Chapter III: WORDS. Words are articulate sounds, used by common consent, as (3)

The class of verbs that are never employed as active, is small. By
using adverbs in connexion with verbs, we can fairly prove that some
verbs are _not_ active. It is incorrect to say, I am _happily_; They
were _peacefully_; She remains _quietly_; The fields appear
_greenly_. These verbs in their common acceptation, do not express
_action_; for which reason we say, I am _happy_; They are
_peaceful_; &c. But in the expressions, The child sleeps _soundly_;
She sits _gracefully_; They live _happily_ and _contentedly_; we
employ the verbs _sleeps, sits_, and _live_, in an active sense.
When no action is intended, we say, They live _happy_ and
_contented_.

If, on scientific principles, it can be proved that those verbs
generally denominated neuter, _originally_ expressed action, their
present, accepted meaning will still oppose the theory, for the
generality of mankind do not attach to them the idea of _action_.

Thus I have endeavored to present a brief but impartial abstract of
the _modern_ theory of the verb, leaving it with the reader to
estimate it according to its value.

To give a satisfactory definition of the verb, or such a one as
shall be found scientifically correct and unexceptionable, has
hitherto baffled the skill, and transcended the learning, of our
philosophical writers. If its essential quality, as is generally
supposed, is made to consist in _expressing affirmation_, it remains
still to be defined _when_ a verb _expresses_ affirmation. In
English, and in other languages, words appropriated to express
affirmation, are often used without any such force; our idea of
affirmation, in such instances, being the mere _inference of
custom_.

In the sentence,--"_Think, love_, and _hate_, denote moral actions,"
the words _think, love_, and _hate_, are nouns, because they are
mere _names_ of actions. So, when I say, "John, _write_--is an
irregular verb," the word _write_ is a noun; but when I say, "John,
_write_--your copy," _write_ is called a verb.

Why is this word considered a noun in one construction, and a verb
in the other, when both constructions, until you pass beyond the
word write, are exactly alike? If write does not _express_ action in
the former sentence, neither does it in the latter, for, in both, it
is introduced in the same manner. On scientific principles, _write_
must be considered a noun in the latter sentence, for it does not
_express_ action, or make an affirmation; but it merely _names_ the
action which I wish John to perform, and affirmation is the
_inferential_ meaning.

The verb in the infinitive, as well as in the imperative mood, is
divested of its affirmative or verbal force. In both these moods, it
is always presented in its _noun-state_.

If, after dinner, I say to a servant, "_Wine,"_ he infers, that I
wish him to bring me wine; but all this is not said. If I say,
_Bring_ some _wine_, he, in like manner, understands, that I wish
him to bring me wine; but all that is expressed, is the _name_ of
the action, and of the object of the action. In fact, as much is
done by _inference_, as by actual expression, in every branch of
language, for thought is too quick to be wholly transmitted by
words.

It is generally conceded, that the termination of our verbs, _est,
eth, s, ed_, and, also, of the other parts of speech, were
originally separate words of distinct meaning; and that, although
they have been contracted, and, by the refinement of language, have
been made to coalesce with the words in connexion with which they
are employed, yet, in their present character of terminations, they
retain their primitive meaning and force. To denote that a verbal
name was employed as a verb, the Saxons affixed to it a verbalizing
adjunct; thus, _the_ (to take, hold) was the noun-state of the verb;
and when they used it as a verb, they added the termination _an_;
thus, the_an_. The termination added, was a sign that _affirmation_
was intended. The same procedure has been adopted, and, in many
instances, is still practised, in our language. _An_, originally
affixed to our verbs, in the progress of refinement, was changed to
en, and finally dropped. A few centuries ago, the plural number of
our verbs was denoted by the termination, _en_; thus, they _weren_,
they _loven_; but, as these terminations do not supersede the
necessity of expressing the _subject_ of affirmation, as is the case
in the Latin and Greek verbs, they have been laid aside, as
unnecessary excrescences. For the same reason, we might, without any
disparagement to the language, dispense with the terminations of our
verbs in the singular.

In support of the position, that these terminations were once
separate words, we can trace many of them to their origin. To denote
the feminine gender of some nouns, we affix _ess_; as, heir_ess_,
instructr_ess. Ess_ is a contraction of the Hebrew noun _essa_, a
female. Of our verbs, the termination _est_ is a contraction of
_doest, eth_, of _doeth_, _s_ of _does_. We say, thou _dost_ or
_doest_ love; or thou _lovest_; i.e. _love-dost_, or _love-doest_.
Some believe these terminations to be contractions of _havest,
haveth, has_. We affix _ed_, a contraction of _dede_, to the present
tense of verbs to denote that the action named is _dede, did, doed_,
or _done_.

_To_ and _do_ from the Gothic noun _taui_, signifying _act_ or
_effect_, are, according to Horne Tooke, nearly alike in meaning and
force; and when the custom of affixing some more ancient verbalizing
adjunct, began to be dropped, its place and meaning were generally
supplied by prefixing one of these. When I say, "I am going _to
walk,"_ the verbal or affirmative force is conveyed by the use of
_to_, meaning the same as _do_; and _walk_ is employed merely as a
verbal name; that is, I assert that I shall _do_ the act which I
name by the word _walk_, or the act of _walking_.

Perhaps such speculations as these will prove to be more curious
than profitable. If it be made clearly to appear, that, on
scientific principles, whenever the verbal name is unaccompanied by
a verbalizing adjunct, it is in the _noun-state_, and does not
express affirmation, still this theory would be very inconvenient in
practice.

I shall resume this subject in Lecture XI.

* * * * *

QUESTIONS ON THE PHILOSOPHICAL NOTES.

What has usually been the object of philosophical investigations of language? (page 32.)--Do the syntactical dependances and connexions of words depend on their _original_ import?--Is the power of association and custom efficient in changing the radical meaning of some words?--Have words intrinsically a signification of their own; or is their meaning _inferential_; i.e. such as _custom_ has assigned to them? (page 38.)--On what _fact_ is based the true, philosophical principle of classification?--Define philosophical grammar.--Which is supposed to be the original part of speech?--How were the others formed from that?--How many parts of speech may be recognised in a scientific development and arrangement of the principles of our language?--Name them.--What testimony have we that many things do not act? (page 43.)--Repeat some of the arguments in favor of, and against, the principle which regards all verbs as _active_.--In what moods are verbs used in their _noun-state?_ (page 48.)--Give examples.--What is said of the terminations _est, eth, s,_ and _en_, and of the words _to_ and _do?_

REMARKS ON VERBS AND NOUNS.

