THE WITNESS OF PHILOLOGY. 305 



ball," or "pocket" in "pocket-book," &c., are adjectives in 

 virtue of position — i.e. of apposition with the substantives 

 which they thus serve to qualify. 



Similarly as regards the genitive case. This, also, is of 

 an attributive quality, and, therefore, like the now in- 

 dependent adjective, originally had no independent existence. 

 When the force of the genitive had to be conveyed, it 

 was conveyed by this same device of apposition. And, 

 lastly, the same device was resorted to for purposes of 

 predication. Or, to quote these important facts from re- 

 sponsible sources, Professor Sayce says : — " Even the genitive 

 case, necessary as it appears to us to be, once had no 

 existence, as indeed it still has none in groups of languages 

 like the Taic or the Malay. Instead of the genitive, we here 

 have two nouns placed in apposition to one another, two 

 individuals, as it were, set side by side without any effort 

 being made to determine their exact relations beyond the 

 mere fact that one precedes the other, and is therefore thought 

 of first. . . . Now, this apposition of two nouns, which still 

 serves the purpose of the genitive in many languages, might 

 be regarded as attributive or as predicative. If predicative, 

 then the two contrasted nouns formed a complete sentence, 

 ' Cup gold,' for instance, being equivalent to ' The cup is gold.' 

 If attributive, then one of the two nouns took the place of an 

 adjective, 'gold cup' being nothing more than 'a golden 

 cup.' " * Then, after giving examples from different languages 

 of the artificial contrivances whereby in course of time these 

 three grammatical differentiations originated (namely, by 

 conventional changes of position between the words apposed, 

 in some cases the form of predication being A B, and that of 

 attribution or possession B A, while in other languages the 

 reverse order has obtained), Professor Sayce goes on to say : — 

 "These primitive contrivances for distinguishing between the 

 predicate, the attribute, and the genitive, when the three ideas 

 had in the course of ages been evolved by the mind of the 



• Sayce, Introduction, ^c, i. 415. .See also F. Miiller, /or. cit., I. i. 2, p. 2, 

 for .inothcT statement of the same fp.cls referieci to by .Sayce. 



X 



