Similarly, in a series of words or phrases parallel in construction, all have the rising inflection but the last:
As Cæsar lóved me, I wéep for him; as he was fortúnate, I rejóice at it; as he was válíant, I hónour him; but as he was ambìtious, I slèw him! There is teárs for his lóve; jóy for his fórtune; hónour for his válour; and deàth for his ambìtion.
Cráfty men contémn studies; símple men admíre them; and wìse men ùse them.
If one part of the antithesis is a negation, it takes the rising inflection, whether it comes first or second. This is owing to the fact that, as illustrated above, a negation implies incompleteness. The other part then takes the falling inflection:
Fall into the hands of Gòd, not into the hands of Spáin.
I come to bùry Cæsar, not to práise him.
I said an èlder soldier, not a bétter.
Often only one part of the antithesis is expressed, the contrast being implied. In such a case, the voice brings out the contrast by placing a combination of the two inflections of the regularly expressed antithesis on the one word which does duty for both parts: Cassius says: "I said an elder soldier, not a better" in reply to Brutus' speech—"You say you are a better soldier." The antithesis is fully expressed, and the voice places the falling inflection on "elder" and the rising inflection on "better." If Cassius had omitted the words "not a better," the very same meaning could have been conveyed by placing a combination of the rising and the falling inflection or a falling circumflex on the word "elder," thus—"I said an êlder soldier." In the next line he goes on to say "Did I say bĕtter?" Here, there is an implied contrast with "elder," which is expressed by a combination of the falling and the rising inflection or a rising circumflex. From these two examples, we can see that the law of completeness and incompleteness holds good with the compound or circumflex inflection, just as it does with the simple inflection, and determines whether the circumflex shall be rising or falling.
A very common mistake in reading is to use the circumflex inflection in emphasizing a word, thus making a contrast where none is intended. "Ramped and roared the lions" with a falling circumflex inflection on "lions," instead of a simple falling inflection, suggests that the tigers or some other animals did not ramp and roar. For similar reasons, avoid the circumflex when emphasizing "hand" and "feet" in "put a ring on his hand and shoes on his feet."
As has already been stated, it is necessary to know the motive behind the words. When Shylock says: "O wise and upright judge," his intention is evidently to bestow sincere praise. The reader, knowing this, instinctively gives a straight slide. Later, when Gratiano says: "O upright judge, O learned judge!" his intention is to taunt and hold up to ridicule; there is a double meaning conveyed, which finds its natural expression in a curved inflection.
Compare the curved inflections in the cobbler's speeches in Act I. Scene I, of Julius Cæsar (p. [133]) when he is fencing with Marullus, with the straight inflections of his final speech when he has thrown aside his raillery and speaks with sincerity:
| Truly, sir, to wear out their shoes, to get myself |
| in more work. But, indeèd, sir, we make hòliday to |
| see Caèsar, and to rejoìce in his triùmph. |