CHAPTER VI.
ON QUANTITY.
[§ 232]. The dependent vowels, as the a in fat, i in fit, u in but, o in not, have this character; viz. they are all uttered with rapidity, and pass quickly in the enunciation, the voice not resting on them. This rapidity of utterance becomes more evident when we contrast with them the prolonged sounds of the a in fate, ee in feet, oo in book, o in note; wherein the utterance is retarded, and wherein the voice rests, delays, or is prolonged. The f and t of fate are separated by a longer interval than the f and t of fat; and the same is the case with fit, feet, &c.
Let the n and the t of not be each as 1, the o also being as 1: then each letter, consonant or vowel, shall constitute ⅓ of the whole word.
Let, however, the n and t of note be each as 1, the o being as 2. Then, instead of each consonant constituting ⅓ of the whole word, it shall constitute but ¼.
Upon the comparative extent to which the voice is prolonged, the division of vowels and syllables into long and short has been established: the o in note being long, the o in not being short. And the longness or shortness of a vowel or syllable is said to be its quantity.
[§ 233]. The division of vowels into long and short coincides nearly with the division of them into independent and dependent. Mark the word vowels, and mark the word nearly. In the length and shortness of vowels there are degrees. This is especially the case with the broad vowels. The a in father is capable of being pronounced either very quickly, or very slowly. It may be attend most rapidly and yet preserve its broad character, i.e., become neither the a in fat, nor the a in fate.
In the independence and dependence of vowels there are no degrees.
Subject to the views laid down in the next section, the vowel ee in seeing is long, and it is certainly independent. Whether the syllable see- be long is another question.
1. All long vowels are independent, but all independent vowels are not long.
2. All dependent vowels are short, but all short vowels are not dependent.
Clear notions upon these matters are necessary for determining the structure of the English and classical metres.
[§ 234]. The qualified manner in which it was stated that the vowel in the word seeing was long, and the attention directed to the word vowels in the preceding section, arose from a distinction, that is now about to be drawn, between the length of vowels and the length of syllables.
The independent vowel in the syllable see- is long; and long it remains, whether it stand as it is, or be followed by a consonant, as in seen, or by a vowel, as in see-ing.
The dependent vowel in the word sit is short. If followed by a vowel it becomes unpronounceable, except as the ea in seat or the i in sight. By a consonant, however, it may be followed, and still retain its dependent character and also its shortness. Such is the power it has in the word quoted, sit. Followed by a second consonant, it still retains its shortness, e.g., sits. Whatever the comparative length of the syllables, see and seen, sit and sits, may be, the length of their respective vowels is the same.
Now, if we determine the character of the syllable by the character of the vowel, all syllables are short wherein there is a short vowel, and all are long wherein there is a long one. Measured by the quantity of the vowel the word sits is short, and the syllable see- in seeing is long.
But it is well known that this view is not the view commonly taken of the syllables see (in seeing) and sits. It is well known, that, in the eyes of a classical scholar, the see (in seeing) is short, and that in the word sits the i is long. The classic differs from the Englishman thus,—He measures his
quantity, not by the length of the vowel but, by the length of the syllable taken altogether. The perception of this distinction enables us to comprehend the following statements.
I. That vowels long by nature may appear to become short by position, and vice versâ.
II. That, by a laxity of language, the vowel may be said to have changed its quantity, whilst it is the syllable alone that has been altered.
III. That, if one person measures his quantities by the vowels, and another by the syllables, what is short to the one, shall be long to the other, and vice versâ. The same is the case with nations.
IV. That one of the most essential differences between the English and the classical languages is that the quantities (as far as they go) of the first are measured by the vowel, those of the latter by the syllable. To a Roman the word monument consists of two short syllables and one long one; to an Englishman it contains three short syllables.
These remarks are appreciated when we consider the comparative characters of the classical and the English prosody.