Grammar. ‘traced wi 
408 
- The English plural termination may, we think, be 
th greater probability, as well as greater beau- 
ty, to a later origin than that now mentioned. Our 
terminating s seems to have arisen from a syllable 
the English. which was once applied to signify a more extensive mo- 
plaral in s. difiecation of the uses of the noun, and was gradually va- 
ried, in the improvement of our language, for the pur- 
poses of more precise distinction. It was anciently the 
syllablezs. ‘ Towns,” the plural of town, was toun-is. 
The same syllable was also used for what we call a ge- 
nitive. “ Father’s” was facher-is, or fader-is. It is only 
among those who are inordinately attached to the pre- 
sent habitudes of our language that the termination is, 
in these two applications, ill be considered as neces- 
sarily of different origin. The sign for the genitive 
and that for the plural are only different exemplifica- 
tions of one sign which in its meaning includes both. 
It was simply a term of relation synonymous with the 
/English preposition “ of,” i. e. “ with respect to.’ 
«« Bees,” for example, signifies relating to the bee ; 
** bees wax,” wax connected with the bee ; “two bees,” 
a repetition or doubling with respect to the bee. “Scot,” 
is a designation for a native of a particular country. 
* Scotis,” or “ Scots,’’ means relating to such a native. 
Two individuals are ‘* two Scots ;”.a “* Scotswoman,” a 
woman relating to Scot ; and, in the same manner, the 
word might be used in such phrases as, ‘“ the Scots 
court,” “ Scots customs,” “ a Scots dress.’? The mean- 
ing of the letter s in these different instances is not dif- 
ferent: it is only general; and, therefore, susceptible 
of different specific applications. Any particularity in 
the application intended was, in the first instance, left to 
be inferred from the connection ; and, afterwards, some 
slight differences in its orthography, pronunciation, or 
both, were adopted, and appropriated to the different ap- 
plications. We have “ Scot’s” for the genitive ; ‘‘ Scot- 
tish,” or “Scotch,” for the descriptive adjective ; while 
* Scots,” if used at all, is restricted to the plural. 
This derivation of the English plural from a more 
general modification of the noun will acquire confirma- 
tion when we reflect that, in spite of the strictness of 
formal grammatical rules respecting the plural number, 
we often use the same form of the noun which denotes 
plurality, on different other occasions.” We speak, for 
example, of introducing a knife “lengthways,’’ though 
the way is only one. “ Edgeways” is used in» the 
same manner. The word “ otherways,” now changed 
to ‘ otherwise,” is a similar example. ‘ Sides fore- 
most” is a common provincial phrase in some parts of 
England. We pee of going “ up stairs” or “ down 
stairs” where there is only one stair, meaning up or 
down with respect to stair. Some of the English even 
speak of going. “ up streets”? and “ down streets.” A 
boy in tossing a halfpenny calls “ heads or tails,’ 
though it has only one head and one tail. If to the 
question, “ Have you any pens?” a person should re- 
ply; “yes I have one;’’ the answer would be con- 
demned by some as ungrammatical, because one pen is 
not plural, and a person who has only one cannot be said 
to have ‘ pens.” Yet we have'a constant tendency to this 
mode of speaking. Common sense, adhering tothe power- 
ful analogies of language, bears down the authority of for- 
malizing systems, even in cases in which she doesnot pos- 
sess sufficient dialectic knowledge to vindicate her.pro- 
ceedings. The word « pens” in this instance is merely 
general. _It is independent of all ideas of number. _ It is 
no more restricted to plurality, so as to exclude the. - 
singular, than it is restricted to two, four, or any par- 
ticular number. Had the word.“ pen” been used inthe 
1 ; 
GRAMMAR. 
question now alluded to,it would have beet raid y 
as exclusively si r. But it was necessary to use ¢ 
one of these tins vA ate mae see {0 fepresent 
the genus independently of number. To prohibit the — 
employment ot cny-feniaich teal iataeeeiaad 
general, would imply an extreme obstinacy of artificia 
regulation in no degree conducive to accuracy. het 
want ofa separate form pian ect plication o 
the noun, independently of *, SOF gives’ 
rise to the following awkward cireumlocutions in pro. — 
clamations and jegal writings: “If any person or 
sons shall transgress in the manner ebdecetiten, fro R: 
they shall be subjected to the following punishments.” 
Another English plural: is ‘formed by means of the py, 
termination en as in oxen. Such plurals were muchine 
more common ata remote period-of the English lan 
guage. Housen, for example, was used for “houses.” 
They abound in the modern German, which owes: 
them to the same source. This syllable, like the one 
already mentioned, was originally of a more: ) 
application, signifying “ of or relating to.” The 
plication of it which is most abundantly Ta orig <y , 
English is for the descriptive adjective, as “ wooden, 
earthen, golden,” words the same in meaning with the 
phrases “ of wood, of earth, of gold.’” The old. 
language was little varied in its modifications. _ The syl- 
lables is and en both expressed the general circum-. 
stance of relation betwixt the idea expressed by 
noun to which they were ‘attached and some 
They were applied indiscriminately to relations -of — 
every kind, and the occasions of discourse were trust. / 
ed to for the suggestion of particular ideas, A desire 
of improving | e danguage amidst, the multiplicity of 
relative ideas which arose from intellectual impro’ , 
led our ancestors to appropriate one termination 
one subdivision of that general meaning, as well-as to. 
produce a still greater particularity, by varying the’ 
modes of writing the termination. The English thus 
made a nearer approach to the-copious and refined lan-, 
guages of classical antiquity... The final s and the ter- — 
mination en came to signify important distinctions, 
en being used to form the descriptive adjective, and s 
for expressing various relations, including that of plus 
rality. Wooden is the adjective: woods. is the plural. 
The word, ox is an instance in which the en is retained. 
as the plural sign, and the zs (in.oxis written ox’s)is the 
genitive., We say a ‘drove of oxen” for the plural: 
“an ox's gall” for the genitive. Here we havea specimen. 
of the simple but effectual expedients towhich mankind, — 
so readily recur in order to express the varieties of 
their thoughts... . ‘ p (A 
Seon. VIL. Cases. 
Cases are changes.of form to which nouns are sub- y 
jected for the purpose of denoting ,annexation. Some coun 
of them are more general than others. (The marks of ¢ 
annexation are external to the name of the object, and) 
might therefore be expressed by separate words. But. 
they are often attached to the name in the form.of ter- 
minations. This circumstance, though. not: affecting 
their meaning, occasions a_ particularity, of aspect in 
certain languages in a written state, by, abridging the 
number of words, and also a particularity of sound. 
wen a Janguage is spoken, because a termination is 
ced after the name of the object, but a preposition 
yefore it. The cases: often ol I Sg s0- 
general and so evanescent, steyeneegeree word to rex. 
present them has ever been used. On this account, it 
