jpre^cntct) hi i w if ■ CucpclopetM Brttamnta OR, A DICTIONARY OF ARTS, SCIENCES, AND MISCELLANEOUS LITERATURE; ENLARGED AND IMPROVED. THE FIFTH EDITION. JUustrateD toitl) ncaclg srtif ftunoceti <$ngcaDtngs(. VOL. x. INDOCTI discant; ament meminisse periti. EDINBURGH: Printed at the Encyclopedia Press, FOR ARCHIBALD CONSTABLE AND COMPANY, AND THOMSON BONAR, EDINBURGH GALE, CURTIS, AND FENNER, LONDON; AND THOMAS WILSON AND SONS, YORK. 1815. VttAVroiTDK ^ •' ' ; j > (j / / _ ; - j, j _> •i >OA obit, crofting a ftream of water : The back-ground, a landfcape. 5. Baucis and Goatlt Gonrgues. Philemon entertaining Jupiter and Mercury. 6. A landfcape, called the Aurora, reprefenting the dawn of day. The effeQ. is very beautiful. 7. The beheading of St John in prifon, a very fmall upright oval print, which is by far the fcarceft. GOVERNMENT, in general, is the polity of a ftate, or an orderly power conrtituted for the public good. Civil government was inftituted for the prefervatiou and advancement of mens civil interefts, and for the better lecurity of their lives, liberties, and properties. I fie ufe and neceffity of government is fuch, that there never was an age or country without feme fort of civil authority : but as men are feldom unanimous in the means of attaining their ends, fo their differences in opinion in relation to government have produced a va¬ riety of forms of it. To enumerate them w ould be to recapitulate the hiftory of the whole earth. But, ac¬ cording to Montefquieu, and moft others writers, they may, in general, be reduced to one of thefe three kinds. 1. I he republican. 2. The monarchical. 3. Thedef- potic.— Hie firft is that, where the people in a body, or only a part of the people, have the fovereign power ; the fecond, where one alone governs, but by fixed and eftablifhed laws j but in the defpotic government, one perfon alone, without lawT and without rule, directs every thing by his own will and caprice. See the arti¬ cle Law, N° 1. 3—10. On the fubjedt of govern¬ ment at large, fee Montefquieu’s VEfprit dts Loix, 1. 2. c. 1. j Locke, ii. 129, &c. quarto edition, 1768 9 Sidney on government 9 Sir Thomas Smith de Repub,. AngL' and Acherly’s Britannic Conftitulion.—As to Gothic government, its original and faults, &c. fee Montefquieu’s DE/prit des Loix, 1. li.c. 8.—With re- fpedl to the feudal policy, how it limited government, fee FeODAL Siyjlem. Government is alfo a poft or office, which gives a. perfon the power or right to rule over a place, a city, or a province, either fupretnely or by deputation. Government is likewife ufed for the city, coun¬ try, or place to which the power of governing is ex¬ tended. GOUGE, an inftrument ufed by divers artificers, being a fort of round hollow chifel 9 ferving to cut holes, channels, grooves, &c. in wood, ftone, &c. GOULART, Simon, a famous minifter of Geneva, was born at Senlis in 1543 5 and was one of the moft indefatigable writers of his time. He made confider¬ able additions to the Catalogue of witneftes of the truth, compofed by Ulyricus 9 and acquired a great reputation by his works 9 the principal of which are, 1. A tranf- lation of Seneca. 2. A colleftion of memorable hifto- ries. 3. A tranflation of St Cyprian De lapjis. 4. Se¬ veral devotional and moral treatifes. He died at Ge¬ neva in 1628. GOURD. See Cucurbita, Botany Index. GOURGUES, Dominique, an illuftrious French patriot, G O W [ Gourgues patriot, a private gentleman of Gafeony. The Spa¬ ll niards having inhumanly maffacred a colony of French- Gown. men wj10 }iacl fettled in Florida, Gourgues took a fe- vere revenge on them, an account of which is given under the article Florida. On his return he was re¬ ceived with acclamations by his countrymen, but was forbidden to appear at court. Queen Elizabeth invited him to command an Englilh fleet againft the Spaniards in 1593 ; but he died at Tours in his way to Eng¬ land. GOURNAY, a town of France, in the department of Lower Seine, celebrated for its butter-market. It is fituated on the river Ept, in E. Long. 1. 47. N. Lut. 49. 29. Gournay, Mary de Jars de, a lady celebrated for her learning, was the daughter-of*William de Jars, lord of Neufvi and Gournay. After the death of her father, the was patronifed by Montaigne and Cardinal Riche¬ lieu. To the daughter of the former the dedicated her Nofegay of Pindus ; and com poled feveral other works, the moft confiderable of which is Les Avis. She died at Paris in 168 ij, aged 80. The critics are divided concerning the reputation of this lady : by fome fhe is ftyled the Sijren of France ; others fay her works Ihould have been buried with her. GOUT. See Medicine Index. GOWER, John, one of our moft ancient Englifli poets, was contemporary with Chaucer, and his inti¬ mate friend. Of what family, or in what country he was born, is uncertain. He iludied the law, and was Lome time a member of the fociety of Lincoln’s-inn, where his acquaintance with Chaucer began. Some have aflerted that he was a judge •, but this is by no means certain. In the firtt year of Henry IV. he be¬ came blind ; a misfortune which he laments in one of his Latin poems. He died in the year 1402 j and was buried in St Mary Overie, which church he had re¬ built chiefly at his own expence, fo that he muft have lived in affluent circumftanqes. His tomb was magni¬ ficently and curioufly ornamented. It ftill remains, but hath been repaired in later times. From the collar of SS round the neck of his effigies, which lies upon the tomb, it is conjediured that he had been knighted. As to his charadfer as a man, it is impoffible, at this diftance of time, to fay any thing with certainty. With regard to his poetical talents, he was undoubt¬ edly admired at the time when he wwote, though a modern reader may find it difficult to difeover much harmony or genius in any of his compofitions. He wrote, 1. Speculum rneditantis, in French, in ten books. There are two copies of this in the Bodleian library. 2. Vox clamantis, in Latin verfe, in feven books. Pre- ferved alfo in the Bodleian library, and in that of All- Souls. It is a chronicle of the infurreCfion of the commons in the reign of Richard II. 3. ConfeJJio amantis ; printed at Weft min ft er by Caxton in 140 ;. Lond. MS2? i554- It is a fort of poetical fyftem of morality, interfperfed with a variety of moral tales. 4. De rege Henrico IV. Printed in Chaucer’s works. There are likewife feveral hiftorical traels, in manu- feript, written by our author, which are to be found in different libraries; alfo fome fhort poems printed in Chaucer’s works. GOWN, Robe, a long upper garment, worn by 3 ] G O W ■ lawyers, divines, and other graduates j who are hence Gown, called men of the gown, or gownmen. Gowran The gown is an ample fort of garment, worn over the ordinary clothes, hanging down to the feet.—It is fafhioned differently for ecclefiaftics and for laymen. At Rome they gave the name “ virile gown,” toga viriiis, to a plain kind of gown which their youth af- fumed when arrived at puberty. This they particu¬ larly denominated preetexta. See Toga, PralTExta, &c. “ The remarkable drefs of our Britifh aneeftors Hijlory of ed to the prefeni among the mountaineers of Scotland, and is therefore rendered very familiar to our ideas, carried in it an afford filing appearance to the Romans. And it feems to have been equally the drefs of the men and women among the nobles of Britain. But in a few years after the erecction of the Roman Britith towns in the north, and in the progrefs of refinement among them, this ancient habit began to be difefteemed by the chiefs of the cities, and looked upon as the badge of an¬ cient barbarifm. And the growing prejudices were foon fo greatly improved, that within 20 years only after the conffrmffion of the towns, the Britifli fagum was a finally refigned, and the Roman toga or gown affumed by many of them. “ The gowrn, however, never became univerfal in Britain : and it feems to have been adopted only by the barons of the cities and the officers of the croivn 5 and has therefore been tranfmitted to us as the robe of reverence, the enfign of literature, and the mantle of magiftracy. The woollen and plaide$ garments of the chiefs having naturally fuperfeded the leathern veftures of their clients, the former were ftill wore by the ge¬ nerality of the Britons; and they were retained by the gentlemen of the country, and by the commonalty both in country and city. That this was the cafe, appears evident from the correfpondent conduiff: of the Gauls and Britons j avIio kept their Virgata Sagula to the laft, and communicated them to the Franks and Saxons. The plaided drapery of the Britons ftill ap¬ peared general in the ftreets of Manchefter 5 and muft have formed a ftriking contrail to the gown of the chief, the dark mantle of Italy : and it and the orna¬ mented buttons on the thoulder are preferved among us even to the prefent moment, in the parti-coloured clothing and the taffeled flioulder knots of our foot¬ men.” In fome univerfities phyficians wear a fcarlet gown. In the Sorbonne, the dodtors were always in gowns and caps. Beadles, &c. w'ear gowns of two or more co¬ lours. Among the French officers, &c. they diftinguilh thofe of the fhort gown or robe; which are fuch as have not been regularly examined. They have alfo barbers of the fhort gown, who are fuch as are obliged to pracliie in an inferior way to thofe of the long robe. G own is alfo taken in the general for civil magiflra- ture, *tr the profeffion oppofite to that of arms. In this fenfe it was that Cicero laid cedant anna toga:. GOWRAN, a borough town, in the county of Kilkenny and province of Leinfter, Ireland. N. Lat. A 2 .152. fivir WhitaKer obierves;, winch continued very nearly IVlati¬ the fame to the commencement of the laft century fcfei among the natives of Ireland, and has adlually defeend-1' 3°?' G K A [ Gocmn 52. 34. W. Long. 7. o. It is governed by aportrieve, Graaf. reorder, and town clerk. Here are the ruins of an -—y—°|d church,, alfo the handfome feat of the late Lord Clifden; and three miles beyond Gowran the ruins of Ballinabola eaftle. GOYEN, John Van, painter cf landfcapes, cattle, and fea pieces, was born at Leyden in 1596 } and was Tor feme time inltrufted by liaac Nicholai, who was reputed a good painter 5 but afterwards he became the difciple of Efaias Vandervelde, the moll celebrated Tandlcape painter of his time. Van Goyen very foorv tofe into general efteem j and his works are more uni- verfally fpread through all Europe than -the works of any other mailer, for he pohefTed an uncommon readi- nels of hand and freedom of pencil. It was his con- llant pleafure and practice to Iketch the views of vil¬ lages and towns lituated on the banks of rivers or canals j of the lea-ports in the Low Countries j and lometijnes of inland villages, where the feenes around *hem appeared to him pleafing or piciurefque. Thofe he afterwards ufed as fubjedls for his future landfcapes 3 enriching them with cattle, boats, and figures in eha- radler, jult as the livelinefs of his imagination diredled. He underllood perfpeclive extremely well, and alio the principles of the chiaro-fcuro ; which branches of knowledge enabled him to give his pictures a flrong rmd agreeable effea. He, died in 1656, aged 60.-- His ufual fabjedts were fea-pieces, or landfcapes with views of rivers, enlivened with figures of peafauts either ferrying over cattle, drawing their nets in Hill water, or going to or returning from market. Sometimes he ’re- prefented huts of boors on the banks of rivers, with overhanging trees, and a beautiful refleaion of their branches from tke tranfparent furface of the waters. Thefe were the fubjefts of his bell time, which he generally marked with his name and the year; and the high finilhed pictures of Van Goyen will be for ever eltimable. . But as he painted abundance of piflures feme are flight, fome too yellow, and fome negligently finilhed ; though all of them have merit, being marked with a free, expeditious, and eafy pencil, and a light touch. His pictures frequently have a grayilh call ; which did not arife from any mifmanagement of the tints, or any want of Ifeill in laying on the colours ; but was occafioned by his ufing a colour called Haer/em bine, much approved of at that time, though now en¬ tirely difufed, becaufe the artiils found it apt to fade into that grayifh tint; and it hath alfo rendered the pictures of-this mailer exceedingly difficult to be clean¬ ed without injuring the finer touches of the finilhing. His bell works are valued fo highly in moll parts of Europe, and efpecially in the Low Countries, that they defervedly afford large prices, being ranked in Hol¬ land rvith the pictures of Teniers ; and at this time are not eafily procured, particularly if they are undamaged though his flighter performances are fufficiently com¬ mon. GRAAF, Regnikr de, a celebrated phyfician, born at ochoonlraven, m Holland, in 1641. He ftudied phyfic in Pruffia. He was educated in Leyden, where he acquired great honour by publifhing a treartfe De Succo Pancreatico. He alfo publifhed three pieces up¬ on the organs of generation, both male and female - upon which fubjedt he had a controverfy with Swram- .•nerdam. He died young, ir\ 1673 ; and his works, 6 4 1 b n a with his life prefixed, were publilhed at Leyden in Graaf 1677, in 8vo. (| GRABE, John Ernest, a very learned writer in T Gracc- the beginning of the 18th century, a native of Konmf. ' v berg, in Pruffia. He was educated in the Lutheran religion; but the reading of the fathers led him into doubts. . He prefented to the eledloral confiftory at Sambia in Pruffia a memorial containing his doubts. 1 he eledtor gave orders to three eminent divines to an- fvver them. Their anfwers Ihook him a little in his re- folution of embracing the Roman Catholic religion ; and one of them, Spener, advifed him to go to Eng¬ land. He went; and King William gave him a pen- flon,_ which was continued by Queen Anne. He was ordained a prieft of the church of England, and ho¬ noured with the degrefe of dodtor of divinity by the uni- verfity of Oxford; upon which occafion Dr George Smalridge pronounced two Latin orations, which were afterwards printed. He wrote, 1. Spteeleg 1 um S. S. Pa~ trum, ut et Piereticonim feeculipoji Chrijlum natum, 8vo, * 2. An edition of the Septuagint, from the Alexandrian manufeript in St James’s library. 3. Notes on Juilin, &c. ; and other works, which are elteemed by the learned. GRACCHUS, Tiberius, eleded tribune of the Roman people, demanded in the fenate, in their name the execution of the Agrarian law ; by which all per- ions poffeffing above 200 acres of land were to be de¬ prived of the furplus, for the benefit of the poor citi¬ zens, amongil whom an equal diftribution of them was to be made. Having carried his plan into execution by violent meafures, he fell a victim to his zeal, being affaffinated by his own party, 133 B. C. Caius his brother, purfuing the fiime Reps, was killed by the conful Opimius, 121 B. C. See (hiftory of) Rome. GRACE, among divines is taken, 1. For the free love and favour of God, which is the fpring and fource of all the benefits we receive from him. 2. For the work of the Spirit renewing t!ie foul after the imao-e of God ; and continually guiding and ftrengthening the believer to obey his will, to refill and mortify fin, and overcome it. Grace is alfo ufed, in a peculiar fenfe, for a fliort prayer laid before and after meat. The proofs of the moral obligation of this ceremonv drawn from different paffages of the New Tellament! are fo well known, that it is needMs to infill on them here. Some others, drawn from the practice of differ- ent nations, and of very remote antiquity, may not be dilagreeable to our readers. . 1 ‘ Alhenaeus tells us, in bis PPeipn^foph. lib. ii. that m the famous regulation made by A'mphi&yon king of Athens with refped to the ufe of wine, both in fa- enfiees and at home, he required that the name of Jupiter the SuJIniner fhould be, decently and reverently pronounced. The fame writer, in lib. iv. p 1 ,0 quotes Hermeias, an author extant in his time who informs us of a people in Egypt, inhabitants of t]fe city of Naueratis, whofe cuftom it was on certain oc- cafions, after they had placed tbemfelves in the ufual polture of eating at the table, to rife again and kneel • whem the pnell or precentor of the folemnity began to chant a grace, according to a Hated form amongft ihem and when that was over, they joined in the meal in a fulemn famficial manner. Heliodorus has a paffag^ G 11 A [ 5 1 G 11 A Grace. paiTage in his JEthiopics to the fame purpofe, that it was •—y—* the cutlom of the Egyptian philofophers to pour out libations and put up ejaculations before they fat down to meals. Porphyry, in his treatife De abjhn. lib. iv. p. 408. gives a great charafter of the Sarnnean gymno- fophifts in Egypt for the Itriftnefs of their life : as one article in their favour, he obferves, that at the founding of a bell before their meals, which confided only of rice, bread, fruits, and herbs, they went to prayers j which being ended, and not before, the bell founded again, and they fat down to eating. In general this was a religious ufage or rite among the ancient Greeks j and derived from yet older ages, if Clement of Alex¬ andria rightly informs us. He mentions, that thefe people when they met together to refrelh themfelves with the juice of the grape, fung a piece of mufic, in imitation of the Hebrew pfalms, which they called a fcholion. Livy, lib. xxxix. fpeaks of it as a fettled cuftom among the old Romans, that they offered facrifice and prayer to the gods at their meals and compotations. But one of the fulled; tedimonies to our purpofe is given by Quintilian, Declam. 301. Adijli menfam, fays he, ad quam cum venire caepimus, Deos invocamus ; “ We approached the table (at dipper together), and then invoked the gods.” The Jefuit Trigautius, in his very elegant and in- druftive narrative of the Chridian expedition of their miffionaries into China, book i. p. 69. gives this ac¬ count of the people there in the particular now under Confideration. “ Before they place themfelves for partaking of an entertainment, the perfon who makes it fets a veffcl, either of gold, or filver, or marble, or fome fuch valuable material, in a charger full of wine, W'hicli he holds with both his hands, and then makes a low bo iv to the perfon of chief quality or charafter at the table. Then from the hall or dining-room, he goes into the porch or entry, where he again makes a very low bow, and turning his face to the fouth, pours out this wine upon the ground as a thankful oblation to the Lord of heaven. After this, repeat¬ ing his reverential obeifance, he returns into the hall,” &c. The Turks pray for a bleffing on their meat •, and many more indances might be produced of infidels who have condantly obferved the like cudom in fome way or other. 2. The faff, therefore, with refpefl to the heathen world, being thus evident, we proceed to the fenti- ments and behaviour of the Jews in this particular. Their celebrated hidorian Jofephus, giving a detail of the rites and cudoms of the Effenes, who were con- fefiedly the drifted and mod pious profeffors of the Jewifh religion, has this remarkable paffage to the pre¬ fect purpofe: “ The pried,” fays he, “ begs a blefling before they prefume to take any nourifhment 5 and it is looked upon as a great fin to take or tade before.” Then follows the thankfgiving before meat : and “ -when the meal,” proceeds he, “ is over, the pried prays again j and the company with him blefs and praife God as their preferver, and the donor of their life and nourifii- ment.” Philo, in his book De vita contemplativa, gives an account of a body of men and women drifter than *ven the Effenes themfelves. He didinguilhes them by no particular name, though his relation is very accurate Grace;- and circumdantial j namely, that on certain fpecial w~ occafions, before “ they took their meals, they placed themfelves in a proper decent order j when, lifting up their hands and eyes to heaven, they prayed to God that he would be pleafed to be propitious to them in the ufe of thofe his good creatures.” From the Hebrew ritual it appears, that the Jewrs had their hymns and pfalms of thankfgiving, not only after eating their paffover, but on a variety of other occafions, at and after meals, and even between their feveral courfes and dilhes; as when the bed of their wine was brought upon the table, or their aromatic confec¬ tions, or the fruit of the garden, &c. On the day of the paffover was fung Pfalm cxiv. “ When Ifrael came out of Egypt,” &c. Aridaeus has a paffage full on the prefent fubjeft. “ Mofes,” fays he, “ commands that when the Jews are going to eat or drink, the company diould immedi¬ ately join in facrifice or prayer.” Where Rabbi Elea- zar (upon that author) met with this fentence, has been controverted. But fuppofing it not to be found in feriptis, it is fufficient for us to knovr that the Jews did condantly praftife this cudom, upon the foundation of an ancient and general tradition and ufage. That the prophet Daniel gave thanks before meat, is evident from the Apocryphal book concerning Bel and the Dragon, where, ver. 38, 39, we find, that “ Daniel faid, Thou had remembered me, O God! neither had thou forfaken them who feek thee and love thee. So Daniel arofe, and did eat.” Of this text Prudentia takes notice in Cathemirin, hymn iv. His fumptis Danielis excitavit ^ In ccelum faciem, ciboque fortisy ' Amen reddidit, allelujah dixit. The much-belov’d took the repaff, And up to heav’n his eyes he cad j By which refrefh’d he fung aloud, Amen, and allelujah to his God. Where, by the way, it may be obferved, that the poet is a little midaken in making the prophet give thanks after meat; whereas, according to the text, he did it before. Grace, or Gracefulnefs, in the human eharafter; an agreeable attribute, infeparable from motion as oppofed to red, and as comprehending fpeech, looks, gedure, and loco-motion. As fome motions are homely, the oppofite to grace¬ ful 5 it is to be inquired, With what motions is this attribute connefted ? No man appears graceful in a mafic ; and therefore, laying afide the expreffions of the countenance, the other motions may be genteel, may be elegant, but of themfelves never are graceful. A motion adjuded in the mod perfeft manner to anfwer its end, is elegant 5 but dill fome what more is required to complete our idea of grace or gracefulnefs. What this unknown more may be, is the nice point. One thing is clear from what is faid, that this wore mud arife from the expreffions of the countenance : and from w'hat expreffions fo naturally as from thofe which indicate mental qualities, fuch as fweetnefs, benevolence, elevation, dignity ? This promifes tp be a fair analyfis: becaufe of all objefts mental qualities affeft us the mod y •iinb G R A [ ■Graces an^ ^ie imprefnon made by graceful appearance upon jr‘^CL5' , every fpedlator of talle, is too deep for any caufe purely corporeal. .1 he next ftep is, to examine rvhat are the mental qualities, that in conjunction with elegance of motion, produce a graceful appearance. Sweetnefs, cheerful- nefs, affability, are not feparately fufficient, nor even in conjunction. Dignity alone, with elegant motion, produce a graceful appearance ; but Hill more graceful with the aid of other qualities, thofe efpeciaily that are the moft exalted. See Dignity. But this is not all. T he moft exalted virtues may be the lot of a perfon whofe countenance has little ex- preflion : fuch a perfon cannot be graceful. Therefore to produce this appearance, we muil add another cir- cumftance, viz. an expreflive countenance, difplaying to every fpedlator of tafte, with lile and energy, every thing that paffes in the mind. Collecling thefe circumfiances together, grace may be defined, “ that agreeable appearance which arifes from elegance of motion and from a countenance ex- preflive of dignity.” Expreflions of other mental qualities are not effential to that appearance, but they heighten it greatly. Of all external objects, a graceful perfon is the moft agreeable. Dancing affords great opportunity for difplaying grace, and haranguing ftill more. See Dancing, De¬ clamation, and Oratory. But in vain will a perfon attempt to be graceful who is deficient in amiable qualities. A man, it is true, may form an idea of qualities he is deftitute of and, by means of that idea, may endeavour to exprefs thefe qualities by look^and geftures : but fuch ftudied ex- preftion will be too faint and obfeure to be graceful. ASI of GfiJCE, the appellation given to the a£l: of parliament 1696, c. 32. which allows prifoners for civil debts to be fet at liberty, upon making oath that they have not wherewithal to fupport themfelves in prifon, unlefs they are alimented by the creditors on ■whofe diligences they were imprifoned, within ten days after intimation made for that purpofe. Days of GRACE, three days immediately following the term of payment of a bill, within which the creditor muft proteft it if payment is not obtained, in order to intitle him to recourfe againft the drawer. Grace is alfo a title of dignity given to dukes, archbilhops, and in Germany to barons and other inferior princes. GRACES, Gratia;, Charities, in the heathen theology, were fabulous deities, three in number, who attended on Venus. Their names are, Aglia, Thalia, and Euphrofyne ; i. e. fhining, fiourilhing, and gay; or, according to lome authors, Pafithea, Euphrofyne, and Aigiale. They were fuppofed by fome to be the daugh¬ ters of Jupiter and Eurynome the daughter of Oceanus; and by others, to be the daughters of Bacchus and Venus. Some will have the Graces to have been four; and make them the fame with the Horce “ hours”, or rather with the four feafons of ihe year. A marble in the king of Pruftia’s cabinet reprefents the three Graces in the ufual manner, with a fourth feattd and covered with a large veil, with the words underneath, Ad Sorores IIII. But this groupe we may underftand to be the i ] G R A three Graces, and Venus, who was their lifter, as being Graces daughter of Jupiter and Dione. II The graces are always fuppofed to have hold of, Graltir‘g each other’s hands, and never parted. They were painted naked, to fhow that the Graces borrow nothing from art, and that they have no other beauties than what are natural. Yet in the firft ages they were not reprefented naked, as appears from Paufanias, lib. vi. and lib. ix. who deferibes their temple and ftatues. They were of wood, all but their head, feet, and hands, which were white marble. Their robe or gown was gilt: one of them held in her hand a rofe, another a dye, and the third a fprig of myrtle. GRACILIS, a mufcle of the leg, thus called from its tlender ftiape. See Anatomy, Table of the Mufcies. GRACULA, the Grakle, a genus of birds be¬ longing to the order of picse. See Ornithology Index. GRACULUS. See Corvus, Ornithology/«c/gv. GRADATION, in general, the afeending ftep by ftep, or in a regular and uniform manner. Gradation, in Logic, a form of reafoning, other- wife called Sorites. Gradation, in Painting, a gradual and infenfible change of colour, by the diminution of the tints and ftiadcs. Gradation, in Rhetoric, the fame with Climax. GRADISKA, a ftreng town of Hungary in Scla- vonia, on the frontiers of Croatia, taken by the Turks in 1691. It is leated on the river Save, in E. Long. 17. 55. N. Lat. 45, 38. Gradiska, a ftrong town of Italy, in a fmall ifiand of the fame name on the frontiers of Friuli, in E. Long. 13. 37. N. Lat. 46. 6. It is fubjedl to the houfe of Auftria. GRADO, a ftrong town of Italy, in a fmall ifiand of the fame name, on the coaft of Friuli, and in the territory of Venice. E. Long. 13. 27. N. Lat. 45. 46. GRADUATE, a perfon who has taken a degree in the univerlity. See Degree. GRAFVIUS, John George, one of the moft learn¬ ed writers in the 17th century. In the 24th yeai of his age, the debtor of Brandenburg made him profeffor at Doilhourg. In 1658, he was invited to Deventer to fucceed his former mailer Gronovius. In 1661, he was appointed profeffor of eloquence at Utrecht; and 12 years after he had the profefforlhip of politics and hiftory conferred on him. He fixed his thoughts here, and refufed feveral advantageous offers. He had, however, the fatisfaclion to be fought after by divers princes, and to fee feveral of them come from Germany to ftudy under him. He died in 1703, aged 71. His Thefaurus antiquitatum et hiforiarum Italia’, &.c. and other works are well known. GRAFTING, or Engrafting, in Gardening, is the taking a ftioot from one tree, and inferting it into another, in fuch a manner that both may unite clolely and become one tree. By the ancient writers on hufbandry and gardening, this operatic,n is called in- cifion, to diftinguilh it from inoculation or budding, which they call inferere oculos. Grafting has been prablifed from the moft remote antiquity ; G R A [ 7 1 G R A Grafting, antiquity but its origin and invention is differently Graham. rtqated by naturalifts. Theophraftus tells us, that a bird ~ v having fwallowed a fruit whole, caff it forth into a cleft or cavity of a Gotten tree ; where mixing with fome of the putrified parts of the wood, and being wafhed Avith the rains, it budded, and produced within this tree another tree of a different kind. i his led the hufbandman to certain reflections, from which foon afterwards arofe the art of engrafting. . For the dif¬ ferent methods of performing this operation, fee Gar¬ dening Index. GRAHAM, James, Marquis of Montrofe, was comparable to the greateft heroes of antiquity. Fie undertook, againfl: almoft every obftacle that could ter¬ rify a lefs enterprifing genius, to reduce the kingdom of Scotland to the obedience of the king ; and his fuccefs correfponded to the greatnefs of the under¬ taking. By valour, he in a few months, almoft effec¬ tuated his delign ; but, for w!ant of fupplies, was for¬ ced to abandon his conquefts. After the death of Charles I. he made a fecond attempt, Avith a few men, but was immediately defeated by a numerous army. As he was leaving the kingdom in difguife, he was betrayed into the hands of his enemy, by the. lord Alton, his intimate friend. He was carried to his ex¬ ecution with every circumftance of indignity that Avan- ton cruelty could invent ^ and hanged upon a gibbet 30 feet high, Avith the book of his exploits appended to his neck. He bore this reverfe of fortune Avith his ufual greatnefs of mind, and expreffed a juft fcorn at the rage and the infult of his enemies. We meet Avith many inftances of valour in this active reign-, but Montrofe is the only inftance of heroifm. He Avas ex¬ ecuted May 21. 1650. See Britain, N° 137, 138, 143, 165. Graham, Sir Richard, Lord Vifcount Prefton, eldeft fon of Sir George Graham of Netherby, in Cum¬ berland, Bart. Avas born in 1648. He Avas fent ambaf- fador by Charles II. to Louis XIV. and was mailer of the Avardrobe and fecretary of ftate under James II. But Avhen the revolution took place, he was tried and condemned, on an accufation of attempting the reite¬ ration of that prince though he obtained a pardon by the queen’s interceffion. He fpent the remainder of his days in retirement, and publiftied an elegant tranf- lation of “ Boethius on the confolation of philofophy.” He died in 1695. Graham, George, clock and Avatch-maker, the molt ingenious and accurate artift in his time, Avas born in 1675. After his apprenticeftiip, Mr Tom- pion received him into his family, purely on account of his merit; and treated him rvith a kind of parental affeftion as long as he lived. Befides his univerfally ac- knoAvledged Ikill in his profeflion, he -was a complete mechanic and aftronomer 5 the great mural arch in the obfervatory at Greemvich Avas made for Dr Plalley, under his immediate infpedtion, and divided by his own hand : and from this incomparable original, the belt foreign inftruments of the kind are copies made by Englifli artifts. The fedftor by Avhich Dr Bradley firft difeovered t\Aro new motions in the fixed ftars, was of his invention and fabric : and when the French acade¬ micians Avere fent to the north to afeertain the figure of the earth, Mr Graham Avas thought the fitted per- fon in Europe to fupply them with inftruments ; thofe 5. Avho went to the fouth were not fo Avell furnilhed. He Graham Avas for many years a member of the Royal Society, GrJLna to Avhich he communicated feveral ingenious and im- , portant difeoveries ; and regarded the advancement of fcience more than the accumulation of Avealth. He died in 1751. Graham's Dyke. See Antoninus's Wall. GRAIN, corn of all forts, as barley, oats, rye, &c. See Corn, Wheat, &c. Grain is alfo the name of a fmall Aveight, the tAven- ticth part of a fcruple in apothecaries Aveight, and the tAventy-fourth of a pennyweight troy. A grain-weight of gold-bullion is Avorth tAvo-pence, and that of filver but half a farthing. Grain alfo denotes the component particles of ftones and metals, the veins of wood, &c. Hence crofs-grain- ed, or againft the grain, means contrary to the fibres of Avood, &e. GRALLiE, in Ornithology, is an order of birds analogous to the bruta in the clafs of mammalia in the Limuean fyftem. See Ornithology. GRAMINA, Grasses 5 one of the feven tribes or natural families, into which all A^egetables are diftri- buted by Linnaeus in his Philofophia Botanica. They are defined to be plants Avhich have very Ample leaves, a jointed Item, a bulky calyx termed gluma, and a Angle feed. This defeription includes the feveral forts of corn as Avell as grades. In Tournefort they con- ftitute a part of the fifteenth clafs, termed apetali; and in Linnaeus’s fexual method, they are moftly contained in the fecond order of the third clafs, called triandria digynia. This numerous and natural family of the graffes has engaged the attention and refearches of feveral emi-. nent botanifts. The principal of thefe are, Ray, Monti, Micheli, and Linnaeus. M. Monti, in his Catalogus Jlirpium agri Bononienjis gramina ac hujus modi afjinia compleElens, printed at Bo- nonia in 1719, divides the graffes from the difpofition of their flowers, as Theophraftus and Ray have divided them before him, into three feftions or orders.—Thefe. are, 1. Graffes having flowers collected in a fpike. 2. Graffes having their flowers collected in a panicle or loofe fpike. 3, Plants that in their habit and external appearance are allied to the graffes. This clafs Avould have been natural if the author had not improperly introduced fwect-rufh, juncus, and ar¬ row-headed grafs, into the third feftion. Monti enu¬ merates about 306 fpecies of the graffes, Avhich he re¬ duces under Tournefort’s genera 3 to thefe he has ad¬ ded three new genera. Scheuchzer in his Arijlographia, publiflied likewife in 1719, divides the graffes, as Monti, from the dif¬ pofition of their floAvers, into the five following fee- dons: 1. Graffes Avith floAvers in a fpike, as phalaris, anthoxanthum, and frumentum. 2. Irregular graffes, as fchoenanthus, and cornucopiae. 3. Graffes Avith floAvers groAA'ing in a Ample- panicle or loofe fpike, as reed and millet. 4. Graffes Avith floAvers growing in a compound panicle, or diffufed fpike, as oats and poa. 5. Plants by their habit nearly allied to the grafles, as cyprefs-grafs, feirpus, linagroftis, rufti, and fcheuchzeria. Scheuchzer has enumerated about four hundred fpe¬ cies, Avhich he deferibes with amazing exadftnefs. Micheli ■ G R A [ B ■Gram'^r FIc^e11 divided the grades into fix fe&ions, t which contain in all 44 genera, and are arranged from the fituation and number of the flowers. Gramina, the name of the fourth order in Linnceus’s Fragments of a Natural Method, confifting of the nu¬ merous and natural family of the graffes, viz. agroftis, aira, alopecurus or fox-tail grafs, anthoxanthum or ver¬ nal grafe, ariftida, arundo or reed, avena or oats, bo- bartia, briza, bromus, cinna, cornucopiae or horn of plenty grafs, cynofurus, da&ylis, elymus, feftuca or fefcue-grafs, hordeum or barley, lagurus or hareVtail ] G R A grafs, lohum or darnel, lygeum or hooded mat weed, Gramina, melica, milium or millet, nardus, oryza or rice, panicum Grammar, or panic-grafs, pafpalum, phalaris or canary-grafs, phle- '—"Y——J um, poa, faccharum or fugar-cane, fecale or rye, ftipa or winged fpike-grafs, triticum or wheat, uniola or fea- fide oats of Carolina, coix or Job’s tears, olyra, pharus, tiipfacum, zca, Indian I urkey wheat or Indian corn, zizania, aegilops or wild fefcue-grafs, andropogon, ap- luda, cenchrus, hokus or Indian millet, ifchaemum. See Botany. GRAMMAR. 1 Definition. I. /'^_RAMMAR is the art of/peaking or of writing any language with propriety; and the purpofe of language is to communicate our thoughts. 2. Grammar, confidered as an art, neceflarily fup- pofes the previous exiftence of language •, and as its defign is to teach any language to thole wbo are igno¬ rant of it, it mull be adapted to the genius of that par¬ ticular language of which it treats. A juft method of grammar, therefore, -without attempting any altera¬ tions in a language already introduced, furniflies cer¬ tain obfervations called rules, to which the methods of fpeaking uted in that language may be reduced ; and 2 this collection of rules is called the grammar of that Grammar particular language. For the greater diftin&nefs with particular, regard to thefe rules, grammarians have ufually divided this fubjeift into four diftindt heads, viz. Orthogra¬ phy, or the art of combining letters into fyllables, and fyllables into words ; Etymology, or the art of dedu¬ cing one word from another, and the various modifica¬ tions by which the fenfe of any one word can be diverf- fed con/ijlently with its original meaning or its relation to the theme whence it is derived; Syntax, or what re¬ lates to the confru&ion or due difpoftion of the words of a language into fentences or phrafes ; and Prosody, or that which treats of the quantities and accents of fylla¬ bles, and the art of making verfes. 3. But grammar, confidered as a fcience, views lan-or un^ver guage only as it is fignificant of thought. Negle&ing fal. particular and arbitrary modifications introduced for the fake of beauty or elegance, it examines the analogy and relation between words and ideas ; diftinguilhes be¬ tween thofe particulars which are ejfential to language and thofe which are only accidental; and thus furnilhes a certain ftandard, by which different languages may be compared, and their feveral excellencies or defedfs pointed out. This is what is called Philosophic or UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR. The de¬ fign of fpeech. 5 Language eonfifts of words fig- nificant of ideas. 4. THE origin of language is a fubject which has employed much learned inveftigation, and about which there is ftill a diverfity of opinion. The defign of fpeech is to communicate to others the thoughts and perceptions of the mind of the fpeaker : but it is ob¬ vious, that between an internal idea and any external found there is no natural relation ; that the word fre, for. inftance, might have denominated the fubftance which we call ice, and that the word ice might have fignifiedyfov. Some of the moft acute feelings of man, as well as of every other animal, are indeed expreffed by Ample inarticulate founds, which as they tend to the prefervation of the individual or the continuance of the fpecies, and invariably indicate either pain or plea- fure, are univerfally underftood : but thefe inarticulate and fignificant founds are very few in number 5 and if they can with any propriety be faid to conftitute a na¬ tural and univerfal language, it is a language of which man as a mere fenfitive being partakes in common with the other animals, .5. Man is endowed not only with fenfation, but alfe with the faculty of reafoning; and Ample inarticulate founds are infufficient for exprefling all the various modifications of thought, for communicating to others a chain of argumentation, or even for diftinguilhing be¬ tween the different fenfations either of pain or of pleR- fure: a man fcorched with fire or unexpectedly plunged among ice, might utter the cry naturally indicative of fudden and violent pain ; the cry would be the fame, or nearly the fame, but the fenfations of cold and heat are widely different. Articulation, by which thofe Am¬ ple founds are modified, and a particular meaning fixed to each modification, is therefore abfolutely neceffary to fuch a being as man, and forms the language which diftinguiflies him from all other animals, and enables him to communicate with facility all that diverfity of ideas with which his mind is ftored, to make known his particular wants, and to diftinguifh with accuracy all his various fenfations. Thofe founds thus modified are called words ; and as words have confeffedly no natural relation to the ideas and perceptions of which they are fignificant, the ufe of them muft either have been the refult of human fagacity, or have been fuggeft- ed to the firft man by the Author of nature. 