mind of the hearer, that he may not only exprefs himself ambiguously, and so along with his own, convey a meaning entirely different; but even express himself unintelligibly, and fo convey no

meaning at all. One would, indeed, think it hardly poffible, that a man of fenfe, who perfectly understands the language which he useth, fhould ever speak or write in fuch a manner as to be altogether unintelligible. Yet this is what frequently happens. The cause of this fault in any writer, I take to be always one or other of the three following; firft, great confufion of thought, which is commonly accompanied with intricacy of expreffion; fecondly, affectation of excellence in the diction; thirdly, a total want of meaning. I do not mention as one of the caufes of this imputation, a penury of language; though this, doubtlefs, may contribute to produce it. In fact, I never found one who had a juftness of apprehenfion, and was free from affectation, at a lofs to make himself understood in his native tongue, even though he had little command of language, and made but a bad choice of words.

PART I. From confufion of thought.

THE firft caufe of the unintelligible in compofition, is confufion of thought. Language, as

hath

hath been already obferved, is the medium through which the fentiments of the writer are perceived by the reader. And though the impurity or the groffness of the medium will render the image obfcure or indiftinct, yet no purity in the medium will fuffice for exhibiting a diftinct and unvarying image of a confufed and unfteady object. There is a fort of half-formed thoughts, which we fometimes find writers impatient to .give the world, before they themselves have been fully poffeffed of them. Now if the writer himfelf perceive confufedly and imperfectly the fentiments he would communicate, it is a thousand to one, the reader will not perceive them at all. But how then, it may be asked, shall he be qualified for discovering the cause, and distinguishing in the writer between a confufion of thought, and a total want of meaning? I answer, that in examples of this kind, the cause will, fometimes, not always, be difcovered, by means of an attentive and frequent perufal of the words and context. Some meaning, after long poring, will perhaps be traced; but in all such cases we may be faid more properly to divine what the author would fay, than to understand what he fays; and therefore all fuch fentences deferve to be ranked among the unintelligible. If a discovery of

the fenfe be made, that it is made ought rather to be ascribed to the fagacity of the reader, than to the elocution of the writer. This fpecies of the unintelligible (which, by the way, differs not in kind, but in degree, from the obscurity already confidered, being no other than that bad quality in the extreme) I fhall exemplify first in mple, and afterwards in complex fentences.

FIRST in fimple fentences: "I have obferved," fays Sir Richard Steele, who, though a man of fenfe and genius, was a great mafter in this style, "that the fuperiority among these," he is fpeaking of fome coffee-house politicians, proceeds from an opinion of gallantry and

fashion*." This fentence confidered in itself, evidently conveys no meaning. First, it is not faid, whose opinion, their own, or that of others; fecondly, it is not faid what opinion, or of what fort, favourable or unfavourable, true or false, but in general an opinion of gallantry and fashion, which contains no definite expreffion of any meaning. With the joint affiftance of the context, reflection and conjecture, we shall perhaps conclude, that the author intended to say, "the rank among thefe politicians, was deter

"that

• Spect. No. 49

5

"mined

"mined by the opinion generally entertained "of the rank in point of gallantry and fashion "that each of them had attained." But no part

46

66

of this is expreffed. Another specimen : “ And as to a well-taught mind, when you've faid "an haughty and proud man, you have spoke

a narrow conception, little fpirit, and defpi"cable carriage." Here too it is poffible to guefs the intention of the author, but not to explain the import of the expreffion.

TAKE the two following examples of complex fentences from the fame hand: "I must confefs "we live in an age wherein a few empty bluf"terers carry away the praise of fpeaking, while

a crowd of fellows overstocked 'with know"ledge are run down by them: I fay, over"ftocked, because they certainly are fo, as to "their fervice of mankind, if from their very

ftore they raise to themselves ideas of respect "and greatness of the occafion, and I know not

what, to disable themfelves from explaining "their thoughts." The other example is, "The ferene afpect of these writers joined with "the great encouragement I observe is given to "another, or, what is indeed to be fufpected, in

t...

* Guard. No. 20.

+ Spec. No. 484. F 3

"which

"which he indulges himfelf, confirmed me in "the notion I have of the prevalence of ambi"tion this way." But, leaving this, which is indeed the dulleft fpecies of the unintelligible, I proceed to the fecond clafs, that which arifes from an affectation of excellence,

PART II. From affectation of excellence.

In this there is always fomething figurative; but the figures are remote, and things heterogeneous are combined. I fhall exemplify this fort alfo, first in a few more fimple fentences, and then in fuch as are more complex. Of the former, take the following inftances: "This temper of foul," fays the Guardian, fpeaking of meekness and humility, "keeps our understanding tight about

* 22

us Whether the author had any meaning in this expreffion, or what it was, I fhall not take upon me to determine; but hardly could any thing more incongruous in the way of metaphor, have been imagined. The understanding is made a girdle to our other mental faculties, for the faftening of which girdle, meeknefs and humility ferve for a buckle. "A man is not qua"lified for a buft, who has not a good deal of "wit and vivacity, even in the ridiculous fide of

Guardian, No. 1.

* Ibid.

• his