hs] 
firft tenfes of the fame name, and are only oid obfolete prefents 
and preterimperfects, preferved after the verb was modernifed, 
merely to vary and enrich the found of the language +. 
Ir may well be doubted whether varying founds without va- 
rying the fenfe can ever be an improvement of language; but no 
man will deny, that if thofe various words have diftin® meanings, 
not only the variety of founds will remain the fame, but the 
language will be more definite, accurate, and perfect, and the 
various turns and ations of the mind or body will be more 
clearly and certainly expreffed. To try whether the Greek 
language may not be refcued from this imputation, for fuch it 
may be confidered, of having diftin@ founds without diverfity 
of meaning, is the object of the prefent effay, which is not fo 
‘much propofed in the light of a fyftem as of an enquiry. 
In purfuing this enquiry, it muft be premifed that we are 
not to expect to meet with any rule that can be adopted with 
refpect to the meaning of the Greek tenfes, to which numerous 
“exceptions will not occur. 
In truth the Greek writers ufe them all in common prac- 
tice fo promifcuoufly, that it feems hard to fay to what philo- 
fophic time they have not applied every tenfe of grammarians 
(C) upon | 
+ If that was the cafe, it would have been incumbent on Lord Monboddo to 
have fhewn how they came to be ufed for futures and aorifts, and not, as they 
naturally would, for other expreffions of the new prefent and preterimperfea. 