6. Whether language be of divine or human origin, is a queftion upon which, though it might perhaps be foon refolved, it is not neceffary here to enter. Upon either fuppofition, the firft language, compared with thofe v'hich fucceeded it, or even with itfelf as after¬ wards enlarged, muft have been extremely rude and narrow. All Language is compofed of WORDS} each of ■which may be defined, A SOUND SIGNIFICANT OF SOME IDEA OR RELA¬ TION. Thefe words may be arranged into four ge¬ neral divifions, called A grammatical table, EXHIBITING A SYSTEMATIC VIEW OF WORDS AS THEY ARE COMMONLY ARRANGED INTO DISTINCT CLASSES, WITH THEIR SUBDIVISIONS, SUBSTANTIVES; which are all thofe words that are expreffive of THINGS WHICH EXIST OR ARE CONCEIVED TO EXIST OF THEMSELVES, AND NOT AS THE ENER¬ GIES OR QUALITIES OF ANYTHING ELSE. Thefe may be divided into two orders, viz. NOUNS, properly fb called, be¬ ing the NAMES OF ALL THOSE things WHicri exist, or are CONCEIVED TO exist. Thefe * may be divided into three kinds, each of which admits of the fubdivifions after men¬ tioned, viz. And PRONOUNS, which are a fpe- cies of word invented to sup¬ ply THE PLACE OF NOUNS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. They are of two kinds, viz. I ANIMAL, | {^N, t ALEXANDER, GYRUS, 6W ^ CERBERUS, ARGUS, tec. NATURAL, or thofe which are ufed as* the NAMES OF NATURAL SUBSTANCES } fuch are j l ^ ARTIFICIAL, or the feveral names ofl § EDIFICE,| J Q The VATICAN, tec. artificial OBJECTS} fuch as, lCHURCH, sT PAUL’S tec. ABSTRACT, or thofe which are the names') ^ §5 c PT rrWT S of qualities confidered as abstracted > 1 MOTION, I \ ^nTTRci^^ ^^'HE FALCON’S FLIGHT, tec. FROM their substances } fuch »s, j | l ^ The GRE-HOUND’s COURSE, tec Nouns of all kinds admit of the fol¬ lowing Ac¬ cidents, viz. \ GENDER, which is a certain affe&ion of nouhs denoting the fek of thofe fubftanees of which they are the names. For as in nature eVery objeft is either male or female, or neither the one nor the other, grammarians, following this idea, have divided the names of beings into three clajfes., Thol'e that denote males, are fa id to be of the MASCULINE gender ,* thofe that denote females, of the FEMININE gender ; and thofe which denote neither the one nor the other, of the NEUTER gender. The Englilh is the only language of which the nouns are, with refpeft to fex, an exaft copy of nature. NUMBER. As there is no objeft in nature fingle and alone} and as by far the greater part of nouns are the names of whole clajfes of objefts, it is evident that every fuch noun ought to have fome variation, to denote whether it is one individual of the clafs which is meant, or more than one. Accordingly we find, that in every language nouns have fome method of exprefling this. If one be mentioned, the noun is ufed in that form, which is called the SINGULAR number ; if more than one, it is ufed in a different form, which is called the PLURAL number. CASES. All nouns except proper names are general terms ; but it is often neceffary to ufe thofe general terms for the purpofe of expreffing particular ideas. This can be done only by conne&ing the general term with fome word fignificant of a quality or eircumjiance peculiar to the individual in¬ tended. When that quality or circumftance is not expreffed by an adjeElive, it is in Englilh and moft modern languages commonly conhe&ed with the noun by the intervention of a prepojition ; but in the Greek and Latin languages the noun has CASES to anfwer the fame end, and even in Englifh the noun has, befides the nominative, one cafe to denote poffeflioni PREPOSITIVE} fo called becaufe they are capable of LEADING A SENTENCE. Thefe are divided into three orders, call¬ ed the pronouns of the * And SUBJUNCTIVE} fo called, becaufe it cannot lead a fentence, but only ferves to fubjoin a claufe to another which was pre¬ vious. Of this kind are FIRST PERSON } in Englifh, I. This pronoun denotes the SPEAKER as characterized by the present act of SPEAKING, in centradiftin&ion to every other chara&er which he may bean It is faid to be of the FIRST PERSON, becaufe there muft neceffarily be a fpeaker before there can be a hearer ; and the fpeaker and hearer are the only perfons employed in difcourfe. SECOND PERSON,—thou. This pronoun denotes, the person addressed as characterized by the present circumstance of being addressed, in contradiftin&ion, tec. It is faid to be of the Second person, becaufe in difcourfe there cannot be a hearer till there be a fpeaker. The pronouns of the firjl and fecond perfons have number and cafes, for the fame reafon that nouns have thefe accidents} but in no language have they any variation denoting gen¬ der ; the reafon is, that sex, and all other properties and attributes whatever, except thofe juft mentioned as defcriptive of the nature of thefe pronouns, are foreign from the mind of the fpeaker when he utters I or THOU in difcourfe. THIRD PERSON,—-HE, SHE, it } which words are employed to denote cwy objeEl which may be the fubjeft of difcourfe different from the fpeaker and the hearer. They are improperly faid to be of any perfon ; for there can be but two perfons employed in difcourle, the fpeaker and the party addrejfed. They are, however, pronouns } fince they ftand by themfelves, and are the fubjlituies of nounS. He is the fubftitute of a noun denoting a male animal} she, of a noun denoting a female animal i and IT, of a noun denoting an objeEi which has no fex. All thefe, like the pronouns perfonal, admit of NUMBER and CASES } but there is this peculiarity attending them, that though iti every cafe of the Jingular ^ number the diftin&ion of gender is carefully preferved, in the plural it is totally loft} THEY, theirs, and THEM, being the nominative, pojfejfive, and accufative^ cafes of HE, of she, and of It. (| WHICH and WHO. This fubjunftive pronoun may be fubftituted in the place of any noun whatever, whether it be expreflive of a genus, a fpecies^ or ah individual; as the animal WHICH, the man who, Alexander WHO, tec. Nay, it may I even become the fubftitute of the perfonal pronouns themfelves ; as when we fay, I WHO now vorite, you WHO now read, thou WHO readejl, he WHO wrote, Jhe who Jpoke; where it is obfervable, that the fubjunBive WHO adopts the PERSON llIHiENT andlraAR AT HAND ; ^ “ THIS man befide me.” t Thefe two articles have plurals: these is the plural of this, and those the plural of that. LTHAJL,} which is prefixed to a noun m the Jingular number, denotes an individual as present but at a little distance } as, *• that man in the corner, j r 1 * There are many other articles both definite and indefinite ; for which fee Chap. II. DEFINITE} as, CONJUNCTIONS} by which name are diftinguilhed all thofe connectives which are com¬ monly EMPLOYED TO CONJOIN SENTENCES. Thefe have been divided into two kinds, called And Accidental addition is expreffed by the conjunftion and ; as when we fay, “ Lyfippus was a ftatuary AND Prifcian was a grammarian.” The unexpected junction OF contrary truths is expreffed by but } as, “ Brutus was a patriot but Csefar was not.” The relation of an effect to its cause is expreffed by because ; as, “ Rome was enllaved because Caefar was ambitious.” The relation of an effect to a cause of which the existence is doubtful, by if } as, “ you will live happily if you live honeftly.” CONJUNCTIVES, or thole words which conjoin fentences and their meanings alfo } and DISJUNCTIVES, or thofe words which, at the fame time that they conjoin fentences, disjoin their meanings. Each of thele general divifions has been again fubdivided. The former into copulatives and continuatives, the latter into simple disjunctives and adversative disjunctives. But the general divifion is abfurd, and the fubdiviftons are ufelefs. Conjunctions never k . _L . ^ ^ un c r -• j »» J- . I ■ r r . c re a. f J r r * , r ti* The relation OF A cause TO tTS EFFECT, by therefore ; as, “ Caelar was ambitious THEREFORE Home was enllaved. disjoin the meanings ot leniences,-mx mcvQ&xvT oxhex enetx.\h?Ln\.o combine two or more imple fentences into one compound fentence. If < . /r j l j - • • 1 •. * • 1.,, ^ r 1 r • J 1 r - . .. 1 J. r J r • , ‘ • ri • * Iyxtt ttmf a r\t? cr nit t> r xr 'r\TX7rTTt> CT'T* V" ic h\r TTl'T* WIT© on/i * qc TTTT’WTTp ih iq nav HR it IS niCTht. thole fimple fentenees be of 0/>/>0/5/£ meanings, before their combination, they will continue fo after it, whatever conjunction be em- ployed to unite them. In nature, DIFFERENT truths are connected, if they be connected at all, by different relations } and therefore when the sentences expreflive of thofe truths are connected in language, it muft be by words fignificant of thofe NATURAL RELATIONS. Thus, The idea of simple diversity is expreffed by either and or'; as, “ either it is day or it is night. Contrariety between two affirmations, which though each may be true by itself, cannot both be true at once, is expreffed by unless } as, “ Troy will be taken unless the Palladium be preferved.” Coincidence of two affirmations apparently contrary to each other is expreffed by although } as, “ Troy will be taken although He&or defend it.” I \ PREPOSITIONS, or thofe connectives of which the common office is to conjoin words WHICH REFUSE to coalesce } and this they can do only by SIGNIFYING THOSE RELATIONS BY WHICH THE THINGS EXPRESSED BY THE UNITED WORDS ARE CONNECTED IN NATURE. The fitjl words of men, like their firft ideas, had an immediate reference to fenfible objects } and therefore < there can be no doubt but the Original ufe of PREPOSITIONS was to denote the various relations of body. Afterwards when men began to difeern with their intelleB, they took thofe words which they found already made, PREPOSITIONS as well as others, and transferred them by metaphor to intelleBual conceptions. Prepositions therefore are either l The ACCIDENTAL JUNCTION OF TWO THINGS BETWEEN WHICH THERE IS NO NECES$ARY CONNECTION } as, “ a hoilfe WITH a party-wall.” The separation of two things which we should expect to find united ; ajs, “ a houfe without a roof, a man without hands.” The relation subsisting between any thing and that which supports it ; as, “ the ftatue ftands upon a pedeftal.” The relations of higher and lower ; as, “ the fun is rifen above the hills :4-To fupport uneafy fteps over the burning marie:—The fun is fet below the hori¬ zon :—The Ihepherd reclines UNDER the fhade of a beech-tree.” The relation between any thing in motion and that in which it moves ft as, “ the rays of light pafs through the air.” The relation between any thing continued, whether motion or rest, aN|3 the point of its beginning} as, “ the rays of light proceed from the fun-Thefe figs came from Turkey :—That lamp hangs FROM the ceiling.” The relation between any thing continued and the point to which it tends} as, “ he is going to Italy :—He dept till morning.” .The relation between an effect and its cause ; as, “ I am fick of my hufbind and for my gallant,” METAPHORICAL. For as thofe who are above others in place have generally the advantage over them, the PREPOSITIONS which denote the one kind offuperiority or inferiority, are likewife employed to denote the other, fay of a king, “ he ruled OVER his people}” and of a foldier, “ he ferved under fuch a general.” PROPER, or thofe which lite¬ rally denote the relations fub- fifting among the objefts of fenfe. Such as Or Conjunctions and preposi¬ tions are indeed employed only to conneft leniences and words } but it may be doubted whether they be parts of fpeech diftin£l from nouns, verbs, ancj adjeBives. See Chap. VI. Thus we INTERJECTIONS are a fpecies of words which are found perhaps in all languages on earth, but which cannot be included in any of the claffes above mentioned } for they are not fubje& to the rules or principles of grammar, as they contribute nothing to the communication of thought. They may be called a part of that natural language with which man is endowed in common with other animals, to exprefs or allay fome very firong fenfation ; fuch as, AH ! when he feels pain. In this view the interje&ion does not owe its charaBerijlical exprejjion to the arbitrary form of articulation, but to the tone of voice, and the modifications of countenance and vi gefiure with which it Is uttered } it is therefore pniverfally underftood by all mankind. In difcourfe interjections are employed only when the fuddennefs or vehemence of fome affection returns men to their natural fate, and makes them for a moment forget the ufe of fpeech. In books they are thrown into fentence? withsut altering their form cith$f in fyntax or in fignification} and in Englilh this is generally done with a very bad effeft, though the writer no doubt employs them with a view to pathos or embelliflunent. Tr 1T V *»' w filuis'f 70 11 U Ti. vi y o 2•?i.*.11 •HUOM j nl wn ft JPS S: .,■;' ®pp|H | |l:■ ■' i. ,i L'ifli. IfiM ,f' vf- v;,‘\ I . •*,' | | || | ? f'l 's»®| B iiiSSl: I 1||i | '■■i | i; || Si I . ' i ' :'. lij , W X ^ t ' li -i ( ji^f|j|!||| ) ' > . ' ’ '- iY, ^ »>vi \> |if n,%''i‘,‘!t tj’iftj jd oJ II|!1 jVfft: I | "/.n.TAM n i ' ■ ■ ■ r ;. -If.': ||i pill : ; ,* i * M Vji u^k^Mj .Amti s m ^ iSflli :- - YVY;;; Y Iff f » W ’MM I, ( r !|| | 'Y'"' | I IfH ' ilp# S ||:f|j , *:f*y')''y f:ij', / ^1^11 It® .Afhk H |SI^ iw1 ll pll, i ’ wti . ' i A\ i . . fiswISIWi ‘. /'< -i ^ 1 ' ' | t'f.-,.fr-YY'Y'Y- il''lii4 ||^||; || || |l :i|l »|w| ^ p Mi iifpl . f «,f < ; n sfe liJll llllll - ! , i ■■,;■ <_ .' |li#ilp|l fill::.' -■,,, : -i. ,, " ' I ■ !■: ^ni..'.,:v.:; If . ,r.'I, .. ',, , '.v :■■■. V - SJl'i ivwi It-A ' ■ IJ|||te Jli|i | y i||:i|ll|| |?sl||j|g|i||| ||:||f||5 ;V..' | j ; I ? I p i f^is/ 0 > : >, 11 4f kw^q‘n fhh! V |Fi\ri ' ,■■■ SI I i> ■ •"/.' I ., ■,, api dm i> '■■■■;' i^SM » ^,teKSvWB.,,,iY'ij:;i:v 1 ® g l,“ 'j \ ' - ’ '. . f t '>i,n 'i'*1'■ |p ni 'tm ■% i-> ! * ’ ffi hwhttfj ^ ftvi i® i / is g p||§!f j vriiL'f p||djj>in 'll .y^ tw^r /Jn^^vKrt-‘ s | / ■ ■ ■ ■■ «m |SM|T 1 .y".''.uYy |',r ^ ^ ■ .aO*, J'l Hi ; i|:fli;lp | >M 1 Jif f.H ZdlW® . | H iPlIpp:. ‘Iff ■■H.:;:; 5|? ^itfY Ji |« f« , < f YWJifJittJ '■ -w' ■: :' /■■■■.:■■'-;■■■■.:;, f i|iH | ■■\m i-aktfZii 'fee: H .. >,,, ...^ / .: r!|i ai|f I«> v | ||i|i!l||||i| 4 ■; V .'. .' ■ / mVw r»ili y. , fpl. | Ullp f$l!: lo | S <’ JAaamuK'f ^;ti irdt nro/tsb 0 ||||||||||||| '’dwin (, ± ^ - '* rij fes..i .’/.oilffisR: < 4 'imm. ||| vr^rfi I* S • 11S | ^jfd'T! S tWs’wti^iiRV S 81 18 ^^^8 8 1 pi *? I || | c(t* ^|f|f| 1 | xw-a'i -lu ^W^odil** Ttt&l fno Stdj ojoftvb US §1 «j |||^| ■ |||pH H"i4c,U'.J ;H:| ‘■■H 1| f.H.i 'H' s»i .•■f" .' f.;;.:.■ x A ; |sk id yf«4w ^41 tn f ^ I li ' | H- I;’*' ffStCBHi ! i i.Y V"; || .;'.■ )> | '■' »f JW'f , > , ' • HtiX') 1 ". HIIIHI f ■■' I .■'■ ‘Ji.i-.J f ,V i Y’ ■ ,'.■/■: ■:.;.. ■ f . ; | , v;. '-Hy ■V'Y" f . , | .'pl| Y f.', ,' YfeHfHyfi f 'M lf| if . '/'Y'Y,-’' ; ' Y Y Y::;; Y:'.Y- ;-f'';'....:;; ■.■ Y''■ Y'.;':Y, 'V'’, ■':. ' ' Hy {;|i i |j| i . f l|| | ;, | f Y I y: f'' 1 1'' ; V;,"'''f- S ' S | . ||f ;i al? :.. :,. :,', ;; , ;.\\;' ;H Y„ i nis v ^ui b«s Bp ^AiiSvs tH&Ssi 1 ' S§; Fv.'iMv't! M ” ■"'Y' |i a ^ m ,"#“v mi 'T0ti$#&jh .ix.Tscattt^o#, i ifl f'f fY 1 SliiSifli II| f | '',ff.| ;:.■ ;■■ .a: n”; SkT iHiililiii iii .VS^VSlW Vj' MwliiM fi®; 1 A;1 wi: .;.:( 1 f.Yvi'fv-"v^ :i ■; i ;:;f;l',-f | '^. , ^ , ; YY ,;,■; ^ | S .’ .vi mn oi;:. -vw.i itYO; J . -1 *%it isun^Ti v'fitj aUfe -Y;-/'- f;..'-.;:' '■:“ |||ig yfi^j ■" Y'' ;,a .f-. vH-YYsHy Ifs—1"~ ' '»«»*! ««wg. ****•■ >* y . . w wm*'w Jrti •VAMt isif, ■■ ''t:. ■ if fy.■;::' :■ feat pj^rLiyu ' . ,: i ^ t W.y ' H' nkjia OtU ■ ■■." - ;||I; ||j|f4' i.: ■;■ -■■ V^v ^ 'III! tnsf^lioxyiaic ;■ i g|i| i'l'f,;v:iUV -Y', . . : ; . ,; of f Ov.- : i / 1 ■. , . Yf:, y!; 0; il YY.:i: I I i.afY y':"' ■■ ■ , Y'.-Y mm .,. IslY ■- ■::■ o ;.- 'o.'. ',■...■ ■ |i SilWaiH : "mi «;>a,.v;.rr‘ ZyW^, and to give one general name to each attribute wherefoever it may be round, without having at the fame time words expreflive of affirmation. We never talk of any attribute a colour tor mftance, without affirming fomething concerning it; as, either that it is bright or faint, or that it is the colour of iome fubfance. It will be feen afterwards, that to denote affirmation is the proper office of what is called the fubftantive verb; as, “ Milk is white.” That verb therefore appears to be as neceffary to the commumcation of thought as any fpecies of Avords whatever; and if we muft range words under a feAV general dalles, avc fliould be inclined to fay, that nouns, attributives, and affirmatives, comprehend all that is effential to TO Division of Words, 10 The com¬ mon divi- fion of the parts of fpeoch the moft pro¬ per. G R A M t>ith the ftones, it neither ac(|uires nor lofes any one of _ fhe qualities ejjential to matier ; it neither communicates its own foftnefs, nor acquires their hardnefs. By this mode of reafoning therefore it would appear, that the words called, definitives and connectives, fo far from ha¬ ving of themielves no fignification, are equally elfen- tial to language and equally fignificant with thole which are denominated fubfiantives and attributives; and upon inyeftigation it will be found that this is the truth. For whatever is meant by the definition or corn eft ion of the words which all men confefs to be fignificant, that meaning mult be the fenfe of the Words of which the purpofe is to define and conneft 5 and as there can be no meaning where there are no ideas, every one of thefe definitives and connectives muft be fignificant of fame idea, although it may not be always eaiy or even polfible to exprefs that idea by another word. 11. Thefe different modes of dividing the parts of fpeech we have juft mentiorted, becaufe they have been largely treated of by grammarians of high fame. But it does not appear to us, that any man can feel him- felf much the wifer for having learned that all Avords are either substantives or attributives, defini¬ tives or CONNECTIVES. The divifion of words into thofe which are significant of themselves, and thofe Avhich are SIGNIFICANT BY RELATION, is abfo- lute nonfenfe, and has been productive of much error and much myftery in fome of the molt celebrated trea- tifes on grammar. It is indeed probable, that any at¬ tempt to eftablilh a different claftification of the parts ®f fpeech from that which is commonly received, Avill be found of little utility either in prattice or in fipecula- tion. As far as the former is concerned, the vulgar divifion feems fufficiently commodious; for every man who knows any thing, knows Avhen he ufes a noun and when a verb. With rcfpedl to the latter, not to mention that all the grammarians from Aristotle to Horne Tooke, have differed on the fubjecl, it ftiould ieern to be of more importance, after having afeertain- ed with precifion the nature of each fpecies of Avords, to determine in Avhat circumftances they difi'er than in Avhat they agree. 12. In molt languages, probably in all cultivated languages, grammarians diftinguilh the following parts of fpeech : Noun, pronoun, verb, participle, adverb, pre- pofition, conjunction. The Latin and Eng/ijb gramma¬ rians admit the interjettion among the parts of fpeech, although it is confefledly not neceffary to the conftruc- tion of the fentence, being only thrown in to exprefs the affe61ion of the fpeaker : and in the Greek and Englifb tongues there is the article prefixed to nouns, ■when they fignify the common names of things, to point them out, and to ftioA\’ Iioav far their fignification extends. In the method of arrangement commonly folloAved in grammars, adjettives are claffed Avith fub- fiantives, and both are denominated nouns ; but it is cer¬ tain that, Avhen examined philofophically, an effential difference is difeovered betAveen the fukfiantive and the adjettive; and therefore fome writers of eminence, when treating of this fubjeft, have lately given the folloAving claflification of words Avhich Are fhall adopt: The ARTICLE, NOUN, PRONOUN, VERB, PARTICIPLE, ADJEC¬ TIVE, ADVERB, PREPOSITION, CONJUNCTION, INTER¬ JECTION. All thefe words are to be found in the En- glifh language; and therefore we fhall examine each 6 M A R. Chap. I. clafs, endeavour fo after tain its prccnc import, and fhow Noun. in Avhat refpefts it differs from every other clafs. It is ' v—1 impoflible to inveftigate the principles of grammar Avithout confining the inveftigation in a great meafure to fome particular language from Avhieh the illuftrations muft be produced; and that we fliould prefer the Eng- lijh language for this purpofe can excite no Avonder, as it is a preference Avhich to every tongue is due from thofe by whom it is fpoken. We truft, hoAvever, that the principles which we thall eftablilh Avill be found to apply umverfally ; and that our inquiry, though princi¬ pally illuftrated from the Englijh language, Avill be an inquiry into philofiophical or umverfal grammar. Chap. I. Of the Noun or Sulfiantive. 13. Nouns are all thofe words by which objetts or The noua fubfiances are denominated, and winch diftinguifh Mcwz defined* from one another, without marking either quantity, qua¬ lity, atiion, or relation. The fubjlantive or noun is the name of the thing fpoken of, and in Greek and Latin is called name ; for it Is evofix in the one, and nomen in the other 5 and if in Englifti avc had called it the name rather than the noun, the appellation Avould per¬ haps have been more proper, as this laid Avord, being ufed only in grammar, is more liable to be mifunder- fiood than the other, which is in confiant and familiar ufe. That nouns or the names of things muft make a part of every language, and that they muft have been the Avords firft fuggelted to the human mind, ay ill not be difputed. Men could not fpeak of themfelves or of any thing elfe, Avithout having names for themfelves and the various objects Avith which they are liirrounded.. Noav, as all the objects Avhich exift muft be either in the fame ftate in Avhich they were produced by nature, or changed from their original ftate by c.rt, or abfiratt- ed from fubftances by the poAvers of imagination, and T3iffcreHfc. conceived by the mind as having at leaft the capacity kinds of of being characterized by qualities 5 this naturally fug- nouns, gefts a divifion of nouns into natural, as man, vege¬ table, tree, &c, artificial, as houfe, /hip, watch, &c. and abstract, as wlutenefs, motion, temperance, &c. 14. But the diverfity of objefts is fo great, that had each individual a difintt and proper name, it Avould be impoflible for the moft tenacious memory, during the courfe of the longeft life, to retain even the nouns of T- the narroAveft language. It has therefore been found Nouns ge- expedient,. Avhen a number of tilings referable each ncra' termS* other in fome important particulars, to arrange them all under one fpecies ; to Avhich is given a name that belongs equally to the whole fpecies, and to each in¬ dividual comprehended under it. Thus the Avord man denotes a fpecies of animals, and is equally applicable to every human being : The Avord horfe denotes another fpecies of animals, and is equally applicable to every in¬ dividual of that fpecies of quadrupeds ; but it cannot be applied to the fpecies of men, or to any individual comprehended under that fpecies. We find, hoAvever, that there are fome qualities in which feveral fpe¬ cies rcfemble each other ; and therefore avc refer them to a higher order called & genus, to Avhich avc give a name that is equally applicable to every fpecies and every individual comprehended under it. Thus, men and horfes and all living things on earth refemble each «ther in this refpecl, that they have life. We refer them Chap. 1. G R A Noun. them therefore to the genus called animal; and this word belongs to every fpecies of animals, and to each individual animal. Xhe fame clafhfication is made both of artificial and abJlraEl fubftances •, of each of which there are genera, fpecies, and individuals. Thus in na¬ tural fubftances, animal, vegetable, and fojjil, denote GENERA 5 man, horfe, tree, metal, a SPECIES ; and Alex¬ ander, Bucephalus, oak, gold, are individuals. In arti¬ ficial fubftances, edifice is a genus ; houfe, church, tower, are SPECIES j and the Vatican, St Paul's, and the Tower of London, are INDIVIDUALS. In ahfraB fubftances, mo¬ tion and virtue are GENERA j flight and temperance are species 5 the flight of Mahomet and temperance in wine are individuals. By arranging fubftances in this man¬ ner, and giving a name to each genus and fpecies, the nouns neceffary to any language are comparatively few and eafily acquired : and when we meet with an object unknown to us, we have only to examine it with atten¬ tion ; and comparing it with other objects, to refer it to the genus or fpecies which it moft nearly refembles. By this contrivance we fupply the want of a proper name for the individual; and fo far as the refemblance is complete between it and the fpecies to which it is re¬ ferred, and of which wre have given it the name, we may converfe and reafon about it without danger of error : Whereas had each individual in nature a difintl and proper name, words would be innumerable and in- comprehenfible j and to employ our labours in lan¬ guage, would be as idle as that ftudy of numberlefs written fymbols which has been attributed to the Chinefe. i f Although nouns are thus adapted to exprefs not the individuals but the genera or fpecies into which fub¬ ftances are clafted *, yet, in fpeaking of thefe fubftances, bers*^ nUm" w^et^er natural, artificial, or abflracl, all men muft have occafion to mention fometimes one of a kind, and fome- times more than one. In every language, therefore, nouns muft admit of fome variation in their form, to denote unity and plurality ; and this variation is called number. Thus in the Englifli language, when we fpeak of a {ingle place of habitation, we call it a houfe ; but if of more, we call them houfes. In the firft of thefe cafes the noun is faid to be in the Jingular, in the laft cafe it is in the plural, number. Greek nouns have alfo a dual number to exprefs two individuals, as have likewife fome Hebrew nouns ; but this variation is evidently not effential to language *, and it is perhaps doubtful whe¬ ther it ought to be conftdered as an elegance -or a defor¬ mity. 16. But although number be a natural accident of nouns, it can only be conftdered as ejfential to thofe which denote genera or fpecies. Thus we may have occafion to fpeak of one animal or of many animals, of one man or of many men ; and therefore the nouns ani¬ mal and man muft be capable of exprefling plurality as Avell as unity. But this is not the cafe with refpect to the proper names of individuals : for we can only fay Xenophon, Ariflotle, Plato, &c. in the.Jingular; as, were any one of thefe names to affume a plural form, it would ceafe to be the proper name of an individual, and become the common name of a fpecies. Of this, indeed, we have fome examples in every language. When a proper name is confidered as a general appellative un¬ der which many others are arranged, it is then no longer the name of an individual but of a fpecies, and as I4 . 'Hie origin of the fin- gular and *S M M A R. fuch admits of a plural; as the Ccefurs, the Howards, the Pelhams, the Montagues, &c.: but Socrates can ne¬ ver become plural; fo long as we know of no more than one man of that name. The reafon of all this will be obvious, if we confider, that every genus may be found whole and entire in each of its fpecies ; for man, horfe, and dog, are each of them an entire and complete ani¬ mal : and every fpecies may be found whole and entire in each of its individuals ; for Socrates, Plato, and Xe¬ nophon, are each of them completely and entirely a man. Hence it is, that every genus, though ONE, is multiplied into MANY ; and every fpecies, though ONE, is alfo multiplied into MANY ; by reference to thofe be- , ings which are their fubordinates ; But as no individual has any fuch fubordinates, it can never in ftridftnefs be confidered as many *, and fo, as well in nature as in name, is truly an INDIVIDUAL which cannot admit of number. 17. Beftdes number, another charafleriftic, viftble in Of gender, fubftances, is that of sex. Every fubftance is either male or female ; or both male and female ; or neither one nor the other. So that with refpeft to fexes and their negation, all fubflances conceivable are comprehended un¬ der this fourfold confideration, which language would be very imperfect if it could not exprefs. Now the exiftence of hermaphrodites being rare, it not doubtful, and language being framed to anfvver the ordinary oc- cafions of life, no provifion is made, in any of the tongues with which we are acquainted, for exprefling, other wife than by a name made on purpofe, or by a peri- phrafls, duplicity oifex. With regard to this great nat ural charafteriftic, grammarians have made only a threefold diftinftion of nouns : thofe which denote males are faid to be of the mafculine gender ; thofe which denote females, of the feminine ; and thofe which denote fub¬ ftances that admit not offex, are faid to be neuter or of neither gender. All animals have fex •, and therefore the names of all animals ftiould have gender. But the fex of all is not equally obvious, nor equally worthy of attention. In thofe fpecies that are moft common, or of which the male and the female are, by \A\Axji%e,form, colour, or other outward circumftances, eminently diflin- guifhed. the male is fometimes called by one name, which is mafculine ; and the female by a different name, which is feminine. Thus in Englifti we fay, hufband, wife; king, queen ; father, mother ; fan, daughter, Sec. In others of fimilar diftinSlion, the name of the male is applied to the female only by prefixing a fyllable or by altering the termination j as man, woman; lion, lionefs; emperor, emprefs, anciently eniperefs ; mafler, miflrefs, anciently muflerefs, See. When the fex of any animal is not ob¬ vious, or not material to be known, the fame name, in fome languages, is applied, without variation, to all the fpecies, and that name is faid to be of the common gender. Thus in Latin bos albus is a ivhite ox, and bos alba a white cow. Diminutive infects, though they are doubtlefs male and female, feem to be confidered in the Englifti language as if they were really creep¬ ing things. No man, fpeaking of a woi'm, would fay he creeps, but it creeps, upon the ground. But although the origin oi genders is thus clear and obvi¬ ous \ yet the Englifti is the only language, with which we are acquainted, that deviates not, except in a very few inftances, from the order of nature. Greek and Latin, and many of the modern tongues, have nouns, B 2 fome I 2 Noun. mafculme, fome feminine, which denote fub- cances where fex never had exigence. Nay, fome languages are fo particularly defective in this refpeft, as to clats every objeft, inanimate as well as animate, under either the mafcuhne or the feminine gender, as they have no neuter gender for thofe which are of neither fex. I Ins is the cafe with the Hebrew, French, Italian, and bpamjh. But the Englijh, ftriftly following the order of nature, puts every noun which denotes a male ani¬ mal, and no other, in the mafeuhne gender 3 every name of a female ■animal, in the feminine; and every animal whofe fex is not obvious, or known, as well as every inanimate objeft whatever, in the neuter gender. And this gives our language an advantage above mod others m the poetical and rhetorical ftyle : for when nouns naturally neuter are converted into mafeuline and feminine, the perfonifcation is more diftinelly and more forcibly marked. (See Personification). Some very learned and ingenious men have endeavoured, by what they call a more fubtle kind of reafoning, to dif- eern even'A things without fex a diftant analogy to that naferal distinction, and to account for the names of ^animate fubftances being, in Greek and Latin, 771«feu. me and feminine. But iuch fpeculations are wholly fanciful 3 and the principles upon which they proceed are overturned by an appeal to fails. Many" of the ^ubfiances that, in one language, have mufculine names, nave in others names that are feminine; which could not be the cafe were this matter regulated by reafon or nature. Indeed for this, as well as many other ano¬ malies in language, no other reafon can' be aligned than that cujlom — gramma r. r. , . r Chap. T, ten the feme will, that of an or; bnt the (hope of the one Nm,n. !6 Q-ueni Penes arbitrium eft, et jus, et norma, loquendi. SxeSsm°f I?' Jt haS been alread7 obferved that moft nouns are the names, not of individuals, but of whole dalles of objects termed genera and fpecies (b). In claffing a num¬ ber of individuals under one fpecies, ire contemplate only thofe qualities which appear to be important, and in which the feveral individuals are found to a^ree ab- ftrailing the mind from the confideration of all thofe which appear to be lefs effential, and which in one in¬ dividual may be fuch as have nothing exa&ly fimilar in any other individual upon earth. Thus, in claffinu the individuals which are comprehended under the fpe¬ cies denominated horfe, we pay no regard to their co- lour or the Ji-ze ; becaufe experience teaches us, that no particular colour or lize is effential to that individual living creature, and that there are not perhaps upon earth two horfes whofe colour and lize are exacflij alike. But the qualities Avhich in this procefs we take into vie iv, are the generalJhape, the fjmmetry, and proportion of the parts ; and in fhort every thing which appears evidently effential to the life of the individual and the propagation of the race- All thefe qualities are ftrikingly fimilar in all the individuals which we call horfes, and as ftrikingly ditlimilar from the correfponding qualities of every ol/icr individual animal. The colour of a horfe is of- . . , . ~luc nutue 01 me one animal, tne fymmetry and proportion of his parts, are to- 1 taily different from thofe or the other 3 nor could any nan be led to oafs the two individuals under the fame fpecies. It is by a fimilar procefs that we afeend from one feC!eSn t0 anotllTcr’ and throu£h all the fpecies to the highest genus. In each fpecies or genus in the afeendimr icnes fewer particular qualities are attended to than were confidered as effential tto the genus or fpecies immediately below it; and oiw conceptions become more and more general as the particular qualities, which are the obieds oi them, become/emer in number. The ule or* general term,.therefore, can reeal to the mind only the common qua 1 its of the clefs, the genus or Ipecies which it re- prelents. But we have frequent occafion to fpeak of individual objeds. In doing this, we annex to the pv- i C5rt.ain words fignifeantof particular qualities, which difcnmmate the objed of which we fpeak, from every other individual of the clafs to which it beWs and of which the general term is the common name. For inftance, m advertifing a thief, we are obliged to men- tion his height, complexion, gait, and whatever may ferve to diltinguim him from all other men. . Proee^s mind in rendering her coneep- tmmparticular, is indeed exadiy the reverfe of that by which fhe generalises them. For as in the pro- cels of generalisation, fhe abfraf.is from her ideas of anv number oi fpecies certain qualities in which they differ from each other, and of the remaining qualities in which they agree, conftitutes the firft genus in the ajcenatng fenes 3 fo when fie wifhes to make her con¬ ceptions more particular, flic annexes to her idea of any genus thofe qualities or circumftances which ivere bc- fore abftraded from it 3 and the genus, with this annexa- /z&tz, confhtutes the hx^ fpecies in the defending feries. In like manner, when (lie wifhes to defeend from anv Jpectes to an individual, fhe has only to annex to the idea of the. fpecies thofe particular qualities which dif- crimmate the individual intended from the other indivi¬ duals of the fame kind. This particularising operation of the mind points out the manner of applying the general terms of language mr the purpofe of expreffing particular ideas. For as tne mind, to limit a general idea, connects that idea with the idea of fome particular circumf ance ; fo language, as we have already obferved, in order to limit a general term, conneds that term with the word denoting the particular circumftance. Thus, in order to particula¬ rize the ideet' of horfe, the mind conneds that general idea with the circumftance, fuppofe, of whitenefs; and in order to particularise the word horfe, language conneds that word with the term white: and fo in other inftan- cos.—Annexation, therefore, or the conneding of ge¬ neral words or terms in language, fits it for expfefffng particular conceptions 3 and this muft hold alike o0od m all languages. But the methods of denoting this an¬ nexation are various in various tongues. In Enfifb and moft modern languages we commonly ufe for this pur¬ pofe (B) Ij is almoft needlefs to obferye that the words a.nd fpecies, and the phrafes higher genus and lower \lCleSl a^fttakei’ her® 111 |-he logical fenfe 3 and not as the .words genus, fpecies, order, clafs, anf often employed ©y natuiahfts. lor a farther account of the mental procefs of generalization, fee Logic and Metaphysics. " Chap. I. G R A Noun. *7 , Cafes, the marks of annexation 18 The im¬ port of the genitive cafe. 19 Of the da¬ tive and accufativs cafes. pofe little words, which we, have chofen to flyle par- ' tides ; and in the Greek and Latin languages, the cafes of nouns anfwer the fame end. 19. Cafes, therefore, though they are accidents of nouns not abfolutely neceffanj, have been often confidered as fuch ; and they are certainly worthy of our exami¬ nation, fince there is perhaps no language in which fome cafes are not to be found, as indeed without them or their various powers no language could readily an¬ fwer the purpofes of life. All the oblique cafes of nouns (if we except the vo¬ cative) are merely marks of annexation; but as the • conneElions or relations fubfiihing among objeBs are very various, fame cafes denote one kind of relation, and fame another. We (hall endeavour to inveftigate the connexion which each cafe denotes, beginning with the genitive.—This is the mof general of all the cafes, and gives notice that fame connection indeed fubfifts be¬ tween two objects, but does not point out the particular kind of connection. That we mutt infer, not from our nature or termination of the genitive itfe/f but from our previous knowledge of the objeBs conneBed. That the genitive denotes merely relation in general, might be pro¬ ved by adducing innumerable examples, in which the relations exprened by this cafe are different; but we fliall content ourfelves with one obfervation, from which the truth of our opinion will appear beyond difpute. If an expreffion be ufed in which are, conne£ted by the genitive cafe, two words fignificant of objects be¬ tween which a twofold relation may lubfiil, it will be found irapoflible, from the exprejjion, to determine which of thefe two relations is the true one, which mutt be gathered wholly from the context. Thus, for example, from the phrafe injuria regis, no man can know whe¬ ther the injury mentioned be an injury fufferedor an in¬ jury infliBed by the king : but if the genitive cafe no¬ tified any particular relation, no fuch ambiguity could exift. This cafe therefore gives notice, that two ob- jedts ?ixe, fomehow or other (c), connected, but it marks not the particular fort of connexion. Hence it may be tranflated by our particle of, which will be feen afterwards to be of a fignification equally general. The dative and accufative cafes appear to have nearly the fame meaning : each of them denoting apportion, or the junction of one objeB with another. Thus when any one fays, Compqro Virgilium Homer0, Homer and Virgil arc conceived to be placed befide one another, in order to their being compared ; and this fort of connedtion is denoted bv the dative cafe. In like manner, when it is faid latus humeros, breadth is conceived as joined to or connedted in appofition with fhoulders •, and the ex- prefiion may be tranflated “ broad at the {boulders.” This apportion of two objedls may happen either without previous motion, or in confequence of it. In the foregoing inftances no motion is prefuppofed; but if one fay, Mi fit aliquos fubfdio eorum, the appoftion is there in confequence of motion. In like manner, when M M A R. it is faid, ProfeBus ejl Rotndm, his appof tion with Rome Noun, is conceived as the effeB of his motion thither. 