OBS. 9.—Again: “While it would be absurd, to sacrifice the established practice of all good authors to the ignorance of such readers [as could possibly mistake for a diphthong the two contiguous vowels in such words as preexistence, cooperate, and reenter]; it would unquestionably be advantageous, to have some principle to guide us in that labyrinth of words, in which the hyphen appears to have been admitted or rejected arbitrarily, or at hap-hazard. Thus, though we find in Johnson, alms-basket, alms-giver, with the hyphen; we have almsdeed, almshouse, almsman, without: and many similar examples of an unsettled practice might be adduced, sufficient to fill several pages. In this perplexity, is not the pronunciation of the words the best guide? In the English language, every word of more than one syllable is marked by an accent on some particular syllable. Some very long words indeed admit a secondary accent on another syllable; but still this is much inferior, and leaves one leading accent prominent: as in expos’tulatory. Accordingly, when a compound has but one accented syllable in pronunciation, as night’cap, bed’stead, broad’sword, the two words have coalesced completely into one, and no hyphen should be admitted. On the other hand, when each of the radical words has an accent, as Chris’tian-name’, broad’-shoul’dered, I think the hyphen should be used. Good’-na’tured is a compound epithet with two accents, and therefore requires the hyphen: in good nature, good will, and similar expressions, good is used simply as an adjective, and of course should remain