141 



" for the purposes of language: for, if precision be re- 

 ** quired, (which, indeed, the Chinese does^ not aim at,) 

 " such languages become more prolix; several words being 

 " necessary to express what might have been expressed by 

 " a single word. Thus, tlie words Dei, and Deo, in Latin, 

 " sufficiently shew, without any addition, what relation the 

 " object signified is understood to stand in, to the objects 

 " expressed by the other words in the sentence; whereas, 

 " in English, and other modera languages, we must em- 

 " ploy, at least, two words, and say, of God, to God, 

 '* and sometimes four; for the single word amavissem, we 

 " must say, I would have loved. This prolixity evidently 

 " enervates the eloquence of most modern languages." 

 Dr. James Gregory adds, that " the moods of verbs, like 

 " other inflections of words, express, much better than any 

 " succession of words can do, the intimate connexion and 

 " relation of various thoughts, Avhich are not successive, 

 " but simultaneous, or co-existent, and which appear un- 

 " naturally disjointed, and, in some measure altered, when 

 " they are expressed by a series of words, denoting each 

 " of thein separately, and in succession."* 



odiy. This simplification of the principles of languages, 

 renders them less agreeable to the ear: the variety of ter- 

 mination in the Greek and Latin, occasioned by their de- 

 clensions and conjugations, gives a sweetness to their lan- 

 guage, altogether unknoAvn to any modern language. 



S'iiy. This 



* 2 Edinb. Trans, p. 216. 



