Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	author_n	person_n	write_v	1,696	5	5.4406	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67383	A defence of the Royal Society, and the philosophical transactions, particularly those of July, 1670 in answer to the cavils of Dr. William Holder / by John Wallis ... ; in a letter to the Right Honourable, William Lord Viscount Brouncker.	Wallis, John, 1616-1703.; Royal Society (Great Britain)	1678 (1678)	Wing W573; ESTC R705	35,199	34

Given over I cannot tell But because such things oft happen I was the less willing to undertake it and did on that account at first decline it as not willing to take anothers Work out of his hand which Dr. Bathurst I presume may still remember who did once and a second time recommend that business to me from the Lady VVharton till Dr. Bathurst did assure me that no more was to be expected from Dr. Holder nor intended by him and that no offence should be taken on that account When Mr. Popham by that Lady his Mother was brought to me I found no appearance of those fine things which are now said to have been done by Dr. Holder And the stories of My having Seen and Heard him before at Blechington c. but Fansies I thought it best therefore to say nothing of it rather than to say That VVhat Dr. Holder had Attempted but Given over I had undertaken with Success Which would have look'd like Insultation in me and a Reproaching of him If any other who knew more than I did could say of him all that which he now says of himself it was free for him or them to have said it if they so pleased But from me who knew it not nor do yet it could not in reason be expected And for the same Reason I said nothing of the Constable of Castil's Son What Pablo Bonnet says of him I know not having never seen the Book nor what is said of him by Sir Kenelm Digby as not having read that I have heard it is said of him That Onely by Seeing another Speak himself being Deaf though Distant from him the Breadth of a large Room he was able to repeat perfectly what ever was said though in VVelsh or Irish or any other Language of which he had no knowledge at all and which had never been spoken to him Which seems to me very Unlikely if not Impossible Concerning which thing I have also delivered my opinion in that Letter of March 14. that I might not be thought to pretend to Impossibilities But without naming any persons in pursuance of the old Rules Parcere nominibus c. I know very well for I have seen it in those that I have taught That Words of such unknown Languages may by a Deaf man be pronounc'd But he must then be otherwise directed what Sound or Letters he is to Form He cannot do it barely by Seeing another speak I know also for the same reason That a Deaf person by Seeing another Speak may sometimes Guess shrewdly at what is said But it must be in such Words and Sentences as he hath been acquainted with not in a strange Language of which he knows neither the Sense nor the Words For certain it is that the Formation of divers Sounds in Speech is perform'd so inwardly in the Mouth Throat and Nostrils and the distinction of Sounds therein so very Nice that it is not possible to be discerned by the Eye of a By-stander But in known Words by Seeing the Formation of some Letters especially the Labials he may Guess at the rest as we do when in a Word we find a Letter or two mis-written or left-out but from the rest may easily know what it should be And in known Sentences having thus discerned some Words he may by them Guess at the rest of the Sentence or at least at the Sense of it And when this very particular was at Gresham-Colledge discoursed upon the occasion of Mr. Whaly's being there it was then affirmed by a Gentleman there present That himself beyond-Sea had seen this Constable of Castil's Son and having heard of these reports before did the more curiously observe him and found those about him to discourse with him by Signs and Gestures in the same manner as is usual with other Deaf persons Which as he well observed would not have been if he by seeing them speak could tell what they said and could himself by speaking give them an answer So that there must needs be something of Amplification in that Story Since therefore I could add nothing from my own knowledge to what by others had been said of him and though I did suspect somewhat of Hyperbole in the case would not concern my self to contradict it I thought best to say nothing of it but leave the Report as I found it upon the credit of the Reporters without going about to extenuate anothers performance And if any one else had of his own Knowledge affirmed as much of Dr. Holder's performance without bespattering another it 's like whatsoever were my own sentiments of it I should have as little concerned my self to contradict that as I did the other But should choose rather if I might be permitted so to do to say nothing of either Another great complaint there is concerning a Book of Dr. Plott It seems he is very much concerned for every one that speaks favourably of me p. 3 4 9 11 14. All that was past might it seems have been pardoned as p. 4 7 9. had it not been for this fresh occasion The fault is this That Dr. Plott in his Natural History of Oxfordshire hath said it seems somewhat of my teaching Dumb persons to speak and of my Treatise De Loquela as p. 9 11. Yet Dr. Plott he can Forgive in hopes of a Reformation p. 11. But Dr. VVallis must be doubly charged 'T was I he says gave this fresh occasion p. 4. 