&c. 102 Adverbs Adverbs, to be a very just appellation, as denoting A PART OF sentence Socrates is evidently compared with the Athe- Adverbs, SPEECH, THE NATURAL APPENDAGE OF SUCH VERBS. nians, and Homer with all other poets. Again, if it be &c. So great is this dependence in grammatical syntax, that said that Socrates was MORE WISE than any other Athean adverb can no more subsist without its verb, i, e. with- nian, but that Solomon was the MOST WISE of men; is not out some word significant of an attribute, than a verb or a comparison of Solomon with mankind in general, as adjective can subsist without its substantive. It is the plainly implied in the last clause of the sentence, as a comsame here as in certain natural subjects. Every colour, parison of Socrates with the other Athenians in the first? for its existence, as much requires a superficies, as the But if both imply comparison, it may be asked, In what superficies for its existence requires a solid body. consists the difference between the comparative and superlative? Does the superlative always express a greater excess than the comparative? No: for though Socrates was the most wise of the Athenians, yet is Solomon affirmed to have been more wise than he; so that here a higher superiority is denoted by the comparative more than by the superlative most. Is this then the difference between these two degrees, that the superlative implies a comparison of one with many, while the comparative implies only a comparison of one with one? No: this is not always the case neither. The Psalmist says, that "he is wiser (or more wise) than all his teachers;" where, though the comparative is used, there is a comparison of one with many. The real difference between these two degrees of comparison may be explained thus: sion. 103 Attributes 95. Among the attributes of substance are reckoned denoting quantity and quality: thus we say a white garment, a high intension mountain, &c. Now some of these quantities and qualities and remis- are capable of intension or remission; or, in other words, one substance may have them in a greater or less degree than another. Thus we say,a garment EXCEEDINGLY white, & mountain TOLERABLY or MODERATELY high. Hence, then, ene copious source of secondary attributes or ADVERBS to denote these two, that is, intension and remission; such as greatly, tolerably, vastly, extremely, indifferently, &c. But where there are different intensions of the same of the same attribute, they may be compared together: Thus, if the kird com- garment A be EXCEEDINGLY white, and the garment B be pared by MODERATELY white, we may say, the garment A is MORE means of white than the garment B. This paper is white, and such adverbs. snow is white; but snow is MORE white than this paper. In these instances, the adverb MORE not only denotes intension, but relative intension: nay, we stop not here, as we not only denote intension merely relative, but relative intension than which there is none greater. Thus we say, Sophocles was wise, Socrates was MORE wise than be, but Solomon was the MOST wise of men. Even verbs, properly so called, which denote an attribute as well as an assertion, must admit both of simple and also of comparative intensions; but the simple verb TO BE admits of neither the one nor the other. Thus, in the following example, Fume he LOVETH MORE than riches; but virtue of all things he Lov. ETH MOST; the words MORE and MOST denote the different comparative intensions of the attribute included under the verb loveth; but the assertion itself, which is the essential part of the verb, admits neither of intension nor remission, but is the same in all possible propositions. 104 The com- tioned; one to denote simple excess, and one to denote When we use the superlative, it is in consequence of having compared individuals with the species to which they belong, or one or more species with the genus under which they are comprehended. Thus, Socrates was the MOST WISE of the Athenians, and the Athenians were the MOST ENLIGHTENED of ancient nations. In the first clause of this sentence, Socrates, although compared with the Athenians, is at the same time considered as one of them; and in the last, the Athenians, although compared with ancient nations, are yet considered as one of those nations. Hence it is that in English the superlative is followed by the preposition of, and in Greek and Latin by the genitive case of the plural number; to show, that the object which has the preeminence is considered as belonging to that class of things with which it is compared. But when we use the comparative degree, the objects compared are set in direct opposition; and the one is considered not as a part of the other, or as comprehendea under it, but as something altogether distinct and belonging to a different class. Thus, were one to say, "Cicero was more eloquent than the Romans," he would speak absurdly because every body knows, that of the class of men expressed by the word Romans Cicero was one, and such a sentence would affirm that orator to have been more eloquent than himself. But when it is said that "Cicero was more cloquent than all the other Romans, or than any other Roman," the language is proper, and the affirmation true for though the persons spoken of were all of the same class or city, yet Cicero is here set in contradistinction to the rest of his