You have already been informed, that verbs are the most important part of speech in our language; and to convince you of their importance, I now tell you, that you cannot express a _thought_, or communicate an _idea_, without making use of a verb, either expressed or implied. Verbs express, not only _the state_ or _manner of being_, but, likewise, all the different _actions_ and _movements_ of all creatures and things, whether animate or inanimate. As yet I have given you only a partial description of this sort of words; but when you are better prepared to comprehend the subject, I will explain all their properties, and show you the proper manner of using them.

A word that is generally a _noun_, sometimes becomes a _verb_; and a verb is frequently used as a _noun_. These changes depend on the sense which the word conveys; or, rather, on the office it performs in the sentence; that is the _manner_ in which it is applied to things. For instance, _glory_ is generally a noun; as "The _glory_ of God's throne." But if I say, I _glory_ in religion; or, He _glories_ in wickedness, the word _glory_ becomes a verb. The _love_ of man is inconstant. In this sentence, _love_ is a _noun_; in the next, it is a _verb_: They _love_ virtue. He _walks_ swiftly; Scavengers _sweep_ the streets; The ship _sails_ well. In these phrases, the words _walks, sweep_, and _sails_, are verbs; in the following they are nouns: Those are pleasant _walks_; He takes a broad _sweep_; The ship lowered her _sails_.

Thus you see, it is impossible for you to become a grammarian without exercising your judgment. If you have sufficient resolution to do this, you will, in a short time, perfectly understand the nature and office of the different parts of speech, their various properties and relations, and the rules of syntax that apply to them; and, in a few weeks, be able to speak and write accurately. But you must not take things for granted, without examining their propriety and correctness. No. You are not a mere _automaton_, or _boy-machine_; but a rational being. You ought, therefore, to _think_ methodically, to _reason_ soundly, and to _investigate_ every principle critically. Don't be afraid to _think for yourself_. You know not the high destiny that awaits you. You know not the height to which you may soar in the scale of intellectual existence. Go on, then, boldly, and with unyielding perseverance; and if you do not gain admittance into the temple of fame, strive, at all hazards, to drink of the fountain which gurgles from its base.

EXERCISES IN FALSE SYNTAX.

NOTE 1, TO RULE 12. A noun in the possessive case, should always be distinguished by the apostrophe, or mark of elision; as, The _nation's_ glory.

That girls book is cleaner than those boys books.

Not correct, because the nouns _girls_ and _boys_ are both in the possessive case, and, therefore, require the apostrophe, by which they should be distinguished; thus, "_girl's, boys'"_ according to the preceding NOTE. [Repeat the note.]

Thy ancestors virtue is not thine.

If the writer of this sentence meant _one_ ancestor, he should have inserted the apostrophe after _r_, thus, "_ancestor's"_; if more than one, after _s_, thus, _"ancestors'_ virtue;" but, by neglecting to place the apostrophe, he has left his meaning ambiguous, and we cannot ascertain it. This, and a thousand other mistakes you will often meet with, demonstrate the truth of my declaration, namely, that "without the knowledge and application of grammar rules, you will often speak and write in such a manner as not to be _understood."_ You may now turn back and re-examine the "illustration" of Rules 3, 4, and 12, on page 52, and then correct the following examples about _five_ times over.

A mothers tenderness and a fathers care, are natures gift's for mans advantage. Wisdoms precept's form the good mans interest and happiness. They suffer for conscience's sake. He is reading Cowpers poems. James bought Johnsons Dictionary.

RULE 4. A verb must agree with its nominative in number and person.

Those boys improves rapidly. The men labors in the field. Nothing delight some persons. Thou shuns the light. He dare not do it. They reads well.

I know you can correct these sentences without a rule, for they all have a harsh sound, which offends the ear. I wish you, however, to adopt the habit of correcting errors by applying rules; for, by-and-by, you will meet with errors in composition which you cannot correct, if you are ignorant of the application of grammar rules.

Now let us clearly understand this 4th Rule. Recollect, it applies to the _verb_ and not to the noun; therefore, in these examples the verb is ungrammatical. The noun _boys_, in the first sentence, is of the third person _plural_, and the verb _improves_ is of the third person _singular_; therefore, Rule 4th is violated, because the verb dues not agree with its nominative in _number_. It should be, "boys _improve_." The verb would then be _plural_, and agree with its nominative according to the Rule. In the fourth sentence, the verb does not agree in _person_ with its nominative. _Thou_ is of the _second_ person, and _shuns_ is of the _third_. It should be, "thou _shunnest_," &c. You may correct the other sentences, and, likewise, the following exercises in

FALSE SYNTAX.

A variety of pleasing objects charm the eye. The number of inhabitants of the United States exceed nine millions. Nothing but vain and foolish pursuits delight some persons.

In vain our flocks and fields increase our store,
When our abundance make us wish for more.

While ever and anon, there falls
Huge heaps of hoary, moulder'd walls.

LECTURE III.

OF ARTICLES.

An article is a word prefixed to nouns to limit their signification; as, _a_ man, _the_ woman.

There are only two articles, _a_ or _an_, and _the. A_ or _an_ is called the indefinite article. _The_ is called the definite article.

The _indefinite article_ limits the noun to one of a kind, but to no particular one; as, _a_ house.

The _definite article_ generally limits the noun to a particular object, or collection of objects; as, _the_ house, _the_ men.

The small claims of the article to a separate rank as a distinct part of speech, ought not to be admitted in a scientific classification of words. _A_ and _the, this_ and _that, ten, few_, and _fourth_, and many other words, are used to restrict, vary, or define the signification of the nouns to which they are joined. They might, therefore, with propriety, be ranked under the general head of _Restrictives, Indexes_, or _Defining Adjectives_. But, as there is a marked distinction in their particular meaning and application, each class requires a separate explanation. Hence, no practical advantage would be gained, by rejecting their established classification, as articles, numerals, and demonstratives, and by giving them _new_ names. The character and application of _a_ and _the_ can be learned as soon when they are styled _articles_, as when they are denominated _specifying_ or _defining adjectives_.

