sto 



Mr. Pytches on his DiBionary. 



[Oct. 1, 



orthography to pronunciation, Is ineffec- 

 tiblf, Had would conduce neither to the 

 riches, nor to the grandeur, nor to the 

 ' ftrength of our language. 



I acknowlegc, however, two import&nt 

 remarks of this gentlemim, and UuiU 

 adopt them without hefitmicy. One is, 

 that whenever the verb whence fuhftan- 

 tives nidl"c\ilnie Jue formed prc-cxifts in 

 our language, the termination iliov.ld he 

 er inftcad of or. The other, that verbs 

 lliouid be dil'criminated from nouns in 

 their orthogrcipliy w'henever fealible. I 

 here beg leave to notice my intention of 

 retaining nouns ending with e in their ad- 

 jc«ives; as, advantage, advantageous; 

 facrilCL'f, facrilegeous ; aiid nouns ending 

 Tilth y, bv fubftituting the i ; iis, bounty, 

 bountjons ; pit^, 'pitiotib. Jiihnfon 

 writes, facrilegjous, bounKous, pittous, 

 &c., &c. 



Xjie infertion of compound epithets in 

 % Dictionary is ftated to be unneceftary, 

 as they increafe its bulk, not its explana- 

 tory \-alije. One example ihall fuflicc to 

 invalidate the aHertion. Thnnd-form, 

 and thre^d-Jcnmed, arc compound terms, 

 but have no w^uivalenre of meaning : the 

 former denotes the JJiupe of a thread ; the 

 latter, formed of threads. Co i pound 

 epitliets, and fometimes the decompofi- 

 tion of tjicm, contribute grace to compo- 

 lifion, obviate circuni'ocution, and fre- 

 quently facilitate the difcovery of the re- 

 lations and contrafts of ideas, where a 

 ilniple epithet would be ellectlcfs. 



From a fupcrficial obiirn-vance, or an 

 undifceniing precipitancy, the gentleman 

 to whom I have latterly been alluding, 

 has ifl'ued a decree againll the legitimacy 

 of the iitli^e xcrh fo/ute., and dii'ulayed 

 an archridicule, that excites my allouifli- 

 mcnt and aniniadvcrfion, becuufe niifap- 

 pliud. It is a univerfally received prota- 

 lis ainong grannnarians, that the firll 

 terms of every laiigua;ie \vere nouns, 

 Hhich were turned into verbs by putting 

 them in a<!'tion. From folution, for in- 

 ftance, which i.> derived from the Latin 

 participle foluliis, we receive the verb 

 to folule. Froficution, from p7-ol'eciilus, 

 whence to profnUe. Execution, from 

 excculun, whence to execute. As fome 

 of your Correfpondeiits perhaps have ne- 

 ver met with the verb, allow me to in- 

 lert a palVage wherein it occurs, and 

 which is not impertinent to the difputa- 

 tive cafe before us. 



Thofe who are good gramm?.rians, and 

 know the properties of words, and are /killful 

 in the tonj;ues, c;in well Ji/ute fuch errors,— 

 fir, fVtljori'i An of Logic. 



So the verbal noun : 



Let this fuffi- e that I have reherfed for the 

 Jolut'mg of the argument. — Ibid. 



I affertcd, and t again repeat, that 

 etymology nuift frequently depend on 

 conjecture. The half-decay of fomc 

 words, the conpli:<g of others, the niif- 

 takes arifnig by tradition, and the muti- 

 lation and couverfion of diiTerent letters by 

 the old herds of abre\iaiin!^ tranfcribcr's, 

 render tlie prifiine mcannig of many 

 words complicated and caballiftical. lor 

 centuries was tiie derivation of our par- 

 ticles offiifcaled, and tiie greater part of 

 our vocabulary remains in a funilar pre- 

 dicament. If a word has but an adinily 

 of found with one that is Latin, or 

 French, it is immediately admitted to be 

 derived from it, though the primitive ra» 

 dix niicht be found in a Celtic, Teutonic, 

 or j\nglo-Sa\on ioil. 



The paragraph in which I aflerted 

 that many of the antique words of Chau- 

 cer would be admitted in my Dictionary, 

 chiefly thofe however that .Spenfer and 

 Milton lia\e borrowed, has occafinned a 

 kind of jittack, in which there appears 

 more art than candor, more rallinefs than 

 dil'cretioii. By iliuftrating a word from 

 Chaucer, we difco\er what it contribut- 

 ed to the ftructurc of a fentence at that 

 era, and what in fuccecding ages. What 

 afpert it has in the fatirical and facetious 

 coinpofition of the former; what in the 

 fubiime fentiments and the inverted (lyle 

 of the latter. 



Thofe words which I noted were not 

 to be admitted, thou:.;h inferted in .Tohn« 

 fon, are of that chifs, w Inch, if not im- 

 pure, are needlefs, and better known 

 from their imprifonment ia his Di6tion- 

 ary, than from their occurrence in au- 

 thors. 



Perhaps I have collc6}ed as coimOus it 

 nomenclature of uiuccorded words us Sir 

 Herbert Croft. The interlcavetl copy of 

 Johnfon's Di(^iionary in the polielVion of 

 the late Dr. Gcddcs would be an inelii- 

 niabje treafure to me ;* fo would the 

 marginal notes in the Dictionary of th« 

 late Gilbert Wakefield. I am tnily ioiiy 

 that I omitted lending over a tranfcriber 

 to his abode at Hackney when he otVor- 

 ed them to inc, which he gciieroully did 

 about eight years fince. How much my 

 labor would be mitigated, ami my Dic- 

 tionary enriched, could I obtain the vc r- 

 bal remarks from tlie adverfarias and the 



* We are enabled to fiy, thnt no fuch in- 

 terleaved Diftionary, enriched by the Note» 

 ot Dr. Geddes, does exift, or ever did exift.— • 

 Editor. 



1 margufs 



