152 Profefor MArtyn’s Obfervations 
lation*; but many will not. For inftance, if we render /cazer by the 
Englifh word rough, how {hall we diftinguifh it from a/per, which 
has the fame fignification? We are therefore reduced to the ne- 
ceffity of rendering a/per, rought; and of retaining moft of the 
other Latin terms with Englifh terminations, as /cabrous, hirfute, 
hifpid, &c. unlefs we would wantonly load the ícience of Botany; 
and our Englith tongue, with terms newly invented or applied, 
which are not either more fignificant, or more eafy to be underftood, 
than thofe which we are already in poffeffion of. 
As to the fecond general principle, namely, that the terminations 
and plurals of our words, together with their compounds and de- 
rivatives, fhould be adapted to the ftruéture and genius of the _ 
Englifh language; it will not perhaps by many be thought of equal 
importance with the firft. There is perhaps no language that is 
more irregular than ours, or that admits of more s. licende j in many 
refpects. z 
This however is no oteaton Skp, i in the. formation of new terms, 
we fhould not follow fuch fundamental rules as we have, avoid 
irregularities as much as poffible, and add no frefh barbarifms to 
thofe which already difgrace us. The well known Horatian rule f 
muft be our conftant guide in the formation of our terminations 
and ‘plurals; and analogy muft be attended to in the ftruéture of 
our compounds and derivatives. Thus neéiary may be ufed for 
nectar ium, piftil for piftillum, flyle for fiylus, pericarp for pericarpium, 
receptacle for receptaculum, capfule £or capfuias glume for gluma, culm 
* As lana wool, pili hairs, feta briftles, hami hooks, flimuli ftings, aculei prickles, þing 
thorns: lanatus may be rendered woolly, pilofus hairy, fetaceus briftly, hamatus hooked, 
aculeatns prickly, /pinofus thorny. 
+ If fo, in order to preferve the analogy, exafperatus may be tranflated -raughened. 
t * Et nova fa@taque nuper habebunt verba fidem, fi 
“Greco fonte cadant, parce detorta. 
for 