The history of this part of speech is very brief. As there are but two articles, _a_ or _an_ and _the_, you will know them wherever they occur.

A noun used without an article, or any other restrictive, is taken in its _general_ sense; as, _"Fruit_ is abundant;" "_Gold_ is heavy;" "_Man_ is born to trouble" Here we mean, fruit and gold _in general;_ and _all men_, or _mankind_.

When we wish to limit the meaning of the noun to _one_ object, but to no _particular_ one, we employ _a_ or _an_. If I say, "Give me _a_ pen;" "Bring me _an_ apple;" you are at liberty to fetch _any_ pen or _any_ apple you please. _A_ or _an_, then, is _indefinite_, because it leaves the meaning of the noun to which it is applied, as far as regards the person spoken to, _vague_, or _indeterminate_; that is, _not definite_. But when reference is made to a _particular_ object, we employ _the_, as, "Give me _the_ pen;" "Bring me _the_ apple, or _the_ apple." When such a requisition is made, you are not at liberty to bring any pen or apple you please, but you must fetch the _particular_ pen or apple to which you know me to refer. _The_ is, therefore, called the _definite_ article.

"_A_ star appears." Here, the star referred to, may be known as a _particular_ star, _definite_, and distinguished from all others, in the mind of the _speaker_; but to the _hearer_, it is left, among the thousands that bedeck the vault of heaven, _undistinguished_ and _indefinite_. But when the star has previously been made the subject of discourse, it becomes, in the minds of both speaker and hearer a _definite_ object, and he says, "_The_ star appears;" that is, that _particular_ star about which we were discoursing.

"Solomon built _a_ temple." Did he build _any_ temple, _undetermined which?_ No; it was a _particular_ temple, pre-eminently distinguished from all others. But _how_ does it become a definite object in the mind of the _hearer_? Certainly, not by the phrase, "_a_ temple," which indicates _any_ temple, leaving it altogether _undetermined_ which; but supposing the person addressed was totally unacquainted with the fact asserted, and it becomes to him, _in one respect only_, a definite and particular temple, by means of the associated words, "Solomon built;" that is, by the use of these words in connexion with the others, the hearer gets the idea of a temple distinguished as _the one erected by Solomon_. If the speaker were addressing one whom he supposed to be unacquainted with the fact related, he might make the temple referred to a still more definite object in the mind of the hearer by a farther explanation of it; thus, "Solomon built _a_ temple _on mount Zion_; and that was _the_ temple _to which the Jews resorted to worship_."

"_The_ lunatic, _the_ poet, and _the_ lover,
Are of imagination all compact."

"_The_ horse is a noble animal;" "_The_ dog is a faithful creature;" "_The_ wind blows;" "_The_ wolves were howling in _the_ woods." In these examples, we do not refer to any particular lunatics, poets, lovers, horses, dogs, winds, wolves, and woods, but we refer to these _particular classes_ of things, in contradistinction to other objects or classes. The phrase, "Neither _the_ one nor _the_ other," is an idiom of the language.

REMARKS.--This method of elucidating the articles, which is popular
with Blair, Priestley, Lowth, Johnson, Harris, Beattie, Coote,
Murray, and many other distinguished philologists, is discarded by
some of our modern writers. But, by proving that this theory is
exceptionable, they by no means make it appear, that it ought,
therefore, to be rejected.

Exceptionable or not, they have not been able to supply its place
with one that is more _convenient in practice_. Neither have they
adopted one _less_ exceptionable. The truth is, after all which can
be done to render the definitions and rules of grammar comprehensive
and accurate, they will still be found, when critically examined by
men of learning and science, more or less exceptionable. These
exceptions and imperfections are the unavoidable consequence of the
imperfections of the language. Language, as well as every thing else
of human invention, will always be _imperfect_. Consequently, a
_perfect_ system of grammatical principles, would not suit it. A
_perfect_ grammar will not be produced, until some _perfect_ being
writes it for a _perfect_ language; and a perfect language will not
be constructed, until some _super-human_ agency is employed in its
production. All grammatical principles and systems which are not
_perfect_, are _exceptionable_.

NOTES.

1. The article is _omitted_ before nouns implying the different
virtues, vices, passions, qualities, sciences, arts, metals, herbs,
&c.; as, "_Modesty_ is becoming; _Falsehood_ is odious; _Grammar_ is
useful," &c.

2. The article is not prefixed to proper nouns; as, _Barron_ killed
_Decatur_; except by way of eminence, or for the sake of
distinguishing a particular family, or when some noun is understood;
as, "He is not _a_ Franklin; He is _a_ Lee, or of the family of
_the_ Lees; We sailed down _the_ (river) Missouri."

3. An _adjective_ is frequently placed between the article and the
noun with which the article agrees; as, "A _good_ boy; an
_industrious_ man." Sometimes the adjective precedes the article;
as, "As _great_ a man as Alexander; _Such_ a shame."

4. In referring to many individuals, when we wish to bring each
separately under consideration, the indefinite article is sometimes
placed between the adjective _many_ and a singular noun; as, "Where
_many a rosebud_ rears its blushing head;" "Full _many a flower_ is
born to blush unseen."

5. The definite article _the_ is frequently applied to _adverbs_ in
the comparative or superlative degree; as, "_The more_ I examine it,
_the better_ I like it," "I like this _the least_ of any."

You may proceed and parse the following articles, when you shall have committed this

SYSTEMATIC ORDER OF PARSING

_The order of parsing an_ Article, is--an article, and why?--definite or indefinite, and why?--with what noun does it agree?--RULE.

"He is _the_ son of _a_ king."

_The_ is an article, a word prefixed to a noun to limit its signification--definite, it limits the noun to a particular object--it belongs to the noun "son," according to

RULE 2. _The definite article_ the _belongs to nouns in the singular or plural number_.

_A_ is an article, a word placed before a noun to limit its signification--indefinite, it limits the noun to one of a kind, but to no particular one--it agrees with "king," agreeably to

RULE 1. _The article_ a _or_ an _agrees with nouns in the singular number only_.

