27^ grammatical disquisitions. -^ug. 29; 



\st. Ou the hypothesis that the particular clafs of 

 words above named are real inflected genitives, itwould 

 be difficult to afsign a reason why one clafs of Englifli 

 nouns fliould admit of this peculiar inflection and not 

 the whole. In those languages which admit of cases 

 in general we find no such distinction ; but in Eng- 

 lifli, the words holinefs, significance^ dependance, dili- 

 gence,, exposure, ntimhnefs, idlenefs, chillnejs, entice- 

 tnent, arrangement, intricacy, discordancy, and thou- 

 sands of others, amounting perhaps to nearly one 

 half the nouns in the language, admit not of any in- 

 flected genitive at all. Whence, it might be alked, 

 arises this peculiarity ? I fhall have occasion to solve 

 this- difficulty in a future part of this efsay, thoughj 

 it seems to be impofsible to solve it on the fore men- 

 tioned h}'pothesis. 



id. If there be no other reason for calling the par- 

 ticular clafs; of En glilh words here mentioned, the 

 genitive case of the nouns from vHhich they are ob- 

 viously derived, but merely that they have in ge- 

 neral the same sense as the noun, without variation, 

 with the word q/" prefixed to them, we fliall find that; 

 many other words have a claim to be. admitted into 

 the clafs of Englifli genitives besides those xisuotlly, 

 j*anked in this clafs. Indeed the words having, that 

 genitive signification *, (and the same might be said. 



* Ibeg the reader will not here think that J adopt as my own, the 

 idtas g'vfn-in the text. I am fully sensible of the impropriety, to ex- 

 prefsit in no stronger language, of forming our idea of tases in the man- 

 ner Keire explained, I cnly mean to give a candid repirsencetion of the 

 mode, of reasoning that has been adopted by Engl ft grammarians in gene- 

 ral. on this, subject J and I l.ope it will bs f«undtbat I. do it Ter^ faiily in 

 the. text. 



