est applause from those who not only receive no edifi. cation from what they hear, but absolutely do not understand it. So far is popularity from being a safe criterion of the usefulness of a preacher.

CHAP. II.—Of Energy.

§ 1. The next quality of Style to be noticed is what may be called Energy; the term being used in a wider sense than the 'Evépycia of Aristotle, and nearly corresponding with what Dr. Campbell calls Vivacity; so as to comprehend every thing that may conduce to stimulate attention to impress strongly on the mind the Arguments adduced-to excite the Imagination, and to arouse the Feelings.

This Energy then, or Vivacity of Style, must depend (as is likewise the case in respect of Perspicuity) on three things; 1st, the Choice of words, 2nd, their Number, and 3rd, their Arrangement.

Choice of

With respect to the choice of words, it will words with be most convenient to consider them under those two classes which Aristotle has de

a view to energy.

scribed under the titles of Kuria and Xena, for which our language does not afford precisely corresponding names: "Proper," " Appropriate," or " Ordinary," terms, will the most nearly designate the former; the latter class (literally the "Strange,") including all others;—all that are in any way removed from common use; whether uncommon terms, or ordinary terms, either transferred to a different meaning from that which strictly belongs to them, or employed in a different manner from that of common discourse. All the Tropes and Figures, enumerated by Grammatical and Rhetorical Writers, will of course fall under this head.

Caution

With respect then to "Proper" terms, the against ge principal rule for guiding our choice with a neral terms. view to Energy, is to prefer, ever, those

words which are the least abstract and general. Individuals alone having a real existence,* the terms denoting them (called by Logicians "Singular terms ") will of course make the most vivid impression on the mind, and exercise most the power of Conception; and the less remote any term is from these, i. e. the more specific or individual, the more energy it will possess, in comparison of such as are more general. The impression produced on the mind by a “Singular term,” may be compared to the distinct view taken in by the eye of any object (suppose some particular man) near at hand, in a clear light, which enables us to distinguish the features of the individual; in a fainter light, or rather further off, we merely perceive that the object is a man; this corresponds with the idea conveyed by the name of the Species; yet further off, or in a still feebler light, we can distinguish merely some living object; and at length, merely some object; these views corresponding respectively with the terms denoting the genera, less or more remote. And as each of these views conveys, as far as it goes, an equally correct impression to the mind, (for we are equally certain that the object at a distance is something, as that the one close to us is such and such an individual,) though each, successively, is less vivid; so, in language, a general term may be as clearly understood, as a Specific, or a Singular term, but will convey a much less forcible impression to the hearer's mind. The more General

cr༢ ”

66

*Thence called by Aristotle, (Categ. sec. 3.) "primary substan(πpuται ovoiαι,) Genus and Species, being denominated "secondary," as not properly denoting a "really-existing thing," (rode ri,) but rather an attribute. He has, indeed, been considered as the great advocate of the opposite doctrine; i. e. the system of "Realism" which was certainly embraced by many of his professed followers; but his own language is sufficiently explicit. Πᾶσα δὲ οὐσία δοκεῖ τόδε τι σημαίνειν. Ἐπὶ μὲν οὖν τῶν πρώτων οὐσιῶν ἀναμφισβήτητον καὶ ἀληθές ἐστιν, ὅτι τόδε τι σημαίνει· ἄτομον γὰρ καὶ ἓν ἀριθμῷ τὸ δηλούμενον ἐστιν. Ἐπὶ δὲ τῶν δευτέρων οὐσιῶν ΦΑΙΝΕΤΑΙ, μὲν ὁμοίως τῷ σχήματι τῆς προσηγορίας τόδε τι σημαίνειν, ὅταν εἴπῃ ἄνθρωπος, ἢ ζῶον. ΟΥ ΜΗΝ ΓΕ ΑΛΗΘΕΣ. ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον Tоióv ri oŋpaivε K. T. X. Aristotle, Categ. 3. See Logic, Dissert. c. v.

the terms are," (as Dr. Campbell justly remarks,) "the picture is the fainter; the more Special they are, the brighter. The same sentiment may be expressed with equal justness, and even equal perspicuity, in the former way, as in the latter; but as the colouring will in that case be more languid, it cannot give equal pleasure to the fancy, and by consequence will not contribute so much either to fix the attention, or to impress the memory."