1——y—— From this idea of the accufative, the reafon is obvious why the objedt after the adtive verb is often put in that cafe \ it is becaufe the adtion is fuppofed to proceed from the agent to the patient. But the fame thing happens with refpedt to the dative cafe, and for the fame reafon. Thus, Antomus Icejit Ciceronem, and Anto¬ nias nocuit Ciceroni, are expreflxons of the fame import, and in each the action of hurting is conceived as pro¬ ceeding from Antony to Cicero j which is finely illu- ftrated by the paflive form of fuch expreflions, w here the procedure above mentioned is exprefsly marked by the prepofition ah: Cicero nocetur, Cicero la;ditur AB An¬ tonio. It is therefore not true, that “ the accufative is that cafe, at lead; the only cafe, which to an efficient nominative and a verb of adtion fubjoins either the ef- fedt or the paflive fubjebt ; nor is the dative the only cafe which is formed to exprefs relations tending to itfelf.” The only thing ejfential to thefe two cafes is to denote the appoftion ovjunBion of one objeB with ano¬ ther ; and this they do nearly, if not altogether, in the fame manner, although from the cufom of language they may not be indifferently fubjoined to the fame verb. The Greek language has no ablative cafe: but in of the ab- the Latin, where it is ufed, it denotes concomitancy, orlativc cafe, that one thing accompanies another. From this concomi¬ tancy we fometimes draw an inference, and fometimes not. For example, when it is faid, Templum clamore petebant, clamour is reprefented as concomitant with their going to the temple 5 and here no inference is draw n: but from the phrafe palleo metu, although nothing more is exprejfed than that palenefs is a concoqiitant of the fear, yet vre inftantly infer that it is alfo the effeB of it. In moft inftances where the ablative is ufed, an inference is drawn, of which the foundation is feme natural eon- nedtion obferved to fubfift between the objeBs thus con¬ nedted in language. When this inference is not meant to be drawn, the prepoftion is commonly added 3 as, interfeBus ef CUM gladio, “ he was {lain with a fword about him 3” interfeBus ef gladio, “ he was llain w ith a fword as the infrument of his death.” The remaining cafes, which have not been noticed, Of the no- are the nominative and the vocative. Thefe are in moft mi native inftances alike in termination, which makes it probable a.n(1 voca" that they were originally one and the fame cafe. ThetlVC CafcS* foundation of this conjedture will appear from confi- dering the life to which each of thefe cafes is applied. The nominative is employed to call up the idea of any objeB in the mind of the hearer. But when a man hears his own name mentioned, his attention is inftant¬ ly roufed, and he is naturally led to Hfen to what is ta be faid. Hence, when a man meant particularly to foheit one’s attention, he would naturally pronounce that perfon’s name ; and thus the nominative cafe would pafs into a vocative, of which the ufe is always tofolicil attention (d). 20. The- (c) The Greek grammarians feem to have been aware of the nature of this cafe when they called it dura, yinxyi or the general cafe: of which name the Latin grammarians evidently miftook the meaning when they tranflated' k cafus genitivus, or the generative cafe ; a name totally foreign from its nature. (d) The chief objedtion to this conjedture, that the nominative and vocative were originally the fame cafe, is- taken from the Latin tongue, in which the nouns of the fecond declenfion ending in us terminate their voca¬ tive ^4 , No™- < 20. The Greek and Latin among the ancient, and the 22 German among the modern languages, exprefs different Import of connexions or relations of one tiling rvith another by the Greek cafes. In Englijh this is done for the moft part by caflLatin PrePofltj™s i but tbe Englifh, being derived from the lame origin as the German, that is, from the Teutonic, has at leaft orje variation of the fubftantive to anfvver the^ fame purpofe. lor inftance, the relation of pof- fejfion, or belonging, is often expreffed by a different end¬ ing, of the fubftantive, which may be well called a cafe. 23 This cafe anfwers nearly to the genitive cafe in Latin j inEn^ifl ^ as ^lut not a denomination fignificant of the na- to demote tUre .°^ t,ie cabe ln any language, it may perhaps in pofleffion. Englifti be more properly called the poffejjive cafe. Thus, God's grace, anciently Godis grace, is the grace belong¬ ing to or in the pojj'ejf on of God : and may be likewife expreffed by means of the prepofition ; thus,—the grace of God. Although the word Godis is as evidently an inflexion of the noun God as the word Dei is an inflexion of Deus, there are grammarians who have denied that in Englijh there is any true inflexion of the original noun, and who have faid that the noun with the addition of that fyllable, which we confider as the fgn of a cafe, ceafes to be a noun, and becomes a definitive; a word which with them is devoid of fignification. Thus, in the expreflion Alexander's houfe, the word Alexander's Hands not as a noun, but as an article or definitive, fer- ving to afeertain and point out the individuality of the houfe. But this is a palpable miftake : the word Alexander's ferves not to point out the individuality of the houfe, but to fhow to whom the houfe belongs ; and is therefore bevond difpute, not an article, but a noun, In the poffefiive cafe. Again, when we fay St Peter's at Rome and St Paul's at London, the words St Peter's and St Paul's are neither articles, nor, as has been ab- furdly imagined, the proper names of edifices, like the Rotunda or the Circus ; but they are in the pojfeffive cafe, the names of the two apoftles to whom the churches were dedicated, and to whom they are fuppofed to belong. But that this, which we have called the is really not fo, muft be evident, it is faid, becaufe there are certain cireumftanees in which it cannot be fubfti- tuted for the noun with the prepofithm prefixed. Thus, though a man may fay, I fpeak OF Alexander, I write OF Ceefar, I think OF Pompey; he cannot fay, I fpeak Alexander's, I write Ccefar's, or I think Pompey's. This is indeed true, but it is nothing to the purpofe : for though I may fay, Loquor BE Alexandra, Scribo BE Cafare, Cogito BE Pompeio ; I cannot fay, Lo^UOl? A- lexandn, Scribo Ccefuris, or Cogito Pompeii: and there¬ fore all that can be inferred from this argument is, ■that as the Latin genitive is not always of the fame im¬ port with the prepofition de, fo the Englifli pofifcffive is not always of the fame import with the prepofition of. Upon the whole, then, we may conclude, that Englifli nouns admit of one inflexion } and that though cafes Chap. II, are not fo effential to nouns as gender and number, no Article, language can be wholly without them or their various —* powers. Chap. II. Of Articles or Definitives. 21. The intention of language is to communicate thought, or to exprefs thole ideas which are fuggefted to us by our fenies external and internal. The ideas firfi fuggefted to us are thofe of pain and pleafure, and of the objeXs with which we are furrounded; and therefore the words firfi learned muft be nouns, or the names of objeXs natural, artificial, and abitradl. Every objeX about which the human mind can be converiant is ftriXly and properly fpeaking particular; tor all things in nature differ from one another in numberlefs refpeXs, which, not to mention the idea of feparate exiftence, fo circumftance and individuate them, that no one thing can be laid to be another. Now the ufe of language being to exprefs our ideas or conceptions of thele objeXs, it might naturally be expected that every object ftiould be diftinguilhed by a proper name. This would indeed be agreeable to the truth of things, but we have alreadj feen that it is altogether impracti¬ cable. ObjeXs have therefore been claiied into genera and fpecies; and names given, not to each individual, but to each genus vend fpecies. By this contrivance of language, tve are enabled to afeertain in feme meafure any indivi¬ dual that may occur, and of which we know’ not the proper name, only by referring it to the genus or fpecies to which it belongs, and calling it by the general or fpecific name ; but as there is frequent occafion to di- ftinguifti individuals of the fame fpecies from one ano¬ ther, it became neceffary to fall upon feme expedient to mark this diftinXion. In many languages general and fpecific terms are modified and reftridled by three orders of Avords; the article, the adjective, and the oblique cases of nouns. The cafes of nouns Aveq-hc reccf- have already confidered : the adjeBive will employ ourfity and ute attention aftenvards : at prefent our obfervations areol lhe ar- confined to the article j a Avord fo very necefiary, that wnthout it or feme equivalent invention men could not employ nouns to any of the purpofes of life, or in¬ deed communicate their thoughts at all. As the bu- finefs of articles is to enable us, upon occafion, to em¬ ploy ^//era/ terms to denote particular objetfs, they muft be confidered in combination Avith the general terms, as merely fubjlitutes for proper names. They have, horv- ever, been commonly called definitives; becaufe they ferve to define and afeertain any particular objelt, fo as to dfiingvijh it from the other objeSls of the general cltfs to which it belongs, and, of courfe, to denote its individuality. Of Avords framed for this purpofe, Avhether they have by grammarians been termed articles or not, we knoAV of no language that is wholly deftitute. The nature of them may be explained as follows. 22. An objedl occurs Avith which, as an individual, Ave are totally unacquainted ; it has a head and limbs, and GRAM M A R. Eve in e. But this is eafily accounted for. The s in fuch Avords Avas often dropt, as appears from the fcan- mng of old Latin poetry ; and Avhen this Avas done, the u being fhort, would naturally in pronunciation pafs intv ■A a Eke fliort voavcI ; and thus, in the vocative cafe, e would in time be Avritten inftead of u. G R Ai'ticte- 2 5 Two ar* tides. A M and Chap, TTr and appear1? to polTefs tKe potvers of felf-motion fenfation : we therefore refer it to its proper and call it a clog, a horfe, a lion, or the like. li it belongs to none of the fpecies with which we are acquainted, it cannot be called by any of their names we then refer it to the genus, and call it an animal. But this is not enough. The objeft at which we are looking, and which we want to diftinguifh, is not a fpecies or a genus, but an individual. Ox what kind ? Known or unknown ? Seen now for the firjl time, or feen before and now remembered ? This is one of the 'inftances in which we (hall difcover the ufe of the two articles A and THE : for, in the cafe fuppofed, the ar¬ ticle A refpefts our primary perception, and denotes an individual as unknown ; whereas THE refpefts oarfecon- darij perception, and denotes individuals as known. lo explain this by an example : I fee an objc£f pafs by which I never faw till now. What do 1 fay ? There goes A beggar with A long beard, h he man departs, and returns a week after: What do I then fay ? There goes THE beggar with THE long beard. Here the article only is changed, the reft remains unaltered. ^ et mark the force of this apparently minute change. The indi¬ vidual once vague is now recognifed as fomething known ; and that merely by the efficacy of this latter article, which tacitly iniinuates a kind of previous acquaintance, by referring a prelent perception to a like perception already paft. This is the explanation of the articles A and THE as given by the learned Mr Harris, and thus far what he lays on the fubjeft is certainly juft *, but it is not true that the article THE always infinuates a previous ac¬ quaintance, or refers a prefent perception to a like perception already paft.—I am in a room crowded wirh company, of which the greater part is to me totally unknown. I feel it difficult to breathe from the groff- nefs of the inclofcd atmofphere; and looking towards the window, I fee in it a perlon whom 1 never faw be¬ fore. I inftantly fend my compliments to THE gentle¬ man in the window, and requeft, that, if it be not incon¬ venient, he will have the goodnefs to let into the room a little frefti air. Of this gentleman I have no previous acquaintance; my prefent perception of him is my pri- niarij perception, and yet it would have been extremely improper to fend my compliments, &c. to A gentleman in the window.— Again, there would be no impropriety in faying—“ A man whom I faw yefterday exhibiting a fhow to the rabble, was this morning committed to jail charged with the crime of houfebreaking.” Not- with(landing the authority, therefore, of Mr Harris and his mafter Apollonius, we may venture to affirm, that it is not effential to the article A to refpeft a pri¬ mary perception, or to the article THE to indicate a pre- ejlabli/hed acquaintance. Such may indeed be the manner in which thele words are moft frequently ufed •, but we fee that there are inftances in which they may be ufed differently. What then, it may be allied, is the im¬ port of each article, and in what refpefls do they differ ? 23. We anfwer, that the articles A and THE are both of them definitives, as by being prefixed to the names of genera and fpecies they fo circumfcribe the la¬ titude of thofe names as to make them for the moft part denote individuals. A noun or fubfiantive, without M A R. any article to limit it, is taken in its widcft fenfe. Thus, the word man means all mankind $ “ The proper ftudy of mankind is man where mankind and man may change places without making any alteration in the fenfe. But let either of the articles of which we are treating be prefixed to the word man, and that word is immediately reduced from the name of a whole genus to denote only a Jingle indi¬ vidual; and inftead of the noble truth which this line afferts, the poet will be made to fay, that the proper ftudy of mankind is not the common nature which is diffufed through the whole human race, but the man¬ ners and caprice of one individual. Thus far therefore the two articles agree; but they differ in this, that though they both limit the fpecific name to fame indi¬ vidual, the article A leaves the individual itfelf unafeer- tained; whereas the article THE afeertains the individual 2() alfo, and can be prefixed to the fpecific name only The indc- vhen an individual is intended, of which fomething may finite and be predicated that diftinguhhes it from the other indi-tiie defillltc* viduals of the fpecies. Thus, if I fay—A man is fit for treafons, my affertion may appear ftrange and vague j but the fentence is complete, and v^ants nothing ta make it intelligible : but if I fay—THE man is ft for treafons, I fpeak nonfenfe 5 for as the article THE (hows that I mean fame particular man, it will be impoffible to difcover my meaning till I complete the fentence, and predicate fomething of the individual intended to diftinguiih him from other individuals. “ The man that hath not mufic in himfelf, &c. “ Is'fit for treafons.” A man, therefore, means feme one or other of the human race indefinitely ; THE man means, definitely, that par¬ ticular man who is fpoken of: the former is called the indefinite, the latter the definite, article. ^ The two articles differ likewife in this refpeift, that The dif- as the article A ferves only to feparate one individual ob-ference be- jeft from the general clafs to which it belongs, it cannottwecn tliefe be applied to plurals. It has indeed the fame fignifica-two’ tion nearly with the numerical word one ; and in French and Italian, the fame word that denotes- unity is alfo the article of which we now treat. But the effence of the article THE being to define objedls, by pointing them out as thofe of which fomething is affirmed or denied which is not affirmed or denied of the other objefts of the fame clafs, it is equally applicable to both numbers •, for things may be predicated of one SET ofi men, as well as of a Jingle man, which cannot be predi¬ cated of other men. The ufe and import of each article will appear from the following example : “ Man was made for Society, and ought to extend his good-will to all men ; but a man will naturally entertain a more particular regard for the men with whom he has the moft frequent intercourfe, and enter into a dill clofer union with the man whofe temper and difpofition fuit bed with his own.” We have faid, that the article A cannot be applied to plurals, becaufe it denotes unity : but to this rule there is apparently a remarkable exception in the ufe of the adjedlives few and many (the latter chiefly with the word great before it), which, though joined with pluralfubfiantives, yet admit of the Jingular article A : as*. G R A M M A as, a few men, a great many men. The reafon of this is mamfeft from the effeft which the article has in thefe R. phia.es • it means a fmall or a great number collec- ive/y taken, to which it gives the idea of a whole, ihat is, of unity. J.hus like wife a hundred, a thoufand, is one whole number, an aggregate of many collectively taken, and therefore Hill retains the article a thodirh joined as an adjective to a plural fubftantive: as,°« Hundred years. I he exception therefore is only appa- denotc^ ^ tliat tlie ar[icle A wiverfally 24. The indefinite article is much lefs ufeful than the other ; and therefore the Greek and Hebrew languages have it not, though they both have a definite article, in languages of which the nouns, adje&ives, and verbs, have mfiexmn, no miftake can arife from the want of the indefinite article; becaufe it can always be known by the terminations of the noun and the verb, and by the circumftances predicated of the noun, whether a whole Jpecies or one individual be intended. But this is not the cafe in Englilh. In that language, the adje&ives having no variation with refpe& to gender or number, and the tenfes of the verbs being for the mod part the lame in both numbers, it might be often doubtful, had We n.ot th® ^finite article, whether the fpecific name was intended to exprefs the whole fpecies or only in. dividual. Lhus if we fay in Englilh, “ Man was born fentfrom God, we muft be underilood to mean that the birth of every man is from God, becaufe to the ipecihc term the indefinite article is not prefixed. Yet the words Eymlo uTnrxXy.wos Gnov convey no Inch meaning to any perfon acquainted with the Greek language 5 as the word without any article is re it rifted to an individual by its concord With the verb and the participle 5 and the fenfe of the paiiage is, a man was born (or ex i/led) fent from God. But though the Greeks have no article correfpondent to the article a, yet nothing can be more nearly rela¬ ted than their‘o to our the, *0 the king; To ^v—the gift In one refpeft, indeed, the Greek and Engliih articles differ. The, former is varied ac- ■ corchng to the gender and number of the noun with which it is affociated, being i—mafeuline, feminine -ra—neuter ; and ol, ul, ret, in the plural number : where¬ as the Englilh article fuffers no change, being invariably the before nouns of every gender and in both numbers. . . re. are’ however, fome modern languages which in imitation of the Greek, admit of a variation of their artmle which relates to gender 5 but this cannot be confidered as efijential to this fpecies of words and it may be queftioned whether it be an improvement to the language. _ In tongues of which the nouns have no inflexion, ^ can on^y ^erve to perplex and confufe, as it always prefents a particular idea df fex where in many cales it is not neceffary. J The articles already mentioned are allowed to articles in °e hriftly and properly fuch by every grammarian : the Englill) bat there are h)me words, fuch as this, that, any, fome language other, Sn.c. which are generally faid to be fome- times aitiaes and fometimes pronouns, according to the different modes of ufing them. That words*Ihould change tlieir nature in this manner, fo as to belong- fometimes to one part of fpeech, and fometimes to ant tier, mull to every unprejudiced perfon appear very extraordinary j and if it were a faft, language would 5 27 A greater number of articles in than is commonly fuppofed. v Chap. IT, be a thing fo equivocal, that all inquiries into its na- Article. ture upon principles of fcience and reafon would be ‘ v— vain. But we cannot perceive any fuch fluftnation in any word whatever; though we know it to be a gene¬ ral charge brought againit words of almoft every de¬ nomination of which we have already feen one initance in Wwpojfejfive caje of nouns, and lhall now fee another 'articles WhlCh 316 Commoilly called, pronominal if it be true, as we acknowledge it to be, that the genuine pronoun always Jlands by if elf affuming the power Myoun, and fupplying its place, then is ifeer- tam that the worth//at, that, any, fome, &c. can never be pronouns. W'e are indeed told, that when we fay this is virtue, give me THAT, the words this and that are pronouns; but that when we fay, this hap it is vir- tue THAT man defrauded me, then are they articles or definitives. This, however, is evidently a miftake oc- caiioned by overlooking thofe abbreviations in con- ftruftion which are frequent in every language, and which, on account of that very frequency, have per¬ haps escaped the attention of grammarians whofe fa- gacity has been fuccefsfully employed on matters lels obvious. \\ hen we fay this is virtue, it is evi¬ dent that we communicate no intelligence till we add a fdbjlantive to the word this, and declare what is vir¬ tue. I he word this can therefore in no inftance af- lume the power of a noun, finee the noun to which it relates, though for the fake of difpatch it may be omit¬ ted in writing or converfation, muft always be ftmplied by the mind of the reader or hearer, to make the fen- tf vvn lntel%ikle, or this itfelf of any importance.- When.we have viewed fpeech analyfed, we may then coniider it as compounded. And here, in the firft place we may contemplate Xhtitfy nth efts, which by combining limple terms produces a truth j then by combining two truths produces a third ; and thus others and others in continued demonftration, till we are led, as by a road to the regions of fcience. Now this is that fuperior and moft excellent fynthefis which alone applies itfelf to our intelleft or reafon, and which to conduft accordino- to rule conftitutes the art of logic. After THIS we mav turn to thofe inferior compofitions which are produftive Ox the pathetic,” &c.—Blere, if any where, the word this may be thought to Jland by itfelf, and to affume the power of a noun ; but let any man complete the conftruftion of each fentence, and he will perceive that this is no more than a defnite article. Thus “ we may contemplate that fynthefis which by combining Ample terms produces a truth ; then by combining two tiuths produces a third truth; and thus other truths and other truths in continued demonftration, till rve are led as by a road, into the regions of fcience. Now this’ combination of truths is that fuperior and moft excellent fynthefis which alone applies itfelf to our intelleft or reafon, and which to conduft according to rule confti- tutes the art of logic. After we have contemplated THIS art, we may turn,” Sec. The word that is generally confidered as ftill more equivocal tlian this; for it is faid to be fometimes an article, fometimes a pronoun, and fometimes a conjunction. In the following extraft it appears in all thefe capaci¬ ties ; and yet, upon refolving the paffage into parts and completing the conftruftion, it will be found to be in¬ variably a definite article.—-*1' It is neceffary to that per- feftion, Chap. IT. ORA M Articles, feclion, of v.'liicK our prefent flate is capable, that the mbul and body Ihould both be kept in aciion j that nei¬ ther the faculties of the one nor of the other be fuff’ered to grow lax or torpid for want of ufe : but neither fhouid health be purehafed by voluntary fubmiffion to ignorance, nor ihould knowledge be cultivated at the expence of health ; for that muit enable it either to give pleafure to its polfelTor, or affiftance to others.” It this long fentence be rcfolved into its conftituent parts, and the Avords be fupplied Avhich complete the conftruddion, we ihall fee the import of the Avord THAT to be preeife- ly the fame in each claufe. “ The mind and body Ihould both be kept in adfion •, THAT aciion is neceflary to THAT perfection of which our prefent itate is capa¬ ble : neither the faculties of the one nor of the other ftiould be fuffered to grow lax or torpid for Avant of ufe \ the degree of aBionproper to prevent THAT laxnefs is neceflary : but neither fhouid health be purchafed by voluntary fubmiffion to ignorance, nor ffiould knoAV- ledge be cultivated at the expence of health 5 for THAT health mult enable it either to give pleafure to its pof- fefibr, or affiftance to others.” Again : “ He that’s unfkilful Avill not tofs a ball 64 A man unfkilful (he is that} will not tofs a ball.” Here the Avord THAT, though fubitituted for Avhat is called the relative pronoun (e), ftill preferves unchan¬ ged its definitive import j and in every inftance, except Avhere it may be ufed very improperly, it will be found to be neither more nor lefs than a definite article. 26. It appears then, that if the effence of an article be to define and afeertain, the Avords this and that as well as any, fame, all, &c. which are commonly called pronominal articles, are much more properly articles than any thing elfe, and as fuch fhouid be confidered in uni- verfal grammar. Thus, when avc fay, THIS piBure I approve, but that I dflike; Avhat do we perform by the help of the words this and THAT, but bring doAvn die common appellative to denote tAVo individuals ; the one as the more near, the other as the more diftant? So Avhen we fay, some men are virtuous, but all men are mortal; Avhat is the natural effedd of this all and SOME, but to define that univerfality and particularity which would remain indefinite were A\re to take them aAA7ay ? The fame is evident in fuch fentences as, SOME fub- fiances havefenfation, OTHERS want it; Choofe way of aBing, and some men willfind fault, &c.: for here SOME, OTHER, and ANY, ferve all of them to define dif¬ ferent parts of a given whole ; SOME, to denote any in¬ determinate part; any, to denote an indefinite mode of aBion, no matter what; and OTHER, to denote the re¬ maining part, Avhen a part has been affumed already. 27. We have faid that the article is a part of fpeech fo very neceffary, that Avithout it, or fome equivalent invention (f), mankind could not communicate their thoughts , and that of Avords falling under this deferip- a8 tion, avc know of no language Avhich is Avholly deftitute. Articles in We are aAvare that thefe pofitions may be controvert- the Latin e(j . anj that the Latin may be inftanced as a language a’lgUasC' VOL. X. Part I. ' M A R. which, without articles, is not only capable of commu¬ nicating the ordinary thoughts of the fpeaker to the mind of the hearer, but .Avhich, in the hands of Cicero, Virgil, and Lucretius, was made to ferve all the pur- pofes of the moft profound philofopher, the moft im- paffioned orator, and the fublimelt poet. That the Latin has been made to ferve all thefe purpofes cannot be denied, although Lucretius and Cicero both com¬ plain, that on the iubjedl of philofiophy, Avhere the ufe of articles is mofc confpicuous, it is a deficient lan¬ guage. But fhouid we grant what cannot be demand¬ ed, that thofe Iavo great men Avere unacquainted with the poAvers of their native tongue, our pofitions avouM ftill remain urtfha.ken j for avc deny that the Latin is wholly Avithout articles. It has indeed no word of pre- cifely the fame import with our THE or the Greek ®: but the place of the indefinite article A might be al¬ ways fupplied, if neceiiary, Avith the numerical Avord Unus. It may be fo even in Englifh , tor we believe there is not a fingle inftance Avhere the Avords one man, one horfie, one virtue, might not be fubftituted for the Words a man, a horfie, a virtue, &c. without in the flighteft degree altering the fenfe of the paflage where fuch Avords occur. This fubftitution, however, can be but very feldom if ever neceflary in the Latin tongue, of Avhich the precifion is much greater than that of the Engli/h Avould be without articles 5 becaufe the oblique cafes of the Latin nouns, and the inflexion of its verbs, Avill almoft always enable the reader to deter¬ mine whether an appellative reprefents a Avhole fpecies or a fingle individual.—The Avant of the definite article the feems to be a greater defeft j yet there are feAV in- ftances in which its place, might not be fupplied by this or by THAT Avithout obfeuring the fenfe , and the Latin tongue is by no means deficient of articles correfponding to thefe tAvo. Let us fubftitute the words one and THAT for A and THE in fome of the foregoing examples, and we ffiall find, though the found may be uncouth, the. fenfe Avill remain. Thus, “ That man who hath not tnufic in himfelf, See. “ Is fit for treafons,” conveys to the mind of the reader the very fame fenti- ment Avhich the poet expreffes by the words “ the man that hath not mufic,” &c. Again, “ Man Avas made for fociety, and ought to extend his good-will to all men ; but one man Avill naturally entertain a more particular regard for thofe men with whom he has the moft frequent intercourfe, and enter into a ftill clofer union with that man whofe temper and difpofition fuit beft Avith his oAvn.” Now the Avords HIC and ILLE be¬ ing exaflly of the fame import with the words this and that ; it folloAvs, that wherever the place of the article THE may in Englifh be fupplied by this or by that, it may in Latin be fupplied by Hie or by ILLE. This is the cafe Avith refpeft to Nathan’s reproof of Da¬ vid, Avhere the definite article is indeed moft empha- tical. The original AVords might have been tranflated into Englifh, “ thou art that man,” as well as “ thou C art Article®. (e) See more of this afterwards. (f) As in the Perfian and other eaftern languages, in Avhich the place of our indefinite article is fupplied by sc termination to thofe nouns which are meant to be particularized. GRAMMA R. art the man and in in/,;, tlicy may witii the utmoll importance. Were it not aS Hie and llle arti¬ cles. propriety be rendered, “ Tu es /7/f 'hoxno.” Indeed the words me and ILLE, and we might inftance many more, though they are commonly called pronouns' are in trutli nothing but definite articles : me is evidently ixi 5 and ILLE is moft probably derived from the He¬ brew word o/, in the plural a/e / which may be tranf- lated indifferently, either the or that. But what proves beyond difpute that thefe two words are not pronouns but articles, is, that in no Angle inftance will they be found to ftand by themfelves and affume the power of nouns. For the fake of difpatch, or to avoid difagreeable repetitions, the noun may indeed be often omitted j but it is alwaysfiupphed hy the reader or hear¬ er, when hic and ILLE appear in their proper place, and are feen to be invariably definite articles. We ftiall give an example of the ufe of each word, and dif- mifs the fubjeef. In tne iirft oration againft Catiline, Cicero begins with addrefling himfelf in a very impaflioned ftyle to the traitor, who was prefent in the fenate-houfe. He then exclaims pathetically againft the manners of the age, and proceeds in thefe words: Senatus hose intelli- git, confiul videt: me t a men vivit. Vivit ? immo vero etiam in fenatum venit: fit pub/ici confilii particeps. In this paflage hic cannot be a pronoun j for from the beginning of the oration there occurs not a Angle noun of which it can poflibly fupply the place. When the orator uttered it, he was probably pointing with his finger at Catiline, and every one of his audience would fupply the noun in his own mind, as we do ivhen we tranflate it, “ Yet this traitor lives” When Vir¬ gil fays, Ille ego, qui quondam gracili modulatus avena Carmen, it is obvious that he means, I am that man, or THAT vom, who.Jung, &c. j and though we may tranflate the words “ I am he who tuned his fong,” &c. yet when we conftrue the paflage, we are under the neceflity of fupplying either vates or vir, which (hows that ille is nothing more than a deflnite article Agnifying that or ihl. It appears then, that the Latin tongue is not wholly deftitute of articles, as few cafes can occur where the Greek » and our the may not be fupplied by the words Hic and ille ; which have in our opinion been very improperly termed pronouns. If there be any fuch tales, we can only confels that the Batin language is defective ; whereas, had it no articles, it is not eafy to conceive how it could anfwer, to a cultivated people, the ordinary purpofes of fpeech. 28. The articles this and that, unlike a and the, are varied according as the noun, with which they are affociated, is in the Angular or in the plural number, 1 hus we fay—this and that man in the Angular, and thefe and thofie men in the plural. The Latin articles hic and ille, for fuch we will call them, are varied like the Greek 0, not only with the number, but alfe with the gender of their nouns. In languages, w’here the ftrufture of a fentence may be fo changed from the or¬ der of nature, as it commonly is in Greek and Latin, and where the reader is guided, not by the pofition but by the terminations of the words, to thofe which are in soncord and thofe which are not, thefe variations of the articles haye their ufe 5 but in Englifh they are of no J Chap. II, that the cuftom of the lan- Articles. guage t he forma loquendi, as Horace calls it—has' de- ' ^ termmed otherwife, there would be no more impropriety in faying this, or that men, than in faying fame men, or the men. ’ 29. As articles are by their nature deAnitives, it fol- with lows of courfe, that they cannot be united with fuch words ar- words as are m their own nature as definite as they may can- be; nor with fuch -words as, being undefinabte, cannot pro- not be uni- perly be made otherwife; but only with thofe words^ which, though indefinite, are yet capable through the ar¬ ticle of becoming definite. Hence the reafon why it is ab urd to fay, the I, or the Ihou ; becaufe nothing, as will be _ feen afterwards, can make thefe pronouns more definite than they are of themfelves j and the fame may be faid of proper names. Neither can we fay, the Both, becaufe the word Both is in its own nature ver- feftly denned. Thus if it be faid—“ I have read both poets,”—this plainly indicates a definite pair, of whom lome mention has been made already. On the con¬ trary, if it be faid, “ I have read tivo poets,” this may mean any pair out of all that ever exifted. And hence this numeral beipg in this fenfe indeflnite (as indeed are all others as well as itfelf), is forced to afifume the article whenever it would become definite. Hence alfo it is, that as two, when taken alone, has reference to feme primary and indefinite perception, while the article aLL has reference to feme perception fiecondary and definite, it is bad language to fay, two the men, as this would be blending of incompatibles, that is, it would be reprefen ting two men as defined and undefined at the fame time. On the contrary, to fay both the men, is good language ; becaufe the fubftantive cannot poflibly be lefs apt, by being deAned, to coalefee with a nume¬ ral adjefiive which is deAned as well as itfelf. So like- wife it is corredt to fay, the two men, these two men, or those tw o men } becaufe here the article, being placed at the beginning, extends its power, as w'ell through the numeral adjedtive as the fubftantive, and tends equally to define them both. 30. As feme of the above words admit of no article, becaufie they are by nature as definite as maybe; fo there are others which admit it not, becaufie they are not to be defined at all. Of this fort are all interroga- tives. If we queftion about fiuhfiances, we cannot fay, the who is this, but who is this ? And the fame as to qualities and both quantities: for we fay, without an article, WHAT sort OF, how many, how great ? Ihe reafon is, the article the refpedts beings of which we can predicate fiomething : but interrogatives refpedl beings about which rve are ignorant, and of which we can therefore predicate nothing ; for as to what we know, interrogation is fuperfluous. In a word, the natural fociators with articles are ALL THOSE COMMON APPEL- words they LATIVES WHICH DENOTE THE SEVERAL GENERA AND nalurafly species OF beings: and it may be queftioned whe-a®3C*ate'> ther, in ftridlnefs of fpeech, they are ever affociated with any other words. 31. .We have faid that proper names admit not of the article, being, in their own nature, deftnite. This is true, whilft each name is conflned to one individual; but as different perfons often go by the lame name, it is neceffary to diftinguilh thefe from one another, to prevent the ambiguity which this identity of name would otherwife cccaflon. For this purpofe we are obliged Chap. II. GRAM Articles, obliged to liave recourfe to adjeBlves or epithets. For t“’'—v1—1 ‘ example, there were two Grecian chiefs who bore the name of Ajax; and it was not without reafon that Mnejiheus ufed epithets when his intention was to dil- tinguilh the one from the other : “ If both Ajaxes cannot be fpared (laid he), at lead let mighty Telamo- nian Ajax corned’ But as epithets are diffufed through various fubjedts, in as much as the fame adjedtive may be referred to many fubftantives, it has been laid to be neceffary, in order to render both parts of fpeech equally definite, that the adjedtive itfelf ailume an ar¬ ticle before it, which may indicate a reference to fame fn'jle perfon only. It is thus we fay—Trypho THE Grammarian; Apollodorus THE Cyrenian, &c. This is the dodtrine of Mr Harris ; from which, though we have the higheft refpedt for the learning of the author, we feel ourfelves obliged to dilient. In the examples given, the article the is certainly not afiociated with the words Grammarian and Cyrenian, in the fame man¬ ner in which it is affociated with the word man in the fentence—“ The man that hath not mufic in himfelf,” &c. When we fay Apollodorus the Cyrenian, we may, without folly or impertinence, be aiked—the Cyrenian WHAT (g) ? And the moment this quell ion is anlwer- ed, it will be feen that the article defines, not an adjec¬ tive^ but a fubfantive. If the anfwer be, the Cyrenian phi/ofopher, the article the is affociated with the word philofopher, and the phrafe Apollodorus THE Cyrenian, is an abbreviation of Apollodorus THE philofopher of Cyrene. In like manner, Trypho THE grammarian, is Trypho THE grammarian writer, or Trypho THE writer of grammar. Such abbreviations are very common. We familiarly fay THE speaker, and are underftood to mean a high officer in the Britiih parliament 5 yet, as fpeaker is a name common to many men, we may, without impro¬ priety, be aiked, what fpeaker we mean ? and if fo, we mull reply, the fpeaker of the houfe of commons. But that which is eminent is fuppofed to be generally known 5 and therefore, in common language, THE speaker is deemed a fufficient defignation of him who prefides over the lower horde of parliament. Hence, by an eafy tran- fition, the definite article, from denoting reference, comes to denote eminence alfo : that is to fay, from implying an ordinary pre-acquaintance, to prefume a kind of ge¬ neral and unwerfal notoriety. Thus a king is any king j but the KING is that perfon whom we acknowledge for our fovereign, the king of Great Britain. In Greek too, as in Englilh, the article is often a mark of emi¬ nence j for THE poet meant Homer, and THE STAGY- RITE meant Ariftotle; not but that there were many poets befides Homer, and many Stugyrites bHiAcs Ari/l0tie, but none equally illullrious. 32. Before we difmifs the ARTICLE, we ffiall pro- . duce one example to Ihow the utility of this fpecies of «fwords!eS worc^s 5 which, although they may feem to be of fmall importance, yet, when properly applied, ferve to make a few general terms fufficient for expreffing, with ac¬ curacy, all the various objefts about which mankind can have oecafion to converfe. Let MAN be the general term, which I have occalion to employ for the purpofe of denoting fome particular. Let it be required to 31 The great Utility of MAR.' 19 exprefs this particular as unknown ; I fay A man Pronouns. Known ; 1 fay THE man:—Defnite; A CERTAIN man: ~v J —Indefinite; ANT man:—Prefent, and near; THIS, man :—Prefent, and at fome difiance ; THAT man :— Like to fome other ; SUCH a man :—Different from fome other; ANOTHER man :—An indefinite multitude; MANT men :—A definite multitude ; A THOUSAND men :—The ones of a multitude, taken throughout; E VER T man :—■ The fame ones taken with dfiinEhon ; EACH man :—• Taken in order; FIRST man, SECOND man, &c. :—The whole multitude of particulars taken colleclivehy ; ALL men:—The negation of thpt multitude; NO man:—- A number of particulars prefent and near; THESE men: —A t fome difiance, or oppofed to others ; THOSE men : —A number of individuals feparated fi'om another num¬ ber ; OTHER men:—A fmall indefinite number; FEW men :—A proportionally greater number ; MORE men : —A finaller number ; FEWER men :—And fo on we might go almoll to infinitude. But not to dwell longer up5n this fubjedt, we lhall only remark, “ that minute changes in PRINCIPLES lead to mighty changes in effedls j fo that PRINCIPLES are well entitled to regard, howevet trivial they may appear.” Chap. III. Of Pronouns, or Subfiantives of the fie- cond order. 