Multique in ruina majore quam fuga oppressi obtruncatique.
L. 4. § 46.
Unde tibi reditum certo subtemine Parcæ
Rupere.
Horace, epod. xiii. 22..
Qui persæpe cava testudine flevit amorem,
Non elaboratum ad pedem.
Horace, epod. xiv. 11.
Me fabulosæ Vulture in Appulo,
Altricis extra limen Apuliæ,
Ludo, fatigatumque somno,
Fronde nova puerum palumbes
Texere.
Horace, Carm. l. 3. ode 4.
Puræ rivus aquæ, silvaque jugerum
Paucorum, et segetis certa fides meæ,
Fulgentem imperio fertilis Africæ
Fallit sorte beatior.
Horace, Carm. l. 3. ode 16.
Cum fas atque nefas exiguo fine libidinum
Discernunt avidi.
Horace, Carm. l. 1. ode 18.
Ac spem fronte serenat.
Æneid iv. 477.
There is want of neatness even in an ambiguity so slight as that is which arises from the construction merely; as where the period commences with a member which is conceived to be in the nominative case, and which afterward is found to be in the accusative. Example: “Some emotions more peculiarly connected with the fine arts, I propose to handle in separate chapters[81].” Better thus: “Some emotions more peculiarly connected with the fine arts, are proposed to be handled in separate chapters.”
The rule next in order, because next in importance, is, That the language ought to correspond to the subject. Grand or heroic actions or sentiments require elevated language: tender sentiments ought to be expressed in words soft and flowing; and plain language devoid of ornament, is adapted to subjects grave and didactic. Language may be considered as the dress of thought; and where the one is not suited to the other, we are sensible of incongruity, in the same manner as where a judge is dressed like a fop, or a peasant like a man of quality. The intimate connection that words have with their meaning, requires that both be in the same tone. Or, to express the thing more plainly, the impression made by the words ought as nearly as possible to resemble the impression made by the thought. The similar emotions mix sweetly in the mind, and augment the pleasure[82]. On the other hand, where the impressions made by the thought and the words are dissimilar, they are forc’d into a sort of unnatural union, which is disagreeable[83].
In the preceding chapter, concerning the language of passion, I had occasion to give many examples of deviations from this rule with regard to the manner of expressing passions and their sentiments. But as the rule concerns the manner of expressing thoughts and ideas of all kinds, it has an extensive influence in directing us to the choice of proper materials. In that view it must be branched out into several particulars. And I must observe, in the first place, that to write with elegance, it is not sufficient to express barely the conjunction or disjunction of the members of the thought. It is a beauty to find a similar conjunction or disjunction in the words. This may be illustrated by a familiar example. When we have occasion to mention the intimate connection that the soul has with the body, the expression ought to be the soul and body; because the particle the, relative to both, makes a connection in the expression, which resembles in some degree the connection in the thought. But when the soul is distinguished from the body, it is better to say the soul and the body, because the disjunction in the words resembles the disjunction in the thought. In the following examples the connection in the thought is happily imitated in the expression.