It might be supposed at first sight, that an Author has little or no choice on this point, but must employ either more or less general terms according to the objects he is speaking of. There is, however, in almost every case, great room for such a choice as we are speaking of; for, in the first place, it depends on our choice whether or not we will employ terms more general than the subject requires; which may almost always be done consistently with Truth and Propriety, though not with Energy; if it be true that a man has committed murder, it may be correctly asserted, that he has committed a crime: if the Jews were "exterminated," and "Jerusalem demolished" by " Vespasian's army," it may be said, with truth, that they were "subdued" by "an Enemy," and their “ Capital" taken. This substitution then of the General for the Specific, or of the Specific for the Singular, is always within our reach: and many, especially unpractised writers, fall into a feeble style by resorting to it unnecessarily; either because they imagine there is more appearance of refinement or of profundity, in the employment of such terms as are in less common use among the vulgar, or, in some cases, with a view to give greater comprehensiveness to their reasonings, and to increase the utility of what they say, by enlarging the field of its application. Inexperienced Preachers frequently err in this way, by dwelling on Virtue and Vice-Piety and Irreligion-in the abstract, without particularizing; forgetting that while they include much, they impress little or nothing.

The only appropriate occasion for this generic language, (as it may be called,) is when we wish to avoid giving a vivid impression-when our object is to soften what is offensive, disgusting, or shocking; as when we speak of an "execution," for the infliction of the sentence of death on a criminal: of which kind of expressions, common discourse furnishes numberless instances. On the other hand, in Antony's speech over Cæsar's body, his object being to excite horror, Shakspeare puts into his mouth the most particular expressions; "those honourable men (not, who killed Cæsar, but) whose daggers have stabbed Cæsar."

Tropes.

§ 2. But in the second place, not only does a regard for Energy require that we should not use terms more general than are exactly adequate to the objects spoken of, but we are also allowed, in many cases, to employ less general terms than are exactly appropriate. In which case we are employing words not "appropriate," but belonging to the second of the two classes just mentioned. The use of this Trope* (enumerated by Aristotle among the Metaphors, but since inore commonly called Synecdoche) is very frequent; as it conduces much to the energy of the expression, without occasioning, in general, any risk of its meaning being mistaken. The passage cited by Dr. Campbell,† from one of our Lord's discourses, (which are in general of this character,) together with the remarks made upon it, will serve to illustrate what has been just said: "Consider,' says our Lord, the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these. If then God so clothe the grass, which to-day is in the field, and to-morrow is cast into the oven, how much more will he clothe

* From Tрε; any word turned from its primary signification. The ingenious Author cites this in the Section treating of "Proper terms," which is a trifling oversight; as it is plain that lily" is used for the Genus "flower,"-"Solomon," for the Spe cies "King," &c.

you?'* Let us here adopt a little of the tasteless manner of modern paraphrasts by the substitution of more general terms, one of their many expedients of infrigidating, and let us observe the effect produced by this change. Consider the flowers, how they gradually increase in their size; they do no manner of work, and yet 1 declare to you, that no king whatever, in his most splendid habit is dressed up like them. If then God in his providence doth so adorn the vegetable productions, which continue but little time on the land, and are afterwards devoted to the meanest uses, how much more will he provide clothing for you? How spiritless is the same sentiment rendered by these small variations! The very particularizing of to-day and to-morrow, is infinitely more expressive of transitoriness, than any description wherein the terms are general, that can be substituted in its room." It is a remarkable circumstance that this characteristic of style is perfectly retained in translation, in which every other excellence of expression is liable to be lost; so that the prevalence of this kind of language in the Sacred writers may be regarded as something exhibiting wisdom of design. It may be said with truth, that the book which it is the most necessary to translate into every language, is chiefly characterised by that kind of excellence in diction which is least impaired by translation.

§ 3. But to proceed with the consideraMetaphor and Simile. tion of Tropes; the most employed and most important of all those kinds of expressions which depart from the plain and strictly appropriate Style-all that are called by Aristotle, Xena-is the Metaphor, in the usual and limited sense; viz. a word substituted for another, on account of the Resemblance or Analogy between their significations. The Simile or Comparison may be considered as differing in form only from a Metaphor; the resemblance being in that case stated, which in the Metaphor is implied.* Each may be † See Logic, chap. iii.

* Luke xii. 27, 28.