'T was my subtil contrivance p. 2. I practis'd it I caus'd it to be publish'd 't is I that penned and spread my own fame in several Authors works and in this amongst the rest they be large Characters engraven by my self p. 3. 'T was I he says thrust my self into Dr. Plott's work I imposed upon that worthy person that I therein renew the challenge that I passed it into the Book that those three whole Paragraphs or the greatest part of them were Certainly of my Penning and that it may be justly thought All the rest was so too that I imposed upon the good Doctor and penned it my self p. 9. that I put upon him that great abuse p. 10. that he hath indeed put it upon Record but did not Know or VVrite any of those matters but what was put into his hands by me that I imposed upon him and prevail'd him to say it as from himself p. 11. that I do there explain my self p. 13. with much more to that purpose Not that Dr. Holder knows this to be True But because it is fit matter for a Chancery-Bill That Dr. Plott did sometimes advise with me while that Book was Writing and Printing is very true And that I was free to give him my Opinion and Advise when he desired it and he as free to take it or leave it as he saw cause Nor was it a fault in either of us so to do But I did not use to Pen whole Paragraphs for him or thrust him upon saying what he had not a mind

what he could not do while things were fresh in memory and knowledg in and about Oxford And therefore that we may still follow his own language he had recourse to subtle contrivances and subtle practises as p. 1 2. Practising from thence-forth to assume Mr. Popham's speaking wholly to himself p. 3. and not allow Dr. Wallis so much as to have shewed any effect of his skill on Mr. Popham p. 13. To this end that Dr. Holder might not be thought to have learned any of his skill from Dr. Wallis's Treatise concerning the Formation of sounds in speech he contrives to write some Papers of his own as he tells us about that subject p. 7. These Papers he compasseth to have mentioned p. 8 9 in the Bishop of Chester's Book of the Universal Character pag. 357. In the year 1668. But he tells us further that in the year 1666 they were lost in the Bishops study together with all his own in the dreadful Fire of London that we may at least think them to be so old These Papers the Bishop tells us did concern the Doctrine of Letters Dr. Holder tells us they were to describe and discover the Method he had used in bringing Mr. Popham to speak p. 7. This it seems was what He aimed at All the rest served but to hedg this in So considerable he would have us think these Papers were that he was Importuned to renew them like another Phaenix out of its own Ashes And a little Importunity we may think served the turn He then contrives further to have the new Phaenix His Elements of speech which we must now suppose to be those Papers presented to the Royal Society 1669 and to get their order to print it and as he speakes p. 6. had it Registred to perpetuat the Memory of his Atchievement But Dr. Holder had a farther Design in it For these elements were to Usher-in a subtle Appendix concerning Persons Deaf and Dumb and in a few subtle lines which was his chief Design to hedge-in what concerned Mr. Popham describing but wisely not nameing him Assuming Mr. Popham's speaking solely to himself To which the other were only subservient to make a noise while this slipt-in Having therein made mention of his success upon a Deaf and Dumb Person in tending Mr. Popham As he tells us p. 7. These Elements as p. 8 9 10 he Contrives and Compasses to have Commended and Magnified as in Mr. Oldenburg's name but I suppose of his own Penning in the Philosophical Transactions of May 1669 as a Well-considered and Useful Tract Concluding with Magnifying its Usefulness for instructing Persons Deaf and Dumb as being by this Author Excellently applied thereunto Modestly said of himself Avouching therein His own Practise Without taking the least notice of any thing Written by Dr. Wallis and others about the Formation of Sounds or the Practise of Teaching Dumb Persons by any other And here as p. 9. he is secure to gain this Point That in a Book which swill come into the hands of all curious Persons Dr. Holder's fame is spread orth to all and Few he hopes will ever happen to know that Dr. Wallis in his Treatise of speech 1653 had shewed him the way that being a Small