NOTE. By considering the original meaning of this article, the
propriety of Rule 1, will appear. _A_ or _an_, (formerly written
_ane,)_ being equivalent to _one, any one_, or _some one_, cannot be
prefixed to nouns in the plural number. There is, however, an
exception to this rule. _A_ is placed before a plural noun when any
of the following adjectives come between the article and the noun:
_few, great, many, dozen, hundred, thousand, million_; as, _a_ few
_men, a_ thousand _houses_, &c.

EXERCISES IN PARSING.

A bird sings. An eagle flies. Mountains stand. The multitude pursue pleasure. The reaper reaps the farmer's grain. Farmers mow the grass. Farmers' boys spread the hay. The clerk sells the merchant's goods. An ostrich outruns an Arab's horse. Cecrops founded Athens. Gallileo invented the telescope. James Macpherson translated Ossian's poems. Sir Francis Drake circumnavigated the globe. Doctor Benjamin Franklin invented the lightning-rod. Washington Irving wrote the Sketch-Book.

I will now offer a few remarks on the misapplication of the articles, which, with the exercise of your own discriminating powers, will enable you to use them with propriety. But, before you proceed, please to answer the following

QUESTIONS NOT ANSWERED IN PARSING.

How many articles are there?--In what sense is a noun taken, when it has no article to limit it?--Repeat the _order_ of parsing an article.--What rule applies in parsing the _definite_ article?--What rule in parsing the _indefinite_?

* * * * *

PHILOSOPHICAL NOTES.

A, AN, THE.

In a scientific arrangement of grammatical principles, _a_ and _the_
belong to that class of adjectives denominated _definitives_ or
_restrictives_.

_A, an, ane_, or _one_, is the past participle of _ananad_, to add,
to join. It denotes that the thing to which it is prefixed, is
_added, united, aned, an-d, oned, (woned,)_ or made _one_.

_The_ and _that_. According to Horne Tooke, _the_ is the imperative,
and _that_, the past participle, of the Anglo-Saxon verb _thean_, to
get, take, assume. _The_ and _that_ had, originally, the same
meaning. The difference in their present application, is a modern
refinement. Hence, _that_, as well as _the_, was formerly used,
indifferently, before either a singular or a plural noun.

* * * * *

QUESTIONS ON THE NOTES.

Before what nouns is the article omitted?--Is the article _the_ ever applied to adverbs?--Give examples.--What is the meaning of _a_ or _an_? --When is _a_ or _an_ placed before a plural noun?--From what are _a, the_, and _that_ derived?

EXERCISES IN FALSE SYNTAX.

NOTE TO RULE 1. _An_ is used before a vowel or silent _h_, and _a_ before a consonant or _u_ long, and also before the word _one_.

It is not only disagreeable to the ear, but, according to this note, improper to say, _a_ apple, _a_ humble suppliant, _an_ hero, _an_ university, because the word _apple_ begins with a vowel, and _h_ is not sounded in the word _humble_, for which reasons _a_ should be _an_ in the first two examples; but, as the _h_ is sounded in _hero_, and the _u_ is long in _university, a_ ought to be prefixed to these words: thus, _an_ apple, _an_ humble suppliant: _a_ hero, _a_ university. You may correct the following

EXAMPLES.

A enemy, a inkstand, a hour, an horse, an herald, an heart, an heathen, an union, a umbrella, an useful book, many an one. This is an hard saying. They met with an heavy loss. He would not give an hat for an horse.

NOTE 1, TO RULE 2. The articles are often properly omitted: when used they should be justly applied, according to their distinct character; as, "Gold is corrupting; _The_ sea is green; _A_ lion is bold." It would be improper to say, _The_ gold is corrupting; Sea is green; Lion is bold.

The grass is good for horses, and the wheat for men. Grass is good for the horses, and wheat for the men. Grass looks well. Wheat is blighted.

In the first of these sentences, we are not speaking of any particular kind of _grass_ or _wheat_, neither do we wish to limit the meaning to any particular crop or field of grass, or quantity of wheat; but we are speaking of grass and wheat generally, therefore the article _the_ should be omitted. In the second sentence, we do not refer to any definite kind, quality, or number of _horses_ or _men_; but to horses and men generally; that is, the terms are here used to denote _whole species_, therefore, the article should be omitted, and the sentence should read thus, "Grass is good for horses, and wheat for men."

In the third and fourth examples, we wish to limit our meaning to the crops of _grass_ and _wheat_ now on the ground, which, in contradistinction to the crops heretofore raised, are considered as _particular_ objects; therefore we should say, "_The_ grass looks well; _The_ wheat is blighted."

NOTE 2. When a noun is used in its _general_ sense, the article should be omitted; as, "_Poetry_ is a pleasing art;" "_Oranges_ grow in New Orleans."

FALSE SYNTAX.

Corn in the garden, grows well; but corn in the field, does not. How does the tobacco sell? The tobacco is dear. How do you like the study of the grammar? The grammar is a pleasing study. A candid temper is proper for the man. World is wide. The man is mortal. And I persecuted this way unto the death. The earth, the air, the fire, and the water, are the four elements of the old philosophers.

* * * * *

LECTURE IV.

OF ADJECTIVES.

An ADJECTIVE is a word added to a noun to express its quality or kind, or to restrict its meaning; as, a _good_ man, a _bad_ man, _a free_ man, an _unfortunate_ man, _one_ man, _forty_ men.

In the phrases, a _good_ apple, a _bad_ apple, a _large_ apple, a _small_ apple, a _red_ apple, a _white_ apple, a _green_ apple, a _sweet_ apple, a _sour_ apple, a _bitter_ apple, a _round_ apple, a _hard_ apple, a _soft_ apple, a _mellow_ apple, a _fair_ apple, a _May_ apple, an _early_ apple, a _late_ apple, a _winter_ apple, a _crab_ apple, a _thorn_ apple, a _well-tasted_ apple, an _ill-looking_ apple, a _water-cored_ apple, you perceive that all those words in _italics_ are adjectives, because each expresses some quality or property of the noun apple, or it shows what _kind_ of an apple it is of which we are speaking.