countrymen, and is not considered as one of the persons with whom he is compared. It is for this reason that in English the comparative degree is followed by a noun governed by the word of contradistinction than, and in Latin by a noun in the ablative case governed by the preposition præ (B) either expressed or understood. We have already observed, that the ablative case deuotes concomitancy: and therefore when an (B) See Ruddimanni Grammaticæ Institutiones, Pars secunda, lib. i. cap. 2. Although it is certainly true, that when we use the superlative, we ought in propriety to consider the things compared &c. 105 or by inflexion. &c. the superlative of eminence something of comparison must Adverbs, be remotely or indirectly intimated, as we cannot reasonably call a man very eloquent, without comparing his eloquence with the eloquence of other men. This is indeed true; but we cannot therefore affirm that comparison is more clearly intimated in this superlative than in the simple adjective eloquent: for when we say that a man is eloquent, we mark between his eloquence and that of other men a distinction of the same kind, though not in the same degree, as when we say that he is very eloquent. In English we distinguish the two superlatives, by prefixing to the one the definite article the, to show that something is predicated of the object expressed by it, which cannot be predicated of any other object; and by subjoining the preposition of, to show that the objects with which it is compared are of the same class with itself: as, "Solomon was the wisest of men; Hector was the most valiant of the Trojans." To the other (c) superlative we only prefix the indefinite article a: as, "he was a very good man: he was a most valiant soldier.” Adverbs, an adjective in the comparative degree is prefixed to a noun, that noun is put in the ablative case, to denote that two things are compared together in company; but by means of the preposition, expressed or understood, that which is denoted by the comparative adjective is seen to be preferred before that which is denoted by the noun. 92. We have hitherto considered comparatives as expressed by the words more and most; but the authors, or improvers of language, have contrived a method to retrench the use of these adverbs, by expressing their force by an inflection of the adjective. Thus, instead of more fair, they say FAIRER; instead of most fair, FAIREST: and the same method of comparison takes place both in the Greek and Latin languages; with this dif ference, however, between the genius of these languages and ours, that we are at liberty to form the comparison either in the one method or in the other; whereas in those languages the comparison is seldom if ever formed by the assistance of the adverb, but always by the inflection of the adjective. Hence this inflection is by the Greek and Latin grammarians considered as a necessary accident of the adjective; but it has reached no farther than to adjectives, and participles sharing the nature of adjectives. The attributes expressed by verbs are as susceptible of comparison as those expressed by adjectives; but they are always compared by means of adverbs, the verb being too much diversified already to admit of more variations without perplexity. 106 tives some 93. It must be confessed that comparatives, as well Compara- the simple as the superlative, seem sometimes to part times lose with their relative nature, and to retain only their intheir rela- tensive. Thus in the degree denoting simple excess: tive nature. TRISTIOR, et lacrymis oculos suffusa nitentes. VIRG. Tristior means nothing more than that Venus was very sad. In the degree called the superlative this is more usual. Phrases extremely common are, Vir doctissimus, vir fortissimus, “a most learned man, a most brave man;" i. e. not the bravest and most learned man that ever existed, but a man possessing those qualities in an eminent degree. In English, when we intimate that a certain quality is possessed in an eminent degree, without making any direct comparison between it and a similar quality, we do it by the intensive word very, more commonly than by most: as, Cicero was VERY eloquent; the mind of Johnson was VERY vigorous. This mode of expres sion has been called the superlative of eminence, to distinguish it from the other superlative, which is superlative upon comparison. Yet it may be said, that even in 107 94. As there are some qualities which admit of com- Adjectives parison, so there are others which admit of none: such, which adfor example, are those which denote that quality of bodies mit not of arising from their figure; as when we say, a circular degrees of comparitable, a quadrangular court, a conical piece of metal, son. &c. The reason is, that a million of things participat ing the same figure, participate it equally, if they do it at all. To say, therefore that while A and B are both quadrangular, A is more or less quadrangular than B, is absurd. The same holds true in all attributives denoting definite quantities of whatever nature for as there can be no comparison without intension or remission, and as there can be no intension or remission in things always definite, therefore these attributives can admit of no comparison. By the same method of reasoning, we discover the cause why no substantive is susceptible of these degrees of comparison. A mountain cannot be said MORE TO BE or TO EXIST than a mole-hill; but the more or less must be sought for in their quantities. In like manner, when we refer many individuals to one species, the lion A cannot be called more a lion than the lion B (D); but if more any thing, he is more fierce, more swift, or exceeding in some such attribute. So again, in referring many species to one genus, a crocodile is not more an animal than a lizard; nor a tiger more than a cat; but, if any thing, the crocodile and tiger are more bulky, more strong, &c. than the animals. with which they are compared; the excess, as before, being derived from their attributes. 