Treatise and written in Latine and a great while since and but annexed to another Book intended principally for Forraigners desiring to learn English or that Dr. Wallis had done any thing of that nature either to Mr. Popham or to Mr. Whaly there being nothing at that time said thereof any-where in Print so little was the Industry or rather so great was the Negligence of Wallis in spreading his own Fame p. 3. And all this he doth under Countenance of an Order of the Royal Society by him procured for the Printing of it p. 7. as if they had been privy to this Design Which would have been yet more advanced if he could have gotten their License for this his New Paper penned by himself in Mr. Oldenburg's name put by him into Mr. Oldenburg's hand to be published in the Transactions as himself tells us p. 9. making the Transactions his market as p. 3. and a Fair for this Merchant of Glory if he could have found way and leave to croud himself in For who should now believe when every body else is silent that ever any one thought of a Treatise of Speech or the Formation of Sounds before Dr. Holder made this Essay in his Elements of Speech For that they must be thought elder than that of Dr. Wilkins he had subtly contrived already by getting him to mention some Papers of Dr. Holder which might now be thought to be these Elements and the small Treatise of Dr. Wallis 't is hoped will be forgotten or known to few And who can believe that any one but Dr. Holder did Teach or attempt to Teach a Deaf man to speak or ever thought of such a Thing so long as Dr. Wallis is silent there being no body then in Print pretending to it And thus he hopes to bear it out as p. 9 11. with subtilty of contrivance speaking like Truth so artificially that the Reader is to believe more than is True and it serves him to impose on those Mr. Oldenburg and the Royal Society whose name and credit he borrows to commend him who innocently suffer a demur Truth of his own penning unwittingly to pass into the Transactions suffering themselves as p. 3. to be imposed upon to publish the Fame and Praise of Dr. Holder in large Characters engraven by himself For that of p. 4 5 6 7 8. is certainly of his own Penning though in Mr. Oldenburg's name And if as p. 9. we may by that guess at the rest and for some other reasons it may be justly thought That in the Transactions of May 1669. is so at least of his superviding Desiring and Designing as p. 11. the World would be so kind as to be cajoled into such a belief when he prevailed with Mr. Oldenburg so say as from himself what Dr. Holder imposed upon him ●nd very much concerned he is that this subtle contrivance takes no better Dr. Wallis was so ignorant of this Contrivance and so unsuspicious of a Design upon him and so unconcerned for what is said in those Elements and Appendix that he never yet read the One or the Other But so it happened the year following that this Mine was sprung unawares and play'd otherwise than was intended Mr. Oldenburg in the Transactions of July 1670 published a Letter of Dr. Wallis to Mr. Boyle of March 14. 1661. And as he had the year before given a large account of Dr. Holders Elements of Speech published in 1669. and how this was by him applyed to the Instruction of Dumb persons Without taking notice of what Dr. Wallis had Writ or Done So now without saying the same again of Dr. Holder he gives a Brief account of Dr. Wallis's Treatise of Speech published in 1653. and what in pursuance of this was

publish'd 16 years before As for me so far as I may be concern'd in it I knew that to touch upon this was to touch him in a sore place I could not speak to his Satisfaction and I was not desirous to Disoblige him and therefore as he phraseth it silently passed it over and left it for them to say who knew it I do not know that I have ever been heard to say That he did or That he did not The first I could not say knowingly the other I was loth to say The case is this In the year 1653. I published together with my English Grammar a Treatise of Speech shewing therein with what Organs in what Positions and by what Motions all Sounds used in Speech are Formed and that upon such Positions and Motions such Sounds will certainly follow whether he that Speaks do Hear himself or not This my Letter says as well as the Postscript I think to be the first attempt in that kind And there to the commonly received Organs of Speech Instrument a novem sunt Guttur Lingua Palatum Quatuor Dentes duo Libra simul I add one more and I think I am the first that do so that is the Nostrils on the Closure and different Appertures of which by help of the Uvula the sole Difference in the Articulation of divers Letters depends as of P B M and of T D N and divers others Which I think no body before me had taken notice of But I am since followed by others Some years after Mr. George Dalgarno at Oxford appli'd himself to write a Treatise concerning an Universal Character which he published in the year 1660 intituled Ars Signorum concerning which he consulted Me as he did also Dr. Wilkins Dr. Ward and others I told him my sense of it as I did also to Dr. Wilkins That the thing was certainly fesible in Nature upon such Considerations as that Letter of March 14. 