c 
.* 
On an Universal written Character. 289 
In Latin, sanguis, sanguineus ; corpus, corporeus. 
Russ, krov, krovavot ; telo, telesnoz. 
German, Jélut, blutig; leib, lerblich. 
English, blood, bloody ; body, bodily, 
French, sang, sanglant. 
You will remark that, in all these examples, so 
much of the original sign is retained as to enable us 
to perceive it. The change produced on it is only to 
fit it to join with the terminational mark, in a man- 
ner that does not occasion a disagreeable sound. 
The meaning of the noun thus modified is 
uniform and determinate. ‘The mode, however, of 
modification is not uniform, I believe, in any lan- 
guage. Several terminations are used to ,express 
the same thing, and are used according as they are 
best fitted to produce an agreeable sound. Séveral 
adjectives appear to me to be synonymous; thus, 
beauteous and beautiful, bownteous and bountiful. It is 
with much hesitation that I differ from my much 
valued friend Dr. Anderson in this respect.* But 
however this be, it would be easy in characteristic 
writing to invent signs even for the terminations 
which may be deemed perfectly synonymous. _Ir- 
regularities in the formation of this class of adjec- 
tives produce no confusion in oral language; the 
idea, though expressed in a different way, is still © 
the same. If in an universal character a sign is 
* Sce Bee, vol. vii. page 275. 
VOL. Vv. ‘NN 
