CHAPTER I.

GROUPS AND PHRASES.

In this chapter we shall present a general account of the principles upon which sentences are divided, in reading, into portions which are separated by pauses. The principles of pauses for the exposition of thought, are evidently the same as those for dividing sentences into groups and phrases. It will be necessary likewise, to make some remarks upon punctuation.

The common directions in books of elocution, for subdividing sentences by pauses, are so loose, and yet so difficult of ready application, that teachers, we believe, generally recommend their pupils to guide themselves solely by the instincts of the ear. Yet as even young children find it natural and easy to read sentences in small portions with appropriate pauses, it would seem that the principles by which their minds are actually guided must necessarily be simple. The real difficulty in the common directions, seems to arise, not from the fact that they are founded on grammar, but from their application requiring that sort of grammatical analysis which is called parsing. It is difficult, and indeed almost impossible, for one to carry on a process of parsing, during the glowing progress of the mind which is necessary for animated delivery. Still, much of the instinctive analysis made by a reader, is in accordance with common grammatical principles. The most necessary of these we shall endeavor to explain. We hope the occasional employment of a few familiar terms of grammar, will not give a repulsive aspect to the following pages, especially as the examples will be intelligible without any description, and their practice will of itself, and without accompanying comment, form the desired habits of mind in delivery. In the present, as in the previous part of the volume, all that is absolutely

necessary in the way of precept, will be printed in a larger type, while such portions will be still fewer than heretofore.

It will be noticed, that although we refer to grammatical principles for the purpose of explaining the formation of groups and phrases, yet we never describe them as invariably coinciding with particular grammatical combinations. In fact the connexions and separations which are made among words in natural utterance, need not be wholly of the same kind throughout a sentence, as those which are made by grammar. When we analyze a sentence of any length, on grammatical principles, we are continually obliged to consider the relations and connexions of words that are separated-often to a considerable distance from each other, by intervening words. But in uttering the sentence, we must take the words in the order in which they occur.

Neither can we be guided exclusively by marks of punctuation, however often, or with whatever accuracy, these may be inserted. As we shall immediately proceed to explain, these marks are used according to no fixed and invariable rule. It is impossible that they should be, inasmuch as their use is partly to indicate pauses for the voice, and partly to assist in explaining the grammatical connexion of words, in situations where no pauses are made in natural and conversational utterance. Even when inserted with the greatest admissible frequency, they never indicate all the divisions in sentences where pauses are naturally made. The frequency and length of vocal pauses also, can never be reduced to fixed and uniform principles, because they are always influenced in a greater or less degree, by the style of delivery, in respect to calm deliberation or eager excitement in pursuing a course of thought.

Yet as it is a very prevalent mistake in school instruction, to regard the common marks of punctuation as intended solely for marking pauses of the voice, it will be well to devote a few words to a consideration of our modern system of such marks.

sent.

The ancients employed no marks corresponding to ours of punctuation, and since their introduction by the moderns, the fashion for inserting them has been constantly fluctuating. Authors generally leave the business to the printers, who exhibit a better tact in using them; yet no two of the latter follow precisely the same rules. A hundred years ago, semicolons, and especially colons, were much oftener employed than at preThe dash is of later adoption than the other marks, and has not yet been introduced to any great extent, in punctuating the sacred Scriptures, or editions of the ancient classics. Some editors and printers, however, make an extremely frequent use of it, as a substitute for all the others. It seems to be the great difference in construction and arrangement between modern and ancient style, that has led to the adoption of the dash in addition to the comma, semicolon, colon and period. These regular marks were first employed for the Latin language, and have never been used for the Greek, for which a different set was invented. They may be inserted on pretty definite and invariable principles in the former tongue, and likewise in compositions in modern languages, when their style is arranged after the classic models.

But whatever plan be adopted for their use, they are less necessary for the assistance of the reader, than is generally imagined. The ancients did without them, and the moderns make but little use of them in manuscript. A letter of friendship, carefully pointed as if for the press, would appear pedantic and in bad taste. It is laid down as an important rule of composition by Blair, never to suffer the construction of a sentence to depend on the absence or insertion of a mark of punctuation. The fashion of the present day, inclines to use as few of them in books as possible, and to insert commas more than formerly, in place of semicolons. The colon, as employed a hundred or a hundred and fifty years ago, is now generally superseded by the period. In short, the whole set of marks is in

tended to indicate a part only of the grammatical divisions, and in very many cases, commas are inserted in situations where a pause is never made in the utterance of ordinary conversation. As the latter fact is not generally known, it may be useful to insert a single example, although scarcely an extract is introduced into our volume, which does not afford instances. E. g. "The latest foreign news by the steamer is, that war has been declared in England." In this example the comma, by the invariable rule of printing, is placed between the copula is, and the conjunction that. The rule admits of no exceptions. Yet in conversation, the pause is invariably before is, instead of after it. The two words is and that are unaccented, and are grouped with whatever words immediately follow. If we pause after is, the word becomes accented, contrary to the genius of our tongue. In Latin, this would not perhaps be the case. The rhythm of that language, like that of the French, would suffer est to receive an accent. In English, the division of the sentence is thus: "The latest foreign news by the steamis that war has been declared in England." We have mentioned the comma after is, as the only one in accordance with common custom. It is a vague rule, however, to insert one after the nominative, (i. e. the subject,) when this is long, though how long it must be, no one attempts to decide. According to this precept, another comma might be introduced in the above sentence, viz. before is, as well as after it. By rule, also, there may be still an additional one after news; e. g. "The latest foreign news, by the steamer, is, that war has been declared in England." Conversational utterance, however, will always group is with that, leaving a pause at the end of the subject; and if the circumstance "by the steamer" is made important, will separate it from the preceding member likewise by a pause: e. g. The latest foreign news by the steam

er

er

66

is that war has been declared in England."

The mind of a reader, then, may notice all the marks of punctuation, and use their assistance in reference to a quick apprehension of the grammatical structure of sentences; or— what is the same thing-may employ them as aids in catching the meaning of a passage, at an instantaneous glance of the eye. No reader must however take them as invariable guides for vocal pausing.

Dismissing therefore all further consideration of the common marks of punctuation, it remains for us to investigate the actual connexions and separations of words that take place in utterance, and the consequent pauses that are needed. This subject will be considered under the heads of Groups of Utterance, and Phrases of Utterance.

The lengths of the different pauses that separate groups and phrases, can be reduced to no unvarying principles, except when they are determined by the rhythm. Neither does any difficulty ever occur in reference to this point. Phrases are naturally separated by longer pauses than groups. Groups of more than one accent, or compound groups, as they will be called, are often subdivided for mere convenience of breath. The absolute length of any particular pause, perpetually varies in accordance with the slowness of the delivery, or the demands of the rhythm; and in respect to these, the natural instincts of the ear and voice are infallible guides.

The significance of a pause does not often depend on the degree of its length, but is determined by the inflexion and prolongation of tone on the word that immediately precedes it. In speaking, the attitude, look and gesture, likewise, are essential to the significance of a pause.

The management of the breath, though connected with the length of pauses, is not absolutely dependent on them, as has been already mentioned on page 52. Vide also, pp. 99, 101, 105, 107, 108.