CHAPTER V. ON THE RHETORICAL REQUISITES OF GOOD COMPOSITION. Up to this point we have treated the subject of composition mainly in its connexion with grammar, and have laid down rules for enabling us to make the language we employ grammatically correct. Although this is of great importance, yet the sphere of composition extends beyond mere grammatical purity, and includes certain requisites which are purely rhetorical. The rhetorical requisites of good composition are those which render it effective for its purpose. They are two in number; in the first place it is necessary that language should be clear and intelligible; in the second place, that it should be forcible. The first of these we shall denote by the word PERSPICUITY, the second by the word STRENGTH. Perspicuity or clearness is the exact opposite to obscurity, and corresponds to transparency in material things. It is a positive essential in composition. He who speaks or writes in such a way as to make others understand his meaning distinctly and certainly, has succeeded in the first great object of language, whether he writes or speaks well or ill with regard to style. Grammatical purity is a great aid to perspicuity, as also is the use of common and well-known words in preference to those which are unusual and technical. A skilful writer, even in handling difficult subjects, makes his style clear and forcible by selecting his words as far as possible from among those which are in ordinary use. The most popular and enduring works in English literature are constructed of homely words. Dr. Johnson, who himself was fond of long and difficult words, commends the style of Swift on the ground that it is forcible and yet simple. "The peruser of Swift wants little previous knowledge; it will be sufficient that he is acquainted with common words and common things; he has neither to mount elevations nor to explore profundities; his passage always on a level, along solid ground, without asperities, without obstruction." Obscurity in composition may arise from many causes, the most important of which we will enumerate. 1. Bad arrangement of words. This subject has already been spoken of, but it is hardly possible to lay too much stress upon it. The rule laid down is that the proper order in a simple sentence shall be Subject, Predicate, Object, and that in expanding these, the limiting or qualifying words shall be placed as close as possible to the words to which they refer. This order should never be departed from, unless with the intention of giving prominence to an important word by putting it out of its usual place-but even then in such a way as to preserve the sentence from ambiguity. The following sentence is very objectionable : "I have now and then inserted in the text characters of books that I have not read on the faith of my guides." The last phrase is misplaced, for it is intended to point out the reason for having inserted certain notices in the text, but not to limit the sentence I have not read. Removing the misplaced words as close as possible to the word inserted to which they refer, the corrected sentence stands thus : "I have now and then, on the faith of my guides, inserted in the text characters of certain books that I have not read." 2. Doubt respecting the intended meaning of a word. It is an unfortunate thing that in every language, words which are pronounced or spelt alike are used to denote different things. The words degree, sense, grain, grave, intimate, kind, lay, mean, and hundreds more, have several very different meanings; it is, therefore, highly important that they should be placed in such a connexion as to exclude the possibility of their being understood in the wrong sense. It is a sign of great negligence when the context naturally suggests the meaning which a certain word is not intended to have, as in the following sentence:— "Not only is painting very unnatural, but it is very easy for any one, without looking carefully, to see the difference between the rosy cheeks and clear complexion of good health, and the unnatural hues that have their origin in the toilette." Here we naturally understand the word painting to denote the art of painting, but towards the end of the sentence we begin to discover that it is intended to refer to the habit of painting the face. No one can possibly understand either of the following sentences, because the words in italics are ambiguous, and the context throws no light upon the meaning intended. A blind man is in one sense destitute. His presence will be unfavourable to his election. I remarked it as we were going along. 3. The use of Parentheses. Sometimes in composing a word or phrase is used which requires to be annotated or explained, and consequently an explanatory phrase is wedged in immediately after it, which is entirely unconnected with the sentence itself, and is therefore separated from the sentence by two brackets, thus (). The words included in the brackets are then said to be Parenthetical. Parentheses should be used very sparingly and cautiously, for their natural tendency is to make sentences pointless and obscure. They may be avoided by placing the parenthetical remarks as foot-notes at the bottom of the page, or better still, by making them into separate and complete sentences following immediately after the sentences to which they refer. The more careless a composer is, the more is he driven to such shifts as that of using parentheses in his composition, but our best writers rarely, if ever use them. They are to be regarded as awkward devices for extricating thoughtless composers from the difficulties into which their carelessness leads them. A composer should see his way to the end of a sentence before he begins to write it; if he is so imprudent as to begin committing it to paper when he sees only the first few words, he must expect to find himself stumbling and entangled, and unable to extricate himself. Nothing can be more lamentably awkward than the following sentence: "Hume's 'Natural Religion' called forth Dr. Beattie's ་ (author of The Minstrel') able work." A prudent writer would have avoided this confusion by simply re-arranging the words : "Hume's 'Natural Religion' called forth the able work work of Dr. Beattie, author of The Minstrel.'" 4. Aiming too much at Brevity. In the following sentence the meaning is obscure, because the writer has not taken pains to use the requisite number of words for making his meaning clear: "He aimed at nothing less than the crown." It is impossible to discover whether this sentence is intended to mean that He aimed at the crown and nothing less, or that "He aimed at nothing less than he aimed at the crown, the latter of course implying that He did not aim at the crown at all. The following sentences are all similarly objectionable: "I have long since learned to like nothing but what you do." 66 66 This subject was the Reformation of Luther." 'You ought to contemn all the wit in the world against you." 5. Simple negligence in using sentences that are nonsensical. Careless writers are often betrayed into blunders as grave as those in the following sentences: "I presume that the sentence which the woman underwent was not executed." |