The distinction between a _noun_ and an _adjective_ is very clear. A noun is the _name_ of a thing; but an adjective denotes simply the _quality_ or _property_ of a thing. This is _fine cloth_. In this example, the difference between the word denoting the _thing_, and that denoting the _quality_ of it, is easily perceived. You certainly cannot be at a loss to know, that the word _cloth_ expresses the _name_, and _fine_, the _quality_, of the _thing_; consequently _fine_ must be an _adjective_. If I say, He is a _wise_ man, a _prudent_ man, a _wicked_ man, or an _ungrateful_ man, the words in _italics_ are adjectives, because each expresses a _quality_ of the noun man. And, if I say, He is a _tall_ man, a _short_ man, a _white_ man, a _black_ man, or a _persecuted_ man, the words, _tall, short, white, black_, and _persecuted_, are also adjectives, because they tell what _kind_ of a man he is of whom I am speaking, or they attribute to him some particular property.

Some adjectives _restrict_ or _limit_ the signification of the nouns to which they are joined, and are, therefore, sometimes called _definitives_; as, _one_ era, _seven_ ages, the _first_ man, the _whole_ mass, _no_ trouble, _those_ men, _that_ book, _all_ regions.

Other adjectives _define_ or _describe_ nouns, or do both; as, _fine_ silk, _blue_ paper, a _heavy_ shower, _pure_ water, _green_ mountains, _bland_ breezes, _gurgling_ rills, _glass_ window, _window_ glass, _beaver_ hats, _chip_ bonnets, _blackberry_ ridge, _Monroe_ garden, _Juniata_ iron, _Cincinnati_ steam-mill.

Some adjectives are _secondary_, and qualify other adjectives; as, _pale_ red lining, _dark_ blue silk, _deep sea_ green sash, _soft_ iron blooms, _red hot_ iron plate.

You will frequently find the adjective placed after the noun; as, "Those _men_ are _tall_; A _lion_ is _bold_; The _weather_ is _calm_; The _tree_ is three feet _thick_."

Should you ever be at a loss to distinguish an adjective from the other parts of speech, the following sign will enable you to tell it. Any word that will make sense with the word _thing_ added, or with any other noun following it, is an adjective; as, a _high_ thing, a _low_ thing, a _hot_ thing, a _cold_ thing, an _unfinished_ thing, a _new-fashioned_ thing:--or, a _pleasant_ prospect, a _long-deserted_ dwelling, an _American_ soldier, a _Greek_ Testament. Are these words adjectives, _distant, yonder, peaceful, long-sided, double-headed?_ A distant _object_ or _thing_, yonder _hill_, &c. They are. They will make sense with a noun after them. Adjectives sometimes become adverbs. This matter will be explained in Lecture VI. In parsing, you may generally know an adjective by its _qualifying a noun or pronoun_.

Most words ending in _ing_ are _present participles_. These are frequently used as adjectives; therefore, most participles will make sense with the addition of the word thing, or any other noun, after them; as, a _pleasing_ thing, a _moving_ spectacle, _mouldering_ ruins.

In the Latin language, and many others, adjectives, like nouns, have gender, number, and case; but in the English language, they have neither gender, person, number, nor case. These properties belong to _creatures_ and _things_, and not to their _qualities_; therefore gender, person, number, and case, are the properties of _nouns_, and _not_ of adjectives.

Adjectives are varied only to express the degrees of comparison. They have three degrees of comparison, the Positive, the Comparative, and the Superlative.

The _positive degree_ expresses the quality of an object without any increase or diminution; as, _good, wise, great_.

The _comparative degree_ increases or lessens the positive in signification; as, _better, wiser, greater, less wise_.

The _superlative degree_ increases or lessens the positive to the highest or lowest degree; as, _best, wisest, greatest, least wise_.

COMPARISON OF ADJECTIVES.

_More_ and _most_ form the comparative and superlative degrees by increasing the positive; and _less_ and _least_, by diminishing it.

Comparison by increasing the positive

_Pos._ _Comp._ _Sup._ great, greater, greatest. wise, wiser, wisest. holy, more holy most holy. frugal, more frugal most frugal.

Comparison by diminishing the positive.

_Pos._ _Comp._ _Sup._ wise, less wise least wise. holy, less holy, least holy. frugal, less frugal, least frugal.

NUMERAL ADJECTIVES.

Words used in counting, are called _numeral adjectives_ of the _cardinal_ kind; as, _one, two, three, four, twenty, fifty,_ &c.

Words used in numbering, are called _numeral adjectives_ of the _ordinal_ kind; as, _first, second, third, fourth, twentieth, fiftieth,_ &c.

NOTE. The words _many, few_, and _several_, as they always refer to
an indefinite number, may be properly called _numeral adjectives_ of
the indefinite kind.

NOTES.

1. The simple word, or Positive, becomes the Comparative by adding
_r_, or _er_; and the Positive becomes the Superlative, by adding
_st_, or _est_, to the end of it; as, Pos. wise, Com. wise_r_, Sup.
wise_st_; rich, rich_er_, rich_est_; bold, bold_er_, bold_est_. The
adverbs, _more_ and _most, less_ and _least_, when placed before the
adjective, have the same effect; as, Pos. wise, Com. _more_ wise,
Sup. _most_ wise; Pos. wise, Com. _less_ wise, Sup. _least_ wise.

2. _Monosyllables_ are generally compared by adding _er_ and _est;
dissyllables, trisyllables_, &c. by _more_ and _most_; as, mild,
milder, mildest; frugal, more frugal, most frugal; virtuous, more
virtuous, most virtuous. Dissyllables ending in _y_; as, happy,
lovely; and in _le_ after a mute; as, able, ample; and dissyllables
accented on the last syllable; as, discreet, polite; easily admit of
_er_ and _est_; as, happi_er_, happi_est_; polit_er_, _polit_est_.
Words of more than two syllables very seldom admit of these
terminations.

3. When the positive ends in _d_, or _t_, preceded by a _single_
vowel, the consonant is doubled in forming the comparative and
superlative degrees; as red, _redder, reddest_; hot, _hotter,
hottest_.

4. In some words the superlative is formed by adding _most_ to the
end of them; as, nethermost, uttermost or utmost, undermost,
uppermost, foremost.

5. In English, as in most languages, there are some words of very
common use, (in which the caprice of custom is apt to get the better
of analogy,) that are irregular in forming the degrees of
comparison; as, "Good, better, best; bad, worse, worst; little,
less, least; much or many, more, most; near, nearer, nearest or
next; late, later, latest or last; old, older or elder, oldest or
eldest;" and a few others.

