placed on the firft and third fyllables ; for by dividing the accentual 
 force ort ovlho :indgra[>/jy, we give the word the found and appearance of an .idjcf^ive 
 and a fubfl.uitive, not fufiiciently united to convey at once one complex idea. It is 
 ccrt.-.in, however, that at fiift fight, the moft plaufible reafoning in the world feems 
 to lie againfl the accentuation here given. When we place the ftrefs on the nrft 
 fyllahle, fay our opponents, we indulge our own language in its favourite accent, 
 and give a kind of fubordinate flrcfs to the third fyllable gn^pa. Thus the word is 
 divided as it were into its primitives, o^9og and yocc^u, and thofe diftmcl ideas it 
 contains are by this means conveyed, which muft ncccHariiy be confounded by the 
 contrary mode; and t.'.'i: pronunciation of compounds, fay they, nni/1 ctitamly be 
 the bcft which bcft prcfcrves the import of its fimples. Nothing can be more fpe- 
 cious than this reafoning. till we look a little higher than language, and confider 
 itsobjea; v/e .HiaJl then difcovcr, that in uniting two words under one accent, fo 
 as to form one compound term, we do but imitate the fupcrior operations of the 
 8 '•''"'"'
 
 PRONOUNCING DICTIONARY. 25 
 
 mind, which, In orJcr to collcJl and convey knowledge, unite fcvcral fimple ideas 
 Into one word. " The end of language," fays Mr. Locke, •' is by fhort founds to 
 " iignify with cafe and difpatch general conceptions, wherein not only abundance of 
 *' particulars arc contained, but alio agreat variety of independent ideas arc colledcd 
 " in:o one complex one, and that which holds thcfc different parts together in the 
 " unity of one complex idea, Is the word we annex to it. For the connexion, 
 " between the loofc parts of thofe complex ideas being made by the mind, this 
 *' union which h.is no particular foundation in nature, would ceafe again were 
 *' there not fomcthing that did as it were hold it together and keep the parts from 
 " fcattering; though, therefore, it be the mind that makes the colle£lion, 'tis the 
 " name which is as it were the knot which tics them faft together." This rea- 
 fonlng, with rcfpcwl to words and ideas, is fo cxaJlIy applicable to accent and 
 words, that wc need but cliangc the names to have an argument in form for that ac- 
 centuation which unites the difFerent parts of a word under one forcible prefl'ure of 
 the voice; for, as Mr. Locke continues, " Men, in framing ideas, feek more the 
 " convenience of language and quick difpstcli by fliprt and comprehenfive figns, 
 " than the true and precife nature of things, and, therefore, he who has made a 
 " complex idea of a body with life, fenfe, and motion, with a faculty of reafon 
 " joined to it, need but ufe the fhort monofyllablc, man, to exprcfs all particulars 
 " that correfpond to that complex idea." So it may be fubjoincd, that in framing 
 words for the purpofc of immediate communication> the end of this communication 
 is bcft anfwercd by fuch a pronunciation as unites fimplcs into one compound, 
 and at the fame time renders the compound as much a fimplc as poflible : but it 
 is evident that this is done by no mode of accentuation but that here adopted in 
 the word orthography ; and therefore that this accentuation, without infixing oa 
 its fupcrior harmony, mufl befl anfwer the great end of language. 
 
 If a work of this kind feems to promife utility, and the few fpecimcns given 
 of it make a favourable imprcffion, the author will not hefitatc a moment to 
 commit it to the prefs, and confign it to the candor of the public ; but though 
 the fafcination of a new difcovery has for years confined him to the magic circle 
 of this fmi-le fubjcdl, the enchantment is not ilrong enough to make him rifque 
 a publication of this bulk and expcnce on the countenance and encouragement of 
 a few partial friends and acquaintance. If the public, therefore, by their cold- 
 ncfs, fufnciently advertife him of the futility of his projed, he is ready to 
 confi'^n to oblivion what is unworthy of their notice, and acquiefce in the fentencc 
 of his country. 
 
 Bur, however refigned the author may be to the dccifion of the public, he 
 docs not pretend to be i^oic enough to expcft it with indifference. As doing 
 ll\c Icafi fcrvicc to his country would afford him the finccrcft pleafurc, his difap- 
 