33. To men who are neither intoxicated with their own abilities, nor ambitious of the honour of building new fyItems, little pleafure can accrue from differing upon points of fcience from writers of great and de- ferved reputation. In fueh circumftances a man of modelty, although he will not upon the authority of a celebrated name adopt an opinion of which he per¬ ceives not the truth, muff always advance his own no¬ tions with fome degree of diffidence, as being confcious that the truth which he cannot perceive, may be vifible to a keener and more perfpicacious eye. In thefe eir- cumltances we feel ourfelves with regard to fome of the moft celebrated writers on grammar, from whom, con¬ cerning one or two points, comparatively indeed of but little importance, we have already been compelled reluc¬ tantly to differ. In treating of pronouns we are likely to deviate dill farther from the beaten track *, but that we may not be accufed of adting the part of dogmatifts in literature, and of claiming from others that implicit confidence which we refufe to give, we ffiall date with fairnefs the commonly received opinions, point out in what refpefts we think them erroneous, affign our rea- fons for calling them in quedion, and leave our readers to judge for themfelves. The mod celebrated writer in Englidi who has treated of pronouns, and whom, fince the publication of his Hermes, mod other Avriters have implicitly followed, is Mr Harris, ayIio, after a diort introduction, proceeds thus : ^ 34. “ All converfation paffes between individuals The com- Avho will often happen to be till that indant unacquaintedmonly fup* with each other. What then is to be done ? How dial! P°^cc* lm- the fpeaker addrefs the other, Avhen he knows not his which the other is Avholly ignorant ? C 2 ofi Nouns, as they have name < or how explain himfelf by his own name, ui.pror0jas. (g) Man or child, philofopher, orator, poet, or foldier, &o..? 30 G R Pronouns.^ have been defcribed, cannot anfwer this purpofe. firfl expedient upon tins occafion feems to have been pointing, or indicating by the finger or hand; Tome traces of which are it ill to be obferved, as a part of that adtion which naturally attends our fpeaking. But the au¬ thors of language were not content with this: they invented a race of words to fupply this pointing ; which words, as they always Jiood for fubjlantives or nouns, were charadteriled by the name of pronouns. Thefe alio they diftinguilhed into three feveral forts, calling them pronouns of the Jtfl, the fecond, and the third per- fon, with a view to certain ditiindlions, which may be explained as follows. Suppofe the parties converting to be ■wholly unac¬ quainted, neither name nor countenance on either fide known, and the fubjedl of the converfation to be the fpeahei hitnfelf Here to fupply the place of pointing, by a word of equal power, the inventors of language iurnifhed the fpeaker with the pronoun I ; I write, I fay, I defire, Sec. : and as the fpeaker is always principal with refpedf to his own difeourfe, this they called, for that reafon, the pronoun of the f.rf perfon. “ Again, fuppofe the fubjedf of the converfation to be the party addreffed. Here, for limilar reafons, they invented the pronoun thou ; thou writeft ,t\\w walkef, &.c. : and as the party addrefled is next in dignity to the fpeaker, or at lead comes next with reference to the difeourfe, this pronoun they therefore called the pronoun of the fecond perfon. “ Laftly, fuppofe the fubjedl of converfation neither the fpeaker nor the party addrefled, but fame third ob- jeB different from both. Here they provided another pronoun, HE, she, or it j which, in diftindtion to the two former, was called the pronoun of the third perfon: And thus it was that pronouns came to be diftinguiflied by their refpedtive persons.” 36. I he defeription of the different persons here given is taken, we are told, from Priscian, who took it from Apollonius. But whatever be the deference due to thefe ancient maflers, their learned pupil, though guided by them, feems not to have hit upon the true and diftinguifning charadleriltic of the perfonalpronouns. He fuppofes, that when the names of two perfons converting together are known to each, other, they may, by the ufe of thefe names, exprefs all that the perfonal pronouns, exprefs : but this is certainly not true. i. o us, at leaf!, there appears to be a very ma¬ terial difference between faying, “ George did this,” and il I did this j” nor do we think that the power of the pronoun would be completely fupplied by the name, even with the additional aid of indication by the hand.' So when one man fays to another, with whom he is. converting, “ James did fo and fo 5” it is furely not equivalent to his faying, “ you did fo and fo.” If fuch were the cafe, one might pertinently afk, when both perfons are known to each other, Why do they ufe the perfonal pronouns ? Mr Harris tells us, that “ when the fubjedl of converfation is the fpeaher him- Jelf he ufes I ; and when it is the party addreffed, he tiles thou.” But in fact the nature of the perfonal pro¬ nouns has no fort of connedlion with the fubjeB of con¬ verfation, whether that converfation relate to the fpeaker, the party addreffed, or a Greek book. In this fentence, “ iy«y that the three angles of every triangle are equal IP two right angles,” the fpeaker is furely not the fub- A M M A II.. Chap. III. I he jetd ol the difeourfe j nor is the party addreffed, but the Prqnouns. truth of his offer t ion, the fubject of difeourfe in the follow¬ ing fentenceToufty, that Horne Tooke's Diverftons of Parley is the moll mallerly treatife on grammar, fo far as it goes, that you have ever feen.” Mr Harris ufes the phrafe, becoming thefubjeci nf converfation, in no other fenfe than that when the fpeaker has occafion to mention himself, he ufes I; when the party addreffed, THOU 5 and when fome other perfon or thing, he, she, or IT : but we know that he may ufe other words, by no means equivalent to the two frfi of thefe pronouns, which will fufficiently mark himfelf and the party addreffed; and that he may ufe indifferently, and without the fmallell injury to the fenfe, either xhr. third pronoun, or the word for which it is merely a fubfitute. A man who bears various charadlers, may defign himself by any one of them. Thus Mr Pitt may fpeak of him- fell asfrfi lord of the treafury, chancellor of the exche¬ quer, or member for the univerfity of Cambridge; and in each cafe he would be what Mr Harris calls the fubjeci of converfation : yet every one feels that none of thefe defignations is equivalent to I. What then is the force of the perfonal pronouns ? 37. It appears to be limply this : Thefrf denotes the Tke real fpeaker, AS CHARACTERISED BY THE PRESENT ACT OF import of speaking in contradifinliion to every other charaBer^cm'‘ which he may bear. The fecond denotes the party ad¬ dreffed, as CHARACTERISED BY THE PRESENT CIRCUM¬ STANCE of BEING ADDRESSED, in contradiflinttion to every other char abler, &c.: And whatis called the pronoun of the third perfon is merely a NEGATION OF THE OTHER TWO, as the neuter gender is a negation of the mafeuline zwA feminine. If this account of the perfonal pronouns be true, and we flatter ourfelves that its truth will be obvi¬ ous to every body, there is but one way of exprefling by other words the force of the pronouns of ihe frf and fe¬ cond perfon. Thus, “The perfon who now fpeaks to you did fo and fo,” is equivalent to “ / did fo and fo ;” and “ The perfon to whom I now addrefs myfelf did fo and. fo,” is equivalent to “ You did fo and fo.” Hence we fee why it is improper to fay the I or the THOU ; for each of thefe pronouns has of if elf the force of a noun with the definite article prefixed, and denotes a perfon ofwhomfomething is predicated, which dfiinguifihes him from all other perfons. I is the perfon who now fpeaks, THOU is the perfon who is now addreffed by the fpeaker. Hence too we fee the reafon why the pronoun / is faid to be of the firfi, and the pronoun thou of the fecond perfon. Thefe pronouns can have place only in coriverfation, or when a man, in the ehara&er of a public fpeaker, addreffes himfelf to an audience ; but it is obvious, that there mufil be a fpeaker before there, can be a hearer ; and therefore, that the pronouns may fol¬ low the order of nature, /, which denotes the perfon of fpeaker, mull take place of thou, which denotes- the perfon of the hearer. Now the fpeaker and the hearer being the only perfons engaged in converfation or declamation, I is ivith great propriety called the pronoun of the firfi, and thou the pronoun of the fe¬ cond perfon. We have faid, that, with refpeft to pro-, nouns, the third perfon, as it is called, is merely a nega¬ tion of the other two. This is evident from the llightelt attention to the import of thofe words which are call¬ ed pronouns of the third perfon. He, SHE, or it, denotes not the perfon either of the fpeaker or of the hearer ; and G H A Chap, III. Proems and, as we liave jufl obferved, no other perfon can have ~v 1 a {hare in converfation or declamation. An ablent per¬ fon or an abfent thing may be the fubjeci of converfation, but cannot be the fpeaker or the perfon addrejfed. He, SHE, and IT, however, as they fund by themfelves, and alTume the power of nouns,wee very properly denominated pronouns ; but they are not perfonal pronouns in any other fenfe than as the negation of fex is the neuter gender. 38. We have already feen that nouns admit of num¬ ber ; pronouns, which are their fubftitutes, likewife ad¬ mit of number. There may be many fpeakers at once of the fame fentiment, as well as o?ie, who, including himfelf, fpeaks the fentiment of many } fpeech may likewife be addrelfed to many at a time, as well as to ONE ; and the fubjebt of the difeourfe may likewife be MANY. The pronoun, therefore, of every one of the perfons muft admit of number to exprefs this fngula- rity or plurality. Hence the pronoun of the firft per¬ fon 1, has the plural WE ; that of the fecond perfon THOU, has the plural YE or you ; and that of the third perfon HE, SHE, or IT, has the plural THEY, which is equally applied to all the three genders. The Greeks and Romans, when addrefling one per¬ fon, ufed the pronoun in the lingular number thou ; whereas, in the polite and even in the familiar ftyle, we, and many other modern nations, ufe the plural Theieeond Y0U- Although in this cafe we apply you to afng/e jjerfoaal perfon, yet the verb muft agree with it in the plural pronoun number ; it muft necelfarily be, you have, not you hajl. ufed in the You WAS—thefecond perfon plural of the pronoun placed fc^when™"™ agreement with the firjl or third perfon Jingular o{ the verb, is an enormous, though common, folecifm, which ought to be carefully avoided. In very folemn ftyle, as when we addrefs the Supreme Being, we ufe thou—perhaps to indicate that he is God alone, and that there is none like unto him ; and we fometimes ufe the fame form of the pronoun in contemptuous or very familiar language, to intimate that the perfon to whom we fpeak is the meaneft of human beings, or the dear- fl and mofl familiar of our friends. A king, exerting his authority on a folemn occafion, adopts the plural of the firft perfon, “ WE ftridily command and charge 5” meaning, that he adts by the advice of coun- fellors, or rather as the reprefentative of a whole people. But in all cafes in which the ufe of the pronoun deviates from the nature of things, the verb in concord deviates with it; for, as will be feen afterwards, thefe two words univerfally agree in number and perfon. 39. But though all thefe pronouns have number. Bourn of the neither in Greek, Latin, or any modern language, do firft and thofe of the /fry? znA. fecond perfon carry the diftindions fens'haver" ^ex* rt'af°n 13 obvious (h), namely, that fex and no varia¬ tions to de- note fex, ————— —- and why. only one perfon is addrefled. 35 ^he pro- M M A R. all other properties and attributes whatever, except thofe mentioned above as deferiptive of the nature of thefe pronouns, are foreign from the intention of the fpeaker, who, when he ufes the pronoun I, means THE PERSON WHO NOW SPEAKS—no matter whether man or woman : and when the pronoun thou—the per¬ son—no matter whether man or woman—to whom now addresses himself—and nothing 2X Pronouns*-. HE 35, b j in Latin, rut I, QUiE, quod j and in Etlglijh, WHO, WHICH, WHAT. 44. In order to determine with precilion the nature and import ot the relative pronoun, it will be neceflary to afcertain the powers which it contains, or the parts of fpeech into which it is capable of being refolved. Now, it is obvious, that there is not a iingle noun, or prepojitive pronoun, which the relative is not capable of reprefenting: for we fay, I, who faw him ye/ierday, cannot be mi/laken ; you, who did not fee him, may have been mijinformed; they, who neither faw nor heard, cun know nothing of the mutter ; THE THINGS, WHICH he exhibited, were wonderful. From thefe examples it is apparent, in the firll place, that the relative contains in itfelf the force of any other pronoun j but it contains fomething more. 45. If from any fentence in which there is a re¬ lative, that relative be taken away, and the prepofitive pronoun, which it reprefents, be fubftituted in its Head, the fentence will lofe its bond of union, and Hand quite loofe and unconnefted. Thus, if inftead of fay¬ ing the man is wife who fpeaks little, we ihould lay the man is wife HE fpeaks little, the fentence would be refolved into two; and what is affirmed of the man’s wifdom, would have no connection with the circum- ftance of his fpeaking little. Hence it is evident, in the feeond place, that the relative contains the force of a connective as well as of the prepofitive pronoun. What kind of connection it denotes, is next to be afeer- tained. 46. It may be laid down as a general principle, “ that, by means of the relative pronoun, a claufe of a fentence, in which there is a verb, is converted into the nature of an adjeBive, and made to denote fome attribute of a fubfance, or fome property or circum/tance belonging to the antecedent noun.'1 * *'' Thus, when it is faid, homo qui prudentia preeditus eft, the relative claufe—quipru- dentia preeditus ef, expreffes nothing more than the qua¬ lity of prudence in concrete with the fubjcB ho?n6, which might have been equally well expreffed by the adjective prudens. In like manner, when we fay, vir fapit qui pauca loquitur, the relative claufe expreffes the property oi fpeaking little as belonging to the man, and as being that quality which coniututes, or from which we in¬ GRAMMAR. 43 and con¬ tains be- fides the iorce of a connective. fer, his wifdom ; but if there were fuch a word as pau- ciloquens, that quality might very properly be ex¬ preffed by it, and the phrafe vir fapit pauciloquens would exprefs the fame affertion with vir fapit qui pauca loquitur. Now if a relative claufe expreffes that which might fee expreffed by an adjeCtive, the prefumption is, that it may be refolved into the fame conftituent parts. But every adjeCtive contains the powers of an ah ft r adz fub- fantive, together with an expreflion of connexion j and may be refolved into the genitive cafe of that fub- ftantive, or into the nominative with the particle of pre¬ fixed, which, in Englilh, correfponds to the termination of the genitive in the ancient languages. That the member of a fentence, in which there is a relative, may, in every inftance, be analyfed in the fame manner, will be apparent from the following examples. Vir qui fapit, vir fapiens, and vir fapientice ; “ a man who is wife, a wife man, and a man of wifdom f are certainly phrafes of the fame import. Again, homo, cm ingratus ejl animus, malus ft amicus, may be tranilated into Greek, *;a:;£oj ymleii things as well as parfons; I 5 Chap. III. GRAMMA R. 27 Pronouns, the ableft prince that ever filled a throne.'” With regard v to the principle upon which this acceptation of the word r that depends, we offer the following conjecture. And why In Englilh, from the cool and phlegmatic arrange- it does fo. ment of the language, occafioned by the want of in¬ flexions and conjugations, the place of every part of a fentence is almoft uniformly determined, and very little variety is allowed in the collocation of the words. The adjective is almolt always placed in appofition with its fubjtantive, and the nominative with its verb. In con- fequence of this uniformity in the collocation of the words, the mind acquires a habit of conneCling in idea any kind of word with the place in which it is ufed to Jland; and is naturally led to confider every word that Hands in Jack a place as belonging to fuch a clafs. Hence it is, wre imagine, that the definitive that pafles into the nature of the relative pronoun ; as in thofe inftances in which it occupies the place of the relative, it was natural to confider it as having the fame import. Yet the word that has undoubtedly in itfelf no more the force of the relative pronoun than the or this, or any other definitive whatever. In fuch expreflions as the foregoing, it is not improbable that originally the claufe of the definitive that, which we now call the relative claufe, was thrown in as a kind of modifying circumftance in the following manner : “ The book (I read that) is elegant 5” where the fpeaker, finding the word book too general for his purpofe, throws in a claufe to qualify and reftriCl it, or to confine his affir¬ mation to that particular book which he is then read¬ ing. We can eafily fuppofe, that through .time the definitive that in fuch an expreffion might be tranfpo- fed or removed from its own place to that of the rela¬ tive: fo that the expreffion would run thus, “ The book that I read is elegant which would be confidered as precifely equivalent to “ The book which I read is ele¬ gant.” This opinion is not a little confirmed by a fimilar ufe of the article in Greek, which, though un¬ doubtedly a definitive like the Engliffi the, is often ufed inftead of the relative pronoun. Numberlefs examples may be found in Homer and Herodotus, efpecially in the latter, who feldom ufes what is properly called the rela¬ tive. We ftiall produce one inflance from each. £<$•£«< Argueiriv Ayctpspyovcz, TON 7r£g< Truilav Zsvj iviriKi Tcovouri oiMftmgls. Iliad x. 88. O^kiokti yct^ piyct\oio-i Kct]u%o>l« (A6nvxici fcil.) (\iot y.^fig cuffion of the verb, Mr Harris, whofe notions of thistlfevnature as of the other parts of fpeech have been generally °f the Vtlb‘ adopted by the lubfequent writers on grammar, has dedicated a laige proportion of his book, 111 which he has tiirown out many excel]eiit oblervations, mixed as it appears to us, with feveral errors. We have alreadv obferved, that no man is ignorant when he ufes what " is called a verb and when a noun. Every fchoolboy knoivs, that, the Avoids is, lcvetii, waeketh, stanb- ETH, in Englijh ; and EST, amat, amatur, AMBUEAT, st at, in Latin, are verbs: he knoAvs like wife that they are of different hinds ; that fome of them are faid to be aflive, fome pajj-vs, and fome neuter. But it ffiould feem that the firlt objeft of our inveftigation ought to be the char utter ft ic of the verb, or that which aif thefe Avords have, in common, and which conllilutes them verbs, diftinguilhing them from every other fpecies cf-,v words. Now it is obvious to the llighteft attention, .aaVriftic- tbat every vei n, Avhether attive, pajjive, or neuter, may of the vertfe be rdolved into the lubftantive Atvb is, and another attributive: for lovetH is of the fame import with is loving ; WAEKETH, Avith IS walking ; and amat, Avith AMANS EST. But loving, walking, and AMANS, are not veros . aa hence it foilcAvs, Inat the churuclerijlic of {] e verb, that which cotfiitutes it zvnai it is, raid cannot be expreffed by other words, muft be that Avhich is fignified by the Avord is j and to us that appears to Le neither more nor lefs than ajfertion. Assertion, therefore, or predication, is certainly the \v:ry ESSENCE of the verb, as being that part of its office, and that part only, which cannot be dift harged by other kinds of Avords. EArery other eircumftance Avhic'h the verb includes, fuch as attribute, mode, time, &c. it may be poffible to exprels by aefittives, participles, and adverbs ; but without a verb it is impoftible to predicate, to affirm or deny, any one thing of any ether thir.o The office of the verb, then, when ftript of all acciden¬ tal circumftances, feems to be merely this, “ To join together the iubjeft and predicate of a prepofition \ y its powers are anakgous to thofe of the fign 4- in Algebra, which dees not affeeft the feparatc^W^ of the quantities between Avbith it is placed, but only uu dxcates their union or coalefcence. To explain by an ex¬ ample : When we fay, Cicero eloquens, Cicero wife; thefe are imperfecft fentences, though they denote a fubftance and an attribute. The reafon is, that they want an ajfertwn, to ffiow that fuch an attribute appertains to uieh a fubftance. But Avhen avc infert the Avord was * AV® Chap. IV. Verbs, -we join tlie fubftance and attribute together 5 we give notice that the wifdom and eloquence are applied to Cicero, and we do nothing more : we neither inereafe the wifdom nor diminilh it, we neither make it real nor imaginary ; for it was fuppofed in all its ex¬ tent when the words Cicero and wife Hood inde¬ pendent of each other. We may^ indeed ufe the verb in a form which implies not an ajfertion only, but like- wife an attribute; as when we fay George wnteth, or George walketh : But as whitenefs or any other parti¬ cular colour is not of the ejj'ence of a horfe, an animal which is found of all colours 5 fo in the phrafes quoted, the attribute, though implied, is not of the ejjence of the verb ; for it may be equally well expreffed by other words: George is writing, and George is walking, are phrafes of the very fame import with George writeth and George walketh. 59. In refolving every verb, whether a<51ive, paflive, or neuter, into the fubtlantive verb IS and another at¬ tributive, we have the honour to agree with all the grammarians but to the word is itfeif the learned au¬ thor of Hermes has given a meaning which, as a verb, it does not admit. He obferves, that before any thing can be the fubjedl of a propolition, it mull exi/l: that all exiftence is either abfolute or qualified, mutable or im¬ mutable : that the verb IS can by itfeif exprefs abfolute exiftence, but never the qualfed, without fubjoining the particular form ; and that it fignines both mutable and immutable exigence, having in thefe cafes different mean¬ ings ; although the fentences which he gives as exam¬ ples are evidently conffrucled in the fame manner and confitf of the fame parts of fpeech. His examples are : of abfolute exillence, B IS 5 of qualified, B IS an animal; of mutable. This orange is ripe ; of immutable. The dia¬ gonal of the fquare IS incommenfurable with its/ides. But if predication be the effence of verb, all this is no¬ thing to the purpofe, and part of it is not true. It is not true that the verb is ever varies its fignification ; for it hath as verb no connexion with exiftence of any kind. All fuch cireumftances are fuperadded to its verbal nature •, or, to fpeak more accurately, we infer fuch eircumftances from our previous knowledge of the objecls concerning which the predication is made. When we fay, “ this orange IS ripe,” we do indeed mean, as Mr Harris obferves, that it is fo now at this prefent in onpofiiion to pajl and future time : but it is not the verb is, but the definitive this, which fixes the time of maturity, as well as the place of the orange ; for had we faid oranges are ripe, we might have been properly a Iked, When and where are they ripe ? although the fame verb is ufed in both fentences. Even in the fentence “ B is,” abfolute exiftence (the moft fimple of all) is inferred, and not expreffed, by the verb ; and the inference is made from this obvious principle, “ That when one utters a mark of predication, we naturally conclude that he means to predicate fomething of the fubjecl.” If he adds 'VA.fpeciftc predication, as B is 29 ROUND, we apply to B the moft general that we can ; Verbs, and what other fpecies is fo general as exijlence ? 1 1 That the idea of exiftence, confidered as mutable or immutable, is not contained in the verb is itfeif, but is derived from our knowledge of the obje6ts concerning which the predication is made, appears manifeftly from this : That if a perfon be fuppofed ignorant of the mean¬ ing of the words God and MAN, whilft he knows that of is ; the uttering of the two propofitions God is happy, and this man is happy, will give him no notice of exift¬ ence confidered as mutable or immutable, temporary or eternal (o). His conclufion rvith refpeft to thefe modes of exiftence, if any fuch conclufion be drawn at all, mull be derived entirely from his previous knowledge of the nature of God and the nature of man. Some of our readers may poflibly think this notion of verb too abftraft and metaphylical; yet what other circumftance than mere predication is effential to that ipecies of words ? We fay effential; for we are here in¬ quiring, not what is expreffed by each individual verb, but what it is which is equally expreffed by all verbs, and which diftinguilhes them from the other parts of fpeech. And if it be true, that every thing which the verb implies, predication alone excepted, may be exprefled by other parts of fpeech, and that no other parts offpeech can predicate ; then we think ourfelves warranted to af¬ firm, 'ClxeX fimple predication is the efj'entialcharaclerftic of verb, that every word which predicates is a VERB, and that nothing is fo which does not predicate. It muft not, however, be concealed, that a do£lrine objec- very different from this has been lately maintained by tion to our a writer of diftinguilhed abilities. “ We have energif '^^Yi expreffed,” fays Hr Gregory (p), “ and of courfe a verb confhtuted without affirmation, when we wilh or command ; without command, when we affirm or wiihj without wifih, when we command or affirm : yet in all thefe cafes we have equally and indifputably a verb.” That in ail thefe cafes we have a verb, is indeed in- difputable j but avc hold it to be equally indifputable, that in all thefe cafes rve have affirmation. The inge¬ nious author has given no dirccl example of a wijh or command uttered without affirmation ; and a feeling or fentiment Avhich is not uttered has nothing to do with language: but he has given a fentence in ay Inch there are three verbs, that in his opinion denote no affirma¬ tion, but a very fisan f/ppojition. If a fuppojition can be expreffed Avithout affirmation, Ave ftiall very readily alloAv that a wi/h or command may be fo expreffed like- Avife. The Hoftor’s fuppofition is thus expreffed : “ Had any puniffiment ever overtaken you for your broken voavs •, were but one of your teeth growing black, or even were but one of your nails groAving lefs beautiful, I ftiould believe you.” It is almoft fuper- fluous to cbferve, that to every verb not in the infini¬ tive mode there muft be a nominative, and to every aclive verb an object, Avhatever be the arrangement of the fenter.ee in Avhich fuch verbs are found. Thefe are GRAMMA R. (o) The truth of this obfervation may be proved by experiment, by uttering to a man of good common fenfie .thefe two propofitions, taking care to exprefs the Avords God and man in a language ay Inch he does not under- Hand. Thus, Ideus is happy, and hie homo is happy, uttered to a man totally unacquainted with the Latin ton rue, ay'ill convey no notice of exiftence confidered as mutable or immutable, &c. (p) Theory of the Moods of Verbs, publilhed in Vol, II. of the Transitions of the ROtal Society *f Edinburgh, p Verbs. 60 anfwered. GRAMMAR. n t\t are truths known to every fchoolbov; the reafnns nf TW ,1 . , . ^nap. 1\ . ' viable “ ^ tfT * >**«& unde- J wiUinriv ^ ',tkb ^ mablt, that in the ientence before us, the nominative to /me/is any punifhment; to the fir ft, were one of your teeth ; and to the fecond, one of your nails. But the (entenee arranged in grammatical order, with the fe- veral nominatives before their refpeftive verbs, is evi¬ dently elliptical; and the conjun6tion if mult be fup- pired as well to complete the conftrudtion as to make lenle of the paffage. If any puniftiment had ever we willingly pay to this very mafterly writer, we are v compelled reluctantly to differ from him, and ftiU to thmk that fmplepredication is the ejfence of the VERB. Should we be required to exemplify our theory by The theory language, and to produce inftances of this fimplifieditfelf cxem- vern in practice, we might anfwer, that the not being-plificc1, able to produce fuch initances would be no good argu¬ ment again ft the truth of our principles. ° It is the nature of language to exprefs many circumftances by overtaken you j if but one of your teeth were grow- the fame wo^ alfof wl h f" mar‘-Y circumft/!nces b7 ing black, or even if but one of your nails were grow diftinmn’fh tl ’ /' ^ 1 ^wever are not effential to mg left beautiful, I Ihould believe you.” Now ft has the othe^/i^' A " •1 'V°rd belongs from lately been proved, by fuch evidence as leaves no room ^ ’ and 11 Is nature of man lor doubt, that if though called a conjunllion, is in fa£l a verb m the imperative mode, of the fame import with give ; that we may fubftitute the one for the other without in the fmalleft degree altering the fenfe. The entence will then run thus : “ Give any puniftiment iiad ever overtaken you ; give but one of your teeth were growing black, &c. I Ihould believe you.” It is therefore fo far from being true, that had and were, when the fentence is completed, exprefs no affirma- tmn ; that it is only upon granting the truth of the affirmation which they denote, that the fpeaker fays “ I llrould believe you.” “ Any puniftiment had ever over¬ taken you,” is plainly an affirmation ; if give that affirmation, admit its truth, “ I ftmuld believe you.” But it cannot be fuppofed that had and were change their fignilications by a mere change of place, or that by being removed from the middle to the beginning of a claufe, they lofe their original import, and come to denote fomething entirely different. Were this the cafe e very attempt to afeertain and £x the general princi¬ ples of grammar would be as ridiculous as an attempt to arreft the courfe of time. For what purpofe then, it may be alked, if the verb always denotes affirmation, is it removed from the middle to the beginning of the claufe, when fuppofilion is implied as in the prefent in- llance ? We anftver, that fuppolition is neither more nor lefs than conditional affirmation; that when fuch affirmation is completely exprefled, the verb is not remo¬ ved to the beginning of the claufe ; and that fuch remo¬ val takes place only wdien the claufe is elliptical, being merely an artificial contrivance in language, to (how the reader or hearer that fome fuch word, as if de¬ manding the truth of the affirmation, is omitted for the fake of difpatch. This is evident j for when the word requiring the affirmation to be granted is fupplied, the verb muft be reftored to its place in the middle of the claufe. Such abbreviations, and fuch contrivances to mark them, are frequent in all languages, as will be feen more clearly when we come to treat of modes. from difeourfe many tilings which are not actually expreffied. Perhaps, however, fomething nearly approaching to an exemplification of our idea of a fimple verb will be found in the following propofition • 1 he. three angles of every plane triangle are equal to two right angles.” What other office the verb are here performs than limply to join the fubjeci and pre¬ dicate, it is difficult to perceive. It does not give notice oi time; oi- fuch notice, if given, is an imperfection : tor the truth or the propofition is independent on time. Neither ought it to imply exiflence ; for the propofition would be true, were there neither a triangle nr/ a right angle in nature. This idea of verb, when it is well confidered, we hope will be found juft ; but ihould any of our readers luipect it of novelty, and on that account be difpofed to condemn it, we have only to requeft that he will re- ftrain his ccnfure till he has examined the writings of others, and nicely obferved the feveral poftures of his own mmd in difeourfe; for meditation may perhaps ftmw him that our theory is not falfe, and inquiry will latisfy him that it is not novel (p ). * ^ 6°. But although it is certain that affiertion, and af-The greater Itition only, is efential to the verb, yet the greater partP;irt of of that fpecics of words which grammarians call verbsverbs de' are ufed to denote an attribute as well as an a/Tertian an at' or, m the language of logic, they exprefs both the copu- combined la and the predicate of a propofition : thus, he liveth, /ffiwith an af- wnteth, he walketh, arc phrafes equivalent in all refpefts fertion* to—is living, he is writing, he is walking. Now, of attributes7W have their effence in motion, as walking; fome in the privation of motion, as refling ; and others have nothing to do with either motion or its privation as wnite and black. But all motion and all privation of motion imply time as their concomitant; and a fuff an ce may have an attribute to-day which it had not yeferday, and will not have to-morrow. This is felf-evident; for a man may be at reft to-day who yeferday was walking, and to-morrow will be on horfeback ; and a fheet of pa¬ per may have been white yefterday, which to-day is black. . 5- ^-r 6 ldeS W7°rds TniC,h are. nfm.es o{ ldeas in tlie mlnd> there are a great many others that are made ufe of to fignify the conneBion that the mmd gives to ideas or propofitions one with another. The mind in communicating i s noughts to others, does not only \\c Befides the tenfes already examined, which are The pluf- expreffive of paf time, in moft languages the verb has quam-pev- another tenfe called theplufquam-perfeB, in which, how- ever, no difficulty occurs to detain our attention. What the prater-impetfeB is to the prfient tenft, that thepluft quam-perfeB is to the prxter-perfeB. The verb had, by which it is refolved in Englifh, being evidently the paft time of have, fufficiently explains its meaning and relation to the other tenfes : “ I had written a letter ” is equivalent to the phrafe, “ I pojfejfed at fome paf time, the finifhed aftion of writing a letter.” It is juftly obferved by Dr Beattie, that the imper- feft and plufquam-perfe6t are very ufeful, and may be the fources of much elegant expreffion ; and that if one were not taught to diftinguilh, in refpect of meaning as well as of form, thefe tenfes from each other, and the preterite from both, one could not pretend to under- ftand, far lefs to tranflate, any good claffic author. 67. Having confidered the tenfes which imply pre- Futu7re tea- fent'and paf time, it now remains that we examinefes. the import of thofe which are exprefiive of time future. In Latin and Engliffi there are two tenfts for this pur- pofe ; of which X\wfrf reprefents an aclion in point of time as not yet exif ing, but as about to exift at fome pe¬ riod to come ; but it does not bring the completion of the a ft ion into view. _ The other afferts the futurity of an aftion together with its completion. Scribam, “ I fhall be writing,” denotes future time and complete aBion ; for it does not fay whether I am to write for a long or for a ffiort time, or whether I fiiall f nijb what I pro- miied to begin. This part of the verb, therefore, to which tjie Greek correfponds, is an imperfeB future, and hkewife an aorif. The futurity of any aftion, it thould feem, may always be computed from the time of fpeak- ing ; for every aftion muff be future with refpeft to the time at which its futurity is declared; but the time of its futurity may be more precifely fpecified by fixing on fome other future time to which to refer it: “ I thall be writing after he ffiall have departed.” Shall or will refc.s to future time mdefnitely; and write or writing refers to an aftion which is indeed to begin and fo fair to proceed, bpt of which nothing is faid concerning the completion. . °n the other bmA, feripftro, “ I fliall have written,” is a perfeB future denoting complete aftion; for (hall Ae- notes future time; written, fnifhed aBion ; and have,pre¬ ftnt pojfejfon. So that the meaning of the whole affertion ■k is. , 72 Of. the tenfes of the fvib- jundtive mode. 13 I he pre- fenh G R A . that “ at fome future period of time I fhall polfefs the finiihed action of writing.” The completion of the ac¬ tion, together with the poJJ'eflion of it, is always future with refpect to the time of affection ; but, with refpect to fome other time exprefled or underftood, the completion «f the aft ion is to be pajl: Promitt is te feripturum f ro- gavero, “ you protnife to write if I lhall have afked you.” In this fentence the aftion of afkivg is future with relation to the time oipromifing, but it is pajl with relation to that of writing. This tenfe the Latin grammarians call the future of the fubjunElive mode; but very improperly. The notice which it communicates, refpefts not the power or liberty of afting, which, as will be feen by and bye, is the charafteriftic of that mode; but the aElion it- felf. It ought therefore to be ranked among the tenfes of the indicative mode ; for feripfero is, in every fenfe, as really indicative as feribam or fer ip turns ero. v 68. Thefe are all the tenfes, effentially different from each other, w'hich have place in the indicative mode of any language with which we are acquainted (r) ; but as there are tenfes in the mode called Subjunctive, w hich bear the fame names with thofe already examined, and w hich have yet a different import, it will be neceffary to confider them before w'c difmifs the fubjeft of tenfes. Of modes in general fomething muff be faid here¬ after ; at prefent we fhall only obferve, that the mode with which w'e are now concerned, is not very properly diftinguithed by the name affigned to it by the Latin grammarians. They call it the fubjunElive, becaufe it is often fubjoined to another verb, and forms the fe- Condary claufe of a fentence : but the mode called in¬ dicative frequently appears in the fame circumilances. The difference betw'een thefe two modes appears to us to confift in this, that the indicative afferts fomething di¬ re Elly concerning the aElion; the fubjunElive, fomething cpneerning the power or liberty of the agent to perform it : for that the latter afj'erts as well as the former, ad¬ mits not of difpute. 69. The prefent tenfe of the fubjunElive mode, in the learned languages, anfwers to the Englifh auxiliaries may and can. Let us confider thefe a little.—May is evidently a verb of the prefent tenfe denoting liberty. When I aflert that I MAY write, I give notice that “ I am under no compulfon to abjlain from writing:” that there is no impediment from without by which I am refrained from writing. Can is alfo a verb of the prefent M M A Ti. Chap. IV. tenfe, expreflive of internalpower or fall. “ I can W'rite” Verbs, is equivalent to—“ There is nothing in my felf which v—-'v——» incapacitates me for performing the operation of wri¬ ting.” This verb feems originally to have denoted knowledge or fkill, and to have been afterwards extended to fignify power or ability of any kind. There is little doubt of its being the fame with the old Englilh verb to con, which fignifies to know.—The difference between the import of thefe two verbs may and can will be beft perceived in a familiar example. Suppofe we fay to one of our tranferibers, “ You may write a treatife on gram¬ mar, to w'hich he returns for anfwer “ I cannot •y our affertion evidently fuppofes him at libertij to write the treatife ; his anfwer implies, that he is unable or unfilled to do it. We may conclude, then, that the prefent tenfe of this mode contains a declaration of prefent liberty, ability, or /kill; and its other tenfes will be found to have reference to the fame capacities. 