J ^0 2, on per senal pronouns. 195 



sion is lu complere ; yet, perhaps, there is no language, 

 ancient or modern, which is so chaste, or so nearly 

 adheres to nature and common sense, in the use of 

 gender, respecting pronouns, as the Englifh ; so 

 that those who use it, are, in this respect, freed from 

 an infinite number of embarrafsments with which 

 other languages in general are encumbered. 



A very slight degree of attention, however, to the- 

 subject, will enable us to discover, that the divisions 

 for gender we have admitted, are by far too few es- 

 pecially in respect to the pronoun of the third per- 

 son, for effecting in a perfect manner the purposes of ^^ 

 language. 



Without repeating what has been said respecting 

 the want of a pronoun denoting castrated animals, 

 such as eunuch, gelding, wedder-Jheep, capon. Sec, I 

 would here confine my observations chiefly to the 

 neuter gender, which, in the Englilli language, com- 

 prehends not only inanimate objects, which are ail 

 that ftiould properly belong to it, but also animals 

 that have na sex at all, those whose sex is not appa- 

 rent, and others still in which, though the sex be 

 known, it is not at all considered. 



Many words are exprefsive of general clafses of 

 animals comprehending both sexes ; such zi frie7id, 

 servant, neighbour, and so on, whose place cannot be 

 supplied neither by the masculine, nor the feminhie 

 pronoun as a substitute, far lef» the neuter. The in- 

 definite gender * is here so much wanted, that the- 



• See p g' 123, for the distinction respecting gender that affect the 

 pronoun of tlic :bird pe: son, in common with those of the first and si- 

 onrf persons. 