95.. compared as of the same class; and when we use the comparative, as of different classes; yet is not this distinction always attended to by the best writers in any language. In Latin and Greek the comparative is sometimes used, where in English we should use the superlative; as dextra est fortior manuum ; and in the Gospel it is said, that a grain of mustard-seed is the smaller (xgolegos) of all seeds, but when grown up it is the greater (i(av) of herbs." Even in English, the custom of the language permits us not to say "he is the tallest of the two," it must be the taller of the two; but we cannot say "he is the taller of the three," it must be the tallest. For these and other deviations from the general rule no reason is to be found in the nature of things; they are errors made proper by use. (c) In English, the termination est is peculiar to the superlative of comparison, to which the definite article is. prefixed. Thus we may say, "Homer was the sublimest of poets;" but we cannot say, "Homer was a sublimest poet." Again, we may say " Homer was a very sublime poet;" but not, "Homer was the the very sublime poet."> (D) When Pope says of a certain person, that he is "a tradesman, meek, and much a liar,;" the last phrase is the same with much given to lying, the word liar having the effect of an attributive. 5 Adverbs, & c. 95. Of the adverbs or secondary attributives already mentioned, those denoting intension and remission may be called ADVERBS of QUANTITY CONTINUOUS, as great103 Adverbs ly, vastly, tolerably, &c. once, twice, thrice, &c. (E) divided in are ADVERBS of QUANTITY DISCRETE; more and most, to classes. less and least, to which may be added equally, proportionally, &c. are ADVERBS of RELATION. There are others of QUALITY: as when we say, HONESTLY industrious, PRUDENTLY brave; they fought BRAVELY, he painted FINELY. 109 The mean verbs to be 110 And here it may be worth while to observe, how the same thing, participating the same essence, assumes different grammatical forms from its different relations. For example, suppose it should be asked, How differ honest, honestly, and honesty? The answer is, They are in essence the same: but they differ in as much as honest is the attributive of a noun; honestly, of verb or adjective; and honesty being divested of these its attributive relations, assumes the power of a noun or substantive, so as to stand by itself. 96. The adverbs hitherto mentioned are common to verbs of every species; but there are some which are confined to verbs properly so called, that is, to such verbs as denote motions or energies with their privations. All motion and rest imply time and place as a kind of necessary coincidence. Hence, when we would express the place or time of either, we have recourse to adverbs formed for this purpose; of PLACE, as when we say, he stood THERE, he went HENCE, he came HITHER; of time, as when we say, he stood THEN, he went AFTERWARDS, he travelled FORMERLY. To these may be added the adverbs which denote the intensions and remissions peculiar to MOTION, such as speedily, hastily, swiftly, slowly, &c.; as also adverbs of place made out of prepositions, such as upward and downward from up and down. It may, however, be doubted whether some of these words, as well as many others which do not so properly modify attributes, as mark some remote circumstance attending an attribute or our way of conceiving it, are truly adverbs, though so called by the grammarians. The simple affirmative and negative YES and NO are called adverbs, though they surely do not signify that which we hold to be the very essence of the adverb, a modification of attributes. "Is he learned? No." "Is he brave? Yes." Here the two adverbs, as they are called, signify not any modification of the attributes brave and learned, but a total negation of the attribute in the one case, and in the other a declaration that the attribute belongs to the person spoken of. Adverbs are indeed applied to many purposes; and ing of ad- their general nature may be better understood by readascertained ing a list of them, and attending to their etymology, by etymo- than by any general description or definition. Many of logy. them seem to have been introduced into language in order to express by one word the meaning of two or three; and are mere abbreviations of nouns, verbs, and adjec tives. Thus, the import of the phrase, in what place, is expressed by the single word WHERE; to what place, by WHITHER; from this place, by HENCE; in a direction ascending, by UPWARDS; at the present time, by NOW; at what time, by WHEN; at that time, by THEN; many times, by OFTEN ; not many times, by SELDOM, &c. Many of them mere abbreviations. &c. 97. Mr Horne Tooke has, with