English, the Persian, and the Bengalese langua- 
free from the embarrassments of arbitrary gen-~ 
in English, indeed, a few objects destitute of sex 
p ogy applied to them borrowed from 
Th 
ti 
; 
ve a phra 
¥€ sexual distinctions. But this is on rare occasions ; and, 
* as no marks of gender are attached to our adjectives, the 
g tthe mae now stated does not occur. The whole 
the use of the personal pronouns he and she. This a 
plication of words denoting sex only partakes of the 
nature of poetical personification. _ It does not consist in 
such an adherence to gender as affords a basis for 
_ “grammatical rules. ‘The sun is called he on the same 
+ principle on which we might compare that luminary to 
_ a king, for the splendour which surrounds him; to 
the cherishing father of a family ; or to a presiding 
mind, by which extensive systems are regulated. The 
moon is called she, on the same principle on which it 
might be compared to an eminent female who does not 
overawe by an oppressive effulgence, but diffuses a mild 
radiance, productive of a gentle pleasure. 
Ma 
i 
Sect. VII. Number. 
_. Tirar accident of nouns which we call number is a 
i- sign for representing the exemplification of a general 
ed in more than one individvad. It does not apply to 
* names. A proper name is in its nature descrip- 
tive of only one object, and therefore essentially singu- 
lar. As soon as it becomes susceptible of plurality, as 
. when we speak of the twelve Cesars, or the seven 
_ Jameses, it ceases to be a proper name. Spain is the 
ts proper name of a country, and Spaniard has by some 
ians been called the te bee we of a people ; 
} Fut the latter is a generic word characterizing any one 
___ of'a great number of persons by their connection with 
_ Spain. When a name is applicable to two individuals, 
these are to be considered as constituting a limited 
nus. This. circumstance may not depend on any in- 
_ herent character, but may be an accident occurring 
___ in the transference of proper names. The name is ori- 
ginally intended, in both instances of its application, to 
a: completely adequate to distinguish an individual 
- from all those with whom he might have been confound- 
ed. But, when the two individuals chance to meet in 
the same place, or to be mentioned near to one another 
in discourse, they must be distinguished. If the name 
of both is Scipio, they are to be considered as a genus 
coinciding in this trivial circumstance of their history, 
that they have received the same name. ; 
nouns Some nouns which are general in their acceptation 
frsin- do not admit of a plural, because the objects which they 
H80r gi ify are not-permanently portioned into individuals. 
Bs This is the case with nouns which express such plastic 
| materials as are capable of being easily arranged in 
~ pieces of any form or size. We have examples of it 
in the names of the different metals, as “ gold,” “ silver,” 
~ iron,” and “ brass,” words which are never used in the 
plural. The plural word “irons” is not applied to 
ieces of the metal, but to instruments formed of it. 
e noun “ stone” is also the name of a material of which 
variously shaped objects may be formed; yet it has a 
ural in frequent use, because nature divides it into 
nah which are not easily reunited so as to become 
homogeneous. These objects have therefore more of 
the character of permanent individuals. ‘Such words as 
‘ ,’** silver,” “ clay,” “ dough,” may be said to have 
x singular nor plural, and to be entirely indepen- 
dent of number. We cannot prefix to them the word a, 
ifference in the adaptation of other words consists in 
GRAMMAR 407 
which is the sign of the singular, with arly greater pro. Universit 
priety than we can invest them with the plural form. — Grammar. 
‘In most languages, nouns receive alterations in their “VY” 
spelling for the expression of plurality. These some Etymolo- 
times consist in the addition of a letter or a syllable, si¢# of the 
sometimes in the substitution of one for another, Such em sad 
alterations, however, are not absolutelynecessary. Num- ~~ 
ber might be pointed out by separate words, or might 
be inferred from the connection. . Many English words 
have no distinction betwixt their use in the singular 
and in the:plural, such as “ sheep,’’ “ grouse,” and 
deer.” Some Latin words are the same in singular 
as in the plural in’ one or more of their cases. Fructus 
signifies “ fruit” or “ fruits.” Res,“ thing’? or “ things.” 
It:is not easy to discover by what circumstances a 
community, during the formation of its language, has 
been influenced in choosing its mode of expressing plu- 
rality. «Some grammarians have thought that much 
satisfaction would be obtained if we could always trace 
the plural termination to some separate word signifying 
a. collection. The addition of a term of this sort is the 
mode of expressing plurality in the Bengalese language. In Benga- 
Projaa signifies a peasant, lok people: and projaa-lok \ese. 
signifies peasants. The authors of Rees’s Cyc ypredia "Hypotheti- 
derive the plural sign in Greek, Latin, and the origin 
modern languages of Europe, from a word in the He- pe ong oe 
brew language parr, which signifies multitude. They brew and 
suppose that this word was at first subjoined to the its dialects. 
singular word, and that afterwards, for the sake of 
brevity, the Hebrews designated plurality by retaining 
only onevof the letters, m; the Chaldeans, Syrians, and 
others, by retaining the n. Thus the plural was in 
Hebrew -~im, in Chaldean -in, in Arabic-o0on, and in Per- 
sian-aan. This theory further supposes the letters x and 
sto have had the same origin, The Chaldean -in, there- 
fore, is supposed to have become -es in the formation of In Greek, 
many Greek and Latin plurals. From the same source } atin, and 
they even wish to derive the s which forms the plural P°'* "0" 
terminations in English and French ; while the Italian cade E 
language’is considered as following in allnouns the and» °° ~ 
logy of the second declension of the Latin by adopting 
the terminating vowel 7. ‘The same authors might have 
added, that this ¢ of the Latin and Italian is the vowel 
letter of the Hebrew’ plural im, (t>',).. This vowel does 
not, indeed, happen to belong to the independent word 
yar, which they consider as giving origin to the plural 
sign; but we find it used in Hebrew not only along 
with the letter m fora familiar sign of plurality, but also 
by itself (’.) And it was sufficiently natural that a 
language derived from the Hebrew should adopt this 
plural sign. , 
This whole style of etymology, however, is question- Estimate 
able. It has indeed the authority of Horne Tooke’s of such hy- 
approbation. One great principle of that author was, potheses. 
that terminations were origina!ly separate words ;. and 
another principle was, that the alterations which take 
place in the progress of language have an abbreviating 
tendency. ‘But terminations ought to be considered as 
equally independent signs in this form as if they were 
separate words; and when any idea is of perpetual oc- 
currence in language, as that of plurality is, it is na« 
tural to expect that the sign used for expressing it 
should be originally brief. signe however, are often 
changed. With some people, the mere circumstance of 
being long familiar renders both words and termina~ 
tions of words apparently stale, and they apply them~ 
selves to the contrivarice of others in their stead. These 
others are’ generally derived from sounds previously 
used for ideas somewhat akin. 
