Taking the last sentence as an example of all, and substituting the equivalent for no in each instance, the following perfect loose sentence will be the result: "Ah! it cannot be: it cannot be: it cannot be: it cannot be." (See, as above, Perfect Loose Sentence.)

4. I have hitherto, except incidentally, spoken of yes and no, as being employed independently; that is, without being followed by any thing with which they could combine and form compound sentences. I shall now show that they do this; and that all the peculiarities I have pointed out, follow them in this new relation. 1. They are employed singly: e. g.

Berth. Wilt thou wear it?

Ethw. Yes, and press it too.

Freb. It is Jane de Montfort.

Lady. No; such description suits not her.

Berth. What! Ethward, say ye?

Sig. No; it is Selred.

Sel. What tidings, man! Is Ethwald at the gate?

Ser. No, nor yet within the walls.

Wog. My place of strength?

Fol. Yes: I spake with one new from the west,

Who saw the ruinous broil.

The first example is a close sentence: (see Close :) the second, double compact with the first and second part expressed: the third, the same with the first and third part expressed: the fourth, the same with the first part only expressed, but this comprising two members: the fifth is a loose sentence: possibly a single compact; correlative words therefore-because or for.

2. They are employed with repetition: e. g.

Ethu. You weep, good Ethelbert.

Eth. Yes; yes; such tears as doth the warm showered earth
Show kindly to the sun.

Freb. My friend, your face is pale: have you been ill?
De Mon. No, Freberg: no: I think I have been well.

Her. I beseech you, let me stay with you.

Ray. No: no: no! speak of this no more.

The first of these sentences is a single compact: the second and third are both loose.

3. Single with the represented sentence inserted: e. g. Jane. And he is well you say?

Freb. Yes, well, but joyless.

Ethw. It is some night-bird screaming on the tower.
Boy. Ay, so belike it seemeth, but I know—

Ethw.

What dost thou know!

Ethw. Thou dost not grieve I am safe returned !
Berth. O no, I do not grieve, yet I must weep.

These sentences are all of them single compacts.

4. Repeated and followed by the represented sentence: e. g. Mrs. B. I do think I could contrive to find you employment if you are inclined to it.

Charles. Yes: yes: I am inclined to it: idleness is tiresome. Mrs. B. O you are wounded, Baltimore.

True.

No; no! there are no wounds; we are victorious.

Theo. Hear me, I do entreat thee.

Out. Nay, nay! no foolish pleadings, for thy life

Is forfeit now: [have at thee.]

Under the preceding head, each of the sentences is a single compact; (which see ;) but under this, the first is loose: the second and third are double compacts. (See Double Compact below.)

2. Well.

This word is not a representative like yes and no, but an elliptical expression for such forms as, "It is well," "You say well," "I know well," "If it be well," "As it is well," "Since it is well," &c.

1. It is a simple sentence when employed independently, like yes and no, for assent or approval: e. g.

Do I say well? Well. He did well Very well.

2. It is often independently repeated, like yes and no, and then forms, in like manner, a perfect loose sentence: e. g.

Al. You will never see him again.

Tob. Well: well.

3. In the main, however, it is employed in connection with words following, like yes and no, and then forms, in like manner, several species of compound sentences. Like them, too, in such a connec

tion, it is employed with or without repetition: e. g.

Har. Would they have a man give up the woman of his heart, because she likes a bit of lace upon her petticoat?

Roy. Well, but she is, &c. &c.

Est. Do you know, last night, before twilight, I peeped over the blind, and saw him walking with slow, pensive steps, under my window?

Mar. Well; what happened then f

Est. I drew in my head, you may be sure; but a little while after I peeped out again, and, do you know, I saw him coming out of the perfumer's, just opposite my dressing-room, where he had been all the while?

Mar. Very well, and what happened then!

Ros. One fault he has: I know but only one:
His too great love of military fame

Absorbs his thoughts, and makes him oft appear
Unsocial and severe.

Fred. Well; feel I not undaunted in the field?
As much enthusiastic love of glory?

Why am I not as good a man as he f

Jer. Alas, my lord, she's dead.