great industry and Adverbs, accuracy, traced many of the English adverbs from their origin in the ancient Saxon and other northern tongues, and shown them to be either corruptions of other words or abbreviations of phrases and sentences. He observes," that all adverbs ending in LY, the most prolific branch of the family, are sufficiently understood the termination being only the word like cor. rupted; and the corruption so much the more easily and certainly discovered, as the termination remains more pure and distinguishable in the other sister languages, in which it is written lick, lyk, lig, ligen." He might have added, that in Scotland the word like is, at this day, frequently used instead of the English termination ly; as for a goodly figure, the common people say a good-like figure. Upon this principle the greater part of adverbs are resolved into those parts of speech which we have already considered, as honestly into honest-like, vastly, into vast-like, &c. so that when we say of a man he is honestly industrious, we affirm that he is honest-like industrious, or that his industry has the appearance of being honest. Adverbs of a different termination the same acute writer resolves thus ; AGHAST into the past participle AGAZED; "The French exclaimed,-the devil was in arms. "And right anon withouten more abode." ALONE and ONLY are resolved into ALL ONE, and ONELIKE. In the Dutch, EEN is one; and ALL EEN alone; and ALL-EEN-LIKE, only, anciently alonely. ALIVE is on live, or in life. Thus, CHAUCER. "Christ eterne on live." AUGHT or OUGHT; A WHIT or O WHIT; o being formerly written for the article A, or for the numeral ONE; and whit or hwit, in Saxon, signifying a small thing, as a point or jot. AWHILE, which is usually classed with adverbs, is evidently a noun with the indefinite article prefixed; a while, i. e. a time. WHILST, anciently and more properly WHILES, is plainly the Saxon HWILEES, time that. ALOFT was formerly written ON-LOFT: As, "And ye, my mother, my soveregne pleasance "Over al thing, out take Christ ON LOFTE." CHAUCER, Now, says Mr Horne Tooke, lyft, in the Anglo Saxon, is (E) These words were anciently written one's, twie's, thrie's; and are merely the genitives of one, two, three, the substantive time or turn being omitted. Thus, How often did you write? Answer, Once, i. e. one's time. See Horne Tooke's Diversions of Purley. ALOFT. Verbs. is the air or the clouds, as IN LYFTE CUMMENDE, coming in the clouds (St Luke). In the Danish, LUFT is air; and " at spronge i luften," to blow up into the air, or So in the Dutch, de loef hebben, to sail before the wind; loeven, to ply to windward; loef, the weather gage, &c. From the same root are our other words; Loft, lofty, to luff, lee, leeward, lift, &c. It would be needless, as the ingenious author observes, to notice such adverbs as, afoot, adays, ashore, astray, aslope, aright, abed, aback, abreast, afloat, aloud, aside, afield, aground, aland, &c. These are at first view seen for what they are. Nor shall we follow him through the analysis which he has given of many other adverbs, of which the origin is not so obvious as of these. Of the truth of his principles we are satisfied; and have not a doubt, but that upon those principles a man conversant with our earliest writers, and thoroughly skilled in the present languages, may trace every English (s) adverb to its source, and show that it is no part of speech separate from those which we have already considered. The adverbs, however, of affirmation and negation, are of too much importance to be thus passed over; and as we have never seen an account of them at all satisfactory, except that which has been given by Horne Tooke, we shail transcribe the substance of what he says concerning AYE, YEA, YES, and No. To us these words have always appeared improperly classed with adverbs upon every definition which has been given of that part of speech. Accordingly, our author says, that AYE or YEA is the imperative of a verb of northern extraction; and means, have, possess, enjoy. And YES is a contraction of AY-ES, have, possess, enjoy, that. Thus, when it is asked whether a man be learned, if the answer be by the word YES, it is equivalent to have that, enjoy that, belief or that proposition. (See what was said of the nature of interrogation, Chap. IV. No 76.). The northern verb of which yea is the imperative, is in Danish EJER, to possess, have, enjoy. EJA, aye or yea; EJE, possession; EJER, possessor. In Swedish it is EGA, to possess; of which the imperative is JA, aye, yea: EGARE, possessor. In German, JA signifies aye, or yea; EIGENER, possessor, owner; EIGEN, own. In Dutch, EIGENEN is to possess; JA, yea. Greenwood derives NOT and its abbreviate NO from the Latin; Minshow, from the Hebrew; and Junius, from the Greek. Our author very properly observes, that the inhabitants of the north could not wait for a word expressive of dissent till the establishment of those nations and languages: and adds, that we need not be inquisitive nor doubtful concerning the origin and signi fication of NOT and NO; since we find that, in the Da- Preposinish NODIG, in the Swedish NODIG, and in the Dutch, tions, &c. NOODE, NODE, and NO, mean averse, unwilling. So that when it is asked whether a man be brave, if the answer be NO, it is a declaration that he who makes it is averse from or unwilling to admit that proposition. 