100 On an Universal Character. 
we might not havea plural of three, oreven more. To 
denote that dual plural, instead of the usual plural {, 
let it be put] ; and if a plural of three were wanted, 
‘j. Wherever a writer wishes to discriminate this 
idea he has it in his power; and, though I cannot 
put it into English, it can be just as well under- 
stood as if I were reading the Greek dual number. 
I have carried the distinctions of gender above 
no farther than the English language admits of; but 
the character needs by no means to be so restricted, 
as there would be no difficulty in making as many 
discriminations in that respect, as I have marked in 
the Essay on Pronouns, in the 11th vol. of the Brg. 
But I have already, I fear, tired you, with this partly 
unintelligible letter; and shall not proceed farther 
than barely to assure you, that I am convinced, if 
the gentleman who has begun this investigation can 
be induced to continue it till he completes a gram- 
mar and a dictionary (which I am persuaded he will 
do, if he meet with proper encouragement) this will 
prove to be, if not one of the greatest discoveries, at 
jeast one of the most useful literary zmprovements of 
the present age. I thought you would be well 
pleased to hear of the first beginnings of an under. 
taking that may prove so extensively useful to 
society ; and remain, with much esteem, 
sir, 
your most humble servant, 
GAMES ANDERSON. 
