Society for Pure English Tract 4 | Page 7

in

Greek.
Of course with the manner of speech the quantities had to be learnt
separately. The task was not as difficult as some may think. To boys
with a taste for making verses the thumbing of a Gradus (I hope that no
one calls it a Gr[)a]dus) was always a delightful occupation, and a
quantity once learnt was seldom forgotten. It must be admitted that, as
boys were forced to do verses, whether they could or not, there were
always some who could read and yet forget.
Although these usages did not precede but followed the pronunciation
of words already borrowed from Latin, we may use them to classify the
changes of quantity. We shall see that although there are some
exceptions for which it is difficult to give a reason, yet most of the
exceptions fall under two classes. When words came to us through
French, the pronunciation was often affected by the French form of the
word. Thus the adjective 'present' would, if it had come direct from
Latin, have had a long vowel in the first syllable. To an English ear
'pr[)e]sent' seemed nearer than 'pr[=e]sent' to the French 'présent'. The
_N.E.D._ says that 'gladiator' comes straight from the Latin
'gladiatorem'. Surely in that case it would have had its first vowel long,
as in 'radiator' and 'mediator'. In any case its pronunciation must have
been affected by 'gladiateur'. The other class of exceptions consists of
words deliberately introduced by writers at a late period. Thus
'adorable' began as a penman's word. Following 'inéxorable' and the
like it should have been 'ádorable'. Actually it was formed by adding
_-able_ to 'adóre', like 'laughable'. It is now too stiff in the joints to
think of a change, and must continue to figure with the other sins of the
Restoration.
Before dealing with the words as classified by their formation, we may
make short lists of typical words to show that for the pronunciation of
English derivatives it is idle to refer to the classical quantities.
From _[=æ]_: [)e]difice, [)e]mulate, c[)e]rulean, qu[)e]stion.
From _[=oe]_: [)e]conomy, [)e]cumenical, conf[)e]derate.
From _[=a]_,: don[)a]tive, n[)a]tural, cl[)a]mour, [)a]verse.
From _[)a]_: [=a]lien, st[=a]tion, st[=a]ble, [=a]miable.
From _[=e]_: [)e]vident, Quadrag[)e]sima, pl[)e]nitude, s[)e]gregate.
From _[)e]_: s[=e]ries, s[=e]nile, g[=e]nus, g[=e]nius.
From _[=i]_: lasc[)i]vious, erad[)i]cate, d[)i]vidend, f[)i]lial,

susp[)i]cion.
From _[)i]_: l[=i]bel, m[=i]tre, s[=i]lex.
From _[=o]_: [)o]rator, pr[)o]minent, pr[)o]montory, s[)o]litude.
From _[)o]_: b[=o]vine, l[=o]cal, f[=o]rum, coll[=o]quial.
From _[=u]_: fig[)u]rative, script[)u]ral, sol[)u]ble.
From _[)u]_: n[=u]merous, C[=u]pid, all[=u]vial, cer[=u]lean.
The _N.E.D._ prefers the spelling 'oecumenical'; but Newman wrote
naturally 'ecumenical', and so does Dr. J.B. Bury. Dublin scholarship
has in this matter been markedly correct.
_CLASSIFICATION OF WORDS ACCORDING TO THEIR LATIN
STEMS._
In classification it seems simplest to take the words according to their
Latin stems. We must, however, first deal with a class of adjectives
borrowed bodily from the Latin nominative masculine with the
insertion of a meaningless o before the final _-us_.[1] These of course
follow the rules given above. In words of more than two syllables the
antepenultimate and stressed vowel is shortened, as '[)e]mulous' from
_æmulus_ and in 'fr[)i]volous' from _fr[=i]volus_, except where by the
'alias' rule it is long, as in 'egr[=e]gious' from _egr[)e]gius_. Words
coined on this analogy also follow the rules. Thus 'glabrous' and
'fibrous' have the vowels long, as in the traditional pronunciation of
glabrum and _fibrum_, where the vowels in classical Latin were short.
The stressed u being always long we have 'lug[=u]brious' and
'sal[=u]brious', the length being independent of the 'alias' rule. Some
words ending in _-ous_ are not of this class. Thus 'odorous' and
'clamorous' appear in Italian as odoroso and clamoroso. Milton has
Sonórous mettal blowing Martial sounds.
The Italian is _sonoro_, and our word was simply the Latin sonorus
borrowed bodily at a somewhat late period. Hence the stress remains on
the penultima. Skeat thought that the word would at last become
'sónorous'. It maybe hoped that Milton's line will save it from the effect
of a false analogy.
[Footnote 1: I regard this statement as inaccurate. The _-ous_ in these
words does not come from the nominative ending _-us_, but is the
ordinary _-ous_ from L. _-osus_ (through Fr.). It was added to many
Latin adjective stems, because the need of a distinctly adjectival ending
was felt. Similarly in early French _-eux_ was appended to adjectives

when they were felt to require a termination, as in pieux from _pi-us_.
Compare the English _capacious_, _veracious_, _hilarious_, where
_-ous_ is added to other stems than those in o. Other suffixes of Latin
origin are used in the same way: e.g. _-al_ in _aerial_, ethereal.--H.B.]
In classifying by stems it will be well to add, where possible, words of
Greek origin. Except in some late introductions Greek words, except
when introduced bodily, have been treated as if they came through
Latin, and