'I he obfervation is here to be repeated which was en¬ larged upon under the prefent of the indicative. The liberty or ability fignified by this tenfe is always repre- fented as prefent ; but the time of this prefence is inde¬ finite. If no particular time be fpecified, we generally refer it to the time of fpcaking ; but another point mav be given from which we are to compute. “ When he fhall have finifhed, you may then proceed as you pro- pofe.” Here the liberty of proceeding is ftated as pre¬ fent, not at the time of fpeaking, but at the time of his finifhing, which is future to the time of fpeaking. But though the liberty, ability, or jkill, denoted by this tenfe, be reprefented as prefent, the aElion if elf h, ftated as con¬ tingent; for it is not necejfary that a man fliould perform an aftion becaufe he has the capacity to perform it. From this idea of the prefent of the fuljunElive fome of its moft peculiar ufes feem capable of being explained. —And, in the firft place, it appears to have a near af¬ finity with the future of the indicative ; infomuch that in many inftances they may be ufed promifeuoufly. Without materially altering the effeft of the expreflion, we may fay, “ Dico me fafturum effe quae imperetf or “ quae imperabhy Thereafon of this, perhaps, may be, that with refpeft to us, futurity and contingency are in moft cafes nearly the fame, both being involved in equal obfeurity ; and therefore it is often of little confequence which mode of expreflion we employ. Secondly, The prefent of the fubjunElive is ufed to de¬ note (r) On this point we fubferibe to the opinion of the elegant and ingenious Dr Beattie.—“ It will perhaps occur (fays he), that there are two Greek tenfes, of which I have given no account ; namely, the fecond aorifi, and the fecond future. The truth is, that I confider them as unnecefiary. Their place, for any thing I know' to the contrary, might at all times be fupplied by the firfi aorifi and the firfi future. Some grammarians are of opinion, that, the firfi aorifi fignifies time pafi irrgeneral, and the fecond, indefinite time pafi; and that the firjlfuture denotes a nearer, and the fecond, a more remote, futurity. But this, I apprehend, is mere conjefture, unfupported by proof: and therefore I incline rather to the fentiments of thofe who teach, that the fecond future and the fecond aorifi have no meaning different from the firfi future and the firfi aorift ; and that they are the prefent and imperfeEl of fome obfolete theme of the verb 5 and when the other theme came into ufe, happened to be retained for the fake of variety perhaps, or by accident, wfitli a preterite and future fignification. Be this as it will, as thefe tenfes are peculiar to the Greek, and have nothing correfponding to them in other tongues, we need not fcruple to overlook them as fuperfluous.”—The Theory of Language, Part II. Chap. ii. To'thefe judicious obfervations we have nothing to add, but that they acquire no fmall degree of confirma¬ tion from this circumftance, that there are many Greek verbs which have no fecond future, and which are yet employed to denote every poflible modification of future time. Of the paulo-pofi-futurum of the Greeks we have taken,; 6 Chap. IV. V erbs. 74 The prse- ter-imper- fca. npte the right of which a perfott is pofTeffed. 1 or I can, fell this book.” This application, which Dr PrieJlleij conliders as the primary iignirication of the tenfe, is eaiily deduced, or rather follows immediately^ from the foregoing account of its import. For it one be under no rejlraint, either external or internal, to pre¬ vent him from performing an a£tion, he has furely a right to perform it. Thirdly, The prefent of the fubjunBive is often ufed to lignify command or requejl; as when one fays, “ You may give my compliments to fuch a perfon.” This ufe of the tenfe under confideration feems to have arifeti from a detire to /often the hdr/hnefs of a command, by avoiding the appearance of claiming fuperiority. When a man utters the above fentence, he certainly utters no command, but only ajferts that the perfon to whom he fpeaks has liberty or power to do him a favour. This aflertion, however, may contain no new information ; and therefore the perfon ad drefed, reflecting upon the intention of the fpeaker in making it, infers that it indi¬ cates a wifh or defire that “ his compliments Ihould be made to fuch a perfon.” 70. Of the fubjunBive as well as of the indicative, the prceter-imperfeB is evidently the paf time of the prefent^ As the latter aflerts liberty, or ability, to perform fome aftion, as exifting at prefent, the former aflferts the fame liberty or ability to have exifed in time pa jl; but the precife portion of time paft, in which thefe capacities exifted, mull be fpecified by other words, or it will remain unknown. Thus in the following fentence, “ Dixi me fafturum effe quae imperaretf the time of imperaret is refefred to that of dixi: the perfon having the right to command, is fuppofed to have had it at the time when the other fa id that he would obey. This tenfe, as well as the prefent, ftates the aftion as going on and incomplete ; and alfo as future with refpeCt to the liberty or ability to perform it. It is rendered into Eng/ifh by the verbs could or might; of which the frjl is the paft time of can, the fecond of may. From the near affinity which the prefent of the fub¬ junBive has to the future of the indicative, the tenfe now under confideration appears, in many inftances, as the paft time of the latter as well as the former. Thus Dixi me faBurum quce imperaret, may be rendered “ I faid that I would do whatever he might, or whatever he fhould, command.” 71. Of the prceter-perfeB, it is fufficient to obferve, tcr-pcrfecft. that as the prefent ftates the agent as at liberty to be performing an unfnifhed aftion •, fo this tenfe ftates him as at liberty to perform the aCtion confidered as fnifhed, “ I may be writing a letter when you come, i. e. I am at liberty to be writing a letter when you come.” I may haVe written a letter when you come,” i. e. I am at liberty to be in pojfejfion of the fnifhed aBion of writing a letter when you come.” It is a common mode of expreffion to fay, “ I may have done fuch or fuch a thing in my time,” when he who fpeaks can have little doubt whether he has done the thing or not. In that cafe, the words may have done, cannot be confidered as the prceter-perfeB of GRAMMAR. 1 may, the fubjunBive of the verb do ; for it is nonfenfe to talk 75 The prae- 70 of liberty, with refpedt to the performance of an action, which, at the time of fpeaking, is fuppofed to be paf and completed. What then is the import of the phrafe >. We are perfuaded that it is elliptical, and that the word fay or affirm is underftood: “ I may (fay that I) have done fuch or fuch a thing in my time j” for liberty or contingency can relate to actions only as they are conceived to be prefent or future. 72. Of all the tenfes, the moft complex is the pluf- Thepluf- quam perfeB of this mode. It combines a puf and a fu- qnam-per- ture time with a fnifhed aft ion. It may be confidered as the paf time both of the perfeB future and of the prcc- ter-perfeB of the fubjunBive ; for it reprefents an action, future and contingent at fome paf time, as fnfhed before another period fpecifed ; which period therefore, though paf at the time of fpeaking, was itfelffuture with refpoCt to the time when the futurity or contingency of the aBion exifed. “ Promififti te feripturum fuiffe fi rogaf fem “You promifed that you would write, if I ihould have allied you.” Here the futurity of the ac¬ tion of ajking, which is reprefented as complete andfnijh- ed, is ftated as co-ex fing with the paf promife ; but the aBion itfelf muft be poferior to that promife : it is how ¬ ever fuppofed to be paf rvith refpebt to tire action of writing, which is alfo poferior to the promife. 73. Before we difmifs the fubjedt of tenfes, it may of number not be improper juft to mention number and perfon ; for and perlon. thefe have place in every tenfe of the verb in the learn¬ ed languages, and in many tenfes even of the Englifh verb. 'They cannot, however, be deemed effientialtotYit verb •, for affirmation is the fame, whether it be made by you, by me, or by a third perfon, or whether it be made by one man or by a thoufand. The moft that can be faid is, that Verbs in the more elegant languages are provided with a variety of terminations which re- fpeef the number and perfon of every fubfantive, that we may know with more precifion, in a complex fen¬ tence, each particular fubftance with its attendant verbal attributes. The fame may be faid of fex with refpedl to adjeBives. They have terminations which vary as they refpedt beings male or female, though it is paft difpute that fubfances alone are fufceptible of fex. We therefore pafs over thefe matters, and all of like kind, as being rather among the elegancies of particular lan¬ guages, and therefore to be learned from the particular grammar of each tongue, than among the ejfentia/s of language j which ejfentials alone are the fubjedl of in¬ quiry in a treatife on univerfal grammar. 74. Befides tenfes, number, and perfon, in every tongue with which we are acquainted, verbs are fubjeft to ano¬ ther variation, which grammarians have agreed to call Modes. Of modes, as of tenfes, it has been warmly dif- puted whether or not they be eflential to language. The truth feems to be, that the only part of the verb abfolutely neceffary for the purpofe of communicating thought is the indicative mode; for all the others, as has been well obferved by Dr Gregory, are refolvable, by means of additional verbs and a word denoting the action of the primary verb, into circuitous expreffions E 2 which taken no notice, becaufe it is found only in the pafive voice; to which if it were neceffary, it is obvious that if would be neceffary in all voices, as a man may be about to aB as well as to fuffer immediately. . 79 Different 75- mean it to feems GRAMM winch fully convey their meaning (s). But fuch ex- preffions continually repeated would make language very prolix and wholly inanimated j for which reafon, the import of each of the commonly received modes is a fub- je6t worthy of the philplogift’s inveftigation. About the number of modes, whether neceflary or only expedi¬ ent, as well as about the import of each, the writers on opinions a- ^amniar have differed in opinion. Mr Harris, one of bout the the molt celebrated of thofe writers, has enumerated number of four tnodes of the verb, beffdes the infinitive ; viz. The modes. INDICATIVE or DECLARATIVE, to ofi'ert what we think certain ; the POTENTIAL or SUBJUNCTIVE,/or thepur- pofes of whatever we think contingent ; the INTERROGA- I [ VE, when we are doubtful, to procure us information ; and the REQU1SITIVE, to ajjijl us in the gratification of our volitions. X he requifitive too, according to him, appeals under two diftmfl Ipecies j eitlier as it is impe¬ rative to inferiors, or precative to fuperiors. i'or eftabliihing fuch a variety of modes as this, no fort of foundation whatever appears. The fame rea- foning which induced the author to give us an interro¬ gative and requiftiye mode, might have made him give us a hortative, a dififiuajive, a volume, and innumerable other modes, with which no language is acquainted. But befides perplexing his reader with ufelefs diftinc- tioijs, we cannot help thinking that Mr Harris has thlicn into lome rmftakes with regard to the import of thofe modes which are univerfally acknowledged. Ac- «ording' to him, affiertion is the chara£!eriftic of the indi¬ cative, and that wnich dillinguilhes it from the fubjunc- hve or potential: but this is certainly not true, for with¬ out an affiertion, the verb cannot be ufed in any mode. Of tuis the learned author, indeed, feems to have been aware, when lie obferved of the fiubjunEiive mode, that it is employed “ when we do noX jlri&ly affert,” and that d implies but a dubious and conjcBural affertion.” The A R. Chap. TV. truth is, that the affertion implied in this mode, though Verbs. it is not concerning the fame thing, is equally pofitive ' v and abjolutc with that conveyed by the indicative. An example quoted by himfelf fhould have fet him rmht as to this matter 6 Sed tacitus pafci f poffei corvus, HABERET Plus dapis, (b’c. M ho does not feel that the affertion contained in ha- beret, is as abfolute and pofitive as any affertion what¬ ever ? Perhaps we may be alked to define what we by a mode. . We know not that we can define uni venal fatisfaflion. i hus much, however, to be obvious, that thofe variations which are called modes do not imply DIFFERENT MODIFICATIONS of the ACTION of the verb. AmO, AmEM, Am A, do not flgnify modes of LOVING ; for modes of loving are, loving much, loving little, loving long, &c.—Shall we then get over the diifieuliy by faying, with Mr Harris, that “ modes exhibit fome way or other the foul and its affections P’’ This is certainly true : but it is nothing to the purpofe.; for it does not ditlinguifh the meaning of mode from the objeft of language in ge¬ neral, ail languages being intended to exhibit the foul and its affeBions. Grammatical modes of verbs have been defined by Mode de- Dr Gregory to be. “ concife modes of exprefling fome fined, of thole combinations of thoughts which occur molt frequently, and are moll important and ftriking.” This is a juft obfervation 5 but perhaps he would have given a more complete definition had he faid, that gramma¬ tical modes of verbs are concife modes of expr effing fiome of thofe combinations of thoughts which occur moj} frequently, and of which ASSERTION is an effentialpart (t). This indeed feems to be the real account of the matter, efpecially if our notion of the nature of verb be well founded,. r ft' V}^:mP?rative, for inftance, may be refolved into a verb of commanding in the firft perfon of the prefent o the indicative, and a word denoting the aBion of the primary verb, commonly called the infinitive mode of lat verb..- J hus, 1 nunc elver, us tecum meditare canoros, and “ Jubeo te nunc ire et tecum meditari,” &c. are entences of the very fame import. The fubjunBive may be refolved in the fame manner by means of a verb de¬ noting power or capacity; for credam, and pofifum credere, may be often ufed indifferently, 'i'be indicative mode, however, P not thus convertible with another verb cf affirming in the firf perfon of the prefent of the indicative, and a word denoting the adion of the primary verb; for Titius feribit, “ Titius writes,” is not of the fame import with dico Titium for there,. quod Titius feribat, “ I fay that Titius writes.” The firft of theftf fentences as las been already Ihown, contains but one affertion ; the fecond obvioully contains two. Titius writes, is equi¬ valent to 1 itius IS writing ; I fay that Titius xvrites, is equivalent to 7 AM faying that Titius IS writing. The tea on why Ase imperative and fubjunBive are refolvable into expreffions into which the indicative cannot be re- iolved, will be ieen when the import of each of* thofe modes is afeertained. .. (T)„Evcry verb, except the Ample verb am, art, is, &c. expreffes without modes a combination of thoughts, viz. affirmation and an attribute. The affirmation, however, alone is effential to the verb, for the attribute may¬ be exprefled by other words. It is indeed extremely probable, that, in the earlieft ages of the world, the affir¬ mation and attribute were always expreffed by different words; and that afterwards, for the fake of concifenefs, one word, compounded perhaps of thefe two, was made to expfefs both the affirmation and the attribute : hence arole the various claffes of verbs, aBive, pa five, and neuter. Of a procefs of this kind there are evident figns in .5 T!;. and/me other tongues. But the improvers of language ftopped not here. The fame love of con- ei ends induced tnem to modify the compound verb itfelf, that it might exprefs various combinations of thought Itillrnore. complex : but m all thefe combinations afiertion was of neceffity included ; for if the word had ceafed to aliert, it would have ceafed to be a verb of any kind. Soon after tnis ffiort note was written, and the whole article finiffied for the prefs, we accidentally met with rickbourn s Difiertation on the Englifb Verb. Of that work it belongs not to us to give a charafter. Such of our readers as ffiall perme it, will fee that on many points we differ widely in opinion from the author 5 but we ' have no Painful apprenenfion 0f any comparifon which may be made. It gives us pleafure, however, to find, that Chap. IV. Verbs, founded,' Sr All modes equally in¬ dicative. GRAMMAR. tliat its ejfence confifts in affirmation. And in lur number ' this opinion we are the more confirmed, from a convic¬ tion that no man ever employs language on am/ occafion but for the purpofe of affirming fornething. The fpeaker may affirm fomething directly of the atlion itfelf; fome- thing of the agent’s power or capacity to perform it \ or fomething of his own defire that it ffiould be performed, &c.—but ftill he muft affirm. If this be fo, then are all the modes equally indica¬ tive. Some may be indicative oiperceptions, and others of volitions ; but Hill they all contain indications. On th is idea the three foregoing modes of amo will be thus diltinguifiied. When a man indicates hisprefent feeling of the paffion of love, he ufes the firft ; when he indi¬ cates his prefent capacity of feeling it, he ufes the fe- cond; and when he indicates his prefent dcfre that the perfon to whom he is fpeaking would entertain that paffion, he ufes the third. 76. As to what Mr Harris calls the interrogative mode, he himfelf obferves that it has a near affinity to the indicative. It has in fact not only a near affinity to it, but, as far as language is concerned, there is not between the one and the other the. llighteft difference. For, in written language, take away the mark of in¬ terrogation, and, in fpoken language, the peculiar tone of voice, and the interrogative and indicative modes appear precifely the fame. That fuch ffiould be the cafe is ex¬ tremely natural. To illuftrate this, let us for once fpeak in the fin ture tenfes being ufed imperatively. For although it were true, as it is evidently faife, that commands are juture, it would not follow that the relation is con¬ vertible, or that employing the future Ihould imply a command. The principle upon which fuch expreflions as, Ihou SHALT NOT kill, come to have the force of a command, feems to be this. When a perfon, efpe- cially one pofleffed of authority, aflerts that an uSiion depending on the veill of nfrce agent, and therefore in its own nature contingent, Jhall or lhall not aclually take place } what are we to conclude from fuch an alfertion > Why furely it is natural to conclude, that it is his will his command, that his affertion be verified. The Engl lilh word Jhall, if we be well informed, denoted origi¬ nally obligation ; a fenfe in which its pall tenfe Jhould is ftill has confulted feveral perfons of undoubted learning, who have devoted a great part of their time to gramraa- cf ^veftigations; and he is extremely unwilling to fuppofe, that all his inquiries refpeaing the moftim- Jnier tf W F have Mdf ln /rr0-’ trufts’ theref,,re’ that he flia11 be ^eemedga petulant ca- y U y, exam;r Wl h f0me feve.rity,the Princlpal obfervations and arguments upon which the Doaor has budt Jus theory. Upon that examination lie enters with diffidence : for the learned Profeffor’s knowledge of the various powers of the mind appears, even in this effiay, to be fuch as eminently qualifies him for afeertainihg the precife import of every fpecies of words employed for the purpofe of communicating thought : and with fuch a mail the prefent writer would be much happier to agree than to differ in opinion. . ihe Doaor acknowledges (I rank of the Royal Society, Edinburgh, vol. ii. lit. clafs, p. 19 c.) that th« infinitive xs molt improperly called a mode: and on that account he thinks we ought to turn our thoughts exclufively to “ when we endeavour to inveftigate the general import of the verb, with a view to afeertain the accident which it denotes ; and be led, Rep by ftep, to form a diflinft notion of what is common in the acci¬ dents ot all verbs, and what is peculiar in the accidents of the feveral claffes of them, and thereby be enabled to give good definitions, fpecifying the ejfence of the verb,” &c. It may be true, that to the infinitive exchfivelu we Ihould turn our attention, when we wiffi to afeeriain the accident denoted by a particular verb or clafs of veibsj 1. e. the kind of aftion, pajfion, or fate of being, of which, fuperadded to affirmation, tliat verb or clafs of verbs is expreffive : but m accidents of this kind it may be doubted if there be any thing that with propriety can be laid to be common to all verbs. There feems indeed to be nothing common to all verbs but that which is e(fential\.o them, and by which they are diflinguiffied from every other part of fpeech 5 but every kind of action, pajfjon, zxx&Jlate of being, may be completely expreffed by participles and abfiraB nouns; and therefore in luch accidents we cannot find the e/fence oi the verb, becaufe fuch accidents diftinguifti it not from other parts of Ipeech. Were a man called upon to fpecify the ejfence of verfe or metre, he would not fay, that it confifls in the meaning of the words, or in the ufing of thefe words according to the rules of fyntax. In every kind of verfe vynere words are ufed they have indeed a meaning, and in all good verfes they are grammatically conflrucled’ but this is like wife the cafe in profe, and therefore it cannot be the ejfence of verfe. The ejfence of verfe muff con- lrl which is not to be found in profe, viz. a certain harmonic fucceffion of founds and num¬ ber 01 lyllables : and the ejfence of the verb muff likewife confift in fomething which is not to be found in any other part of fpeech; and that, we are perfuaded, is nothing but affirmation. But'if affirmation be the very ejfence of the verb, it would furely be improper, when we endeavour to afeertain the general import of that part of fpeech, _ to turn our thoughts exclufively to a word which implies no affirmation j for what does not affirm cannot in flri&nefs of truth be either a verb or the mode of a verb. In the fame page it is faid, that “ the infinitive denotes that kind of thought or combination of thought* which is common to all the other modes.” In what fenfe this is true, we are unable to conceive : it denotes indeed the fame accident, but certainly not the fame thought or combination of thoughts. In the examples quoted Ison ejl VIVE RE, fed VALE'RE vita, &c. the infinitives have evidently the effeft of abjlraci nouns, and not of verbs; for though wW* and valere exprefs the famefates of being with vivo and valeo, they by no means exprefs the fame combination of thoughts. Vivo and valeo affirm that 1 AM living, and that I AM well; and he who litters thefe words muff think not oi life and health in the abJlraB, but of life and health as belonging to himfelf. v IVERE and VALERE, on the other hand, affirm nothing ; and he who utters them thinks only of the fates of living and of being in health, without applying them to any particular perfon. I he exquifitely learned author of A he Origin and Progrefs of Language, having faid that the infinitive is ufed -either as a noun, or that it ferves to conneft the verb with another verb or a noun, and fo is ufeful in fyntax, the Do&or combats this opinion and infers the infinitive to be truly a verb ; becaufe “ the thought expreffed by Chap. IV*. G R A M M A R. Verbs, frill commonly employed. In Englifh, therefore, the foregoing procefs of inferring a command from an a[Jcr- tion of futurity fee ms to have been reverfed; and the word Jhail, from denoting a command or obligation, has 8(S come to denote futurity Amply. Of verbs, as 80. Having considered the verb in its ejfcnce, its ten- they are ac-fes, and its modes, we might feem to have exhaufted the fubjed ; but there is Hill fomething more to be done. Grammarians have diftinguithed verbs into feveral fpe- cies : and it remains with us to inquire upon what prin¬ ciple in nature this diftindiion is made, and how far it proceeds. Now it muft be obvious, that if predication be the effence of verbs, all verbs, as fuch, muft be of the famefpecies ; for predication is the fame in every pro- poftion, under every pofible circumfance, and by vohom- foever it is made. But the greater part of verbs con¬ tain the predicate as well as the predication of a pro- Vol. X. Part I. live, paf- five, or heuter. polition ; or, to fpeak in common language, they denote an attribute as well as an affirmation. Thus, lego is “ I am reading ambulo, “ I am walkingfto, 44 I am funding verbero, “ I am friking f verberor, “ I vxn frickeny But the attributes exprelTed by thefe verbs are evidently of dift'erent kinds ; fome confifting in ac¬ tion, tome in fuffering, and fome in a ftate of being which is neither a£live nor pafive. Hence the diftinc- tion of verbs, according to the attributes which they de¬ note, into aBive, paffve, and neuter. Lego, 'which is an affertion that I am employed in the aid of reading, is an alllive verb ; verberor, which is an affertion that I am fujfering under the rod, is & paffive verb, becaufe it denotes a paffion ; and fo, which is an aflertion that I am funding fill, is faid to be a neuter verb, becaufe it denotes neither aBion nor paffon. But it is felf-evident that there cannot be aBion without an agent, notpajjion F without 4i Verbs. ' ——y-~—^ by means of it, may be exprefled in fynonymous and convertible phrafes, in different languages, by means of other parts or moods of the verb.” Of thefe fynonymous and convertible phrales he gives feveral examples,, of which the firft is taken from Hamlet’s foliloquy. “ To be or not to be, that is the queftion,” he thinks equivalent in meaning to, “ The queftion is, whether we pall be or Jball not be ? But we are perfuaded he is miftaken. “ Whether we fhall be or (hall not be,” is a queftion afking, whether we ffall exift at fome future and indefnite time ? but the fubjeef of Hamlet’s debate with himfelf was not, Whether, if his confcious exiftence iliould be interrupted, it would be afterwards at fome future and indefinite time refored? but whether it was to continue uninterrupted by his exit from this world ? This, we think, muft be felf-evident to every reader of the Soliloquy. It is likewife very obvious, that the word quefion in this fentence does not fignify interrogatory, but fubjeB of debate or affair to be examined; and that the word that ferves for no other purpofe than to complete the verfe, and give additional emphafis, perhaps, to an inquiry fo important. “ To be or not to be, that is the queftion,” is therefore equivalent in all refpefts to “ The continuance or non-continuance of my exiftence, is the matter to be examined and the infinitive is here indifputably ufed as an abftracl noun in the nominative cafe. Should it be faid, that the Doftor may have taken the fentence by if elf, unconne&ed with the fubjeB of Hamlet"1 s foliloquy; we beg leave to reply that the fuppofition is impofiible; for, independent of the circum- .ftances with which they are connedled, the words “ To be or not to befi have no perfeft meaning. Were it not for the fubjeft of the-foliloquy, from which every reader fupplies what is wanting to complete the fenfe, it might be afleed, “ To be or not to be—What ? A coward, a murderer, a king, or a dead man ! Queftions all equally realbnable, and which in that cafe could not be anfwered. With the lame view, to prove the infinitive to be truly a verb, the Doftor proceeds to remark upon the following phrafes, Dico, credo, puto, Titium exifere, valere, jacere, cecidiffe, procubuiffe, projeciffe Mavium, vro- jeBwn fuiffe a Mcevio; which, he fays, have the very fame meaning with dico, &c. quod Titius exifiat, quodjaceat, quod ceciderit,ptc. He adds, that “ the infinitives, as thus ufed, acquire not any further meaning, in addition to the radical import of the verb with tenfe, like the proper moods ; but the fubjunBives after quod lofe their peculiar meaning as moods, and fignify no more than bare infinitives.” In the fenfe in which this obfervation is made by the author, the very reverfe of it feems to be the truth. The infinitives, as thus ufed, acquire, at leaf! in the mind of the reader, fomething like the power of affirmation, which they certainly have not when Handing by themfelves 5 whereas, the fubjunBives neither lofe nor acquire any meaning by being placed after quod. Dico, credo, puto, Titium exifere, valere, jacere, &c. when tranflated literally, fignify' I fay, believe, think, Titius to exifi, to be well, to lie along ; a mode of fpeaking which, though now not elegant, was common with the belt writers in the days of Shakefpeare, and is frequently to be found in the writings of Warburton at the jwefent day. Dico, credo, puto, quod Titius exifat, quod jaceat, &c. fignifies literally, Ifay, believe, think, that Titius may exif, may lie along, &c. Remove the verbs in the indicative mode from the former fet of phrafes, and it will be found that the infinitives had acquired a meaning, when conjoined with them, which they have not when left by tlmmfelves : for Titium exif ere, jacere ; “ litius to exift, to lie along,” have no complete meaning becaule they affirm nothing. On the other hand, when the indicative verbs are removed, together with the won¬ der-working quod, from the latter fet of phrafes, the meaning of the fubjunBives remains in ail refpe6ts as it was before the removal j for litius exif at, jaceat, &c. fignify, Titius may exif, may lie along, as well when they ftand by themfelves as when they make the final claufes of a compound fentence. F.very one knows that quod though often called a conjumftion, is always in faff the relative pronoun. Dico, credo, puto, quod Titius exifiat muff therefore be conftrued thus : Titius exifiat {eft id) quod dico, credo, &c. “ Titius may exilt is that thing, that proportion, which I fay, believe,. think.” In the former fet of phrafes, the infinitives are ufed as abftraff nouns in the accufative cafe, denoting, in conjunflion with Titium, one complex conception, the exiflence &c of Titius: Dico, credo, puto; I fay, believe, think 5” and the objeB of my fpeech, belief, thought, is Titium ex¬ ifere, “ the exiftence of Titius.” In G R A M M A R. without a puffive being \ neither can we make a predica- is pliilofophically Juft s7 All verbs have a nc co fury re nouft in the nominative cals. 88 Aelive tun of any kind, though it denote neither ndiian nor paf- Jion, without predicating of fomething. All verbs, there¬ fore, whether uthve, pa (jive, or neuter, have a neceffary reference to fome noun expreflive of the fuhjlance, of ference to a which the attribute, denoted by the verb, is predicated. This noun, which in all languages muft be in the nominative cafe, is faid to be the nominative to the verb; and in thofe languages in which the verb has perfon and number, it muft in thefe refpccis agree with its nominative. Of attion, and confequently of verbs denoting act ion, ^stran- ^ere are obvioutly two kinds. There is an aBion which Sramltivc ' paffes from the agent to fome fubjeEl, upon which he is employed •, and there is an uBion which refpefts no ob- jeB beyond the agent himfelf Thus lego and umbulo are verbs which equally denote aBion ; but the action of lego refers to fome external objeB as well as to the agent; for when a man is reading, he muft be reading fotne- thing, a book, a newfpaper, or a letter, &c. whereas, the action of umbulo is confined wholly to the agent; for when a man is walking, he is employed upon nothing beyond himfelf—his aBion produces no ef'eB upon any thing external. Thefe two fpecies of verbs have been denominated tranftive and intranfitive; a defignation extremely proper, as the diltinffion which gave rife to it Chap. IV. Verbs of both fpecies are aBive ; Participles, but the action of thofe only which are called tranftive ^c- refpedts an external objett; and therefore in thofe lan- ' guages of which the nouns have cafes, it is only after The for- verbs which are tranftive as well as aBive, that the mer only noun denoting the fubjeB of the action is put in the ac-Sovern cufative or objcBive cafe. Verbs which are intranf live, though they be really aBive, are in the Itruclure oftive cafe> * fentences conftdered as neuter, and govern no cafe. And fo much for that moil important of all words the verb. We proceed now to the confideration of participles, adjeBtves, and adverbs ; which as they have a near relation to one another, we ihall treat of in the fame chapter. Chap. V. Of Participles, AdjeBives, and Adverbs, Sect. I. Of Participles. 9° 81. The nature of VERBS being underflood, that of Participles PARTICIPLES is not of difficult comprehenfion. Every denote an verb,except that which iscalledthefubfantiveverb,is ex- attribute^ preffive of an attribute, of time, and of an affertion. Now Vd/time if we take away the affertion, and thus deftroy the verb, there will remain the attribute and the time ; and thefe combined make the offence of that fpecies of words call¬ ed In confirmation of the fame idea, that the infinitive is truly a verb, the author quotes from Horace a palTage, which, had we thought quotations neceffary, we (hould have urged in fupport of our own opinion : PJec quicquam tibi prodefi Aerias TENT ASSE domos, animoque rotundum Percuhrisse polum, morituro. To our apprehenfion, nothing can be clearer than that tentasse and PERCURRISSE are here ufed as nouns ; tor if they be not, wffierc ffiall we find a nominative to the verb prodefi2 It wras certainly what was fignified by TENTASSE aerias domos, animoque r&tundum PERCURRISSE polum, that is faid to have been no advantage to Archytas at his death. This indeed, if there could be any doubt about it, would be made evident by the two profe yerfions, which the profeffor fubjoins to thefe beautiful lines. The firft of which is as follows: i\ec quicquam tibi prodejl quod aerias domos TENTAVER1S, et animo PERCURRRERISpolum ; which muft be thus conftru&ed : TENTAVERIS aerias domos, et PERCURRERIS animo polum {ejl ia) quod nec quicquam tibi prodejl. This verfion, however, is not perfcBly accurate : for it contains two propojitions, while Horace’s lines contain but one. 1 he fecond, which, though it may be a crabbed inelegant lenience, expreffes the poet’s fenfe with more precilion, is in thefe words : Nec quicquam tibi prodefi morituro tua TENTATIO domuum aertarum, et CLRSUS tuus circa polum. having oblcrvcd, with truth, that this fentence has the very fame meaning with the lines of Horace, Dr Gregory afles, “ \\ hy are not tentatio and curfus reckoned verbs as well as tentaffe and percurriffe Let thofe anfwer this queftion who believe that any of thefe ivords are truly verbs; for they are furely, as he adds, all verjynear akin ; indeed fo near, that the mind, when contemplating the import of each, cannot perceive the^ dmerence. Meanwhile* we beg leave in our turn to alk, Why are not tentajfe and percurrijfe reckoned ubjlracd nouns as well as tentatio and curfus ? To this queftion it is not eafy to conceive what anfwer can be returned upon the Doftor s principles. In his theory there is nothing fatisfadtory j and what has not been done by himfelf, we expeft not from his followers. On the other hand, our principles furniih a very obvious reafon for excluding tentatio and curfus from the clafs of verbs ; it is, becaufe thefe words exprefs no predication. Tentaffe and percurriffe indeed denote predication no more than tentatio and curfus ; and therefore upon the fame principle wre exclude them likewife from a clafs to which, if wrords are to be arranged according to their import, they certainly do not belong. . n n. Should the reader be inclined to think that we have dwelt too long on this point, we beg him to reriect, that it our ideas of the effgnee of the verb and of the nature of the infinitive be erroneous, every thing which we have faid of modes and tenfes is erroneous likewife. We were therefore willing to try the folidity of thefe principles which hold the effence of the verb to confift in energy: and we feletted Dr Gregory’s theory for ihe .ubject.oi examination, not from any difrefped to the author, whom the writer of this article never faw ) butbecauie we be¬ lieve his abilities to be fucli, that Defend! pojfent, Si Pergama dextrd etiam hac defenfa fuiffent. 5 Chap. V. G R A M M A 43 Thus, take away the afferhon from the by means of the verb j and the tithe at ’which it belong- , Participles, ed PARTICIPLES ™—v-—' verb writeth, and there remains the participle yt'&tpMi writing ; which, without the affection, denotes the fame attribute and the fame time. After the fame manner, by withdrawing the af rtion, we difcover written in lygctfi wrote; ypxfuv about to write in Jhall be writing. This is Mr Harris's dodirine relpedf- ing participles; which, in our opinion, is equally ele¬ gant, perfpicuous, and juft. It has, however, been controverted by an author, whole rank in the republic of letters is fuch, that we thould be wanting in refpedl to him, and in duty to our readers, were we to pafs his objedlions wholly unnoticed. 82. It is acknowledged by Dr Beattie, that this, which we have taken, is the moft convenient light in which the participle can be confidered in univerfal gram¬ mar : and yet he affirms that prefent participles do not always exprefs prefent time, nor preterite participles pajl time ; nay, that participles have often no conneftion with iime at all. He thus exemplifies his affertion, in Greek, in Latin, and in Enghjh. “ When Cebes fays, Ervy^xtopiy iri^iiroiTovy]^ iv not rev Xgevew ‘ IVe WERE WALKING in the temple of Sa¬ turn,' the participle of the prefent w'ALKlNG,is,by means of the verb WERE, applied to time pajl; and therefore of itfelf cannot be underftood to fignify any fort of • time.” Again, after obferving, that in Englilh we have but two fimple participles, fuch as ’writing and written, of which .the former is generally confidered as the prefent and the latter as the pajl, the liodtor adds, But “ the participle writing, joined to a verb of dif¬ ferent tenfes, may denote either pafl or future aftion for we may fay not only, / AM writing, but alio, I was writing yefterday, and I shall be writing to¬ morrow whence he infers that no time whatever is de¬ noted by the prefent participle. But furely this is a hafty inference, drawn from the dodlrine of abfolute time and a definite prefent, which we have already fhown to be groundlefs and contradictory. When we fpeak limply of an aftion as prefent, we mufi mean that it is prefent with refpeCt to fomething befides itfelf, or we fpeak a jar¬ gon which is unintelligible, but we do not afeertain the time of its prefence. From the very nature of time, an aftion may be prefent now, it may have been prefent formerly, or it may be prefent at fome future period; but the precife time of its p re fence cannot be afeertained even by the prefent of the indicative of the verb itfelf j yet who ever fuppofed that the prefent of the indicative denotes no time ? The participle of the prefent reprefents the aBion of the verb as going on ; but an aftion can¬ not be going on without being prefent in time with fomething. When, therefore, Cebes fays, “ We were walking in the temple of Saturn,” he reprefents the aftion of the verb walk as prefent with fomething •, but by ufing the verb expreffive of his affertion in a pafi tenfe, he gives us to underftand that the aElion was not prefent with any thing at the period of his fpeaking, but at feme portion of time prior to that period : what that portion of time was, muft be eolleCIed from the fubfequent parts of his difeourfe. The fame is to be faid of the phrafes 1 was writing yefierday, and I fhall be writing to-morrow. They indicate, that the aBion of the verb WHITE was prefent with me yefierday, and will again be prefent with me to¬ morrow. The aBion, and the timeoi aftion, are denoted by the participle ; that aftion is affirmed to belong to me ed to me is pointed out by the tenfes of that verb, am, was, and /ball be. All this is fo plain, that it could not have efcaped Dr Beattie’s penetration, had he not haftily adopted the abfurd and contradictory notion of a defnite prefent. Of the truth of his aflerdon refpeCling pajl participles, he gives a Greek and a Latin example. The former is taken from St Mark : 0 %iciva-ci', trufaoLIxi and the latter is that which is commonly called the perfeB future of the paflive verb amor, amatus fuero. In the firft in- ftance, he fays that the participle, though belonging to the aorift of the pafi time, muft be rendered either by the indefinite prefent, “ he who believeth ;” or by the future, “ he who will believe 5” and the reafon which he gives for this rendering of the word is, that “ the believing here fpoken of is confidered as pofienor in time to the enunciation of ihe promifeB This is indeed true, but it is not to the purpofe ; for with the enun¬ ciation of the promife, the time of the participle has no manner of concern. The time of Trafhva-x; depends en¬ tirely upon the time of e-uiya-iTou, with refpeCl to which it muft undeniablyhe pafi. Our Lord is not here afterdng, that hewhoJhall believe at the: day offinal retribution, fliali be faved; but that he who Ihall on that day be found to have believed in time pajl, fhall be faved : and if the participle had not been expreffive of zfinifioed aBion and a pafi time, the whole fentence would have conveyed a meaning not friendly to the interefts of the gofpel. In like manner, the timp of amatus is referred, not to the time of /peaking, but to the time of fuero, with refpeCl to which, who fees not that it is pafi ? The twro words, taken together, contain a declaration, -that he who utters them Jhall, at fome time pofierior to that of fpeaking, have BEEN loved; Jhall have been loved denotes two times, both future with refpeCl to the time of fpeak¬ ing ; but when the time, denoted by Jhall have, comes to be prefent, that of the participle loved muft be pafi, for it is declared that the aBion of it ftialf then be com¬ plete and finijhed. We conclude, then, that it is effential to a participle to exprefs both an attribute and time; and that fuch words as denote no time, though they may be in the form of participles, as doBus, “learned,” eloquens, “ elo¬ quent,” &c. belong to another part of fpeeqh, which we now proceed to confider. Sect. II. Of AdjeBives. 