 li . pointnicnt
 
 26 G E N E R A L I D E A O F A 
 
 pointment cannot but be attended with regret. Indeed the general attention fo 
 juftly paid to the cultivation of our language within thcfe few years affords a fa- 
 vourable opportunity to every adventurer; and if any country on earth ought to 
 encourage the melioration of its; language, it is our's. Perhaps it is in fomc 
 mcafure to our language we owe fuch writers as Shakefpcarc and xMilton, Ever" 
 other tongue in Europe muft have" funk under the force of fo much genius, and 
 but for the immortal verfe of which our language is fufceptible, we muft have been 
 content to rhyme along with the reft of Europe, without any diftincf^ion among ths 
 jingling train. But in fpite of every difadvantage it has fo long laboured under, 
 fo excelKnt are its principles, fo fimple its ftruflurc, and fo extenfive its derivations, 
 that its fupcrlority to tvery living language is incontcftable. The Engliflj, not 
 quite fo impatient to exprefs themfelves as the French, nor fo ftudious of harmony 
 as the Italians, do not, like the former, retrench half their confonants, nor, v/ith the 
 latter, pronounce every vowel ; yet, with a vigour and energy fuperior to both, 
 prefervc ftrength and loftinefs enough for the fublimeft expreffion, foftnefs enou-h 
 for the tendercfl:, and even a harfiincfs that is fuitablc to the mofl terrific and ab- 
 horrent. In fnort, while other nations reform their feveral languages on orinci- 
 ples of volubility or harmony, the Englifh fecm attentive only to unornamcn:- 
 ed fenfc ; and, far from excluding foreign words that are happier than their 
 own, they embr.-ice with eagcrnefs every expreiEon from every language that but 
 promifes a nearer acquaintance with the human mind. 
 
 But the natural advantages of our language ihould be fo far from rcncerino- uz. 
 inattentive to its improvement, that they ought firongly to excite us to a rational 
 cultivation of it. When a language once degenerates, it is a flriking prcfa-^e of de- 
 clining genius ; and a negle(fl of our mother-tongue will not only make us ineaoable 
 of producing new authors, but abate our relifli for the old. As our writers dc-er.c- 
 rntc our orators mull necelTarily decline; and as oratory may not improperly be 
 flylcd the voice of the fine arts, an enfeebled or vicious oratory mufi ever be at- 
 tended by mediocrity and bad tafle. We find eloquence and oratory the conilant 
 companions of the freedom of Greece and Rome, and it is wonderful that the ftate- 
 which now approaches the ncareft thofe renowned republics in liberty, faould re- 
 fcmble them the leaft in their attention to thefc arts. England, favoured by Pro- 
 vidence with natural advantages, feels perhaps a fcntiment of fuperiority in her 
 language as well as in other refpeds, and not being equally necefHtous with other 
 nations, neglc(Sls thofc advantages which the Author of nature often annexes tone- 
 ccllity. 
 
 It would be fuperfluous to enumerate the benefits and advajuages that muft arife 
 in a country like our's to individuals capable of exprcfTing themfelves well in their 
 mother-tongue. It is the privilege of every Englifhman from the greatefl to the 
 aieanefl^ if an Englifhmaa, poflcffing fuch privileges, can be faid to be mean, to be 
 
 occe-
 
 P R O !: O U N C : N G DICTIONARY. 
 
 27 
 
 cccrnunally a judge of the lite and ibrtunc of his fc)low-citi;:cns. It if his h.ip- 
 j.inifi in have a voice in framing thofc l.iws he i; gov>rrncd by, and his fliii jrrcstcr 
 happiiiefs lo have ihe application of ti:ofc laws open to the frccft and moft un- 
 'o;af;Vd t]i!>u:jon. The cultivation of the art.«, the cxtcr.fion ofcompurcc, ana the 
 Ji'.pi-y of cvciv t.-lcnt la pubiic invite liim daily to an irriprovccicnt in the 
 i'cicncc of fpcaking, ar.d as the bafis of oratory is a juft, confident, utu- analo^icil 
 pronunciation, the work now addrcffid to the public, if not worthy of their cn- 
 coura^eintnr, ii silcaft, dcferving of their conlidcration. 
 
 II. E EN !>•. 
 
 
 A D V 2 R r I S E M E N T,' 
 
 ^Is iherc arc fc-'j ma: cf rcjltxlon wha have not made occafional rcmarxs on fonts psrt- 
 of ile prcnuiiciiitloii of thdr incthcr ten^ui, tht Author could zuijh to inviti fuch as have 
 U'.rr.cd i'rc'ir thoughts on this fubjcSl to a com.r.unication cf whatever may have occurred 
 u tbem. Every elfervaiion he is favoured with fyall have the utmojl def erf nee paid to it ; 
 '^nd if fiur.d to contain any th'in^ liew or inter//<i:ig, Jliall le marhd ■uiilh fuch iianie^ 
 Inlti.d letters, or fgnature., as the correfpondent fliall think proper to appoint. Lctiersy 
 i^'erefore, Of: this fubjccl, pcji paid-, directed to Mr, V/alker^ at the Chapter Cc^csrhnfr,^ 
 ^jtiT'L-ftcr-TiVJ, will, he punSliiaUy atietidedto..
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY 
 
 Los Angeles 
 
 This book is DUE on the last date stamped below. 
 
 Form L9-Series4939