1661 mentions But that I did not think it likely to obtain in Practice Because this Universal Character must be in the nature of a New Language Which he was so apprehensive to be true that having once contrived his Universal Character he did upon this suggestion accommodate thereunto his Universal Language to make his Character Effable as is there seen So that For all Persons to Learn his Character and to have all Books Written in it is the same thing as to Translate all Books into One Language and to have this Language learned by All. Which if it cannot be hoped of any of the Languages now in being which have the advantage of being already understood by more than ever are like to learn that other much less is it to be hoped for of a New Language now to be contrived And in case men should be willing to change the way of Writing from Vocal to Real Characters there would soon arise a like Variety of Real Characters each fansying his own way the best as now there is of Vocal Languages Nor is it to be expected That a general Law should be made to confine All to the same Characters any more than amongst our selves All Writers of Short-hand be confined to the same way and method of Brachy-graphy or Short-writing which we find to multiply according to the variety of Teachers And Specious Arithmetick which as to so much is a kind of Real Character hath not in all Writers the same Characters but very different as different Writers This Enterprise of Mr. Dolgarro gave occasion to Dr. Wilkins the late Bishop of Chester to pursue the same Design as himself intimates in his Epistle both as to a Real Character as he calls it or Characters of Things instead of Words and the expressing those Characters by Vocal Sounds which he calls his Philosophical Language in his Essay of a Real Character and Philosophical Language published in the year 1668. which is the Result of his Thoughts on that Subject for divers years before with the concurrence of Dr. Seth Ward now Bishop of Salisbury and Dr. William Lloyd now Dean of Bangor and others as himself mentions with whom he had frequent conference about that Affair And it would have been publish'd somewhat sooner if not interrupted by the Fire of London in the year 1666. Not that he did expect this Real Character of his and his Philosophical Language should universally obtain and all Books be translated into it But to shew the thing to be fesible and divers Advantages which might arise thence if it could so obtain And to demonstrate the thing it self to be Practicable He was pleased when his Book was newly made publick to write a Letter to me in his Real Character to which I return'd an Answer in his Philosophical Language And we did perfectly understand one another as if written in our own Language In order to this Design he found it expedient for reasons by him expressed to consider the Formation of Sounds in Speech and to engraft in his Essay a particular Discourse thereof in Chap. 10 11 12 13 14. of his Third Part. And because I had particularly considered that Subject and published a Treatise of it he was pleased more particularly to discourse that part with me which we did at divers Meetings on that occasion There being scarce any part in all that Discourse wherein I was not advised with In some things he was pleased on those Discourses to alter his former Thoughts for reasons which I suggested As for instance Some Vowels he judged to be of their own nature Long and could not be pronounced Short as ô in Boat oo in Food ū in Lute c. Others in their own nature Short and not capable of being produced as the French e Feminine in je ne c. and the English ū in cut but c. Contrary to which I suggested that in good goode wood woo'd full fool pull pool wooll wool hood hoo'd c. there is a manifest distinction of the same sound of the Vowel pronounced Long and Short And in recubo tetubo c. we in England pronounce Short the same sound of ú which in cubo tubo c. we pronounce Long. So in gula régula c. And the like of ô in potent impotent dolent indolent rédolent solens insolens vola évola benévola c. And that in Musick the words cut put may be sung as a Brief or Sembrief as well as a Crotchet or Quaver which depends onely upon the Short or Long sounding of that Vowel those Consonants c b t not being capable of production but the Vowel onely and the like of the French e Feminine And contrariwise tô too tú may be a Crotchet or Quaver as well as a Brief or Sembrief Whereupon he agreed with me that all Vowels and some Consonants are capable of Production and Contraction but that some Vowels are for the most part produced in common Speech others mostly Contracted So the English Vowel î in Bite