CHAPTER III.

EMPHASIS.

THIS important subject will be considered in the same physiological light, as those of pause and inflexion. But before proceeding to treat of it in detail, it is essential that we make a few remarks, in order to explain more definitely than any one has hitherto done, what is the peculiar province of one who acts as a teacher, not of oratory, but of elocution.

Delivery, as a subject of study on the part of a reader or speaker, or of criticism on that of an auditor, must be regarded under one of two aspects. Viewed in one light, it is a natural and instinctive act, by which we give an adequate expression of the thoughts and feelings suggested by our subject, and by the time, place and occasion. This is the light in which it is regarded throughout the whole of this treatise. Elocution thus limited, becomes a branch of physiology.

In the other aspect, reading or speaking is viewed as an art, and therefore as dependent solely on judgment and taste. The art of delivery is a part of the art of oratory. Acting, which makes a distinct branch, is also in the legitimate sense of the word an art; as much so as poetry or painting. It is an art of a high order.

Delivery thus exercised, makes use of the physiological laws of utterance, as instruments. A speaker who deserves to be called an orator, does much more than merely give an adequate expression of his impulses and feelings. His reason, or as we more commonly say, his taste and judgment, are all the while superior to these, and, as it were, look down upon them from a higher position; determining which he shall encourage and which he shall check. In doing this, however, he must never violate any law of nature. His pauses and inflexions, for in

stance, are all determined by laws of reason and grammar. In short, all the principles which we have as yet investigated, are fixed and definite. They are capable of being reduced to scientific laws.

If we apply these considerations to our present subject, the distinction between the natural laws of utterance in regard to emphasis, and the artistical taste and judgment of the orator, is as follows.

Nature has provided certain modes of rendering words emphatic. We are so constituted, that in the language of our definition, (p. 103,) "Emphatic force is given to those parts of discourse which excite the mind of a speaker to peculiar earnestness, and cause him to make a special effort to awaken the same feelings in those whom he addresses." In a merely instinctive delivery, every word that peculiarly excites the speaker, must be uttered in precise correspondence with the impulse. But in so doing, he is liable to misjudge. He feels, for instance, impulses leading him to enforce with great vehemence, all the explanatory inflexions on the principal words of his course of reasoning. His audience, however, may be so familiar with. the subject, or so quick of apprehension, that they do not need this assistance, and feel it to be disagreeable. So too, of appeals to the imagination and emotions: the speaker may perpetually misjudge. In all such cases, a knowledge of elocution, considered as a mere account of the natural laws of utterance, can render him no assistance, and he must be guided by principles belonging to the art of oratory. Such principles, like those of poetry, painting and sculpture, are not properly of a scientific nature. There may be a science of elocution, as there is of natural history. No one however, speaks of a science of poetry or oratory. Science does not, like the arts, appeal to taste and the decisions of the imagination and feelings, As a clear apprehension of these distinctions is essential in reference to practical speaking, as well as to an artistical man

agement of elocution, it will be useful to dwell upon the distinction between emphasis and inflexion. In speaking of the latter, we have generally been careful to avoid confounding it with the tone that results from its union with the former. An emphatic inflexion is a compound of inflexion with emphatic force.

Emphatic force results from feeling. The inflexions represent acts of the intellect, and are continually employed, with or without that excitement of feeling which produces emphatic force. Let us illustrate this assertion by a familiar example:

I said yes,

and not no.

Here the contrast between what is affirmed and what is denied, is expressed by opposite inflexions. These must be of a marked degree, or there will be no tone of explanation. They must be at least thirds and not seconds; and the extent of the change of pitch, by skip and slide, will represent the degree of explanatory tone. If we employ but a slight degree, the voice will skip and slide a third; if we are more explanatory, these changes will either be through a fifth, or the simple slides will become waves. But suppose the person addressed, is inattentive, or incredulous, and we wish to arouse his mind to perceive the truth or importance of what we say; then it is, and only then, that we employ emphatic force. This may be given in different ways, but it is always something superadded to the inflexion.

Emphasis, then, is some kind of emphatic force, and may exist with or without inflexion.

It represents the feeling of the importance of an idea; and if accompanying an inflexion, it superadds force and energy to the simply explanatory act of the intellect.

Emphasis or emphatic force, is simply an instrument for awakening attention, and consequent sympathy, in other minds.

A familiar exemplification of its essential nature, is afforded by the sharp, loud, or harsh utterance, which we employ to command brute animals.

There is an apparent exception to the truth of the above proposition, in the fact that we employ emphasis when talking to ourselves. But in all such cases, we are either in imagination addressing others, or we actually address ourselves, in the same way as when one person speaks to another. E. g. "I say to myself.". If we may be permitted to use a mode of expression that is now growing familiar to all, we may say that, subjectively, we address ourselves viewed as objective. We, at any rate, make an objective representation of our own discourse.

If then, the various forms of emphasis are nothing more or less than instruments for arousing attention and sympathy in others, when should we employ these instruments?

It is obvious that we may feel the importance of directing the attention of others, to the grammatical construction; to the logical relations of ideas; to particular images before the imagination; or to particular emotions or passions. Accordingly, we have the following classification:

1. Grammatical Emphasis.

2. Logical Emphasis.

3. Emphasis of the Imagination.

4. Emphasis enforcing particular emotions.

The words to be selected for receiving emphatic force, must evidently be the most important ones in reference to each of these heads.

Errors occurring under the first two classes, imply that the reader or speaker misapprehends the meaning of a passage. In respect to these, no license is admissible, except to avoid giving force to more words than will be necessary for intelligibility. In respect to emphatic enforcement of words that appeal to the imagination, or to the emotions, the principles of grammar and logic are not without influence, yet imagination is also ne

cessary, and taste and judgment must be exercised. The call for these is similar to that made in writing an essay or oration. The grammatical and logical arrangement of the composition, will indeed, in ordinary cases, be a sufficient direction, but a reader or speaker of skill and cultivated power, will often be much superior to those who depend on these alone. No composition is found less interesting in ordinary delivery, than description or narration; while none is more so, when read or spoken by one who makes use of a poetical imagination.

We thus find that even the selection of words for receiving emphatic force, is liable to depend on taste and judgment; while the degree of the force must be determined solely by the same guides. But as artistic principles are never very necessary for enabling one to do justice to his own sentiments; nothing more is necessary for qualifying us to become practical speakers, than to acquire the power of giving a free and bold expression to natural impulses.

Let a speaker emphasize such words as most excite his own understanding, imagination and feelings; and let the degree of force be such as to produce on his audience the impression he wishes.

In respect to determining the latter point, considerable assistance may be derived from the section (p. 126) on the Consciousness of being earnest and interesting.

By the very act of endeavoring to speak with earnestness, one's whole mind is aroused to activity; and improvement in respect to propriety of emphasis, keeps pace with that in the more mechanical and physical requisites of delivery. Yet though the mind of the speaker is in fact actuated by principles of thought, he is not often distinctly conscious of them at the time of speaking.

The following general directions, however, seem to us to be such as actually influence the choice of emphatic words, and will undoubtedly be found useful.