The two first of these properties are founded on the nature of mind itself. So far as discourse is an expression of mind, it must be significant or expressive of thought.

Thought, moreover, is continuous. The mind, and more especially when cultivated and disciplined, does not act by sudden impulses in irregular, disconnected thoughts: the unity of its aim imposes on its movements the character of progressiveness and consecutiveness.

The property of naturalness is founded on the individuality of thought as the product of one distinct mind peculiar in its native structure and its acquired habits, and influenced in its action by peculiar circumstances of place and time.

CHAPTER II.

SIGNIFICANCE IN STYLE.

$296. Significance in style implies two things: First, That the speaker have some thought to communicate; and

Secondly, That the words employed actually express some meaning.

Sometimes a speaker has no desire to communicate any thought; but speaks for some other object, as to occupy time, or amuse or astonish his audience. This kind of discourse has been denominated “spurious oratory.”

It sometimes happens, moreover, that through mere vagueness or vacuity of thought a speaker or writer will use the forms of speech with no thought or sentiment expressed in them. This kind of style is termed “the nonsensical.

$297. SPURIOUS ORATORY, or discourse in which the

speaker does not design to communicate any thought, is, either,

For the purpose of appearing to say something:
For occupying time; or

For entertaining his audience with words of lofty pretensions, but of no significancy.

The first species named is a kind of verbal or rhetorical sophistry, in which want of argument is disguised under the mere dress of words.

The second is very common in deliberative bodies where, to prevent immediate action and delay a decision, a speaker occupies the attention of the sembly with the show of discussion.

The third is a species of rhetorical jugglery, and sometimes appears even in parts of grave and serious discourse, when vanity and love of applause, or perhaps a worse principle, lead to a sacrifice of the high end of speaking to the gratification of a low personal feeling.

§ 298. THE NONSENSICAL in style proceeds from vacuity of thought. The various species of it are the puerile, the learned, the profound, and the marvelous.

Dr. Campbell, in his Philosophy of Rhetoric, has ably treated of this part of style; and has indicated at length the causes of it. The species enumerated are those described in his work. The following extracts will exemplify them

1. The Puerile. If 'tis asked whence arises this hai mony or beauty of language? The answer is obvious Whatever renders a period sweet and pleasant makes it als graceful: a good ear is the gift of nature; it may be much improved but not acquired by art. Whoever is possesse of it will scarcely need dry critical precepts to enable him to judge of a true rhythmus, and melody of composition Just numbers, accurate proportions, a musical symphony

magnificent figures, and that decorum which is the result of all these, are unison to the human mind; we are so framed by nature, that their charm is irresistible. Hence all ages and nations have been smit with the love of the muses.—Geddes on the Composition of the Ancients.

The cadence comprehends that poetical style which animates every line, that propriety which gives strength and expression, that numerosity which renders the verse smooth, flowing and harmonious, that significancy which marks the passions, and in many cases makes the sound an echo to the sense.- -Goldsmith.

2. The Learned. Although we read of several properties attributed to God in Scripture, as wisdom, goodness, justice, &c., we must not apprehend them to be several powers, habits, or qualities, as they are in us; for as they are in God, they are neither distinguished from one another, nor from his nature or essence in whom they are said to be. In whom they are said to be; for, to speak properly, they are not in him, but are his very essence or nature itself; which acting severally upon several objects, seems to us to act from several properties or perfections in him; whereas, all the difference is only in our different apprehensions of the same thing God in himself is a most simple and pure act, and therefore cannot have any thing in him, but what is that most simple and pure act itself.—Beveridge's Ser

mons.

3. The Profound. 'Tis agreed that in all governments there is an absolute and unlimited power, which naturally and originally seems to be placed in the whole body wher ever the executive part of it lies. This holds in the body natural; for wherever we place the begining of motion, whether from the head, or the heart, or the animal spirits in general, the body moves and acts by a consent of all its parts. Swift.

4. The Marvelous. Nature in herself is unseemly, and he who copies her servilely and without artifice, will always produce something poor and of a mean taste. What is called loads in colors and lights can only proceed from a profound knowledge in the values of colors, and from an

admirable industry which makes the painted objects appear more true, if I may say so, than the real ones. In this sense it may be asserted, that in Reubens' pieces, art is above nature, and nature only a copy of that great master's works.-Dr. Piles.

The nonsensical appears not unfrequently in translations in which the words and grammatical construction of the original are followed only in respect to the form; and the particular thought of the author escapes attention.

The following will serve for illustration:

Let Rhetoric therefore be a power or faculty to consider in every subject what is therein contained proper to persuade.

This sentence extracted from a translation of Aristotle's Rhetoric by the translators of the Art of Thinking, conveys no meaning. Rhetoric is not a power or faculty to consider in any sense that can be attached to the expression; and we can form no notion of what it is to "consider in a subject what is contained in it."

The following is another extract from the same work which is liable to the same censure:

Wherefore also Rhetoric seems to personate politics; and they who challenge the knowledge of it, claim that knowledge partly through ignorance, partly through arrogance, and partly upon other human reasons; for it is a kind of particle and similitude of logic, as we have said in the beginning.

CHAPTER III.

OF CONTINUOUSNESS IN STYLE.

$ 299. CONTINUOUSNESS is that property of style which represents the thought as connected and flowing All thought in a cultivated and disciplined mind is con

tinuous, § 269; and consequently should be so represented in discourse so far as language will allow. There are limits, indeed, to the degree in which this property can be secured to style. When the mind is roused to a high pitch of passion, and the thoughts come strong and quick, language becomes too inflexible and awkward to serve as its ready expression. Then the thought bursts out, as it best can, in dissevered fragments of speech. It leaps, like the electric fluid from cloud to cloud, manifesting itself here and there at wide intervals of space. And yet even then it properly maintains something of the appearance of continuousness, and does not offend the hearer by its violent leaps; but by the very velocity of its movement prevents the notice of its successive radiations, and, like the lightning, gives to its separate flashes the effect of a continuous sheet of light.

Although, thus, strong impassioned thought leads to a sententious style, and, therefore, such a style becomes highly beautiful, as natural and proper to it, the affectation of such a style when the thought is of the opposite character is extremely disgusting.

The speeches of Lord Chatham and Patrick Henry furnish copious examples of a sententious expression which, as warranted by the character of the thought, are fine illustrations of its nature and its proper function.

The following are examples of a style faulty in this respect. The first is an extract from the Euphues of John Lyly; from which romance the name of Euphuism has been derived to this species of style. This kind of writing is not uncommonly combined with labored antithesis and affected quaintness of expression.

A burnt child dreadeth the fire. He that stumbleth twice at one stone is worthy to break his shins. Thou mayest happily forswear thyself, but thou shalt never delude me.