While it is commonly noticed that the English style of pronunciation differs considerably from the American, few or none have explained in what the difference consists. The former however, will be found on observation, to use less nasality of voice, and to employ a much stronger accent. The Americans incline to drawl. In the English West Indies, the drawl is so ludicrous, and is combined with so many other errors, that the late Mr. Rafinesque, who was a Sicilian by birth, classified the West Indian mode of pronouncing, as a distinct dialect of the English language!

We mentioned lately, (page 81,) that it is only a part of the consonants that are liable to be imperfectly articulated by those who have no lisp or impediment of speech. Perhaps we ought to devote a few words to explaining the point. Take such words as back, bag, bed, hat, buzz, age. It is very common to hear them uttered with a tendency to a drawl-not amounting however to a true drawl-which proceeds from a feeble enunciation of the terminal consonant. From their imperfect strength of articulating organs, children always exhibit this peculiarity. We will endeavor to illustrate it by the following mode of spelling, ba-ag, ha-at, &c. Still farther to explain the point, we will mention the fact, that all such words should be pronounced with that shortening of the vowel, and force on the final consonant, that is represented by the ancient mode of spelling such words, viz. bagge, hatte, &c. That is, they should have, when not followed by another word, the vocula, as it is called, which is a whispering sound of short e or u after the consonant. This vowel is represented in French by the mute e of that language. It will readily be perceived that there is a connexion between this firm and strong enunciation, and the habit of strongly accenting.

PRONUNCIATION.

As long as it is the main object of the instructor to qualify students for practical speaking, he will hardly find time and opportunity for correcting many errors in pronunciation. During the excitement of earnest delivery, the minds of unpractised speakers can seldom be sufficiently at leisure, to allow of changing fixed habits in regard to this point.

It would also seem scarcely advisable to occupy the time of the younger classes in a college, with lessons or lectures on pronunciation. Coming from different districts of the country, they often bring with them local peculiarities; but these are soon lost, and the average pronunciation in a large institution, corresponds sufficiently with that of men of education throughout England and the United States. Those who may wish to investigate the subject with peculiar care, can do this by themselves with the aid of books, and in leisure moments. For formal lessons or lectures on the subject, the Senior year would seem to be most suitable. If however, formal and full instruction on this point be deferred till that period, it ought to be given in a linguistical, and if possible, in a learned manner.

The pronunciation which formerly prevailed in the New England states, and which in the parent country still remains among the uneducated classes, is ill adapted to the purposes of delivery, and on this account more than from the influence of fashion, has now been universally rejected by public speakers in both countries. It is not only more guttural and nasal, but more indefinite and obscure in the sounds of the vowels. It also fails of conforming to that great law in English phonology, which requires us to avoid all hiatus, and all difficult transitions in the utterance of letters, by means of smooth and gliding sounds. What is now cultivated as a genteel pronunciation, is not only more fluent and facile, and consequently better suited

to rapid utterance in familiar intercourse, but in public speaking, is capable of being rendered more easily audible and intelligible, without disagreeable loudness. This pronunciation is as yet better exhibited in the middle and southern states, than in New England. The writer once asked an educated Spanish gentleman, in which part of our country he found it easiest to understand our language when he listened to the conversation of the people. He replied, in the southern.

It is remarkable that up to this time, Walker has been the only author who has attempted to investigate systematically, the laws of English pronunciation. No other writer has done more than make detached and fragmentary examinations of the subject. Indeed, scarce any other writer in our tongue has apparently had a clear conception that the tendencies to change of pronunciation in any living dialect follow certain definite laws, which laws are in accordance with the genius of the language, and the intellectual and social habits of the people. Yet Walker was as modest as he was industrious, and apparently never imagined it possible that an absurd effort might be made, to set up his dictionary as an immutable standard by which to fix forever the pronunciation of a living language spoken all over the world. Those who declaim against Walker, often exhibit a surprising ignorance of the principles which he has investigated in the introduction to his dictionary, and always manifest a want of acquaintance with the fact, that changes in pronunciation are principally caused by the more or less unconscious efforts made by persons of cultivated minds and manners, to be at once distinct and fluent, as well as to conform to the peculiar analogies and laws of their vernacular tongue. As the study of the present subject is however, not very necessary to those for whom this work is written, it does not conform to its plan and objects to treat of it in detail. A discriminating and judicious classification of the most prevalent errors in pronunciation, may be foundin the original and valuable work of Professor Goodrich, on elocution,

It ought to be remarked, that old-fashioned modes of pronunciation are not necessarily vulgar. Vulgarity in this respect depends on vulgarity of articulation and tone of voice, or on mere affectation of refinement and fashion. The most vulgar pronunciation heard in our country, is that of those who affect what are called Walkerianisms. They who do this, violate Walker's own principles more than those of any other writer. His taste was manly and truly English; and it is strange that merely fashionable and "Frenchified" affectations, should be charged to the account of the very man who was instant and earnest in opposing them.

Walker was a man of education, and was accustomed to the most learned and refined society of his day. His dictionary was suggested by the request of one of the universities of England, that he should deliver a course of lectures on the laws of English orthöepy. Yet the pronunciation of our tongue has become more regular since his day, and the changes that have taken place may be found in the work of Jameson.

For common reference, the student of this subject needs nothing more than the table prefixed to the abridged octavo edition of Webster's dictionary. In this table, he will find the modes of pronunciation, adopted by different orthöepists, arranged in the order of the times in which they wrote. If he carefully examines it, he will feel inclined to be guided in general by Walker and Jameson, and when these differ, generally by the latter. There is a strange mistake prevalent respecting the late honored and venerated Dr. Webster, that he made it one of the objects of his great work, to give a full exhibition of the pronunciation of our language. Such was neither one of his real nor professed objects. In none of his various and numerous works, has the present writer been able to find any thing from which he could even conjecture what sound Dr. Webster thought -ought to be given to the letter u, in such words as nature and feature. In his "Elementary spelling book," indeed, he fur

nishes a table of a few such words, but gives no intimation of the manner in which they ought to be pronounced, and merely mentions that the best public speakers in England and this country do pronounce them in a certain way, viz. with the short u preceded by y. It should be observed however, that in this statement the learned author is unquestionably mistaken, as it is the long and not the short u that is required by distinctness, euphony and analogy, and such is undoubtedly the custom of speakers of the highest cultivation. In his "American spelling book," Dr. Webster in too many cases, directed to pronounce different unaccented vowels alike, giving as an example, that rural and fitful, were pronounced with the same vowel sound in their last syllables. In a "table of words different in meaning, but alike in pronunciation," he gives the two words chronical and chronicle, as being the same in sound.

No one who has hitherto written on this subject seems to have been aware, that the ultimate test of the true sound of unaccented vowels, is only to be found by trying words, with a perfectly clear and open tone of voice, in the deliberate articulation required for elevated delivery before large audiences-in the artistical recitation of poetry, or in vocal music. In these circumstances—or at least in the two latter-every unaccented vowel must have a definite sound. In vocal music, especially, no indefinite vowel sounds are ever admissible. If the unaccented vowels are tried by these tests, Walker will be found to have investigated the subject with remarkable accuracy.

Some however object, that in the rapid utterance of conversation, such perfection of articulation is unattainable. In the case of many of the thick and husky voices of men, this objection is undoubtedly well founded. But let those who make it, listen to the articulation of unaffected and elegant women, who are distinguished for beauty of conversation, and they will find that the minutest refinements directed by Walker, though unconsciously, are yet habitually exhibited.