98. Most writers on grammar have mentioned a species of adverbs, which they call adverbs of interrogation, such as where, whence, whither, how, &c. But the truth is, that there is no part of speech, which, of itself, denotes interrogation. A question is never asked otherwise than by abbreviation, by a single word, whether that word be a noun, a pronoun, a verb, or an adverb. The word WHERE is equivalent to-in what place; WHENCE to-from what place; and HOW to-in what manner, &c. In these phrases, IN what place, FROM what place, and IN what manner, the only word that can be supposed to have the force of an interrogative, is what, which is resolvable into that which: But we have already explained, in the chapter of Pronouns, the principles upon which the relative is made to denote interrogation, and the same reasoning will account for the adverbs where, whence, whither, how, &c. being employed as interrogatives. When we say, where were you yesterday? whence have you come? whither are you going? how do you perform your journey? We merely use so many abbreviations for the following sentences; tell us, or describe to us, THE PLACE where (or in which) you were yesterday; THE PLACE whence (or from which) you have come; THE PLACE to which you are going; THE MANNER in which you perform your journey? And so much for adverbs. We now proceed to those parts of speech which are usually called prepositions and conjunctions, and of which the use is to connect the other words of a sentence, and to combine two or more simple sentences into one compound sentence. CHAP. VI. Of Prepositions, Conjunctions, and Inter jections. 111 99. It has been observed, that a man while awake Objects, is conscious of a continued train of perceptions and and of course ideas, ideas passing in his mind, which depends little uponoured tee bis own will; that he cannot to the train add a new gether. idea; and that he can but very seldom break its connexion. To the slightest reflection these truths must be apparent. Our first ideas are those which we derive from external objects making impressions on the senses; but all the external objects which fall under our observation are linked together in such a manner as indicates them to be parts of one great and regular system (s) The same resolution might probably be made of the Greek and Latin adverbs, were we as intimately acquainted with the sources of those tongues as Mr Horne Tooke is with the sources of the English language. "Many of the Latin adverbs (says the learned Ruddiman) are nothing else but adjective nouns or pronouns, have ing the preposition and substantive understood; as, quo, eo, eodem, for ad quæ, ea, eadem (loca) or cui, ei, eidem (loco); for of old these datives ended in o. Thus, qua, hac, illac, &c. are plainly adjectives in the abl. sing. femin. the word via, “a way,” and the preposition in, being understood. Many of them are compounds; as, quomodo, i. e. quo modo; quemadmodum, i. e. ad quem modum ; quamobrem, i. e. ob quam rem ; quare, i. e. (pro) qua re; quorsum, i. e. versus quem (locum); scilicet, i. e. scire licet; videlicet, i. e. videre licet; ilicet, i. e. ire licet; illico, i. e. in loco; magnopere, i. e. magno opere; nimirum, i. e. ni (est) mirum ; hodie, i. e. hoc die; postridie, i. e. postero die; pridie, i. e. præ die. Perfecto, certe, sane, male, bene, plane, are obviously adjectives. Forte is the ablative of fors; and if we had leisure to pursue the subject, and were masters of all the languages from which the Latin is derived, we doubt not but we should be able to resolve every adverb into a substantive or adjective. VOL. X. Part I. G + 112 Preposi system. When we take a view of the things by which tions, &c. we are surrounded, and which are the archetypes of our ideas, their inherent qualities are not more remarkable than the various relations by which they are connected. elations: Cause and effect, contiguity in time or in place, high and low, prior and posterior, resemblance and contrast, with a thousand other relations, connect things together with out end. There is not a single thing which appears solitary and altogether devoid of conuexion. The only difference is, that some are intimately and some slightly connected, some nearly and some at a distance. That the relations by which external objects are thus linked together must have great influence in directing the train of human thought, so that not one perception or idea can appear to the mind wholly unconnected with all other perceptions or ideas, will be admitted by every man who believes that his senses and intellect represent things as they are. In English, however, the case is otherwise; for were Preposiwe to say, "He rode Edinburgh, went the parliament- tions, &c. house, walked his counsel the court met," we should speak unintelligibly; as in these expressions there is either a total want of connexion, or such a connection as produce falsehood and nonsense. In order to give meaning to the passage, the several gaps must be filled up by words significant of the various relations by which the different ideas are connected in the mind; as, "He rode to Edinburgh, went to the parliament- Expressed house, and walked with his counsel till the court met." by preposiOf these connecting words, TO and WITH are called pre- tions and positions, AND and TILL are usually called conjunctions. Although these prepositions and conjunctions are not so absolutely necessary in Greek and Latin as they are in English; yet as there is no language wholly without them, nor any language in which it is not of importance to understand their force, they well deserve a place in universal grammar. 