THEORY OF LANGUAGE. 39S 



In fact, the substantive verb is considered as the simple ex.- 

 pression for " that pecuhar differential circumstance which, 

 " added to the definition of a Noim, constitutes the Verb." 

 This is the view adopted by the learned author of the article 

 Universal Grammar, in the later editions of the EncyclopcBdid 

 Britannica. 



Tliis doctrine does not seem, however, to be acquiesced in 

 by all. The ingenious author of the corresponding article ia 

 E-EEs's Cyclopcedia, though he does not directly oppose it, 

 seems not to consider affirmation as essential to language. He 

 casually speaks of the verb as losing its power of affirmation 

 in the Imperative Mood. He has not, however, substituted 

 any other theory of the general object of language, nor laid 

 down- any general doctrine on the nature of sentences. He 

 does not, indeed, shew himself to be aware, that since, in this 

 instance, he denied a doctrine reckoned by others fundamen- 

 tal, it was incumbent on him either to substitute another, or to . 

 prove that none could be obtained. 



The theory which considers the business of language as con- 

 sisting in affirmation, and which considers all sentences as as- 

 sertions, is certainly recommended by some share of plausibi- 

 lity. We feel, for the most part, that this is our object. We 

 use the noun as the sign of an idea, and the verb as a sign by 

 which we communicate a new connection betwixt one idea and 

 another. The substantive verb, placed betwixt two nouns, 

 signifies that the ideas expressed by these nouns have a cer-- 

 tain order of succession in our thoughts, — aa order which we 

 endeavour, by means of this sign, to produce in the thoughts 

 of the person to whom we speak. " This cloth is green," 

 when addressed to any person, signifies merely that we con- 

 nect the idea expressed by " this cloth" with that which is. ex- 

 pressed by the term " green." The assertion made is, that a 



greeiLi 