6. The following adjectives, and many others, are always in the
_superlative_ degree, because, by expressing a quality in the
highest degree, they carry in themselves a superlative
signification: _chief, extreme, perfect, right, wrong, honest, just,
true, correct, sincere, vast, immense, ceaseless, infinite, endless,
unparalleled, universal, supreme, unlimited, omnipotent, all-wise,
eternal_.

7. Compound adjectives, and adjectives denoting qualities arising
from the figure of bodies, do not admit of comparison; such as,
_well-formed, frost-bitten, round, square, oblong, circular,
quadrangular, conical_, &c.

8. The termination _ish_ added to adjectives, expresses a slight
degree of quality below the comparative; as, _black, blackish; salt,
saltish. Very_, prefixed to the comparative, expresses a degree of
quality, but not always a superlative degree.

Read this Lecture carefully, particularly the NOTES; after which you may parse the following adjectives and neuter verb, and, likewise, the examples that follow. If you cannot repeat all the definitions and rules, spread the Compendium when you parse. But before you proceed, please to commit the

SYSTEMATIC ORDER OF PARSING.

_The order of parsing an_ ADJECTIVE, is--an adjective, and why?--compare it--degree of comparison, and why?--to what noun does it belong?--RULE.

That _great_ nation _was_ once _powerful_; but now it is _feeble_.

_Great_ is an adjective, a word added to a noun to express its quality--pos. great, com. greater, sup. greatest--it is in the positive degree, it expresses the quality of an object without any increase or diminution, and belongs to the noun "nation," according to

RULE 18. _Adjectives belong to, and qualify, nouns expressed or understood_.

_Was_ is a verb, a word that signifies to be--neuter, it expresses neither action nor passion, but being or a state of being--third person singular, because its nominative "nation" is a noun of multitude conveying _unity_ of idea--it agrees with "nation," agreeably to RULE 10. _A noun of multitude conveying_ unity _of idea, may have a verb or pronoun agreeing with it in the_ singular.

_Powerful_ is an adjective belonging to "nation," according to Rule 18. _Feeble_ belongs to "it," according to Note 1, under Rule 18. _Is_ is a neuter verb agreeing with "it," agreeably to Rule 4.

"Bonaparte entered Russia with 400,000 men."

_Four-hundred-thousand_ is a numeral adjective of the cardinal kind, it is a word used in counting, and belongs to the noun "men," according to Note 2, under Rule 18. _Numeral adjectives belong to nouns, which nouns must agree in number with their adjectives_.

If, in parsing the following examples, you find any words about which you are at a loss, you will please to turn back, and parse all the foregoing examples again. This course will enable you to proceed without any difficulty.

_More_ is an adverb. _Of_ and _to_ are prepositions, governing the nouns that follow them in the objective case.

EXERCISES IN PARSING. A benevolent man helps indigent beggars. Studious scholars learn many long lessons. Wealthy merchants own large ships. The heavy ships bear large burdens; the lighter ships carry less burdens. Just poets use figurative language. Ungrammatical expressions offend a true critic's ear. Weak critics magnify trifling errors. No composition is perfect. The rabble was tumultuous. The late-washed grass looks green. Shady trees form a delightful arbor. The setting sun makes a beautiful appearance; the variegated rainbow appears more beautiful. Epaminondas was the greatest of the Theban generals; Pelopidas was next to Epaminondas.

The first fleet contained three hundred men; the second contained four thousand. The earth contains one thousand million inhabitants. Many a cheering ray brightens the good man's pathway.

NOTE. _Like, Worth_. The adjective _like_ is a contraction of the
participle _likened_, and generally has the preposition _unto_
understood after it. "She is _like_ [_unto_] her brother." "They are
_unlike_ [_to_] him." "The kingdom of heaven is _like_ [_likened_ or
made _like_] _unto_ a householder."

The noun _worth_ has altogether dropped its associated words. "The
cloth is _worth_ ten dollars _a_ yard;" that is, The cloth is _of
the_ worth _of_ ten dollars _by the_ yard, or _for a, one_, or
_every yard_.

Some eminent philologists do not admit the propriety of supplying an
ellipsis after _like, worth, ere, but, except_, and _than_, but
consider them prepositions. See Anomalies, in the latter part of
this work.

REMARKS ON ADJECTIVES AND NOUNS.

A critical analysis requires that the adjective when used without its noun, should be parsed as an adjective belonging to its noun understood; as, "The _virtuous_ [_persons_] and the _sincere_ [_persons_] are always respected;" "Providence rewards the _good_ [_people,_] and punishes the _bad_ [_people._]"

"The _evil_ [_deed_ or _deeds_] that men do, lives after them;
"The _good_ [_deed_ or _deeds_] is oft-interred with their bones."

But sometimes the adjective, by its _manner_ of meaning, becomes a noun, and has another adjective joined to it; as, "the chief _good_;" "The vast _immense_ [_immensity_] of space."

Various nouns placed before other nouns, assume the character of adjectives, according to their _manner_ of meaning; as, "_Sea_ fish, _iron_ mortar, _wine_ vessel, _gold_ watch, _corn_ field, _meadow_ ground, _mountain_ height."

The principle which recognises _custom_ as the standard of grammatical accuracy, might rest for its support on the usage of only _six_ words, and defy all the subtleties of innovating skeptics to gainsay it. If the genius and analogy of our language were the standard, it would be correct to observe this analogy, and say, "Good, good_er_, good_est_; bad, bad_der_, bad_dest_; little, littl_er_, littl_est_; much, much_er_; much_est_." "By _this mean_;" "What _are_ the _news_." But such a criterion betrays only the weakness of those who attempt to establish it. Regardless of the dogmas and edicts of the philosophical umpire, the good sense of the people will cause them, in this instance, as well as in a thousand others, to yield to _custom_, and say, "Good, _better, best_; bad, _worse, worst_; little, _less, least_; much, _more, most_;" "By _this means_;" "What _is_ the _news_?"