De Mon. Well; then she is at rest.

Jer. How well, my lord!

De Mon. Is she not with the dead, the quiet dead, where all is peace?

Jer. Oh, I am stunned! My head is cracked in twain:

Your honor does forget how old I am.

De Mon. Well; well; the wall is harder than I wist.

With. I will have an end put to all this foolery.

Mar. Very well; I have just been following your advice.

All these examples of well, in connection with sequent matter, are compact sentences, of which well constitutes the first part: the first four having the correlative words, indeed-but, expressed or understood, and the next two, therefore because, understood: the last, as-so. Before closing my remarks on this word, I should say that, like yes and no, it often appears to be single and independent, in consequence of the suppression of a part of the sentence, when, such being the case, it is, of course, in connection with the suppressed portion, compound. For an example, see Ch. VI., Simple Declarative Sentences, at the end.

I may add also, that the dependence or independence of these little words, on what follows, has a marked effect on their delivery: hence the importance of ascertaining their relation. To deliver them without reference to this, uniformly in the same way, as many do, is, in half the cases occurring, to pervert the sense.

+

CHAPTER V.

EMPHASIS.

I SHALL Speak of emphasis under two heads: first, the nature and different kinds of emphasis, and secondly, the effect.

SEC. I. THE NATURE OF EMPHASIS IN GENERAL; OR COMMON EMPHASIS.

1. Every word in a sentence in part declares, and in part implies three propositions: first, an affirmative; second, a negative, denying that affirmative; and third, another affirmative incompatible with the first.

Example.

By the faculty of a lively and picturesque imagination, a man in a dungeon is capable of entertaining himself with scenes and landscapes more beautiful than any that can be found in the whole compass of nature.

The definite article the, the second word in this sentence, is used by the author, as all will acknowledge, not only to designate a particular faculty to the exclusion of every other which forms a part of our constitution, but more especially to contradict a possible assertion or supposition, that there is more than one faculty with this particular function: an assertion or supposition which would be expressed, if a, each or every were substituted for the in the example.

Such being the case, we have found two of the propositions above enumerated: the first is that which the declares: the second is that which the contradicts. Somebody says, has said, or may say, By a, each or every faculty of, &c.; but the author, to exclude

this, says, By the faculty of, &c. But these two propositions necessarily imply a third; namely, an intermediate denial of the first; for to oppose one assertion to another, is equivalent to asserting, not merely that the one is true, but also that the other is not. Introducing then the intermediate proposition, we obtain the entire series involved in the use of the definite article in the case before us, as follows:

By a faculty: not by a faculty, but by the faculty.

Take another example: the word faculty is applied to the imagination by the author, in opposition to theories which would make it a mere modification of some other faculty, or of the intellect in general. It has a furtive reference, therefore, to one or both of these ideas, and excludes them as false. Consequently we have here, as above, three propositions, thus:

By the modification, &c. not by the modification, &c., but by the faculty.

Proceeding from word to word, in the same manner, to the conclusion of the sentence, we shall find the same number of propositions involved in each e. g.

By the faculty of memory: not of memory, but the imagination. Of a dull and common-place: not a dull and common-place, but a lively and picturesque.

A man anywhere: not anywhere, but in a dungeon.
As beautiful: not as beautiful, but more beautiful.

Than some: not some, but any.

That have been not that have been, but that can be.

In a province: not in a province, but in the whole compass of nature, &c. &c. &c. &c. &c.

2. The first of these propositions being that which the second denies, and the third contradicts, I term the relative idea of the series the second, the negative: the third, the contradictory.

:

3. Most of the words in a sentence, being employed to convey received ideas, that is, ideas common both to the writer and reader, speaker and hearer, no necessity exists for indicating the exclusion. of their relatives, either by formally introducing the series of propositions involved, or by any other means.

This, however, is not true of all: in every sentence, one or more are intended to convey ideas, differing from those entertained by the reader or hearer; or supposed to be different; or different from those of third parties referred to: in a word, they are intended to convey, not merely particular ideas, but particular ideas in opposition to other ideas.