period, and yined with the verb 
ve,” to signify that the act is The in- 
1 of that verb is sufficient for marking the dis- 
« He walked,” and “ he has*walked,” are 
y distinct from one another, as “ he did,” and 
«he has done.” In some verbs in which the preterite 
is formed by a change of the vowel, the same simpli- 
ity is observed: Vb na fl pas for both these va- 
_ rieties in the expression of past events. 
as- That form of the past tense which is conjoined with 
the yerb “ to have,” sd rians prenaenee 
rigi and properly the passive iciple. In this 
sentence, “ I have ariver Peal Foote the wall,” they 
consider the verb “ have” as governing the noun 
* nail” in the accusative, and “ driven” as the passive 
participle ing with the noun. In this form of the 
past tense the same word is always used as for the pas- 
sive participle. bess ye ae peceiapene 
as signifying in etymological analysis, “ I have a nai 
fatten) aiiven into the wall,” transferred by use 
___ and common consent to signify that the action is per- 
oct ete Ms individual mentioned in the nomin : a- 
tive. i receives t su rom 
prey? af some iporitios ee Hin lan 
g , which show that the passive participle is really 
ied employed, as its ihflections doo asia and 
made to agree with the noun in gender and num- 
ber. Such is the phrase Ho aperte le vostre lettere. 
« T have opened your letter.” This analysis of such 
i would have great probability, if the facts uni- 
‘ormly corresponded with it. But it is not a constant 
rule. It is often left even in the Italian to the op- 
tion of the speaker. We may say Ho aperto or aperte 
‘Te vostre letiere, e veduto or veduta ivi la vostra cor- 
tesia. The French say J’ai donné, not donnée occa- 
sion. Il a tué, not tués, ses ennemis. Donné and tué 
therefore merely signify a past action, and, like any 
other part of the verb, introduce or govern the sub- 
sequent noun. They cannot be considered as agree- 
ing with it like a passive participle. If it is con- 
venient to have a separate name for that part of the 
verb, it may with sufficient propriety be called a Pre- 
rete- terite Gerund. The peculiarity of its nature will ap- 
i. pear in the most convincing light, when we turn our 
attention to neuter and intransitive verbs, which, having 
no passive voice, cannot be said to have a passive par- 
ticiple. When we say “ he has gone,” “ I have come,” 
the words “ gone” and “ come” cannot be past partici- 
Ples agreein g with nouns, as no nouns are introduced 
after them. There is no sufficient reason why the in- 
‘oduction of a noun should alter the nature of the word. 
the phrase “ I have struck,” the word “ struck” sig- 
nifies action, and, as a part of the active verb, it may go- 
vern the accusative case with as much propriety as any 
other part of it. When we say “ I struck my enemy,” 
and “I have struck my enemy,” the word “ struck” is 
': French in both instances ly active in its meaning. There 
are certain occasions in which the past participle in 
the French language is used to agree with the go- 
verned noun; but these are altogether peculiar, and can- 
not give any room for ae that this is the origi- 
_ __ nal construction of this form of the preterite, after- 
/ —s-wards transferred to an active meaning; for it only 
takes place when the substantive noun ie been pre- 
viously introduced, and then referred to by means of 
the relative que. The French say J/ a rue’ plusieurs 
hommes ; but, Les hommes qu’ il a rue's.. This was a sub- 
sequent arrangement, admitted after a long discussion 
for 
oer 0 = a el 
| 
GRAMMAR. 
427 
a There is some a be- on 
twixt this gerund and t t participle, though their Grammar. 
syntax is not identical. Both’ signify an event com. “vr” 
— The participle is only the tense, trans- 
erred to the adjective or participial application, by 
which a past action is treated as a qualit introduced 
for describing an object. Its active application is of 
prior date, and is in constant use. 
It is not necessary to treat particularly of the other 
forms of past tenses, as they are regulated by the same 
principles, whether they are formed of combinations 
of words, as in the modern languages of Europe, or 
combinations of syllables, as in the ancient languages. 
Some observations connected with the general subject 
of their varieties will be suggested by certain forms of 
the subjunctive mood. 
4, The Future. 
The signification of the future tense requires no il- The future 
lustration. The remarks which we have to make on y 
this subject will therefore be confined to its etymology, “*P™*** 
Our conceptions of future events are mere deduc~ 
tions from known arrangements in the past or pre- 
sent, tending to modify their character. Hence all 
the contrivances for expressing futurity, that can be 
traced to their origin, are founded on the connection 
in which the future stands to the past and the present as 
an effect to a cause. They are derived from verbs signi« 
fying resolution, obligation, or other preparatory cir- 
cumstances, and, with respect to etymology, are equi- 
valent to the words employed in such English expres- 
sions as “I intend to go,”’ “ I must go,” “ I am kely 
to go,” “I prepare to > aah 
Mr Tooke ingeniously derives the Latin future in Jo Its etymolo~ 
from ass * to will” or “to be resolved.” In ido, for ex~ 8Y i Latin, 
ample, i signifies “go,” b (from 6s) “ will,” and o (from 
sy) 1.” Amabo and docebo are formed by annexing the 
same letters to ama “love,” and doce “ teach.” The 
future in am he considers as an adaptation of the radi- 
cal letters of amare, “ to love.” Legam is thus equiva- 
lent to legere amo, audiam to audire amo. By those 
who indulge a general scepticism in etymology, or who 
have other systems to support, these derivations may 
be thought improbable, and abundant opportunities are 
afforded of taking refuge in the obscurity of old de. 
rivations, It may be said, if 6 means @sa# in amabo, 
what is meant by the 6 in amabam? Such objec- 
tions can have no further effect than to throw dis- 
credit on instances of etymology that are somewhat 
obscure. Let us therefore attend to some which are of 
recent formation, and which, as the successive steps of 
their change are easily traced, are superior to all ob- 
jection. If general principles of analogy are there dis- 
closed, by which the abbreviating contrivances of lan- 
guage have been conducted, the uncertainty of some 
antique instances is not to be much regretted. The 
former will also assist us to judge of the degree of 
probability to be attached to some etymologies other- 
wise uncertain. 
In Italian, the future tense has undoubted marks of In Italian. 
a derivation from the verb avere “ to have.” Partiro 
«| shall depart,” is evidently derived from partire- 
ho * I have to depart.” This is evinced by the iden- 
tity of the terminations of the future with those of that 
verb in the present in all its persons and both numbers. 
Ho, hai, ha; havemo, avete, hanno: Partir-o, partir-ai, 
rlir-a ; partir-emo, partir-ete, parlir-anno, 
The French future is as evidently derived from the In French. 
of the French academy. 