83. The nature of verbs and participles being un- Adjectives derftood, that of adjectives becomes eafy. A wrZ'c'e.”otte implies (as we have faid) an attribute, time, and an belonging tion; a participle implies only an attribute and time; and to fubltan- an adjective implies only an attribute as belonging toces. fome fubfiance. In other words, an adjective has no affiertion, and it denotes only fuch an attribute as has not its effence either in motion or its privation. Thus, in general, the attributes of quantity, quality, and relation, fuch as many, few, great, little, black, white, good, bad, double, treble, &c. are all denoted by adjectives. 84. To underftand the import and the ufe of this They hava fpecies of words, it muft be obferved that every adjective tfic import is refolvable into afubjluntive and an expreffion of connec-0^ tion equivalent to of. Thus, a good man is a man o/^her'wkh^* goodnefs ; where we fee the attribute denoted by the ax 44 Adjectives 93 ’fhe ufual effedt of ad jcAives is to modify a general term. S>4 '{•he re- ■verfe of this is fbmetimes the cafe. GRAM M evident that the noungoodnefs does not exprefs the whole meaning of the adjeBivegood; for every adje&ive expref- fes not only an attribute, but alfo the connexion between the attribute and its fu!fiance; whereas in the abfirabl noun, the attribute is confidcred as afubfiance unconnccicd with any other fubftance. In the next place it is to be obferved, that the con¬ nexion expreffed by adjeXives, like that expreffed by of, Is of a nature {o general and indefinite, that the particu¬ lar kind of connexion muft, in fome languages, be infer¬ red from our previous knowledge of the objefts be¬ tween which it fubfifts, or it will for ever remain un¬ known. This might be proved by a variety of ex¬ amples, but will perhaps be fufficiently evident from the following. Color falubns lignifies colour that in¬ dicates health j exercitatiofalubris, exercife that preferves health; vicius falubris, food that improves health; medi- cina falubris, medicine that refiores health. In allthefe examples the conneciion expreffed by the adjective form oifalubris different; and though it may be known from previous experience, there is nothing in any of the expreffions themfelves by which it can be afeertain- ed. Thus, adjettives are each fignificant of an attri¬ bute and conneBion ; but. the particular kind of connec¬ tion is afeertained by experience.—The ufual effedl of adjeXives in language, is to modifj or particularife a ge¬ neral term, by adding fome quality or circumfiance which may diftinguifh the objedf meant by that term, from the other objects of the fame fpecies. I have occafion, for example, to fpeak of a particular man, of wThofe name I am ignorant. The word man is too general for my purpofe, it being applicable to every individual of the human fpecies. In what way then do I pro¬ ceed, in order to particularize it, fo as to make it de¬ note that very man whom I mean to fpecify? I annex or conjoin to it fuch words as are fignificant of objeXs and qualities with which he is conneXed, and which are not equally applicable to others from whom I mean to diftinguifh him. Thus I can fay, a man of prudence or a prudent man, a wife man, a good man, a brave man. &c. By thefe additions the general term man is limited, or modified, and can be applied only to certain men to whom belong the attributes expreffed by the adjeXives prudent, wife, good, and brave. If it be ftill too gene¬ ral for my purpofe, I can add to it other qualities and circumftances, till I make it fo particular as to he ap¬ plicable to but one individual man in the univerfe. 85. This is the way in which ADJECTIVES are com¬ monly ufed, but this is not the only way. Inftead of be¬ ing employed to modify a fubfiantive, they fometimes ap¬ pear as the principal words in the fentence, when the foie ufe of the fubfiantive feems to be to modify the abfiraX noun, contained under the adjeXive to which that fub- llantive is joined. In order to underftand this, it will be neceffary to attend to the following obfervations. It may be laid down as a general propofition, that when any term or phrafe is employed to denote a com¬ plex conception, the mind has a power of confidering, in wdiat order it pleafes, the Jimple ideas of which the com¬ plex conception is compofed. To illuftrate this obferva- tion by an example: The word eques in Latin denotes a complex conception, of which the confiituent Jimple ideas are thofe of a man and a horfe; with this connexion fub- .fifting between them, that the man is conceived as on the back of the horfe. In the ufe of this word, it is 5 ^ Chap. V. well known that the idea firfi in order, as being the Adjectives. principalfubjeX of the propofition, is commonly the MAN v— o/f the back oj the horfe ; but it is not fo always, for the mind may confider the horse as the principal’ obiedl. Thus when Virgil fays, Fnena Pelethronii Lapithce gyrofque dedcre, Impofiti dorfo ; atque E QUIT EM docuere fub armis SULTARE SOLO, et GRESSUS G1.OMERARFJuperbcx the energies attributed to the objeft fignified by equi- rEM, make it evident that the horfe and not the man is meant; for it is not the property of a man, infultare folo, et greffus glomcrare fuperbos. I he fame obfervation holds true where the complex objcX is denoted by two or more words; an adjeXive, for inftance, and fubfiantive. 1 bus in the phrafe fummus monsfe inter nubila condit, the wordsfummus mans repre- fent a complex conception, of which the conitiiuent ideas are thofe of height and mountain, connected together by the adjeXtve form of fummus. Either of thefe ideas may be the fubjedl of the propofition ; and the expreffion will accordingly admit of two different fignifications. If mof be made the fubjeft of the propofition, the mean¬ ing wdll be, “ the higheft mountain hides itfelf among the clouds.” If the fubfiantive included in the radical part of fummus be made the 1'ubjeft of the propofition, the expreflion will fignify, “ the fummit, or higheft part of the mountain, hides itfelf among the clouds.” The latter is the true import of the fentence. 86. From thefe obfervations and examples, we fnall Two ufes be enabled to underftand the two ufes of the adjeXive. of the ad¬ it is either employed, as has been already obferved,icaivc“ to refiriX or modify, a general term; or the abfiraX fubfiantive contained in the adjeXive is modified by the noun, with which, in the concrete or adjedlive form, that abfiraX fubfiantive is joined. The firft may be called the direX, the fecond the inverfe, acceptation of adjedlives. The inverfe acceptation of adjeXives and participles (for both are ufed in the fame manner) has not, ex¬ cept in a very few inftances, been noticed by any grammarian ; yet the principle is of great extent in lan¬ guage. In order to explain it, we fhall produce a few examples ; which on any other principle it is impofiible to underftand. Livy, fpeaking of the abolition of the regal autho¬ rity at Rome, fays, Regnatum efi Romceab UR BE CON HIT A ad L1BERATAM annos ducentos quadraginta quatuor, “ Monarchy fubfifted at Rome, not from the city built (which would convey no meaning), but from the build- ing of the city, to its deliverancefi &c. Both the parti¬ ciples condita and hberatam are here ufed inverfely; that is, the abfiraX fubfiantives contained in condita and libe¬ ral am are modified or reftricted by the fubftantives urbe and urbem, with which they unite. Again, Ovid, i’peak- ing of the conteft between Ajax and Vlyffes for the arms of Achilles, has thefe lines : Qui, licet eloquio fidum quoque Nefiora vincat. Hand tamen efiiciet, DESERTUM ut NESTORA CRIMEN Nullum efie rear. Here alfo the adjeXive or participle desertum is taken inverfely, and the general notion of defertion contained in it is modified or rendered particular by being joined with the fubftantive Nestora, The meaning of the paffage Chap. V. GRAM Xd'e&ives. paflTage is, “ I will never be Induced to believe that the ■ J ^ i defertion of Nejlor was not a crime.” Were defer turn to be taken dire ft ly as an adjeftive modifying its fubfantive, the fentence mult be tranllated, “ 1 cannot believe that Nefor defer ted was not a crime.” But it is evident that this is nonfenfe : as Nestor, whether deferted or not deferted, could not be a crime. It were eafy to produce many more examples of ad¬ jectives taken inverfely; but thefe may fuffice to illu- llrate the general principle, and to fhow, that without attending to it, it is impoffible to underltand the ancient authors. We lhall adduce one inftance of it from Shake- fpeare, to evince that it is not confined to the ancient languages, though in thefe it is certainly more frequent than in the modern : “ Freeze, freeze, thou bitter Iky j “ Thou canit not bite fo nigh “ As benefits forgot: “ Though thou the waters warp, “ Thy ding is not fo lharp “ As friends remember"1 d not. Here it is evident, that the adjeftive FORGOT is taken inverfely 5 for it is not a benefit, but the forgetting of a benefit, which bites more than the bitter Iky : and there¬ fore, in this paifage, the adjeftive ferves not to modify the noun ; but the noun benefits is employed to modify the abfiraft fubfiantive contained in the adjeCHve forgot, which is the fubjeCt of the propofition, and the princi¬ pal word in the fentence. Had Mr Harris attended to the principle, and re¬ flected upon what he could not but know, that all ad- jeftives denote fulfil ances ; not indeed fubfifiing by them- felves, as thofe exprelTed by nouns, but concretely, as the attributes of other fubftances 5 he would not have claffed adjeftives with verbs, or have paffed fo fevere a cenfure upon the grammarians for clafling them with nouns. It matters very little how adjeftives are claffed, provided their nature and efifeft be underltood 5 but they have at leaft as good a title to be ranked with nouns as with verbs, and in our opinion a better. To adopt Mr Harris's lan¬ guage, they are homogeneous with refpeft to nouns, as both denote fubfiances ; they are heterogeneous with re- fpeCt to verbs, as they never do denote alTertion. 87. Belides original adjeCHves, there is another clafs, which is formed from fubftantives. Thus, when we fay, the party ofPompey, thefiyle of Cicero, the philofophy of Socrates; in thefe cafes, the party, the fiyle, and the philofophy fpoken of, receive a ftamp and character from the perfons whom they refpeCt: Thofe perfons, there¬ fore, perform the part of attributes. Hence they aftu- alhj pafs into attributives, and affume as fuch the form of adjeftives. It is thus wre fay, the Pompeian party, the Ci¬ ceronian fiyle, and the Socratic philofophy. In like man¬ ner, for a trumpet of brafs, we fay a bru%en trumpet, and for a crown of gold, a golden crown, &c. Even pronominal fubftantives admit the like mutation. Thus, inftead of faying, the book of me, and of thee, we fay my book, and thy book ; and inftead of faying, the country of us, and of you, we fay our country, and your country. Thefe words my, thy, our, your, &c. have therefore been properly called pronominal adjeftives. 96 Adjedtives formed from ‘ub- ftantives, 97 and from pronouns. &c. 98 MAR. 45 88. It has been already obferved, and muft be obvi- Adverbs, ous to all, that fubfiances alone are fufceptible of fex ; and that therefore bubfiantive nouns alone Humid have diftinCtions refpeCting gender. The fame is true with refpeCt to number and perfon. An attribute admits Adjedtives of no change in its nature, whether it belong to YOU from their or to ME, to a man or a WOMAN, to ONE man or to MANY j and therefore the words expreflive of attributes, n^varia-™ ought on all occafions, and in every fituation, to be tion to de- fixed and invariable. For as the qualitiesand bad, note fex, black and white, are the fame, whether they be applied timber, or to a man or a woman, to many or to few ; fo the word 't'ellon’ which exprefles any one of thefe attributes ought in ftriCtnefs to admit of no alteration with whatever fub¬ fiantive it may be joined. Such is the order of nature j and that order, on this as on other occafions, the Eng- lifti language mort ftriCtly obferves : for we fay equally, a good man or a good woman ; good men or good wo¬ men ; a good houfi'e or good houfes. In fome languages, indeed, fuch as Greek and Latin, of which the nouns admit of cafes, and the fentences of an invertedftrufture, it has been found neceflary to endowr adjeftives with the threefold diftinCtion of gender, number, and per¬ fon; but as this is only an accidental variation, occaiion ■ ed by particular circumftances, and not in the leaft ef- fential to language, it belongs not to our fubjeCt, but to the particular grammars of thefe tongues. There is, however, one variation of the adjeftive, Tbevhavc which has place in all languages, is founded in the nature however of things, and properly belongs to univerfalgrammar. °.nc varia- It is occafioned by comparing the attribute of one fub- ftance with a fimilar attribute of another, and falls na- rjature of turally to be explained under the next feCtion. Sect. III. Of Adverbs, and the Comparifon of Adjeftives. things. 89. As adjeftives denote the attributes of fubfiances, fo import; there is an inferior clafs of words which denote the mo-of adverbs. difications of thefe attributes. Thus, when we fay “ Ci¬ cero and Phny were both of them eloquent; Statius and Virgil both of them wrote;''' the attributes exprefled by the words eloquent and wrote are immediately refer¬ red to Cicero, Virgil, &c.; and as denoting the attri¬ butes offubfiances, thefe words, the one an adjeftive, and the other a verb, have been both called attributives OF THE FIRST order. But when we fay, uPliny was moderately eloquent, but Cicero exceedingly eloquent y Statius wrote indifferently, but Virgil wrote admirably" ; the words moderately, exceedingly, indifferently, and admi¬ rably, are not referable to fubfiantives, but to other attributes; that is, to the words eloquent and wrote, the fignification of which they modify. Such words, therefore, having the fame effedt upon adjeftives that adjedtives have upon fubftantives, have been called Ior ATTRIBUTIVES OF THE SECOND ORDER. By gram- The reafoa marians they have been called AD VERBS ; and, if of their we take the word VERB in its moft comprehenfive fig- narnes‘ nification (a), as including not only verbs properly fo called, but alfo every fpecies of words, which, whe¬ ther effentially or accidentally, are fignificant of the attributes of fubftances, we fhall find the name adverb to (a) Arifiotle and his followers called every word a verb, which denotes the predicate of a propofition. This claflifi- cation was certainly abfurd 5 for it confounds not only adjeftives and. participles, but even fubfiantives, with verbs 1 but the authority of Ariftotle was great •, and hence the name of adverb, though that word attaches itfelf only to. an adjeftive or participle, or a verb fignificant of an attribute; it does not attach itfelf to the pure verb. 4-6 GRAMMAR. Adverbs, &c. 102 Adverbs denoting intenfion and reraif- fion. 103 Attributes of the fame kind com¬ pared by means of fuch ad¬ verbs. 104 The com¬ panion of adjedlivis, cither by- adverbs, 1 to be a very juft appellation, as denoting a part of SPEECH, THE NATURAL APPENDAGE OF SUCH VERBS. So great is this dependence in grammatical fyntax, that an adverb can no more fubfift without its verb, i. e. with¬ out fame word lignificant of an attribute, than a verb or adjective can fublift without its fubjtantive. It is the fame here as in certain natural fubjefts. Every colour, for its exiftence, as much requires a fuperjicies, as the fuperjicies for its exiftence requires if olid body. 90. Among the attributes of fubftance are reckoned quantity and quality: thus we fay a white garment, a high mountain, &c. Now fome of thefe quantities and qualities are capable of intenfon or remifjion; or, in other words, one fubfance may have them in a greater or lefs degree \\\iu another. Thus we fay, a garment excfkdingl r white, amountain tolerabltor moderately high. ence,then, one copious fource offecondary attributes or adverbs to denote thefe two, that is, intenfon and remfion; luch as greatly, tolerably, vafly, extremely, indifferently, &c. But where there are different intentions of the fame at¬ tribute, they may be compared together : Thus, if the garment A be exceedingly white, and the garment B be moderately white, we may fay, the garment A is more white than the garment B. This paper is white, and fnow is white ; but fnow is more white than this paper. In thefe inftances, the adverb more not only denotes in- tenfion, but relative intenfon: nay, we flop not here, as we not only denote intenfon merely relative, but relative inten¬ fon than which there is none greater. Thus we fay,Sophocles was wife, Socrates was more wife than he, but Solomon was the most wife oi men. Even verbs, properly fo called, which denote an attribute as well as an affertion, muff ad¬ mit both of fmple and alfo of comparative wtenfons ; but ihefmple verb to be admits of neither the one nor the other. Thus, in the following example, Fame he lo- veth more than riches ; but virtue of all things he loveth most ; the words more and most denote the different comparative intenfons of the attribute included under the verb loveth ; but the affertion itfelf, which is the effential part of the verb, admits neither of intenfon nor remiff on, but is the fame in all poffible propofitions. 91. From this circumftance of quantities and quali- ties being capable of intenfon and remiffwn, arife the com¬ parison of adjeFlives, and its different DEGREES, which cannot well be more than the two fpecies above men¬ tioned } one to denote fmple excefs, and one to denote fuperlative. Were vre indeed to introduce more degrees than thefe, we ought perhaps to introduce infinite, which is abfurd. For why flop at a limited number, when in all fubjedls fufceptible of intenfion, the inter¬ mediate exceffes are in a manner infinite ? Between the firft fmple white and the fuperlative whitef, there are infinite degrees of more white ; and the fame may be faid of more great, more ftrong, more minute, &c. The doctrine of grammarians about three fuch degrees of companion, which they call the pofitive, the compa¬ rative, and the fuperlative, muft be abfurd; both becaufe in their poftive there is no comparifon at all, and becaufe their fuperlative is a comparative as much as iheir compa¬ rative itfelf. Examples to evince this may be met with everywhere: Socrates was the most ivise of all the Athe¬ nians; Homer was the most sublime of allpoets, &c. In Chap. this fentence Socrates is evidently compared with the Adve Athenians, and Homer with all other poets. Again, if ^ ^c- it be faid tuat Socrates was more ivise than any other v~” Athenian, but that Solomon was the most ivise of men; is not a companion of Solomon with mankind in general, as plainly implied in the laft claufe of the fentence, as a com¬ parifon of Socrates with the other Athenians in the firft ? But if both imply comparifon, it may be alked, In what confilts the difterence between the comparative and fuperlative? Does thefuperlative always exprefs a greater excefs than the comparative ? No : for though Socrates was the mofi wife of the Athenians, yet is Solomon af¬ firmed to have been more wife than he; fo that here a higher fupenorily is denoted by the comparative more than by the fuperlative mcfi. Is this then the difterence between thefe two degrees, that the fuperlative implies a comparifon of one with many, while the comparative implies only a comparifon of one with one ? No : this is not always the cafe neither. The Pfalmift fays, that “ he is wifer (or more wife) than all his teachers where, though the comparative is ufed, there is a com¬ parifon of one with many. The real difference between thefe two degrees of comparifon may be explained thus : W'hen we ufe the fuperlati ve, it is in confequence of having compared individuals with the fpecies to which they belong, or one or more fpecies with the genus un¬ der which they are comprehended. Thus, Socrates was the most ivise of the Athenians, and the Athenians were the most enlightened of ancient nations. In the firft claufe of this fentence, Socrates, although compared with the Athenians, is at the fame time confidered as one of them ; and in the laft, the Athenians, although compared with ancient nations, are yet confidered as one of thofe nations. Hence it is that in Englifh the fuperlative is followed by the prepofition of, and in Greek and Latin by the genitive cafe of the plural number; to Ihow, that the objedl which has the pre¬ eminence is confidered as belonging to that clafs of things with which it is compared. But when we ufe the comparative degree, the objects compared are fet in direct oppofition ; and the one is con¬ fidered not as a part of the other, or .as comprehended under it, but as fomething altogether difiinEl and be¬ longing to a different clafs. Thus, were one to lav, “ Cicero was more eloquent ihm the Romans,” he would, fpeak abfurdly ; becaufe every body knows, that of the clafs of men expreffed by the word Romans Cicero was one, and fuch a fentence would affirm that orator to have been more eloquent than himfelf. But vs hen it is faid that “ Cicero was more eloquent than all the other Romans, or than any other Roman,” the language is proper, and the affirmation true : for though the perfons fpoken of were all of the fame clafs or city, yet Cicero is here fet in contradiftindlion to the reft of his countrymen, and is not confidered as one of tho perfons with whom he is compared. It is for this reafon that in Englifh the comparative degree is follow7- ed by a noun governed by the word of contradiftinc- tion than, and in Latin by a noun in the ablative cafe governed by the prepofition pree (b) either exprefl'ed or underftood. We have already obferved, that the ablative cafe denotes concomitancy : and therefore when (b) See Ruddimanni Grammaticce Infituliones, Pars fecunda, lib. i. cap. 2. Although it is certainly true, that when we ufe fuperlative, we ought in propriety to confider the things compared > 4 Chap. Adverbs, 8cc. i°S Or by in flexion. v. G It A an adje&ive in the comparative degree is prefixed to a noun, that noun is put in the ablative cafe, to denote that ' two things are compared together in company ; but by means of the prepofition, expreffeu or underitood, that which is denoted by the comparative adjeBive is feen to be preferred before that which is denoted by the noun. 92. We have hitherto confidered comparatives as ex- prefled by the words more and mof 5 but the authors, or improvers of language, have contrived a method to retrench the ufe of thefe adverbs, by expreffing their force by an mfleBion of the adjeBive. I hus, initead of more fair, they fay FAIRERinftead of mof fair, fair¬ est : and the fame method of comparifon takes place both in the Greek and Latin languages ; with this dif¬ ference, however, between the genius of thefe langua¬ ges and ours, that we are at liberty to form the com¬ parifon either in the one method or in the other ; whereas in thofe languages the comparifon is feldom if ever formed by the afliftance of the adverb, but always by the inflection of the adjeftive. Hence this inflection is by the Greek and Latin grammarians confidered as a neceffary accident of the adjeBive ,• But it has reached no farther than to adjeBives, and participles flooring the nature of adjeBives. The attributes expreffed by verbs are as fufceptible of comparifon as thofe expreffed by adjeBives ; but they are always compared by means of adverbs, the verb being too much diverfified already to admit of more variations without perplexity. 93. It muft be confeffed that comparatives, as well lives'fome- the fimple as the fuperlative, feem fometimes to part times lofe thejr relative nature, and to retain only their in- tenfve. Thus in the degree denoting /f/;;/>/')rt- 11 —l/tl-e imperative of the JltL and Anglo. i A A ’■ and,m thofe lanS'»ges,.as well as in the Englilh formerly, this funm/ed conjnnBion Mas pronounced and written as the common imperative gif. Thus, *— ■“ My largefle “ Hath lotted her to be your brother’s miftrefle, r n,- n r r ^ n GlF J166 Can be ^aimed j gif not, his prey.” Sad Shepherd, Aft ii. fcene 1 Gawm Doug/afs almoft always ufes gif for if, as the common people 'in fame counties of Scotland do even at J el 1S- Tl’ thaV)Ur IF lias always vilification Of tile Englifti imperative give, and no other So that the refolution of the condruclion in the fentence, Iv you live honejlly you will live happily, is limply this , J?!' lW, hont’Jl/!/ (taking you live honefly as an abftrabt noun) you will live happily. Your‘living hlppily is Si6/ ^ Snd Up0n -y°UrrS W^aS the cond^ ^ give that, and^L happinefs fs pSvely A.iitited. In like manner may fuch fentences be refolved as, y “ I wonder he can move ! that he’s not fixed ! "ri « xt- r v ^F THAT flings be the fame with mine.” Thus, His feelings be the fame with mine, give that, I wonder he can move,” &c. And here we cannot forbear giving our affent to the truth of Mr Tooke’* obfervation, that when the datum upon which any conclufion depends is ex fentence, the article that, if not expreffed, may always be inferted. We do not, however think the mfernon at all times absolutely necefary to complete the fyntax 5 for aftive verbs govern whole fentences ’and claufes of fentences as well as fubftantive nouns. Inftances of this occur fo frequently in the Latin clalfics, that they can lave efcaped no man s notice who has ever read Horace ox Virgil with attention. We agree likewife with our molt ingenious author, that where the datum is not a fentence, but fome noun governed by the verb if or give the- article that can never be inferted. _ For example, if we be allied, how the weather will difpofe of us to morrow ? we cannot fay : If that fair,, it will fend us abroad 5 if that foul, it will keep us at home j” but “ if fair, if will fend us abroad, &c. The reafon is obvious : the verb in this cafe dire<% governs the noun : and the re¬ folved conftruaion is, “ give fair weather, it will fend us abroad j give foul weather, it will keep us at home.” AN, the other luppofitive conjunaion mentioned, is nothing elfe than the imperative of the Anglo-Saxon verb AN AN, which likewife means to give or to grant. As, “ An you had an eye behind you, you might fee more de- trathon a . youi heels than fortunes before you 5” that is “ Grant you had an eye behind you, you might fee,” this account of the two conditional conjunctions in Englilh is fo rational and fatisfaaory, that we are ftronvly in- dined to believe that all thofe words which are fo called, are in all languages to be accounted for in the fame man- ner. Not indeed'that they mull all mean precifely to give ox grant, but fome word equivalent; fuch as, he it, fun- poje allow, permit, &c. j which meaning is to be fought for in the particular etymology of eacli refpedive language. a l •t ie conJun&ions mentioned in the text, BECAUSE has been already eonfidered : and fome account mult be given of the two words since and AS. The former of tbefe, according to Mr H. Tooke, is a very cor¬ rupt abbreviation, confounding together different words and different combinations of words. To us it appears to be compounded ofsEAND, feeing ; and es, that or it; or of sin, feen, and es. Seand and SIN are the prefent and pafl participles of the Anglo-Saxon verb seon, to fee. In modern Englilh SINCE is ufed four wavs ; two as a PREPOSITION affecting words and two as a conjunction affefting fentences. When ufed as a prepofition, it has always the figmfication of the pall participle SEEN joined-to THENCE (i. o.feen and thenceforward'), or elfe the hgnitication of the pall participle SEEN only. When ufed as a conjunction, it has fometimes the fignification ot the prefent participle seeing, or SEEING that 5 and fometimes the lignification of the pall participle seen, or SEEN that. We mall give examples of all thefe lignifications. iff, As a prepeftion fignifying SEEN and thence- jot ward: A more amiable fovereign than George III. has not fwayed the Englilh feeptre SINCE the conquef." ' 1 1 V'S’ f he conqueft feen (or at the completion of the fight of the conqueft), and thenceforward, a more ami¬ able lovereign than George III. has not fwayed the Englilh feeptre.” Since, taken in this fenfe, feems rather- to.be a corruption of siththan or stthence, than a compound of seand and ES. gdly, As a nrepofition figni- iying seen fimply : Hid George III. reign before or since that example ? 3dly, As a conjunction, SINCE means jeeing that: as, “ If I Ihould labour for any other fatisfa&ion but that of my own mind, it would be an effeCl of phrenzy in me, not of hope ; since {ox feeing that) it is not truth but opinion that can travel through the world without a paffport.” 4thly, Tt means seen that or that seen; as, “ Since death in the end takes from alT whatloever fortune or force takes from any one, it were a foolilh madnefs in the Ihipwreck of worldly things, when a links but the forrow, to fave that;” i. e—Death in the end takes from all whatfoever fortune or force takes from any one; that seen, it were a foolilh madnefs,” &c. As, the other cau/al conjunction mentioned in the text, is an article meaning always it, or that, or WHICH, I ake the following example : M She glides awav under the foamy feas As fvvift as darts or feather’d arrows fly.” That Chip. VI. G R A THEREFORE (n) the fun is in eclipfe. We therefore ufe caufals in thofe inftances where, the effeB being confpi- cuous, we feek for its caufe ; and coiieBives, in demon- ftration and fcience, properly fo called, where the caufe being firft known, by its help we difcern ejfeBs. As to caufal conjunctions, we may further obferve, that there is no one of the four fpecies of caufes 119 Caufal con junctions denote four they are not capable of denoting. For example, caufe:,0" the MATERIAL caufe ; The trumpet founds BECAUSE it is made of metal. The FORMAL ; The trumpet founds BECAUSE it is long and hollow. The EFFICIENT; The trumpet founds BECAUSE an artif bloivs it. The FINAL; The trumpet founds THAT it may raife our courage. It is worth obferving, that the three firft caufes are ex- preffed by the ftrongeft affirmation \ becaufe if the ejfeB actually be, thefe mult be alfo. But this is not the cafe ■with refpeCt to the laft, which is only affirmed as a thing that may happen. The reafon is obvious } for whatever may be the end which fet the artift firlt to work, that end it may ftill be beyond his power to obtain •, as, like all other contingents, it may either happen or not. Hence alfo it is connected by a parti¬ cular conjunction, THAT (o), abfolutely confined to this j 2o caufe. Disjunc- 103. We come now to the disjunctive conjunc- *ive con¬ junctions. M M A R. S3 tions } a fpecies of words which bear this contradic- Corjutic- tory name, becaufe while they CONJOIN the fentences, , tlons- t they disjoin the fenfej or, to fpeak a language more in- telligible, they denote relations of DIVERSITY or OPPO¬ SITION. That there ffiould be fuch words, whether called con- junBions or not, is extremely natural. For as there is a principle of UNION diffufed through all things, by which this WHOLE is kept together and preferved from, diffipation 5 fo is there in like manner a principle of DI¬ VERSITY diffufed through all, the fource of di/linBiony of number, and of order. Now it is to exprefs in feme degree the modifications of this diverfity, that thofe words called disjunctive conjunctions are employed. i2r Of thefe disjunBmes fome are simple and fome ad-Either fim- VERSATIVE : Simple; as when w’efay, EITHER it is or it is night: Adverfative; as when we fay, it is not L day BUT it is night. The difference between thefe is, that the Jimple exprefs nothing more than a relation of diversity ; the adverfative exprefs a relation not barely of diverjity, but alfo of opposition. Add to this, that the adverfatives are DEFINITE, the fimple INDEFINITE. Thus when we fay, the number three is not an even num¬ ber BUT (p) an odd, we not only disjoin tw'o oppofite attributes, but we definitely affirm the one to belong to the That is, “ She glides away (with) that fwiftnefs (with) WHICH darts or feathered arrows fly.” In German, where AS ftill retains its original fignification and ufe, it is written ES. So is another conjuitBion of the fame import with as, being evidently the Gothic article sa or so, which fignifies it or that. (n) As Mr Harris has called THEREFORE, WHEREFORE, &c. colleBive conjunBions, we have retained the de¬ nomination, though perhaps a more proper might be found. It is indeed of little confequence by what name any clafs of words be called, provided the import of the words themfelves be underftood. Wherefore and there¬ fore evidently denote the relation of a caufe to its ejfeBs. They are compounds of the Saxon words hwa:r and TH/ER -with FOR or voor : and fignify, for which, for thofe, or that. It is worthy of remark, that in fome parts of Scotland the common people even at this day ufe thir for thefe. (o) We have already confidered the -word THAT, and feen that it is never a conjundtion, but uniformly a defi¬ nite article. “ The trumpet founds (for) THAT it may raife our courage}” taking the claufe it may raife our cou¬ rage as an abftract noun in concord with that and governed by for. Or the fentence may be refolved thus : “ The trumpet may raife our courage (for) that (purpofe) it founds.” (?) Mr Horne Tooke has favoured us with fome ingenious remarks on the tw-o different derivations of the word BUT, when ufed in the two acceptations that are ufually annexed to it, viz. that which it bears in the beginning of a fentence, and that which it has in the middle. He has given it as his opinion, that this w7ord, when employ¬ ed in the former way, is corruptly put for bot, the imperative of the Saxon verb botan, to boot, to fuperadd, to fupply, &c. and that when ufed in the latter it is a contradtion of be-utan, the imperative of BEOnutan, to be out. Our ancient writers made the proper diftindtion between the orthography of the one word and that of the other. Gawin Douglafs, in particular, although he frequently confounds the two words, and ufes them im¬ properly, does yet abound with many inftances of their proper ufe ; and fo contrafted, as to awaken, fays our author, the moft inattentive reader. Of the many examples quoted by him, we ffiall content ourfelves with the two following: “ Bot thy worke (hall endure in laude and glorie, “ But fpot or fault condigne eterne memorie.” Prefhce. “ Bot gif the fates, but pleid, “ At my pleafure fuffer it me life to leid.” Book iv. If this derivation of the word but from botan, to fuperadd, be juft, the fentence in the text, “ the number three is not an even number but an odd,” will be equivalent to, “ the number three is not an even number, fuperadd (it is) an odd number •, and if fo, the oppofition is not marked (at leaft diredlly) by the word BUT, but by the adjectives even and ODD, which denote attributes in their own nature oppofite. It is only when But has this fenfe that it anfwers to fed in Latin, or to mais in French. In the fecond line of the quotation from Gawin Uouglafs’s Preface, the word but is evidently a contraction of BE-utan, and has a fenfe very differ¬ ent from that of bot in the preceding line. The meaning of the couplet is, “ Superadd (to fomething faid or fuppofed to be faid before) thy work {hall endure in laude and glorie, BE out (i. e. without j fpot or fault,” &c. In the following paffage from Donne, the word but, although written in the fame manner, is ufed in both its meanings : “ You muft anfwer, that (he was brought very near the fire, and as good as thrown in $ or elfe, that ftie was provoked to it by a divine infpiration. But that another divine infpiration moved die beholders to believe that ftie did therein a noble aCt, this aCt of her’s might have been calumniated.” That 122 An impro¬ per dii'cmc tioB. the fuhjccl, and deny the other, number of thefars is EITHER (o) even OR odd; though we alien one attribute to be, and the other not to be, yet the alternative is notwithiianding left indefinite. As to adverfiative disjunBives, it has been already faid, ■ after Mr Harris, that they imply opposition : but the truth leems to be, that they only unite in the fame fen- tence words orphrafes of oppofite meanings. Now it is obvious, that cppofite attributes cannot belong to thefame fiubjeci ; as when we fay, Nereus was beautiful, we can¬ not superadd to this fentence, that, he was ugly ^ wre cannot fay, he was beautiful but ugly. When tin re is oppofition, it muft be either of the fame attribute in different fubjecls} as when we fay, “ Brutus was a pa¬ triot, but Casfar was not Or of different attributes in the fame fubjeft : as when we fay “ Gorgius was a/v- phi.fi but not nphi/ofopher.” Or of different attributes in different fubfeBs; as when we fay, “ Plato was aphilofo- pher, but Hippias was a fophifiP The con'un&ions ufed for all thefe purpofes have been called abfolute ad- veifatives, we think improperly, as the oppofition is not marked by the conjunctions, but by the words ovfenlences which they fcrve to conned. Mr Locke, fpeaking of the word but, fays, that “ it fometimes intimates ^ fop of the mind, in the courfe it was going, before it came to the end of k to which Mr fooke replies with truth, that BUT itfelf is the fartheft of any word in the language from intimating a flop. On the contrary, it akvays intimates fomething to follow ; infomuch, that when any man in difcourfe finilhes his words with but, inftead of fuppoling him to have flopped, wTe alw’ays alk, BUT what ? Befides the adverfatives already mentioned, there are twTo other fpecies, @f which the moll important are un- GRAMMAR. But when we fay, the less and ALTHOUGH lions. Chap. VI. For example, “ Troy will be Gonjune- taken, unless the palladium be preferved; Trot/ will be taken, although Hedor defend it.” The na¬ ture of thefe adverfatives may be thus explained. As every event, is naturally allied to its caufe, fo by parity of reafon it is oppofed to its preventive; and as every caufe is either adequate or inadequate (inadequate when it endeavours without being effedual), fo in like man¬ ner is every pt eveniive. Now adequate preventives are exprefled by liich adverfalives as unless : “ Troy will be taken, unless the palladium be preferved that is this alone is lufficient to prevent it. The inadequate, are exprefled by fuch adveriatives as although : “ Troy will be taken although HeElor dc|end it that is HeBo'r's defence will prove ineffe&uul. " Thefe may be called adverfatives adequate and inadequate. Suca s the dodlrine of Mr Harris ; which although we can difeover in it no determinate meaning, wre have ventured with others to retail, in rcfpedl to our readers, who may be more perfpicacious tlian ourfelves. The author was a man of great learning; and the lubjed, as he has treated it, appears to be intricate. But what¬ ever fenfe or nonfenfe there may be in what he fays of caufes and preventives adequate and inadequate, we have no hefitation to affirm that he has totally miftaken the import of the words UNLESS and although. From thefe being called both preventives, the oneadequatezx-Atho other inadequate, an unwary reader might be led to infer, that they denote the fume idea or the fume relation ; and that the whole difference between them is, that the expref- fion of the one is more forcible than that of the other. Nothing, however, can be farther than this from the truth. The meaning of unless is diredlly oppofite to that oi although. Unless (r) and though are is, “ You muft anfwer, that ffie was brought very near the fire,” &c. “ Superadd (to that anfwer) BE out (or unless or without ; for, as will be feen by and bye, all thofe words are of the fame import) that another divine infpirahon moved,” &c. To thefe remarks and examples it may be worth while to add, that even now BUT is often uled by the illiterate Scotch for without; as nothing is more common than to hear a clown fay He came from home but his breakfaft.” Having mentioned W ITHOUT as a word of the fame import with but when diftinguifhed from EOT it may not be improper to confider that word here ; for though in modern Engliffi it is entirely confined to the office of a piepoffinm, it was formerly ufed indifferently either as a prepofition or a conjunction. Without then is nothing out the imperative wyrthan-utan, from the Anglo-Saxon and Gothic verb weorthan, WITH.an ; which in the Anglo-Saxon language is incorporated with the verb BEGN, effe. According to this derivation, which is Horne Tooke's, the word without, whether called conjunction or prepofition, is the fame as BE out ; and fuch will be its import, ffiould it after all be nothing more than a compound of WITH, which fignifies to join, and fometimes to be, and ute, out. (q) Either is nothing more than a diftributive pronoun, which every body underftands ; and OR we have already explained. (r) So lew down a*' in the reign of Queen Elizabeth (fays Horne Tooke') this coniunCHon was fometirres written oneles or onele/fe ; but more anciently it was written ONLES and fometiines ONLESSE. Thus, in the trial of Sir John Olaeaftle in 1413, “ It was not poffible for them to make whole Chriiieseote without feme, ONLESSE certeyn great men were brought out of the wray.” So, in “ The image of governance,” by Sir T. Elliot, 1 c/ii “ ^0 fere to approache unto their fovereigne Lord, ONELES they be called.” So again, in “ A neceffary cioctrine and erudition for any Chriftian man, let furthe by the king’s maieftie of England,” 1543, “ Onles ye believe, ye thall not under ft ande.’’ « No man {hull be crowned, ONLES he lawfully fight.” “ The foul waxeth feeble, ONLESSE the fame be cherilhed.” “ It cannot begynne, onelesse by the grace of God.” Now, oNl.ES is the imperative of the Anglo-Saxon verb onlesan, to difmifs or remove. Les, the imperative of lesan (which has the fame meaning as onlesan), is likewifc ufed fometimes by old wniers inftead of UNLESS. Inftances might be given in abundance from G. Dcugfafs and Ben Johnfon ; but perhaps it may be of more importance to remark, that it is this fame imperative LES, which, placed at the end of nouns and coalefemg with them, has given to our language fuch adjeClives as hwpelejs, refilefs, death!tfs, motionlefs, occ. 1. e. difmifs hope, reft, death, motion, &c. Mr J ooke obferves, that all the languages which have a conjunClion correfponding to less or unless, as well Chap. VI. - GRAM M A R. • 55 Conjunc- are both verbs in the imperative mode: the former fig- tions. nifying take away or dijmifs ; the latter allow, permit, m~'J grant, yield, ajjent. This being the cafe, “ Troy will be taken UNLESS the palladium be preferred,” is a fen- tence equivalent to “Remove the palladium be preferved (taking the palladium be preferved as an abftraht noun, the prefervation of the palladium^) Troy will be taken.” Again, “ Troy will be taken, although HeElor de¬ fend it,” is the farpe as “ Troy will be taken allow lleBor (to) defend it.” The idea, therefore, expreffed by unless is that of the removal of one thing to make way for another ; the idea exprefled by although (s) is that q/' ALLOWING one thing to COEXIST with another, with which it is APPARENTLY incompatible. 104. Before we take leave of this fubjeht, we might treat, as others have treated, of adverbial conjunflions, and conjunctions (t) of various other denominations. But of multiplying fubdivitions there is no end ; and fyftems, in which they abound, convey for the molt part no information. The nature of conjunctions can be thoroughly underitood only by tracing each to its . original in fome parent or cognate tongue *, and when that lhall be done in other languages with as much fuc- cefs as it has lately been done by Mr Horne Tooke in Conjunc- Englilh, then, and not till then, may ive hope to fee a tl0ns- rational, comprehenflve, and coniiltent theory of this " " v part of fpeech. Then too fhall we get rid of all that J2^ farrago of ufelefs diftinftions into conjunctive, adjure- Which live, disjunctive, fubjunchve, copulative, continuative, ferves only fubcontinuative, p of live, fuppoftive, caufal, collective,to vel11S" preventive, adequate and inadequate, adverfative, condi- ‘:0l'ance’ tional, illative, &c. &c. •, which explain nothing', and which ferve only to veil ignorance and perplex lagacity. That Mr Tooke''s principles will apply exactly to the conjunctions of every language both dead and living, is what our limited knowledge of thefe languages does not authorife us politively to affirm. It is, howrever, a ftrong prefumption in favour of his opinion, that illite¬ rate lavages, the firft cultivators of language, are little likely to have fent out their faculties in quell of words to denote the abfraCt relations fubfilfing among their ideas, when we have fuch evidence as his book affords that the names of the molt common fubfances and quali¬ ties could anfwer that and every other purpofe, which in the ordinary intercourfe of life can be anfwered by the faculty of fpeech. It is a farther prefumption in his favour, well as the manner in which the place of thefe words is fupplied in the languages which have not a conjunction cor- refpondent to them, Itrongly jultify his derivation which we have adopted. The Greek s.-pj, the Latin niji, the Italian fe non, the Spanilhy?«o, the French f non, all mean be it not. And in the fame manner do we fometimes- fupply its place in Englilh by but, without, be it not, but if, &c. It may be proper juft to add, that, according to the fame author, the conjunction lest is a contraction of lesed, the palt participle of lesenj and that lest, with the article that, either expreffed or underftood, means no more than hoc dimiffo or quo dimijfo. (s) Although is compounded of al or all, and tho’, though, that, or, as the vulgar more purely pronounce it, thaf, thauf, and THOF. Now, THAF or thauf, is evidently the imperative thaf or THAFIG of the verb tha- FIAN or THAFIGAN to allow, permit, grant, yield, ajfent; and THAFIG becomes thah, though, thoug, (and thoch, as G. Douglafs, and other Scotch authors write it) by a tranfition of the fame fort, and at leaft as eafy as that by which HAFUC becomes hawk. It is no imall confirmation of this etymology, that anciently they often ufed all be,, albeit, all had, all were, all give, inftead of although 5 and that as the "Latin si (if) means be it, and nisi and sine (unlefs and without) mean be not, fo etsi (although) means and be it. (t) In a work of this kind, wdiieh profeffes to treat of univerfal grammar, it would be impertinent to wafte our own and our readers time on a minute analyfis of each conjunction which may occur in any one particular language.. We lhall therefore purfue the fubj eft no farther; but fhall fubjoin Mr Horne Tooke’s table of the Englifh con¬ junctions, referring thofe who are defirous of fuller fatisfaCtion to his ingenious work entitled The Diverfons of Turley* If An Unless Eke Yet Still Else Though or Tho’ But But Without And !> E 1 HH fGlF ' An Onles Eac Get Stell Ales Thafig or Thaf Bot Be-utan Wyrth-utan An ad i> V > w 1C cd Lest is the participle lesed of lesan, "Siththan' Syne Seand-es SlTHTHE or SlN-ES CtIFAN Anan Onlesan Eakan Getan Stellan Alesan Thafigan 7 or Thafian Bot an Beon-utan Wyrthan-utan _ Anan ad to difmifs. Since > is the participle of Seon, to fee.. To give. To grant. To difmifs.. To add. To get. To put. To diminiffi. To allow. To boot, or fuperadd. To be out. To be out. Dare congeriem. That is the article or pronoun that. As is es, a German article, meaning it, that, or which. And So is sa or so, a Gptliic article of the fame import with AS. Prepofi- tious. 5$ _ _ . GRAM faVoflr, fijat iii tlfe rudeft languages there are few if j ariy conjunctions j and that even in others which are the rao'd^ highly poiifhed, fucli as Greek and Latin, as well as Eng lip, many of thofe words which have been called conjunaions are obviouily refolvable into other parts of fpeech. Thus aXt-.x, tranHated but, is evidently the neuter gender of either the nominative or accufative plural oi *X\o$ another; and when ufed as a con junci ion, it intimates that you are going to add pnietlung to what you have already faid. Cceterum has the fame meaning, and is nothing but kxi htgev. Mais (but in Trench j is the Latin majus; ut, uti, on, quod, is the rela^ live pronoun. Of quocirca, quia, prceterea, antequam, quenquam, quanvis, quantumvis, quatnlibet, &c. the refo- lution is too obvious to require being mentioned. Where fuch refolutions as thele can be made, or when the con- junSlions of any particular tongue can be traced to their origin in any other, there needs be no difpute about their true import; but when the cafe is otherwife, and the conjunElion either appears to be an original word, or is derived irom a fource to which it cannot be traced, we 124 would advife fuch of our readers as wifh to fpeak or The import write correftly, to difmifs from their minds all confidera- of conjuno tion of copulatives, continuatwes, caujals, and disjunc- larwuag^ to ^ Verbs and nouns ffiould always pafs from one language to another, in order to be converted into prepofltions. The¬ ir reek prepofition is evidently the corrupted imperative of to fever, to disjoin, to feparate. The Latin sine is sit ne, be not. The German BONDER is the imperative of SONDERN, which has the fame meaning as •'guffQii'). (b) Up, UPON, OVER, rove, above, have all, fays Horne Tooke, one common origin and fignincation. In- the Anglo-Saxon, up'A, ufera, ufkm/PST, are the adje&ives altus, altior, altissimus. Ufa or ufan, up; . comparative ufera, op'ERE or OP'ER, over or upper ; fuperlative ufemjest, upmofl or uppermofl. Beufan, Eu- P’-an, on bufan, hove, above. If this be a juft account of the origin of thefe words, the fentences in the text, where upon, over, and above, occur, will run thus : “ The ftatue flood ON high a pcdeftal 5” “ the river ran- HTGHER afand ; “ the fun is riftpi on high the hills.” And here we may obferve, that the mere relation between /landing, running, &c. and place, is rather inferred from the verb itfelf than expreffed Xoy a feparate word ; and the reafon is obvious. For if a ftatue fland, every one knows that it muft Hand on fome thing as well as at fome- t-ime. I here is therefore no neceffity, whatever elegance there may be in it, for employing any word to denote that relation, which is commonly believed to be fignified by on ; but it is neceffdry \o infert, between the verb and pedeflal, a word fignificant of place, that pedeffal may not be miftaken, by an ignorant perfon, for a portion: tf time, or any thing elfe connefted with the flanding of the flutue. (c) I hat to is fignificant of detached relation, is the language of Mr Harris, which, though it may be al¬ lowed in a loofe and vulgar fenfe, is certainly-not philofophically juft. The prepofition to (in Hutch written TOE and tot) is the Gothic fubftantive taui or tauhts, fignifying a&, eff'e&, refult, or confummation ; which.v Gothic fubftantiye is itfelf no other than the paft participl© Tauid or TAUIDS of. the verb TAUJAN agere; And * ' . - iV Chap. VT. Prcpofi- end (of liis journey) Italy ; the fun Is nfen above the t‘ons- kills, i. e. the fun is rifen (the place) THE top of the ^ , hills : thefe figs came FROM Turkey, i. e, thefe figs came BEGINNING (their journey at) Turkey. Befides the detached relation of body, Mr Harris is of opinion that the prepofition FROM denotes two other relations not lefs different than thofe of motion and rift. Thus if we fay, “ That lamp hangs FROM the ceiling, the prepofition FROM aifumes a character of quiefccnce. But if we fay, That lathp is falling FROM the ceiling, the Prcpofl- prepofition in iuch cafe afiumes a charaCrer oi motion.^ t|0r>s' But this is evidently a -miftake : the detached relation L,'“ \rw-- in the former inftance of the fgs, as well as the motion and refi in the prelent initances, are exprefled not by the prepofition, but by the verbs came, jails, hangs. 1 he word from has as clear, as precile, and at all times as uniform and unequivocal a meaning, as any word in the language. From means merely beginning, and no¬ li 2 thin£' GRAMMAR, it is obvious, that what is done, is terminated, ended, finifhed. In the Teutonic, this verb is written TUAN o? tuon ; whence the modern German THUN, and its prepofition tu. In the Anglo-Saxon, the verb is teocan, and the prepofition to. Do, the auxiliary verb, as it has been called, is derived from the lame root, and is in¬ deed the fame word as TO. The difference between a T and a D is fo very fmall, that an etymologift knows by the practice of languages, and an anatomift by the re of on of that practice, that in the derivation of words it is fcarce worth regarding. To iiipport this etymon of to, Mr Horne Tooke gives a fimilar initance in the Latin tongue. The prepofition ad, he fays, is merely the paft participle of AGERE, which pail participle is likewife employed as a Latin fubfiantive. He exhibits the derivation of AD thus : f AGDUM* AGD AD Agitum—~agtum < or or or' C ACTUM ACT AT The molt fuperficial reader of Latin verfe (he obferves), knows how readily the Romans dropped their final um. And a little eonfideration of the organs and practice of fpeech will convince him how eafily AGD or act would become ad or at ■, as indeed this prepofition was indifferently written either way by the ancients. By the later writers of Rome, the prepofition was written AD with f) only, in order to diftinguilh it from the other corrupt word called the conjundiion AT ; which for the fame reafon w7as written with the T only, though that likewife had anciently been written, as the prepofition, either AD or at. The prepofition to and the conjunftion too in Eng- li(h, are both in fyntax and in meaning ufed exactly as the prepofition ad and! the conjunction at in Latin. From the fpecimens prefixed to Johnfon’s dictionary, as a hiftory of our language, it appears that, as late as the reign of Elizabeth, the prepofition and conjunction ivere both written with one o. And it has been Ihown in the firlt vo¬ lume of the Tranfadiions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, that to and too, as well as ad and AT, are precilely of the fame import. The only difference, in either language, between the prepofition and the conjunction, is, that the former dircCis, as a modification of fome previous propolition, the addition of fome fubfiantive or noun ; the latter, fometimes a fcntence or claufe of a fentence conlidered abfiraCtly as a noun ; and that, when the former is ufed, the prepofition, to which the modifying circumftance is to be added, is formally exprejfed, but omitted when the latter is employed. Thus Denham fays, “ Wifdom he has, and, to his wifdom courage j “ Temper TO that, and, unto all, fuccefs.’-’ In this example, every fucceeding circumftance is by the prepofition to marked as an addition to the preceding. “ Wifdom he has, and courage additional to his wifdom.” But Denham might with equal propriety have omitted the obje£t which TO governs, or to which it directs fomething to be added, though he muft then, from the cuftom ©f the language, have employed the conjunction inftead of the prepofitioji. As, “ Wifdom he has, and courage too,” &c. This mode of expreflion would have been more concife, and as intelligible as the other, “ Wifdom he has, and •ourage to his wifdom f &c. Not only is the object governed by to omitted, when it is reprefented by a fabfiantive in the context, but alfo when it is involved in a prepofition ; and then the conjunction, as it is called, is always ufed. Thus, “ -—Let thofe eyes that view “ The daring crime, behold the vengeance TOO.” Sro, “ He made him prifoner, and killed him /oo.” In the one example, the circumftance of behold* ing the vengeance is ftated as an addition to the viewing of the crime; and in the other, the killing him is ftated as an addition to the making him a prifoner. In both examples, the objeft governed by too is the amount of the preceding propofition taken abfiraClly as a noun or fubfiantive. Thus then it appears, that TO -and too, though claffed the one with the prepofitions, and the other with the conjun6Iions, are really one and the fame word. 1 he fame is true of AD and at. Thus, “ Ad hoc, promiffa barba et capilli efferaverant fpeciem oris,” fignifies “ Additional to this, his long beard and hair had given a wildnefs to his afpeft.” But when the object governed by ad is not formally ftated, AD itfelf is claffed with the conjunctions, and written differently, at. Thus Terence, “ Ph. Fac ita ut juffi, deducantur ifti. Pa. Faciam. Ph. At diligenter. Pa. Fiet, Ph. At mature.” By the means of at, the eireumftances of diligence and hafie are fuperadded to the action commanded. “ Ph. It is not enough that you do it, you muft do it carefully TOO. Pa. Well, it fhallbe carefully done. “ Ph. In good time too.” At, taken in this lenfe, is moft commonly employed, like the Englifti but, 1o mark the unexpected union of incongruous objeCls: As, “ Aulam tyranni frequentabat, at patriam amabat literally, “ He frequented the court of the tyrant •, joined EVEN TO that he loved his country.” “ He was « icourtier and a patriot too.” But if ad and at S' fources as thefe, no room can be left for difputes concerning their meaning. In carrying on this ety¬ mological purfuit, we find advantages in the nature of prepofitions which conjunEiions do not afford us. \\ ith and without., irom and to, with many other words belonging to this clafs, have meanings direflly oppo¬ site and contradictory to each other. If, then, by the total or partial extinction of an original language, the root of any one prepofition be lott, whilit ‘that of its oppofite remains, the philofopher ought to be fatisfied with reafoning from contrariety; as nothing is more evident, than that the meaning of a word is known when we know with precifion the meaning of its op¬ pofite. . When we meet, however, with a lucklefs prepofition of which no root is left to be dug up, and which has itfelf no direCt oppofite in the language, no¬ thing remains but that we inquire for what purpofe it is ufed by the beft writers both ancient and modern ; and if we can fix upon one meaning which will apply, how¬ ever awkwardly, to all the places where it occurs, or to the greater part of them, the probability is, that we have difcovered the true and original (h) meaning of the prepofition j and by keeping that meaning conflantly in view, we fhall ourfelves be enabled to ufe the wrord with perfpicuity and precifion. Sect. III. Of Interieflions. *34 1 The inter- III. Befides the above parts of fpeech, there is an- propedy101 °ther acknowledged in the languages of Europe, any part of called the interjection j a word which cannot be fpeech. comprehended under any of the foregoing claffes. The genuine interje&ions are very few in number, and of very little importance, as they are thrown into a fen- tence without altering its form either in fyntax or in Signification.. In the words of Horne Toohe the brutifh inarticulate interjeftion has nothing to do with fpeech, and is only the miferable refuge of the fpeechlefs. The dominion of fpeech, according to the fame author, is erefted on the downfal of interjeflions. Without the artful contrivances of languages, mankind would have nothing but interjetfions with which to communicate orally any of their feelings. “ The neighing of a horfe, the lowing of a cow, the barking of a dog, the purring of a cat, fneezing, coughing, g-roaning, fhriek- ing, and every other involuntary convulfion with oral found, have almoft as good a title to be called parts of fpeech as interjeSlions. In the intercourfe of language, znterjeflions are employed only when the fuddennefs or vehemence of fome affe&ion or paflion returns men to their natural ftate, and makes them for a moment forget the ufe of fpeech ; or w hen, from fome circum- ftance, the fhortnefs of time will not permit them to exercife it.” The genuine interjeftion, w'hich is al¬ ways expreffive of fome very ftrong fenfation, fuch, as ah ! when we feel pain, does not owe its chara&erifti- ^ M A K- Chap. VI. cal expreffion to the arbitrary form of articulation, Interjec. but denves its whole force from the tone of voice and tions. modification of countenance and gefture. Of conic-l—-y——> quence, thefe tones and geflures exprefs the fame meaning, without any relation to the articulation which they may afiume •, and are therefore univerfally under- ftood by all mankind. Voluntary interjections are ufed in books only for embellilhment, and to mark forcibly a ftrong emotion. But where fpeech can be employed, they are totally ufelefs j and are always in- fufticient for the purpofe of communicating thought. Dr Beattie rmksf range,prodigious, amazing, wonderful, 0 dear, dear me, &c. when ufed alone, and without apparent grammatical iyntax, among the interjediions: but he might with as much propriety have confidered hardly, truly, really, and even many Latin verbs, as interjettions; for thefe two are often ufed alone, to fupply the place of whole Sentences. The truth is, that all men, when fuddenly and violently agitated, have a ftrong ten¬ dency to ihorten their difeourfe by employing a fngle word to exprefs a fentiment. In fuch cafes, the word employed, whether noun, adjeSlive, or verb, would be the principal word of the fentence, if that fentence were completed $ and the agitation of the fpeaker is fuch, and the caufe of it fo obvious, that the hearer is in no danger of miftaking the. fenfe, and can himfelf fupply the wrords that are wanting. Thus if a perfon, after liftening to a romantic narrative, were to exclaim, frange! would any man of common fenfe fuppofey that the viovdif range, becaufe uttered alone, had loft the powder of an adjedive and become an interjedion ? No, furely : Every one fees, that the exclamation is equivalent to, That is STBJNGE, or That is a STIUA'GE fi°ry. /?eff/interie£Hons are never employed to convey truth of any kind. 1 hey are not to be found amongft laws, in books of civil in filiations, in hifiory, or in any treatife of ufeful arts or fciences; but in rhetoric and poetry, in novels, plays, and romances, where in Englifh, fo far from giving pathos to the ftyle, they have gene¬ rally an effeCf that is difgufting or ridiculous. Having now analyfed every part of fpeech which can be neceffary for the communication of thought, or which is acknowledged in any language with which we are acquainted $ we fhall difmifs the article of Grammar, after annexing a Table, which may prefetit at one view the feveral clafes and fubdivifions of words. Of the different modes of dividing the parts of fpeech, as well as of the little importance of fyfematic clajfif cations, we have already declared our decided opinion : but for the fake of thofe who may think differently from us, we fhall in the annexed Table adopt Mr Harris'1 s claffifica- tion as far as it is intelligible j after informing our readers that Mr Horne Toohe admits only three parts of fpeech, the article, the noun, and the verb, and confideis all other words as corruptions or abbreviations of the two laft of thefe. A jlndance’ us IuPP°fe that Horne Toohe's derivation of FOR, from the Gothic fubftantive FAIRINA, is fanciful and ill-founded \ yet there can be little doubt but CAUSE is its true and original meaning, when it is found, that of fixteen examples brought by Greenwood, and forty-fix by Johnfon, of different fignifications of the mol'd For, there is not one where the noun cause may not be fubftifuted inftead of the prepofitidn for j fometimes indeed awkwardly enough, but always without injury to the fenfe. Even where for Items to be loco alterius, 'which Loxvth afferts to be \t$ primary fenfe, it will be found to be CAUSE, and nothing elfe : Thus He made con- fderable progrefs in theftudy of the law before he quitted that profef ion FOX this of poetry i i. e. before he quitted that profefion, this of poetry being the CAUSE of his quitting it. G R A [ <53 ] G R A Gramma- GRAMMARIAN, one that is Ikilled in or teaches rl‘*n grammar. Granada Anciently the name grammarian was a title of ho- , ‘'i nour, literature, and erudition, being given to pcrfons accounted learned in any art or faculty whatever. But it is otherwife now, being frequently ufed as a term of reproach, to fignify a dry plodding perion, employed about words and phrafes, but inattentive to the true beauties of expreffion and delicacy of fenti- ment. The ancient grammarians, called alfo phi/olo- gers, mull; not be confounded with the grammatifts, whole foie bulinefs was to teach children the firft ele¬ ments of language. Varro, Cicero, Meffala, and even Julius Caefar, thought it no didionour to be ranked grammarians, who had many privileges granted to them by the Roman emperors. GRAMMONT, a town of France, in Upper Vi- «nne, remarkable for its abbey, which is the chief of the order. E. Long. 1. 30. N. Lat. 46. 1. GRAMPIAN hills •, a chain of high mountains in Scotland, which run from call to Avelt almoft the whole breadth of the kingdom. See (Scottijh') Alps and Scotland.—They take their name from only a (ingle hill, the Mans Grampius of Tacitus, where Gal- gacus waited the approach of Agricola, and where the battle was fought fo fatal to the brave Caledonians. GRAMPOUND, a town of Cornwall in England, feated on the river Valle, over which there is here a bridge. W. Long. 4. 45. N. Lat. 50. 18. The in¬ habitants have a conliderable manufadlure of gloves •, and the town fends turn members to parliament. Some ■think that this town is the Voluba of the ancients, becaufe it (lands on the fame river \ and that on the building of the bridge, the name was changed into Grandpont. It was made a borough in the reign of Edward III. by whofe charter it was endowed with large privileges, particularly freedom from toll through all Cornwall, a market on Saturday, and three fairs in the year; which the burgeffes hold of the duchy of Cornwall in fee-farm, at the rent of about 12 guineas. Its privileges were confirmed by King Henry VIII. but it did not fend members to parliament till the reign of Edward VI. It is a corporation with a mayor, eight magilfrates, a recorder, and town-clerk. The mayor is' chofen annually the Tuefday before Mi¬ chaelmas, and the members by the majority of the magiilrates and freemen, who are fuch of the inhabitants as pay foot and lot. There is a chapel of eafe in the town to the parilh church, which is at Creed about a quarter of a mile olf. GRAMPUS, a fpecies of-delphinus. See Delphi- NUS, Cetologv Index. GRANADA, a province of Spain, which for a long time was a kingdom diilinct from the reft of that country. See the article Spain.—It made a part of the ancient Bmtica •, and was inhabited by the Ba- fluli, the Sexitani, &c. At prefent it is fometimes called Upper Andalufia. It is bounded to the fouth and call by the Mediterranean, to the weft and north by Lower Andalufia, and the north-eaft by Murcia. Its extent from weft to eaft is two hundred and ten miles •, but its greateft breadth exceeds not eighty. The air here is temperate and healthy ; and though there are many mountains in the province, and fome *>£ them very high, yet they are almoft everywhere covered with vines and fruit-trees, together with laurel, Granada. myrtle, fweet-baftl, thyme, lavender, marjoram, and -y—J other aromatic herbs, which give an exquiftte tafte to the lie Hr of their fheep and cattle. A great deal of filk and fugar, flax and hemp, honey and wax, is alfo produced here 5 befides dates and acorns, fuperior to the fineft nuts 5 good ftone for building ; feveral forts of gems } fumach, ufed in drefling goat-lkins ; and galls, of w hich a dye is made for leather. The valleys, with which the mountains are interfperfed, are extremely beautiful and fertile. The inhabitants of fome of the higheft mountains are faid to be defeendants of the Moors ; and, though they are become Roman Catholics, retain in a great meafure, their ancient cuftoms, manners, and language. The principal rivers in the province are the Genii or Xenil, and Guadalantin, befides which there are many leffer ftreams. Abundance of fait is made in this province j which, though neither fo populous nor fo well cultivated as when fubjetft to the Moors, yet is as much fo as any in Spain. It W'as the laft of the kingdoms poffeffed by the Moors, and was not reduced and annexed to the crown of Caftile until I492- . . Granada, the capital of the above province, is fitu- ated at the foot of the Sierra Nevada, or the Snowy Mountain, in a wholefome air and fruitful country, an hundred and eighty-eight miles fouth of Madrid, in W. Long. 3. 40. N. Lat. 37. 17. It Hands upon two lulls feparated by the Darro. The Genii runs under the walls, and thefe two rivers are formed from the melting of the fnow with which the mountain is con- ftanfly covered. The Darro is faid to carry with it fmall particles of gold ; and its name, derived from dat durum, may be alleged as a proof of this : the Ge¬ nii, in like manner, rolls with its dream little pieces of filver. When Charles V. came to Granada in 1526, with the emprefs Ifabella, the city preferlted him with a crown made of gold gathered from the Darro. 1'he city is large and magnificent, containing a great num¬ ber of very handfome public and private buildings. Its walls, which are adorned with many towTers at equal diftances, are faid to be ten miles in compafs. Here are two caftles ; the one built by the Moors,- and the other by Charles V. and Philip II. . They both com¬ mand a very fine profpecl; and the firft is fo large* that it looks like a city by itfelf, and,- it-is faid, has room enough to accommodate forty thoufand people* exclufive of the royal palace, and the convent of St Francis. Here is alfo a court of inquifition j a royal tribunal 4 and an univerfity, founded in 15.31 j with . the fee of an arehbifhop, who has a revenue of forty thoufand ducats per annum., A great many noble¬ men, clergymen, and wealthy citizens, refide in this city, of which' the (ilk trade and manufacture is very great, and the arfenal is faid to be the belt furniflied of any in Spain. The inhabitants, who are partly de-. feended of the Moors, are well fupplied with wra- ter. . There are feveral 'fine fquares, particularly that called the. Biyaramba, or P/afa Mayor, where the bull-fights -are held ; and without the city is a large plain, full- of towns and villages, called La Vega de Granada. ■ The Moors are faid to regret nothing but Granada, amongft all the Ioffes they have fuftained in Spain ; they mention it in all their evening prayers, and fupplicate heaven '■4 “Granada G ft A heaven to reftore it to their poffeflxon. iih ainbaffador who came into Spain obtained permiffion of the king to fee Granada j he died tears on entering the Alhambra, and could not refrain from exclaiming, that the folly of his anceftors had deprived them and their pofterity of that delightful country. Granada had formerly twenty gates : the lirft, that of Elvira, which dill remains ; the fecond, that of Bib- almazar, or of conference, becaufe, with the Moors, it wras a kind of place of refort where they converfed on af¬ fairs ; the third, Vivarambla, fo called from its leading to a grand fquare which dill bears the fame name j the fourth, Bib Racha, or of providons •, the fifth, Bita- taubin, or the gate of the hermits, which led to difi’er- ent folitudes, the abodes of dervifes j the fixth, Bib- mitre, or Biblacha, the fird gate 5 the feventh, the mill gate 5 the eighth, that of the lun, becaufe it open¬ ed to the ead ; the ninth, the gate of the Alhambra, called by the Moors Bib Luxar ^ the tenth, Bib Adam, ov the gate of the bones of Adam; the twelfth, Bib Ciedra, the gate of the nobles 5 the Moors kept this gate fhut for a long time, becaufe it had been prediffed that the enemies which fiiould one day take the city, would enter by that gate; the thirteenth, is that of Faxalauza, or of the hill of almond trees; the four¬ teenth, the lion gate, in Arabic, Bib Elecei; the fif¬ teenth, the coad gate, called by the Moors Alacabar ; the fixteenth, Bib Albonut, or the gate of the Banners, at prefent the magdalen gate ; the feventeenth, that of the Darro 5 the eighteenth, that of the Mofayca 5 the nineteenth, that called the gate of Ecce Homo; the twentieth, that by the fide of the Alhambra. The Moors have left more monuments in Granada than in any other city in Spain. From the great num¬ ber of infcriptions in and about the city, and the fine edifices of the Alhambra and the Generalif, it might be fuppofed thefe people intended to make Granada ♦he greated depofitory of their religion, manners, cu- doms, and magnificence. There is not a wall which does not Rear fome marks of their power •, but, not- withdanding this abundance of monuments, the reign of the Moors in Spain is dill buried in confufion and obfcurity. I he ignorance of the Spaniards, their fu- perdition, and the hatred they bore the Moors, have much contributed to this darknefs ; they have either dedroyed, or differed to be effaced by time, every thing which bore the mark of Mahometanifm, indead of preferving the monuments of antiquity, which at the fame time were thofe of their own glory ; and it may be faid, that chance alone, and the folidity of their con- dru&ion, much more than curiofity or a love of the arts, has preferved thofe which dill exid, though daily going to ruin. An account of the Alhambra has been already gi¬ ven under its name in the order of the alphabet. From the hall of Comares there mentioned, there is a modern little daircafe *, the old one, which correfponded to the beauty of the edifice, having been dedroyed. At the top of the daircafe is a gallery, a part of which is in- clofed with an iron railing : this kind of cage -is called the prifon of the queen. It was here the wife of the lad king of Granada w'as imprifoned. The Gomels and Legris, two families of didin&ion, bore falfe wit- nefs againd her virtue, and occafioned the dedruftion of the greated part of the Abencerrages, another C 64 ] G It A The lad Moor- powerful and numerous family of Granada of whom they were jealous. The hidory of this event is given as follows : .In the year 1491, Abdali, furnamed the Little, dill reigned in Granada ; but this city was upon the brink of rum, for the principal families were divided againd each other. I he Moors had carried their arms againd Jaen, and had been bravely repulfed. Abdali was con¬ fiding himfelf in one of his pleafure houfeS for the ill fuccefs of his enterprife, when the Zegris, who long had been the fecret enemies of the Abencerrages, took the opportunity of this defeat to reprefent them to the king as rebellious fubje&s, who employed their immenfe riches to gain the favour of the people and dethrone their Sovereign. They accufed Albin Ha- met, the mod rich and powerful among them, of ha¬ ving an adulterous commerce with the queen, and pro¬ duced witneffes who aherted they had on a certain fe- dival feen, at Generalif, under a bower of rofe trees Albin Hamet in the arms of that princefs. The furv of Abdali may eafily be imagined 5 he fwore the de- druftion of the Abencerrages. But the Zegris, too prudent to let his anger break forth, advifed him to diflimulate, and not to differ it to be known to that numerous and powerful family that he was informed of their perfidy. It will be better, faid they, to entice them into the fnare, and, before they can unite and put themfelves into a date of defence, revenge upon their heads the infult offered to the crown. This ad¬ vice was followed ; Abdali went to the Alhambra, having ordered thirty of his guards to arm themfelves, and the. executioner to attend. The Abencerrages w'ere fent for one by one, and beheaded as foon as they entered the hall of the lions, where there is dill a large vale of alabader, which was quickly filled with blood and the heads of expiring bodies. Thu ty-five heads had already been druck off, and all the Abencerrages would have died in the fame manner, had not a page, who had followed his mader, and remained unpercei¬ ved in the hurry of the execution, taken an opportu¬ nity of withdrawing and giving information to the red of the unhappy family of rvhat had paffed. Thefe im¬ mediately affembled their friends ih arms, crying out through the city of Granada, “ Treafon ! treafon! Let the king die ! he unjudly puts to death the Aben¬ cerrages !” The people, with whom they were favou¬ rites, did not hefitate in afliding them : fourteen thou- fand men were foon found in arms, and immediately proceeded towards the Alhambra, fliouting all the way, Let the king die ! Abdali, furprifed his fecret Ihould have been fo foon difcovered, and feverely re¬ penting of having followed the pernicious counfels he had received, ordered the cadle gates to be fimt j but they were prefently fet on fire. Muley Hacen, who had been forced to abdicate the throne in favour of his fon, hearing the tumult of the people, had one gate open¬ ed, and prefented himfelf to appeafe the rage of the citizens ; but he no fooner appeared, than he was lift¬ ed up by the multitude neareft the gate, who cried out, “ Behold our king, we will have no other, long live Muley Hacen and leaving him furrounded by a ftrong guard, the Abencerrages, and other nobles, en¬ tered the caftle, accompanied by uprvards of an hun¬ dred foldiers. But they found the queen only, with her women, and in the utmoft confternation at the fudden Granada.- G R A Craiwla. fuddcn revolution, of which die knew not the caufe. They allied for the king *, and being informed he was in the hall of the lions, entered it furioully, and found him defended by the Zegris and the Gomels, and in lefs than two hours killed upwards of two hundred of them. Abdali had the good fortune to efcape. The bodies of the beheaded Abencerrages were laid upon black cloth, and carried to the city. Muza, brother to Abdali, and who by his great aflions had gained the favour of the people, feeing the Abencerrages were revenged, found means to appeafe them $ and having learned that the king had taken refuge in a mofque near the mountain now called Saint Helena, went and brought him back to the caftie of the Alhambra. For feveral days nothing but fighs and groans were heard throughout the city. Abdali Ihut himfelf up in the caftie, and refufed to fee the queen. Thofe who had accufed her of adultery, however, perfifted in their falfe accu- fation, and faid, they would maintain, with arms in their hands, againft all who ftrould contradict them, that the queen was guilty. The unhappy princefs was imprifoned, and the day arriving on wdiich Ihe was to perilh by the hands of the executioner, when none among the Moors offering to defend her, Ihe was ad- vifed to commit her caufe to fome Chriftian knights, who prefented themfelves at the time appointed, and conquered her falfe accufers, fo that die was immedi¬ ately fet at liberty. The taking of Granada foon fol¬ lowed this combat} Muza and the Abencerrages ha¬ ving, it is faid, facilitated the conqueft of it by Ferdi¬ nand and Ifabella. From the Alhambra you enter the Generalif by a low gate, which favoured the efcape of Abdali when Ferdinand took Granada. Generalif is faid to fignify, in Arabic, the houfe of love, of dance, and pleafure. It was built by a prince of the name of Omar, who was fo fond of mufic, that he retired to this palace, en¬ tirely to give himfelf up to that amufement. The Ge¬ neralif is the moft pleafing fituation in the environs of Granada. It is built upon a very high mountain, whence waters rufh from every fide, which efcape in torrents, and fall in beautiful cafcades in the courts, gardens, and halls of that ancient palace. The gar¬ dens form an amphitheatre, and are full of trees-, vene¬ rable from their antiquity. Two cypreffes in particu¬ lar are noted, called the Cyprefles of the Oueen, be- caufe it was near them the perfidious Gomel impeach¬ ed the virtue of that princefs and the honour of the Abencerrages. Of this place, travellers obferve, that the writers of romances have never imagined a fcene equal to it. Granada was formerly called Illiberia, and founded, if we will believe fome writers, by Liberia, a great- grand-daughter of Hercules, daughter of Hifpan, and wife to Hefperus, a Grecian prince, and brother to Atalanta. Others, who fupport their aflertions by proofs to the full as fatisfa&ory, maintain that it was founded by Iberus, grandfon of Tubal, and that it took , the name of Granada, or Garnata, from Nata the daughter of Liberia •, this word being compofed of Gar (which in the language of the time fignified grot¬ to) and Nata; that is, “ the grotto of Nata,” becaufe that princefs ftudied aftrology and natural hiftory, and delighted in the country. It is certain that fuch a perfon as Nata, or Natayda, cxifted in the firft ages of Vol. X. Part I. G R A the foundation of Granada •, and that in the place Granada where the Alhambra now Hands, there was a temple ll dedicated to Nativala. The date of the foundation of t-r,a"a 0* Granada is faid to be 2808 years before Chrift We know that in the time of the Romans it vas a munici¬ pal colony.