In applying more closely to Isokrates the general description just quoted, the first point to be noticed is his choice of words. His diction is tempered of two opposite elements. It is a compromise between the ‘elaborate’ diction represented by Thucydides and the ‘plain’ diction represented by Lysias ¹ . But it is infinitely more Lysian than Thucydidean.

Of its Lysian qualities, the first is purity; an ² excellence already ³ explained as including two ideas —avoidance of obsolete, or novel or too poetical words ⁴ ,—and correctness of idiom. In this Isokrates was the nearest rival, though not the equal, of Lysias ⁵ . Next, though the general effect of ⁶ Isokrates is ornate and the general effect of Lysias is plain, yet the Lysian simplicity belongs in a certain sense to the language of Isokrates. His composition abounds in figures—to be noticed presently; but his diction generally avoids tropes ⁷ ; that is, it uses the individual word in the normal sense. Yet here again there is a difference. Lysias prefers common words; Isokrates, though he can distinguish occasions, has a general bent towards grandeur ⁸ . There is far less of this in the six forensic speeches than elsewhere; yet even here there is something ⁹ .