With regard to the using of adjectives and other qualifying words, care must be taken, or your language will frequently amount to absurdity or nonsense. Let the following general remark, which is better than a dozen rules, put you on your guard. Whenever you utter a sentence, or put your pen on paper to write, weigh well in your mind _the meaning of the words_ which you are about to employ. See that they convey precisely the ideas which you wish to express by them, and thus you will avoid innumerable errors. In speaking of a man, we may say, with propriety, he is _very_ wicked, or _exceedingly_ lavish, because the terms _wicked_ and _lavish_ are adjectives that admit of comparison; but, if we take the words in their literal acceptation, there is a solecism in calling a man _very_ honest, or _exceedingly_ just, for the words _honest_ and _just_, literally admit of no comparison. In point of fact, a man is _honest_ or _dishonest, just_ or _unjust_: there can be no medium or excess in this respect. _Very_ correct, _very_ incorrect, _very_ right, _very_ wrong, are common expressions; but they are not _literally_ proper. What is not _correct_, must be _incorrect_; and that which is not _incorrect_, must be _correct_: what is not _right_, must be _wrong_; and that which is not _wrong_, must be _right_. To avoid that circumlocution which must otherwise take place, our best speakers and writers, however, frequently compare adjectives which do not literally admit of comparison: "The _most established_ practice;" "The _most uncertain_ method;" "Irving, as a writer, _is far more accurate_ than Addison;" "The metaphysical investigations of our philosophical grammars, are _still more incomprehensible_ to the learner." Comparisons like these, should generally be avoided; but sometimes they are so convenient in practice, as to render them admissible. Such expressions can be reconciled with the principles of grammar, only by considering them as figurative.

Comparative members of sentences, should be set in _direct opposition_ to each other; as, "Pope was _rich_, but Goldsmith was _poor_." The following sentences are inaccurate: "Solomon was _wiser_ than Cicero was _eloquent_." "The principles of the reformation were _deeper_ in the prince's mind than to be _easily eradicated_." This latter sentence contains _no comparison_ at all; neither does it literally convey _any meaning_. Again, if the Psalmist had said, "I am the wisest of my teachers," he would have spoken absurdly, because the phrase would imply, that he was one of his teachers. But in saying, "I am wiser _than_ my teachers," he does not consider himself one of them, but places himself in contradistinction to them.

Before you proceed any farther, you may answer the following

QUESTIONS NOT ANSWERED IN PARSING.

What is the distinction between a noun and an adjective?--By what sign may an adjective be known?--Are participles ever used as adjectives?--Does gender, person, number, or case, belong to adjectives?--How are they varied?--Name the three degrees of comparison.--What effect have _less_ and _least_ in comparing adjectives?--Repeat the order of parsing an adjective.--What rule applies in parsing an adjective?--What rule in parsing a verb agreeing with a noun of multitude conveying _unity_ of idea?--What Note should be applied in parsing an adjective which belongs to a pronoun?--What Note in parsing _numeral_ adjectives?

QUESTIONS ON THE NOTES. Repeat all the various ways of forming the degrees of comparison, mentioned in the first five NOTES.--Compare these adjectives; _ripe, frugal, mischievous, happy, able, good, little, much_ or _many, near, late, old_.--Name some adjectives that are always in the superlative, and never compared.--Are compound adjectives compared?--What is said of the termination _ish_, and of the adverb _very?_--When does an adjective become a noun?--What character does a noun assume when placed before another noun?--How can you prove that _custom_ is the standard of grammatical accuracy?

* * * * *

PHILOSOPHICAL NOTES.

ADNOUNS.

_Adnoun_ or _Adjective_, comes from the Latin, _ad_ and _jicio_, to
_add to_.

Adnouns are a class of words added to nouns to vary their
comprehension, or to determine their extension. Those which effect
the former object, are called _adjectives_, or _attributes;_ and
those which effect the latter, _restrictives_. It is not, in all
cases, easy to determine to which of these classes an adnoun should
be referred. Words which express simply the _qualities_ of nouns,
are adjectives; and such as denote their _situation_ or _number_,
are restrictives.

Adjectives were originally nouns or verbs.

Some consider the adjective, in its present application, _exactly_
equivalent to a noun connected to another noun by means of
juxtaposition, of a preposition, or of a corresponding flexion. "A
_golden_ cup," say they, "is the same as a _gold_ cup, or a cup _of
gold_." But this principle appears to be exceptionable. "A cup _of
gold_," may mean either a cup-_full_ of gold, or a cup _made_ of
gold. "An _oaken_ cask," signifies an _oak_ cask, or a cask _of
oak_; i.e. a cask _made_ of oak; but a _beer_ cask, and a cask _of
beer_, are two different things. A _virtuous_ son; a son _of
virtue_.

The distinguishing characteristic of the adjective, appears to
consist in its both _naming_ a quality, and _attributing_ that
quality to some object.

The terminations _en, ed_, and _ig_ (our modern _y_,) signifying
_give, add, join_, denote that the names of qualities to which they
are postfixed, are to be attributed to other nouns possessing such
qualities: wood-_en_, wood-_y_. See page 37.

_Left_ is the past participle of the verb _leave_. Horne Tooke
defines _right_ to be that which is _ordered_ or _directed_. The
_right_ hand is that which your parents and custom direct you to use
in preference to the other. And when you employ that in preference,
the other is the _leaved, leav'd_, or _left_ hand; i.e. the one
_leaved_ or _left_. "The one shall be taken, and the other _(leaved)
left_."

_Own_. Formerly a man's _own_ was what he _worked for, own_ being a
past participle of a verb signifying to _work_.

_Restrictive_. Some restrictives, in modern times, are applied only
to singular nouns; such as _a_ or _an, another, one, this, that,
each, every, either_. Others, only to plural nouns; as, _these,
those, two, three, few, several, all_. But most restrictives, like
adjectives, are applied to both singular and plural nouns: _first,
second, last, the, former, latter, any, such, same, some, which,
what_.

_Numerals_. All numeration was, doubtless, originally performed by
the fingers; for the number of the fingers is still the utmost
extent of its signification. _Ten_ is the past participle of
_tynan_, to close, to shut in. The hands _tyned, tened_, closed, or
shut in, signified _ten_; for there numeration _closed_. To denote a
number greater than ten, we must begin again, _ten_ and _one, ten_
and _two_, &c.

