those which are silent!  And, indeed, whether the stress which distinguishes some monosyllables from others, is supposed by the writer to be accent, or emphasis, or both, it is scarcely possible to ascertain from his elucidations.  “The term emphasis,” says he, “is used to denote a fuller sound of voice after certain words that come in antithesis; that is, contrast.  ‘He can write, but he cannot read.’  Here, read and write are antithetical (that is, in contrast), and are accented, or emphasized.”—­P. 189.  The word “after” here may be a misprint for the word upon; but no preposition really suits the connexion:  the participle impressing or affecting would be better.  Of quantity, this work gives the following account:  “The quantity of a syllable is that time which is required to pronounce it.  A syllable may be long or short. Hate is long, as the vowel a is elongated by the final e; hat is short, and requires about half the time for pronunciation which is used for pronouncing hate.  So of ate, at; bate, bat; cure, cur.  Though unaccented syllables are usually short, yet many of those which are accented are short also.  The following are short:  advent, sinner, supper.  In the following, the unaccented syllables are long:  al_so_, ex_ile_, gan_grene_, um_pire_.  It maybe remarked, that the quantity of a syllable is short when the accent is on a consonant; as, art, bonnet, hunger.  The hyphen (-), placed over a syllable, denotes that it is long:  n=ature.  The breve (~) over a syllable, denotes that it is short; as, d~etr=act.”—­Chandler’s Common School Gram., p. 189.  This scheme of quantity is truly remarkable for its absurdity and confusion.  What becomes of the elongating power of e, without accent or emphasis, as in juncate, palate, prelate?  Who does not know that such syllables as “at, bat, and cur” are often long in poetry?  What more absurd, than to suppose both syllables short in such words as, “_~advent, sinner, supper_,” and then give “serm~on, f=ilt~er, sp=ir~it, g=ath~er,” and the like, for regular trochees, with “the first syllable long, and the second short,” as does this author?  What more contradictory and confused, than to pretend that the primal sound of a vowel lengthens an unaccented syllable, and accent on the consonant shortens an accented one, as if in “also” the first syllable must be short and the second long, and then be compelled, by the evidence of one’s senses to mark “ech~o” as a trochee, and “detract” as an iambus?  What less pardonable misnomer, than for a great critic to call the sign of long quantity a “hyphen”?