—A defcription in Latin of Granada, inch as it was in 1560, written by a merchant of Antwerp, named George Hofnahel, who travelled into Spain, is to be found in the work intitled Cmitates orbis terra- rum, printed at Cologne in 1576. This book alfo contains a good plan ol the city of Granada. Granada, or Grenada, one of the Caribbee ifiands. See Grenada. Granada, a town of Mexico, in America, in the province of Nicaragua, and in the audience of Guati- mala, feated on the lake Nicaragua, 70 miles from the South fea. It was taken twice by the French buc¬ caneers, and pillaged. Tne inhabitants carry on a great trade by means of the lake, which communi¬ cates with the North fea. W. Long. 87. 46. N. Lat. 10. 12. Granada, New, a province of South Ameri¬ ca, in Terra Firma, about 75 miles in length, and as much in breadth. It is bounded on the north by Carthagena and St Martha, on the eaft by Venezuela, on the louth by Popayan, and on tne weft by Darien. It contains mines of gold, copper, and iron j horfes, mules, good pa (lures, corn, and fruits. It belongs to the Spaniards, and Santa-Fe de Bagota is the capi¬ tal town. GRANADILLOES, the name of fome iflands of the Caribbees, in America, having St Vincent to the north and Granada to the fouth. They are fo incon- fiderable that they are quite negledled 5 but were ceded to England by the treaty of peace in 1763. GRANADIER, a foldier armed with a fword, a firelock, a bayonet, and a pouch full of hand grana- does. They wear high caps, are generally the tailed: and brilkeft fellows, and are always the firft upon all attacks. Every battalion of foot has generally a company of granadiers belonging to it j or elfe four or five granadiers belong to each company of the battalion, which, on occafion, are drawn out, and form a com¬ pany of themfelves. Thefe always take the right of the battalion. GRANADO or Grenade, in the art of war, a hollow ball or {hell of iron or other metal, of about ■§■ inches diameter, which being filled with fine powder, is fet on fire by means of a fmall fufe driven into the fufe-hole, made of well-feafoned beech wood, and thrown by the granadiers into thofe places where the men ftand thick, particularly into the trenches and other lodgments made by the enemy. As foon as the compofition within the fufe gets to the powder in the' granado, it burfts into many pieces, greatly to the da¬ mage of all who happen to be in its way. Granadoes were invented about the year 1594. The author of the Military Di<5lionary has the following remark on the ufe of granadoes. “ Grenades have unaccountably funk into difufe; but I am perfuaded there is no¬ thing more proper than to have grenades to throw among the enemy who have jumped into the ditch. During the fiege of Cafiel under the count de la Lippe, in the campaign of 1762, a young engineer I undertook [ 65 1 G R A [66 Gran ado undertook to carry one of the outworks with a much Granary. ^n)a^er detachment than one which had been repul- fed, and fucceeded with eafe from the ufe of grenades ; which is a proof that they fhould not be neglefted, either in the attack or defence of pofts.”—-The -word Granado takes its rife from hence, that the ihell is fill¬ ed with grains^of powder, as a pomegranate is with kernels. GRANARD, a borough, market, fair, and pod town in the county of Longford, province of Lein- fter 5 it gives title of earl to the family of Forbes; fituated 52 miles from Dublin, and about 16 north-eaft of Longford. N. Lat. 53. 44. W. Long. 7. 30. Here is a remarkable hill or mount, called the Moat of Granard, thought to be artificial, and the fite of a Darulh caftle or fort; which commands from its fum- mit a mod extenfive profpeft into fix or feven adjoin¬ ing counties. In this town have lately been given an¬ nual prizes to the bed performers on the Iridi harp. Granard has a barrack for a company of foot; and for¬ merly returned two members to the Iridi parliament; patronage in the families of Macartney and Greville. fairs held 3d May and id October. This place takes its name from Grian-ard, or “ the height of the fun,” and was formerly the refidence of the chiefs of North Teffia. It is fometimes written Grenard. GRANARY, a building to lay or dore corn in, especially that defigned to be kept a confiderable time. Sir Henry Wotton advifes to make it look towards the north, becaufe that quarter is the cooled and mod temperate. Mr Worlidge obferves, that the bed gra¬ naries are built of brick, with quarters of timber wrought in the infide, to which the boards may be nailed, with which the infide of the granary mud be lined fo clofe to the bricks, that there may not be any room left for vermin to dielter themfelves. There may be many dories one above another, which diould be near the one to th£ other ; becaufe the (hallower the corn lies, it is the better, and more eafily turned. I he two great cautions to be obferved in the ereft- ing of granaries are, to make them fufficiently drong, and to expofe them to the mod drying winds. The ordering of the corn in many parts of England, parti¬ cularly in Kent, is thus : To feparate it from dud and other impurities after it is thralhed, they tofs it with fhovels from one end to the other of a long and large room ; the lighter fubdances fall down in the middle of the room, and the corn only is carried from fide to fide or end to end of it. After this they fereen the corn, and then bringing it into the granaries, it is fpread about half a foot thick, and turned from time to time about twice in a week; once a-week they alfo repeat the fereening it. This fort of management they continue about two months, and after that they lay it a foot thick for two months more ; and in this time they turn it once a-week, or twice if the feafon be damp, and now and then fereen it again. After about five or fix months they raife it to two feet thicknefs in the heaps, and then they turn it once or twice in a month, and fereen it now and then. After a year, they lay it tw’o and a half or three feet deep, and turn it once in three weeks or a month, and fereen it proportion- ably. When it has lain two years or more, they turn it once in two months, and fereen it ©nee a-quarter; and how long foever it is kept, the oftener the turn- 4 ] G R A ing and fereening are repeated, the better the grain will Granary be found to be. —It is proper to leave an area of a yard wide on every fide oi the heap of corn, and other empty fpaces, into which they turn and tofs the corn as often as they find occafion. In Kent they make twro fquare holes at each end of the floor, and one round in the middle, by means of which they throw the corn out of the upper into the lower roomsy and fo up again, to turn and air it the better. Their fereens are made with two partitions, to feparate the duft from the corn, which falls into a bag, and when fufficiently full this is thrown away, the pure and good corn remaining behind. Corn has by thefe means been kept in our granaries 30 years; and it is ©bfer- yed, that the longer it is kept the more flour it yields in proportion to the corn, and the purer and whiter the bread is, the fuperfluous humidity only evapora¬ ting in the keeping. At Zurich in Swifferland, they keep corn 80 years, or longer, by the fame fort of me¬ thods. J he public granaries at Dantzick are feven, eight or nine Rories high, having a funnel in the midlt of each floor to let down the corn from one to another. I hey are built fo fecurely, that though every way furrounded with water, the corn contract no damp, and the velfels have the convenience of coming up to the walls to be loaded. The Ruffians preferve their corn in fubterranean granaries of the figure of a fugar- loaf, wide below and narrow at top; the fides are well plaftered, and the top covered with flones. They are very careful to have the corn well dried before it is laid into thefe ftorehoufes, and often dry it by means of ovens; the fummer dry weather being too fhort to effeft it fufficiently.—Dantziok is the grand ftorehoufe or repofitory of all the fruitful kingdom of Poland. The wheat, barley, and rye, of a great part of the country, are there laid up in parcels of 20, 30, or 60 lafts in a chamber, according to the fize of the room ; and this they keep turning every day or two, to keep it fweet and fit for fliipping. A thunder ftorm has fometimes been of very terrible confequences to thefe {lores. All the corn of the growth of former years has been found fo much altered by one night’s thunder, that though over night it was dry, fit for {hipping or keeping, and proper for ufes of any fort, yet in the morning it was found clammy and flicking. In this cafe, there is no remedy but the turning of all fuch corn two or three times a-day for two months or longer; in which time it will fometimes come to it- felf, though fometimes not. This effed of thunder and lightning is only obferved to take place in fuch corn as is not a year old, or has not fweated thoroughly in the ftraw before it was threftied out. The latter inconvenience is eafily prevented by a timely care; but as to the former, all that can be done is carefully to examine all flores of the laft year’s corn after every thunder ftorm, that if any of this have been fo affeded, it may be cured in time; for a negled of turning will certainly utterly deftroy it. According to Vitruvius’s rules, a granary ffiould al¬ ways be at the top of a houfe, and have its openings only to the north or eaft, that the corn may not be expofed to the damp winds from the fouth and weft, which are very deftrudive to it; whereas the contrary ones are very neceffary and wholefome to it, ferving to G 11 A [ 67 ] G R A Granary, to cool and dry it from all external humidity, from —"•V"-whatever caufe. There mult alfo be openings in the roof to be fet open in dry weather, partly to let in freftr air, and partly to let out the warm effluvia which are often emitted by the corn. The covering of the roofs fliould always be of tiles, becaufe in the worft feafons, when the other openings cannot be fafe, there will always be a confiderable inlet for freffl air, and a way out for the vapours by their joinings, which are never clofe. If there happen to be any windows to the fouth, great care muft be taken to Ihut them up in moift weather, and in the time of the hot fouthern winds. There muft never be a cellar, or any other damp place under a granary, nor ftiould it ever be built over ftables j for in either of thefe cafes the corn will certainly fuf- fer by the vapours, and be made damp, in one, and ill-tafted in the other. M. du Hamel and Dr Hales recommend various contrivances for ventilating or blowing frelh air through corn laid up in granaries or Ihips, in order to pre- ferve it fweet and dry, and to prevent its being de¬ voured by weevils or other infefls. This may be done by nailing wooden bars or laths on the floor of. the granary about an inch diftant from each other, when they are covered with hair-cloth only ; or at the dif¬ iance of two or three inches, when coarfe wire-work, or balket-work of olier is laid under the hair-cloth, or wdien an iron plate full of holes is laid upon them. Thefe laths may be laid acrofs other laths, nailed at the dif- tance of 15 inches, and two or more deep, that.there may be a free paflage for the air under them. The under laths muft come about fix inches Ihort of the wall of the granary at one end of them ; on which end a board is to be fet edgewife, and Hoping againft the wall : by this difpofition a large air-pipe is formed, which having an open communication with all the interftices between and under the bars, will admit the paflage of air below forcibly through a hole at the extremity of it, into all the corn in the granary, that will confequently carry off the moift exhalations of the corn. Ihe ventilators far fupplying frefli air may be fixed againft the wall, on the infide or outfide of the granary, or under the floor, or in the ceiling ; but wherever they are fixed, the handle of the lever that works them muft be out of the granary, otherwife the perfon who works them would be in danger of fuffocation, when the corn is fumed with burning brimftone, as is fometimes done for deftroying ■weevils. Small moveable ventilators will anfwer the purpofe for ventilating corn in large bins in granaries, and may be eafily moved trom one bin to another. If the granary or corn {hip be very long, the main air-pipe may pafs lengthwife •along the middle of it, and convey air, on both fides, under the corn. In large granaries, large double ven¬ tilators laid on each other, may be fixed at the middle and near the top of the granary, that they may be worked by a wind-mill fixed on the roof of the huild- ing, or by a water-mill. The air is to be conveyed from the ventilators through a large trunk or trunks, reaching down through the feveral floors to the bot¬ tom of the granary, with branching trunks to each floor, by means of which the air may be made to pafs into a large trunk along the adjoining crofs walls : from the'e trunks feveral leffer trunks, about four inches wide, are to branch off, at the diftance of three or four feet from each other, which are to reach through Granary, the whole length of the granary, and their farther ends are to be clofed : feams of -j—- or ttt of an inch are to be left open at the four joinings of the boards, where they are nailed together, that the air may pafs through them into the corn. In fome of thefe leffer trunks there may be Aiding {flutters, in order to ftop the paffage of the air through thofe trunks which are not covered with corn j or to ventilate one part of the granary more brifldy than others, as there may be oc- cafion. There muft alfo be wooden {flutters, hung on hinges at their upper part, fo as to {hut clofe of them- felves } thefe muft be fixed to the openings in the walls of the granary on their outfide : by thofe .means they will readily open to give a free paflage for the ventila¬ ting air, which afcends through the corn, to pafs off, but will inftantly {hut when the ventilation ceafes, and thereby prevent any dampnefs of the external air from entering : to prevent this, the ventilation ftiould be made only in the middle of dry days, unlefs the corn, when firft put in, is cold and damp. In lefler granaries, where the ventilators muft be worked by hand, if thefe granaries ftand on ftaddles, fo as to have their loweft floor at fome diftance from the ground, the ventilators may be fixed under the loweft floor, between the ftaddles, fo as to be worked by men {landing on the ground, without or within the granary. A very commodious and cheap venti¬ lator may be made for fmall granaries, by making a ventilator of the door of the granary ; which may be eafily done by making a circular fcreen, of the fize of a quarter of a circle, behind the door: but in order to this, the door muft be open, not inwards but out¬ wards of the granary, fo that as it falls back, it may be worked to and fro in the fcreen } which muft be exadfly adapted to it in all parts of the circular fide of the fcreen, as well as at the top and bottom. But there muft be a ftop at about eight or ten inches dif¬ tance from the wall, to prevent the door’s falling back farther ; that there may be room for a valve in the fcreen to fupply it with air ; which air will be driven in by the door, through a hole made in the wall near the floor, into the main air-trunk, in which there muft be another valve over the hole in the wall, to prevent the return of the air. To defiroy weevils and other infe&s with which Gra¬ naries are apt to be infejled.—The prefervation of grain from the ravages of infefts may be beft effefted by timely and frequent fcreening, and ventilation ; as little or no inconvenience will follow corn or malt lod¬ ged dry, but what evidently refults from a negleft of thefe precautions. For, whether the obvious damage arife from the weevil, the moth, or rhe beetle, that da¬ mage has ceafed at the time the vermin make their ap¬ pearance under either of thefe fpecies, they being, when in this laft ftate of exiftence, only propagators of their refpeftive kinds of vermiculi ; which, while they con-» tinue in that form, do the mifchief. In this laft, or infect ftate,. they eat little, their prin¬ cipal bufinefs being to depofit their ova (eggs), which unerring iuftinft prompts them to do where large col- leftions of grain furnith food for their fucceffors while in a vermicular ftate. It is therefore the bufinefs of induftry to prevent future generations of thefe ravagers, by deftroying the eggs previous to their hatching 5 and I 2 this G R A [68 (iranarj this is befi accomplifhed by frequent fcreening, and ex- Grand. P°‘ure to draughts of wind or frefn air. By frequent- ir. v— ftirring the grain, the cohelion of their ova is bro* ken, and the nidus of thofe minute worms is deftroyed, which on hatching collect together, and fpin or weave numerous nefts of a cob-web like fubftance for their fe- curity. To thefe nefts they attach, by an infinity of fmall threads, many grains of corn together, firft for their prote&ion, and then for their food. When their habitations are broken and feparated by the fcreen, they fall through its fmall interftices, and may be eafi- ly removed from the granary with the duft. Thofe that efcape an early fcreening will be deftroyed by fubfe- quent ones, while the grain is but little injured ; and the corn will acquire thereby a fuperior purity. But by inattention to this, and fometimes by receiving grain already infedted into the granary, thefe vermin, parti¬ cularly the weevil, will in a Ihorttime fpread themfelves in that ftate everywhere upon its furface, and darken » even the walls by their number. Under fuch circuin- ftances, a hen or hens, with new hatched chickens, if turned on the heap, will traverfe, without feeding (or very fparingly fo) on the corn, wherever they fpread j and are feemingly infatiable in the purfuit of thefe in- feds. . When the numbers are reduced within reach, a hen will fly up againft the walls, and brufh them down with her wings, while her chickens leize them with the greateft avidity. This being repeated as often as they want food, the whole fpecies will in a day or two be deftroyed. Of the phalaena (moth), and the fmall beetle, they feem equally voracious : on which account they may be deemed the moft ufeful inftruments in na¬ ture for eradicating thefe noxious and deftrudive ver¬ min. See VERMIN, De/lru&ion of. GRAN ATE, or Garnet, a fpecies of mineral be- longing to the filiceous genus. See MINERALOGY Index. GRANATE-PaJle. See Garnet. GRAND, a term rather French than Englifh, though ufed on many occafions in our language. It has the fame import with great, being formed of the Latin grandis. In this fenfe we fay, the grand-mafter of an order, the grand-mafter of Malta, of the free- mafons, &c. So alfo the grand-fignior, the grand-vifir, &.c. grand-father, grand-mother, &c. Among the French there were formerly feveral of¬ ficers thus denominated, which we frequently retain in Englilh ; as grand almoner, grand ecuyer, grand cham- bellan, grand voyer, &c. Grand-AJf%e. See Assise. GRAND Di/lrefs (difir iff io magna'), in Englijh Law, a writ ofdiftrefs, fo called on account of its extent, which reaches to all the goods and chattels of the party within the county. The writ lies in two cafes : either when the tenant or defendant is attached and appears not, but makes default ; or where the tenant or defendant hath once appeared, and after makes default. On fuch occafions, this writ lies by common law, in lieu of a petit cape. GRAND Gufo, among painters, a term ufed to ex- prefs that there is fomething in the pidlure very great and extraordinary, calculated to furprife, pleafe, and inftruft.—Where this is found, they fay, the painter was a man of grand gujlo ; and they ufe the words fub- Grand H Grandeur and Sublimity, ] . G R A htne and marvellous, when they fptak of a piclu re, in much the fame fenfe. Grand Jury, larcency, ferjeanty, &c. See Jury, &c. GRANDEE, isunderftood of a lord of the firft rank ¥ or prime quality. In Spain, the term grandees is ufed abfolutely to de¬ note the prime lords of the court, to whom the king has once given leave to be covered in his prefenee ; there are fome grandees for life only $ made by the king’s faying fimply, Be covered. Others are grandees by defeent j made by the king’s faying, Be covered for thyielf and heirs, ihele laft are reputed far above the former. There are fome who have three or four grandeefliips in their family. t GRANDEUR and Sublimity. Thefe terms have Double fig- a double fignification : they commonly fignify the qua-nification* lity or cireumftance in objects by which the emotions of grandeur and fublimity are produced ; fometimes the emotions themfelves. In handling the prefent fubjepe- ration of fome difficulty, the fafeft method forjudging is, to choofe a plain objedt that is neither beautiful nor deformed, il fueh a one can be found. The plainefl: that occurs, is a huge mafs of rubbifh, the ruins per¬ haps of fonre extenfive building; or a large heap of ftones, fuch as are colledted together for keeping in memory a battle or other remarkable event. Such an objedl, which in miniature would be perfeftly indiffer¬ ent, makes an impreflion by its magnitude, and ap¬ pears agreeable. And luppofing it fo large as to fill the eye, and to prevent the attention from wandering upon other objedls, the impreffion it makes will be fo much the deeper. See Attention. But though a plain objedt of that kind be agreeable it is not termed it is not entitled to that cha¬ racter, unlefs, together with its fize, it be poffeffed of „ other qualities that contribute to beauty, fuch as regu¬ larity, proportion, order, or colour: and according to the number of Inch qualities combined with magnitude, it is more or lefs grand. Thus St Peter’s church at Rome, the great pyramid of Egypt, the Alps towering above the clouds, a great arm of the fea, and above all a clear and ferene Iky, are grand j becaufe, befide their fize, they are beautiful in an eminent degree. On the other hand, an overgrown whale, having a difagreeable appearance, is not grand. A large building agreeable by its regularity and proportions, is grand 5 and yet a much larger building deftitute of regularity, has not the leaft tindlure of grandeur. A fingle regiment in battle-array, makes a grand appearance j which the furrounding crowd does not, though perhaps ten for one in number. And a regiment where the men are all in one livery, and the horfes of one colour, makes a grander appearance, and confequently ftrikes more ter¬ ror, than wffiere there is confufion of colour and drefs. 2 Ihus greatnefs or magnitude is the circumftance that Grandeur diftinguifhes grandeur from beauty : agreeablenefs isdiftinguilb- the genus, of which beauty and grandeur are fpecies. ( ' r The emotion of grandeur, duly examined, will be found ed from beauty. Grandeur anti Sublimity. Demands not ftrufl: regularity. 4. Qualities contribu¬ ting to grandeur. G R A [ found an additional proof of the foregoing do&rine. That this emotion is plealant in a high degree, requires no other evidence but once to have feen a grand objedl: and if an emotion of grandeur be pleafant, its caufe or obje£t, as oblerved above, mull infallibly be agreeable in proportion. The qualities of grandeur and beauty are not more diftindl, than the emotions are which thefe qualities produce in a fpedator. It is oblerved in the article Beauty, that all the various emotions of beauty have one common chara<5ler, that of fweetnefs and gaiety. The emotion of grandeur has a different cha¬ racter : a large object that is agreeable, occupies the whole attention, and fwells the heart into a vivid emo¬ tion, which, though extremely pleafant, is rather fe- nous than gay* And this affords a good reafon for diltinguilhing in language thefe diflerent emotions. The emotions railed by colour, by regularity, by pro¬ portion, and by order, have fuch a refemblance to each other, as readily to come under one general term, viz. the emotion of beauty ; but the emotion of grandeur is fo different from thefe mentioned, as to merit a pecu¬ liar name. Though regularity, proportion, order, and colour, contribute to grandeur as well as to beauty, yet thefe qualities are not by far fo effential to the former as to the latter. To make out that propotition, fome preli¬ minaries are requihte. In the firil place, the mind, not being totally occupied with a finall objeCt, can give its attention at the lame time to every minute part j but in a great or extenlive objeCt, the mind, being totally occupied with the capital and linking parts, has no at¬ tention left for thofe that are little or indifferent. . In the next place, two timilar objeCts appear not fimilar when viewed at different diftances ; the fimilar paitsof a very large objeft, cannot be feen but at different di- ftancesj and for that reafon, its regularity, and the proportion of its parts, are in fome meafure loft to the eye : neither are the irregularities of a very large ob- jeft fo confpicuous as of one that is fmall. Hence it is, that a large objeft is not fo agreeable by its regula- rity, as a fmall object } nor fo dilagreeable by its irre¬ gularities. Thefe conftderations make it evident, that grandeur is fatisfied with a lefs degree of regularity, and of the other qualities mentioned, than is requifite for beau¬ ty j which may be illuftratcd by the following experi¬ ment. Approaching to a fmall conical hill, we take an accurate furvey of every part, and are fenftble of the flighted deviation from regularity and proportion. Sup- pofing the hill to be confiderably enlarged, fo as to make us lefs fenfible of its regularity, it will upon that account appear lefs beautiful. It will not, how¬ ever, appear lefs agreeable, becaufe fome flight emo¬ tion of grandeur comes in place of what is loft in beauty. And at lait, when the hill is enlarged to_a great mountain, the fmall degree of beauty that is left, is funk in its grandeur. Hence it is, that a towering hill is delightful, if it have but the flighteft relemblance of a cone ^ and a chain of mountains not lefs fo, though deficient in the accuracy of order and proportion. We require a fmall furfaee to be fmooth j but in an extenfive plain, confiderable inequalities are overlooked. In a word, regularity, proportion, order, 69 ] ORA and bolour, contribute to grandeur as well as to beau- Grandeur ty j but with a remarkable difference, that in pafling Suba"m:t?< from fmall to great, they are not required in the lame degree of perfection. This remark ferves to explain the extreme delight we have in viewing the face of na¬ ture, when fufficiently enriched and diverfificd with ob¬ jects. The bulk of the objeCts in a natural landfcape are beautiful, and fome of them grand : a flowing ir- ver, a fpreading oak, a round hill, an extended plain, are delightful 5 and even a rugged rock, or barren heath, though in themfelves difagreeable, contribute by.contrail to the beauty of the whole j joining to theft* the verdure of the fields, the mixture of light and lhade, and the fublime canopy fpread over all, it will not ap¬ pear wondertul, that fo extenlive a group of iplendid objeCts fhould fwell the heart to its utmoit bounds, and raife the tfrongeft emotion of grandeur. The fpeCtator is confcious of an enthufiafm which cannot bear con¬ finement, nor the Itrianefs of regularity and order : he loves to range at large j and is fo enchanted with magnificent objeCts, as to overlook flight beauties or deformities. _ 5 The fame obfervation is applicable in fome meafure Sublimityi to works of art. In a fmall building, the flighteft ir¬ regularity is difagreeable: but in a magnificent palace, or a large Gothic church, irregularities are lefs regard¬ ed. In an epic poem, we pardon many negligences that would not be permitted in a fonnet or epigram. Notwithllanding fuch exceptions, it may be juttly laid down for a rule, That in works of art, order and re¬ gularity ought to be governing principles j and hence the obfervation of Longinus, “ In works of art we have regard to exaCt proportion j in thofe of nature, to gran¬ deur and magnificence.” The fame reflections are in a good meafure applicable to fublimity ; particularly that, like grandeur, it is a fpecies of agreeablenefs j that a beautiful objeCt placed high, appearing more agreeable than formerly, produces in the fpeCtator a new emotion, termed the emotion, of fublimity j and that the perfection of order, regularity,, and proportion, is lefs required in objeCts placed high, or at a diftance, than at hand. The pleafant emotion raifed by large objeCts, has not: efcaped the poets: He doth beftride the narrow world Like a coloffus ; and we petty men Walk under his huge legs. Julius Ccefar, aCt 1. ic. 3. Cleopatra. I dreamt there was an emperor Antony: Oh fuch another Deep, that I might fee But fuch another man ! His face was as the heav’ns : and therein Ituck A fun and moon, which kept their courfe, and lighted The little O o’ th’ earth. His legs beftrid the ocean, his rear’d arm Crefted the world. yintony and Cleopatra^ aCt v. fc. 3? -Majefty Dies not alone j but, like a gulf, doth draw What’s near it with it. It’s a maffy wheel Fix’d on the fummit of the higheft mount 5 > To whofe huge fpokes ten thoufand leffer things Are Grandeur and Sublimity. Cx It A [ Are mortis’d and adjoin’d j which, when it falls, Each final 1 annexment, petty confequence, Attends the boilt’rous ruin. Hamlet, a6l iii. fc. 8. The poets have alfo made good ufe of the emotion produced by the elevated fituation of an objeft ; Quod fi me lyricis vatibus inheres, Sublimi feriam fidera vertice. Horat. Cartn. 1. ii, ode i. O thou ! the earthly author of my blood, Whofe youthful fpirit, in me regenerate, .Doth with a twofold vigour lift me up, To reach at vi&ory above my head. Richard II. a cl i. fc. 4. Northumberland, thou ladder wherewithal I he mounting Bolinbroke afcends my throne. Richard II. a6l v. fc. 2. Antony. Why was I rais’d the meteor of the world, Hung in the Ikies ; and blazing as I travell’d, ' Till all my fires were fpent; and then call downward To be trod out by Caefar ? Dryden, All for Love, aft i. The defcriptxon of Paradife in the fourth book of Paradife Loft, is a fine illuftration of the impreflion made by elevated objefts. 7° ] G R A to agreeaLlenefs, is remarkably felt in a feries when we Grandeur pals gradually irom one extreme to the other A and mental progrefs from the capital to the kingdom ’from 5ublim:ty- that to h urope to the whole earth-to the planetary ' y tern to the umverfe, is extremely pleafant: the heart fwells, and the mind is dilated at every ftep. 1 he returning in an oppofite direction is not pofitively pamrul, though our pleafure leffens at every ftep till it vanifh into indifference : fuch a progrefs may fome- times produce pleafure of a different fort, which arifes trom taking a narrower and narrower infpedlion. The ame ooiervation holds in a progrefs upward and down- ward.^ Aicent is pleafure becaufe it elevates us : but de- leent is never painful: it is for the moft part pleafant Irom a different caufe, that it is according to the order of nature. The fall of a ftone from any height, is ex- tremely agreeable by its accelerated motion. We feel it pleafant to defcend from a mountain, becaufe the delcent is natural and eafy. Neither is looking downward painful 5 on the contrary, to look down up¬ on objects, makes part of the pleafure of elevation : looking down becomes then only painful when the obi jedt is fg far below as to create dizzinefs j and even when that is the cafe, we feel a fort of pleafure mixed with the pain : witnefs Shakefpeare’s description of Do- ver cliffs: 1 So on he fares, and to the border comes Of Eden, where delicious Paradife, Now nearer, crowns with her inclofure green, As viith a rural mound, the champain head Of a fteep wildernefs ; whofe hairy fides With thicket overgrown, grotefque and wild, Accefs deny’d j and over head up grew Infuperable height of loftieft tirade, Cedar, and pine, and fir, and branching palm, A filvan icene j and as the ranks afcend, Shade above tirade, a woody theatre Of ftatelieft view. Yet higher than their tops 1 ne verd’rous wall of Paradife up fprung j Which to our general fire gave profpea large Into his nether empire, neighb’ring round. And higher than that wall a circling row Of goodlieft trees, loaden with fairett fruit, Bioiloms and fruits at once of golden hue, Appear’d, with gay enamell’d colours mix’d. 1. 131. Though a grand obje&js agreeable, we muft not in¬ fer that a little object is difagreeable ; which would be unhappy for .man, confidering that he is furrounded with fo many objeaS of that kind. The fame holds with reipeft to place : a body placed high is aoree- able ; but the fame body placed low, is not by that cir- cumftance rendered difagreeable. Littlenefs and Jow- nefs of place are precifely fimilar in the following par¬ ticular, that they neither give pleafure nor pain. And in this may vifibly be difcovered peculiar attention in fitting the internal conftitution of man to his external circumftances. Were littlenefs and lownefs of place agreeable, greatnefs and elevation could not be fo • were littlenefs and lownefs of place difagreeable, they would occafion uninterrupted uneafmefs. ' J The difference between great and little with refpe® — —---How fearful And dizzy ’tis, to caft one’s eye fo low ! I he crows and choughs, that wing the midway air, Show icarce fo grofs as beetles. Half-way down Hangs one that gathers famphire ; dreadful trade ! Methinks he feems no bigger than his head. Tne fifhermen that walk upon the beach Appear like mice j and yon tall anchoring bark Diminifti d to her cock 5 her cock, a buoy Almoft too fmall for fight. The murm’ring fur^e ihat on th unnumbered idle pebbles chafes, Cannot be heard fo high. I’ll look no more, Left my brain turn, and the deficient fight Topple down headlong. King Lear, aft iv. fc. 6 A i emark is made above, that the emotions of gran" deur and fublimity are nearly allied. And hence it is, that the one term is frequently put for the other : an mcreafing feries of numbers, for example, producing an emotion fimilar to that of mounting upward, is com¬ monly termed an afeending Jeries; a feries of numbers gradually decreafing, producing an emotion fimilar to that of going downward, is commonly termed a defcend. mg feries: we talk familiarly of going up to the capital, and of going down to the country : from a leffer king¬ dom we talk of going up to a greater ; whence the ana. bafts m the Greek language, when one travels from Greece to Perfia. We difeover the fame way of fpeak- ing in the language even of Japan ; and its univerfali- ty proves it the offspring of a natural feeling. The foregoing obferyation leads us to confider Grandeur grandeur and fublimity in a figurative fenfe, and as and fubfi- applicable to the fine arts. Hitherto thefe terms mity in a have been taken in their proper fenfe as applicable to t,?urative objects of fight only : and it was of importance to be- lerb'e’ ftow fome pains upon that article : becaufe, generally (peaking, the figurative fenfe of a word is derived from its proper fenfe, which holds remarkably at prefent. Beauty G R A [ 71 ] G R A Grandeur and Sublimity. The fub- lime in poetry. Real and figurative grandeur intimately connected. Beauty, in its original iignification, is confined to ob- jedts of fight j but as many other objedfo, intelledlual as well as moral, raife emotions refembling that of beauty, the refemblance of the effects prompts us to ex¬ tend the term beauty to thefe objedts. This equally accounts for the terms grandeur and fublimity taken in a figurative fenfe. Every emotion, from whatever caufe proceeding, that refembles an emotion of gran¬ deur or elevation, is called by the fame name : thus generofity is faid to be an elevated emotion, as well as great courage ) and that firmnefs of foul which is fupe- rior to misfortunes obtains the peculiar name of mag- nanimity. On the other hand, every emotion that con- tradls the mind, and fixeth it upon things trivial or of no importance, is termed loiv, by its refemblance to an emotion produced by a little or low objedl of fight: thus an appetite for trilling amufements is called a low tajle. The fame terms are applied to characters and adtions : we talk familiarly of an elevated genius, of a great man, and equally fo of littlenefs of mind : fome adtions are great and elevated, and others are little and grovelling. Sentiments, and even exprefiions, are charadterized in the fame manner : an expreflion or fentiment that raifes the mind is denominated great or elevated; and hence the SUBLIME in poetry. In fuch figurative terms, we lofe the diftindtion between great and elevated in their proper fenfe \ for the refem¬ blance is not fo entire as to preferve thefe terms diitindt in their figurative application. We carry this figure ftill farther. Elevation, in its proper fenfe, imports fuperiority of place ; and lownefs, inferiority of place : and hence a man of fuperior talents, of fuperior rank ; of inferior parts, of inferior tafte, and fuch like. The veneration we have for our anceftors, and for the ancients in general, being fimilar to the emotion produced by an elevated objedt of fight, juftifies the figurative expreflion of the ancients being raifed above us, or poffefling a fuperior place. The notes of the gamut, proceeding regularly from the blunter or gruffer founds to the more acute and piercing, produce in the hearer a feeling fomewhat fimilar to what is produced by mounting up¬ ward ; and this gives occafion to the figurative expref- fions, a high note, a low note. Such is the refemblance in feeling between real and figurative grandeur, that among the nations on the eafl: coafl: of Africa, who are diredted purely by nature, the officers of ftate are, with refpedt to rank, diltinguilhed by the length of the batoon each carries in his hand 5 and in Japan, princes and great lords fliow their rank by the length and fize of their fedan-poles. Again, it is a rule in painting, that figures of a fmall fize are proper for grotefque pieces: but that an hiftorical fub- jedt, grand and important, requires figures as great as the life. The refemblance of thefe feelings is in rea¬ lity fo ftrong, that elevation in a figurative fenfe is ob- ferved to have the fame effedt, even externally, with real elevation. K. Henry. This day is call’d the feaft of Crifpian. r!|^i(^ur He that outlives this day, and comes fafe home, Sublimity. Will Hand a tiptoe when this day is nam’d, - v—-.^1 And roufe him at the name of Crifpian. Henry V. adt iv. fc. 8. The refemblance in feeling between real and figura¬ tive grandeur is humoroufly illuftrated by Addifon in criticifing upon Engliffi tragedy*. “The ordinary * method of making a hero is to clap a huge plume of^u4'- feathers upon his head, which rifes fo high, that there is often a greater length from his chin to the top of his head than to the foie of his foot. One would be¬ lieve, that we thought a great man and a tall man the fame thing. As thefe fuperfluous ornaments upon the head make a great man, a princefs generally receives her grandeur from thofe additional incumbrances that fall into her tail : I mean the broad fweeping train that follows her in all her motions, and finds conftant employment for a boy who tiands behind her to open and fpread it to advantage.” The Scythians, impreffed with the fame of Alexander, were aftonifhed when they found him a little man. A gradual progrefs from fmall to great is not lefs remarkable in figurative than in real grandeur or eleva¬ tion. Every one mult have obferved the delightful effeft of a number of thoughts or fentiments, artfully difpofed like an afcending feries, and making impreffions deeper and deeper : fuch difpofition of members in a period is termed a climax. Within certain limits grandeur and fublimity pro¬ duce their ftrongefi; effedls, which leffen by excefs as well as by defe