[487] It is common, at any rate, for prosodists to speak of “the movement of the voice,” as do Sheridan, Murray, Humphrey, and Everett; but Kames, in treating of the Beauty of Language from Resemblance, says “There is no resemblance of sound to motion, nor of sound to sentiment.”—­Elements of Criticism, Vol. ii, p. 63.  This usage, however, is admitted by the critic, had cited to show how, “causes that have no resemblance may produce resembling effects.”—­Ib. 64.  “By a number of syllables in succession, an emotion is sometimes raised extremely similar to that raised by successive motion:  which may be evident even to those who are defective in taste, from the following fact, that the term movement in all languages is equally applied to both.”—­Ib. ii. 66.

[488] “From what has been said of accent and quantity in our own language, we may conclude them to be essentially distinct and perfectly separable:  nor is it to be doubted that they were equally separable in the learned languages.”—­Walkers’s Observations on Gr. and Lat.  Accent and Quantity, Sec.20; Key, p. 326.  In the speculative essay here cited, Walker meant by accent the rising or the falling inflection,—­an upward or a downward slide of the voice:  and by quantity, nothing but the open or close sound of some vowel; as of “the a in scatter” and in “skater,” the initial syllables of which words be supposed to differ in quantity as much as any two syllables can!—­Ib., Sec.24; Key, p. 331.  With these views of the things, it is perhaps the less to be wondered at, that Walker, who appears to have been a candid and courteous writer, charges “that excellent scholar Mr. Forster—­with a total ignorance of the accent and quantity of his own language,” (Ib., Note on Sec.8; Key, p. 317;) and, in regard to accent, ancient or modern, elsewhere confesses his own ignorance, and that of every body else, to be as “total.”  See marginal note on Obs. 4th below.

[489] (1.) “We shall now take a view of sounds when united into syllables.  Here a beautiful variation of quantity presents itself as the next object of our attention.  The knowledge of long and short syllables, is the most excellent and most neglected quality in the whole art of pronunciation.

The disputes of our modern writers on this subject, have arisen chiefly from an absurd notion that has long prevailed; viz. that there is no difference between the accent and the quantity, in the English language; that the accented syllables are always long, and the unaccented always short.

An absurdity so glaring, does not need refutation.  Pronounce any one line from Milton, and the ear will determine whether or not the accent and quantity always coincide.  Very seldom they do.”—­HERRIES:  Bicknell’s Gram., Part ii, p. 108.