113 114 by various This being the case, it is necessary, if the purpose of language be to communicate thought, that the speaker be furnished with words, not only to express the ideas of substances and attributes which he may have in his mind, but also to indicate the order in which he views them, and to point out the various relations by which they are connected. In many instan. ces all this may be done by the parts of speech which we have already considered. The closest connexion which we can conceive is that which subsists between a substance and its qualities; and in every language with which we are acquainted, that connexion is indicated by the immediate coalescence of the adjective with the substantive; as we say, a good man, a learned man; vir bonus, vir doctus. Again, there is a connection equally intimate, though not so permanent, between an agent and his action: for the action is really an attribute of the agent; and therefore we say, the boy reads, the man writes; the noun coalescing with the verb so naturally, that no other word is requisite to unite them. Moreover, an action and that which is acted upon being contiguous in nature, and mutually affecting each other, the words which denote them should in language be mutually attractive, and capable of coalescing without external aid; as, he reads a book, he builds a house, he breaks a stone. Further; because an attribute and its modifications are inseparably united, an adjective or a verb is naturally connected with the adverb which illustrates or modifies its signification; and therefore, when we say, he walks slowly, he is prudently brave, it is plain that no other word is necessary to promote the coalescence of the attributes walking and bravery with their modifications of slowness and prudence. The agreement between the terms of any proposition which constitutes truth is absolutely perfect; but as either of the terms may agree with many other things besides its correlate, some word is requisite in every proposition to connect the particular predicate with the particular subject: and that is the office of the simple verb TO BE; as, the three angles of every triangle ARE equal to two right angles. Thus we see, that many of the relations subsisting between our ideas may be clearly expressed by means of nouns, adjectives, verbs, and adverbs; and in those languages of which the nouns have cases, there is perhaps no relation of much importance which might not be thus pointed out, without being under the necessity of employing the aid of any additional part of speech. 100. The sole use of conjunctions and prepositions in These conlanguage is to connect either sentences or other words; nect either but the theory of these connectives themselves has certain- sentences ly never been understood, unless HORNE TOOKE has or words. at last hit upon the truth. Mr HARRIS writes about them and about them, quoting passages from Greek and Latin authors, and produces at last no information. His definitions of both, as parts of speech void of signification, are highly absurd; and even the principal di stinction which he makes between them seems not to be well founded. Prepositions and conjunctions denote the relations subsisting between the ideas expressed by those words or sentences which they serve to connect; and as relations are contemplated by the mind as well as por sitive ideas themselves, the words which denote those relations cannot be insignificant. The essential difference between the conjunction and preposition, according to the same author, consists in this, that the former conpects sentences, and the latter words: but the fact is often otherwise. An obvious example occurs where the conjunction AND connects not sentences but words. “A man of WISDOM and VIRTUE is a perfect character." Here it is not meant to be asserted, "that the man of WISDOM is a perfect character, and that the man of VIRTUE is a perfect character:" both these assertions would be false. This sentence therefore (and many such will occur) is not resolvable into two; whence it follows, that the conjunction AND does not always connect sentences; and the same is frequently the case with other conjunctions. Horne Tooke's idea of prepositions and conjunctions is, that they do not form distinct classes of words, but are merely abbreviations of nouns and verbs: and with respect to the English language, be has been remarkably successful in proving his position. But though such be undeniably the case in English, it would be rash to conclude à priori that it is so in all other tongues. Ta establish this general conclusion would require a long and tedious deduction in each particular language: and how much language, leisure, industry, and acuteness, such an undertaking would require, even in one tongue, it is not easy to determine. In the languages with which we are best acquainted, many conjunctions, and most prepositions, have the appearance at least of original words; and though this most acute grammarian, from his knowledge of the northern tongues, has been able to trace the most important of those in English to |