_Twain, twa-in, twa-ain, twa-ane_, is a compound of _two (twa, twae,
twee, twi, two_ or _dwo_ or _duo)_ and _one (ane, ain, an.)_ It
signifies _two_ units _joined, united, aned,_ or _oned. Twenty
(twa-ane-ten)_ signifies _two tens aned, oned_, or _united_. Things
_separated_ into parcels of twenty each, are called _scores. Score_
is the past participle of _shear_, to _separate_.

_The Ordinals_ are formed like abstract nouns in _eth. Fifth,
sixth_, or _tenth_ is the number which _fiv-eth, six-eth, ten-eth_,
or mak-_eth_ up the number _five, six_, or _ten_.

Philosophical writers who limit our acceptation of words to that in
which they were _originally_ employed, and suppose that all the
complicated, yet often definable, associations which the gradual
progress of language and intellect has connected with words, are to
be reduced to _the standard of our forefathers_; appear not to have
sufficiently attended to the _changes_ which this principle of
association actually produces. As language is transmitted from
generation to generation, many words become the representatives of
ideas with which they were not originally associated; and thus they
undergo a change, not only in the _mode_ of their application, but
also in their meaning. Words being the signs of things, their
meaning must necessarily change as much, _at least_, as things
themselves change; but this variation in their import more
frequently depends on accidental circumstances. Among the ideas
connected with a word that which was once of primary, becomes only
of secondary importance; and sometimes, by degrees, it loses
altogether its connexion with the word, giving place to others with
which, from some accidental causes, it has been associated.

Two or three instances will illustrate the truth of these remarks.
In an ancient English version of the New Testament, we find the
following language: "I, Paul, a _rascal_ of Jesus Christ, unto you
Gentiles," &c. But who, in the present acceptation of the word,
would dare to call "the great apostle of the Gentiles" a _rascal?
Rascal_ formerly meant a _servant:_ one devoted to the interest of
another; but now it is nearly synonymous with _villain. Villain_
once had none of the odium which is now associated with the term;
but it signified one who, under the feudal system, rented or held
lands of another. Thus, Henry the VIII. says to a vassal or tenant,
"As you are an accomplished _villain_, I order that you receive £700
out of the public treasury." The word _villain_, then, has given up
its original idea, and become the representative of a new one, the
word _tenant_ having supplanted it. To prove that the meaning of
words _changes_, a thousand examples could be adduced; but with the
intelligent reader, proof is unnecessary.

* * * * *

QUESTIONS ON THE PHILOSOPHICAL NOTES.

How are adnouns divided?--What constitutes the true character of an adjective?--What are the signification and denotement of the terminations, _en, ed_, and _ig?_--What do _left_ and _own_ signify?--Name the three ways in which restrictives are applied.--How was numeration originally performed?--What is said of _twain, twenty, score_, and the ordinal numbers?--What is said of the changes produced in the meaning of words, by the principle of association?

EXERCISES IN FALSE SYNTAX. NOTE 9, under RULE 18. Double _Comparatives_ and _Superlatives_ should be avoided; such as, _worser, lesser, more_ deeper, _more_ wickeder, &c.: _chiefest, supremest, perfectest, rightest_; or _more_ perfect, _most_ perfect, _most_ supreme, &c.

Virtue confers the most supreme dignity on man, and it should be his
chiefest desire.

He made the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to
rule the night.

The phrases "most supreme," and "chiefest," in the first sentence, are incorrect, because _supreme_ and _chief_ are in the superlative degree without having the superlative form superadded, which addition makes them double superlatives. They should be written, "confers supreme dignity," and, "his chief desire."

We can say, one thing is _less_ than another, or _smaller_ than another, because the adjectives _less_ and _smaller_ are in the comparative degree; but the phrase "_lesser_ light," in the second sentence, is inaccurate. _Lesser_ is a double comparative, which, according to the preceding Note, should be avoided. _Lesser_ is as incorrect as _badder, gooder, worser_. "The _smaller_ light," would be less exceptionable. You can correct the following without my assistance. Correct them _four_ times over.

The pleasures of the understanding are more preferable than those of imagination or sense. The tongue is like a race-horse, which runs the faster the lesser weight it carries. The nightingale's voice is the most sweetest in the grove. The Most Highest hath created us for his glory, He was admitted to the chiefest offices. The first witness gave a strong proof of the fact; the next more stronger still; but the last witness, the most stronger of all. He gave the fullest and the most sincere proof of the truer friendship.

LECTURE V.

OF PARTICIPLES.

A PARTICIPLE is a word derived from a verb, and partakes of the nature of a verb, and also of an adjective.

Verbs have three participles, the present or imperfect, the perfect, and the compound.

The _present_ or _imperfect_ participle denotes action or being continued, but not perfected. It always ends in _ing_; as, _ruling, being_: "I am _writing_ a letter."

The _perfect_ participle denotes action or being perfected or finished. When derived from a regular verb, it ends in _ed_, and corresponds with the imperfect tense; as, _ruled, smiled:_ "The letter is _written_."

The _compound_ participle implies action or being completed before the time referred to. It is formed by placing _having_ before the perfect participle; as, _having ruled, having been ruled: "Having written_ the letter, he mailed it."

The term _Participle_ comes from the Latin word _participio_, which signifies to _partake_: and this name is given to this part of speech, because it _partakes_ of the nature of the verb and of the adjective.

By many writers, the participle is classed with the verb, and treated as a part of it; but, as it has no nominative, partakes of the nature of an adjective, requires many syntactical rules which apply not to the verb, and, in some other respects, has properties peculiar to itself, it is believed that its character is sufficiently distinct from the verb, to entitle it to the rank of a separate part of speech. It is, in fact, the connecting link between, not only the adjective and the verb, but also the noun and the verb.

All participles are compound in their meaning and office. Like verbs, they express action and being, and denote time; and, like adjectives, they describe the nouns of which they denote the action or being. In the sentences, The boatman is _crossing_ the river; I see a man _laboring_ in the field; Charles is _standing_; you perceive that the participles _crossing_ and _laboring_ express the actions of the boatman and the man, and _standing_ the state of being of Charles. In these respects, then, they partake of the nature of verbs. You also notice, that they _describe_ the several nouns associated with them, like describing adjectives; and that, in this respect, they participate the properties of adjectives. And, furthermore, you observe they denote actions which are still going on; that is, _incomplete_ or _unfinished_ actions; for which reason we call them _imperfect_ participles.