But now hath Christ been raised from the dead, the first fruits of them that are asleep.

The chief assertion is upon the verb "hath been raised;" and in this verb the distinctive part is the auxiliary "hath," which represents the action as already completed. The attention does not need to be called to the idea of raising. The question is as to whether Christ's resurrection is now an accomplished fact. Το reveal this, the first clause might be paraphrased thus: But now the resurrection of Christ has taken place. Verse 35, also, is easily misread:

But some man will say, How are the dead raised, and with what manner of body do they come ?

The emphasis is often placed upon the words "raised" and "come;" but evidently the idea contained in "raised" has been so many times stated or distinctly implied in the preceding verses that it is now simply taken for granted, or assumed; and the word "come" contains no essential significance, being merely the commonplace filling out of the sentence. The true emphasis will be revealed by paraphrasing thus: But some man will say, this raising of the dead is done how? And when the dead rise, they will have what sort of body?

Now with these two words in mind as the central, or emphatic words, read the verse as it stands in the text. The inversion is not suggested as an improvement upon the style of the passage, but as a means of

compelling one's mind to recognize the asserted elements in the different clauses.

Inversion is a momentary help toward restoring to its true logical importance any element that may have been obscured by its weaker position; it compels emphasis for the moment, by securing "dynamic stress."

Inversion, as here used, is not designed to suggest relations of "momentary completeness" in the final interpretation, nor to indicate that the common falling slide accompanied by pause should mark the assertive word. The continuative slide (L) shows that the element is not to be separated, but is to have its force in its connections. With our uninflected language, it is often impossible to secure perfect adjustment of emphasis, and "assertion" is a great corrective.

CHAPTER X.

COMPLEX RELATIONS.

COMPLETENESS,incompleteness, assumption,and asser

tion are usually simple in their nature.

We have also

many cases of composite or combined relations, expressing in the same word or phrase different simultaneous notions. Such complex relations often need some special symbol in the intonation; and for this use the circumflexes are naturally adapted. The double motion of the voice upon a single sound or group of sounds, is an instinctive type of the double purpose in the speaking mind. The following alliterated rule carries more

than a mnemonic significance:

Slides are simple, circumflexes are complex.

The double sense suggested by a circumflex is most apparent in the case of irony.

He is a nice man.

So in many a joke; as, when a highway is torn up

for repairs, one says:

You call this improving the roads, do you?

Or in a pun:

Now is it Rôme indeed, and Room enough,
When there is in it but one only man.

Also in a serious play upon words; as,

-Jul. Cæs. I., 2.

Not on thy sole, but on thy soûl, harsh Jew,
Thou makest thy knife keen.

-Mer. Ven. IV., 1.

Seêms Madam! Nay, it is. I know not seêms.

We recognize three distinct types, or varieties, of composite relations.

I.

1. Comparison or Contrast, with Affirmation. This supposes two elements in the thought, and usually implies, rather than states, the holding of the two before the attention at the same moment. Its vocal symbol is the falling circumflex.

Comparison usually takes the interval of about a third and return; Contrast about a fifth. Comparison more easily carries over the thought from one thing to another, while Contrast sets one thing sharply up against the other. Comparison may be marked [~], Contrast [^].

Comparison.

John, too, has come.

That is, John came, as well as Charlie.

Contrast.

It is ôpen, I say.

That is, it is open instead of closed.

When both members of the antithesis or of the comparison are separately and fully expressed, and when the parts stand close together, they usually take contrasted slides instead of condensed, or circumflex; inflection; as,

I come to bury Cæsar, not to praíse him:

I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,
But here I am, to speak what I do know.

Whereas, "I come not here to talk," would require a

circumflex upon talk, since the other member of the antithesis is only implied.

This is not the only reason.

Here the other reasons that might be named are suppressed, and the word "only" must imply the contrast. It will need the circumflex.

2. Comparison or Contrast with Incompleteness. This is rendered still more complex by the addition of an element of subordination, negation, interrogation, or some other type of incompleteness. Its symbol is the wave [~~~~].

Could I but know this now!

Here the contrast between knowing and only surmising, is joined with anticipation, doubt, or uncertainty.

Some do.

Here the contrast is coupled with a negation, implying; many, on the contrary, do not.

I do not like your faults.

This plainly implies a contrast, with negation or concession.

The fact of their involved double significance renders these forms especially useful in sarcasm, raillery, etc. They may, however, be legitimately used in wit and humor. They often express surprise, which is really a contrast between what was expected and what is seen. They are legitimately used whenever it is most economical to imply double relations of thought, rather than explicitly to state both of the combined ideas.