ee ae 
effugerit, not cfugiat. The following is an inftance of a future 
fenfe expreffed in a fingle word even in the indicative, zabav eyvas 
ay o:omep @poves,  Faflus cognovifles, ea que agis. Cidip. Tyr. 
line 411. 
THESE inftances may fuilice to lead the reader to attend to 
others; they may be found in abundance. Thus much in de- 
fence of Doctor Clark’s explanation of the fecond future. Nor 
can I acquiefce implicitly in Lord Monboddo’s tranflating the 
firft always indefinitely. When Antigone fays, in the Cidipus 
Coloneus, whether exiled in foreign lands or wandering over the 
feas, duoacev eZousy tpoezv, I do not fee why we have not as good 
a right to tranflate it with Dr. Clark, we /ball be leading a mi- 
ferable life, which is the future imperfect, as with Lord Mon- 
boddo, we /ball lead, which is indefinite. The former, though it 
may found inelegantly, appears to me the true tranflation. 
Havine thus fubmitted the few obfervations which occurred 
to me on thefe tenfes, let me not be fufpected of  enter- 
taining the leaft inclination to detract from the reputation of 
Lord Monboddo, as a profound and accurate linguift. I agree 
with Mr. Huntingford in thinking that his work on the Origin 
of Language, is a work of the greateft penetration, erudition, 
and tafte; and the Greek fcholar is particularly indebted to 
him for the chapters relative to the Greek language; but I 
truft we may be indulged, without offence, in thinking that his 
fentence on the aorifts and futures was hafty and unfounded ; 
and if a favourite hypothefis fhould have mifled its author, 
and 
