The Structure of English Prose

the head of Invention are largely theoretical; and their full exposition belongs either to a distinctively theoretical treatise on Rhetoric or to the several sciences that furnish the theory of the art. Were Rhetoric now, as it once was, a purely disciplinary study of Senior year, my book would have taken an entirely different form; but, in view of the wholesome change in our college work which assumes, not that the men know their mother-tongue because they speak it, but that, sadly ignorant of this mother-tongue, they need lessons in English, even more than they need the discipline of foreign languages, ancient or modern,-in view of this change, I have tried to make a book that shall start our younger college students and the older students in high schools and academies on the only road, difficult as it is, to a mastery of English composition.

The limitation of the book to Prose has been adopted, because I believe that every one who will apply himself can acquire appreciable skill in this kind of writing; while Poetry and Romance are products of exceptionally endowed minds. But I have not scrupled to quote examples in verse, both because of their superior interest in certain cases, and because, in many respects, all kinds of composition obey the same laws, and verse may sometimes exemplify these laws better than prose.

The work is the product of my own teaching. Circumstances led me about eight years ago to write a course of lectures for my class, with which to replace the text-book then in use. Later I printed an abstract of these lectures; and now this abstract has grown into an entire work. I do not wish to boast, much less to anticipate criticism; but the course has never yet failed to yield in large measure the fruit expected of it.

From the many works on Rhetoric, acknowledged and obscure, ancient and modern, I have sought both light and help. I am indebted, therefore, to all these writers: indeed, although I have in the main sought new examples and illustrations for the rules, yet I must adopt Dr. Austin Phelps's words;—“I have not scrupled to use any material which has seemed to me adapted to my purpose. I have appropriated principles of which no one knows the origin; I have employed illustrations, some of which belong to the common stock of rhetorical discussion." With him, too, I can excuse myself for not always noting the sources whence I drew my material, on the ground that even "to name them would be in part commonplace, and in part pedantic." To one writer, however, I must make especial acknowledgments. Early in my professorship, The Art of Discourse, by Prof. Henry N. Day, taught me the outline of a systematic Rhetoric, and so gave my studies a direction they have never since lost. Prof. Day will doubtless smile, should he ever honor me by turning my pages, to think that he could have stimulated the production of

a work so unlike his as is mine: yet I hold to my confession. I believe there is nothing extant even purporting to have been written by Timothy; but, if there were, it would doubtless be as little Pauline as are the epistles of James or Peter. Yet Timothy was "son in the faith" to Paul, and evidently his particular disciple. Many friends-more than I could readily mention here-have helped me in my work. Besides the names that appear in several foot-notes, the names of my colleagues, Professor ALBERT S. BOLLES and Mr. LOUIS DU PONT SYLE, must be specially recorded. To Professor Bolles I owe what is worth more than help,-continual and hearty encouragement, even when I was most discouraged. Mr. Syle kindly made the Index.

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA,
February 26, 1885.

J. G. R. McE.

SUGGESTION.

The author's own experience with his book leads him to suggest to his fellow teachers that the best results with it may be obtained by omitting until review nearly all paragraphs in the smaller type. Then these paragraphs, which, as a rule, are theoretical rather than practical, will be the more easily understood. Of course, examples and illustrative extracts must be excepted; but these are not commonly numbered as separate paragraphs. The judicious teacher, however, will modify this plan at his discretion.

The Appendix is intended almost exclusively for the teacher.

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION,

Rhetoric Defined, 9; Rhetoric Proper and Composition,

12; Sciences that give Laws to Rhetoric, 14; Funda-

mental Maxims, 16; Departments of Rhetoric, 19;

Kinds of Discourse, 23.

PART FIRST.--STYLE,

GRAMMATICAL PURITY, 53: Standard of Purity, 55; The

Characteristics of Good Use, 64; Offences against

Purity, 69; Exceptions, 114; Divided Use, 125.

THE ELEMENTS OF STYLE, 132: Vocabulary, 133; The