LANGUAGE. 



579 



ix PI" 



which all of them came to be formed and applied, as 

 well as the particular structure and power ot each, are 

 subject* which fall properly under the head of GRAM- 

 MAR ; and, accordingly, under that head they have al- 

 ready been treated at considerable length. A few ob- 

 servations, however, in regard to them, for the comple- 

 tion of the theoretical history of language, may here be 

 proper. 



We have viewed the verb as originally imperative, 

 and as such, always containing the idea of action ; we 

 have marked also, that in making a return to the 

 command or entreaty conveyed by the imperative, 

 the same term or sound would probably be used, but 

 with such variation of tone, as might imply that the 

 person addressed was willing to concur. This appears 

 to be the first and most obvious extension of the use of 

 language. It is, in fact, \hefuture tense of the verb, 

 conveying the idea of the action, combined with the in- 

 tention of performing it. Instead, however, of barely 

 signifying a readiness to concur, after a command or 

 entreaty had been used, it is easy to see, that in many 

 nsri a simultaneous effort might be agreed upon, which 

 would give rise to the present tense ; and in many cases 

 it might happen, that the action from some other cause 

 bad already been done, which would produce such a 

 variation as to form the past tensest. All these different 

 meanings, as well as the circumstance of the consent 

 being only conditional and not absolute, or so doubtful as 

 to demand some farther information in regard to it, could 

 easily be marked by the various inflexions of the voice, 

 or by additional sounds annexed to the original radix, 

 and form either the subjunctive mood, or the inirrroga- 

 tise form of the indicative. I lencc the various parts of 

 the verb would draw their origin ; and it is easy to ex- 

 plain, from the tendency of men to proceed in the track 

 hey have been accustomed, how the same 

 variations, which were once used to denote these pecu- 

 liarities in regard to one action, would be uniformly, 

 or at least generally etu> to denote Miailar va- 



riations in every other, and thus a pretty general uni- 

 formity in the form of these several modifications would 



TW parti- Nearly connected with the verb, we find what is 

 *'. termed the parliciplf. This seems to have taken rise, 



merely from a wish to designate the action denoted by 

 the verb, as either permanently or occasionally cliarac- 

 teristic, of tome person or object to which the attention 

 is directed. It i easy therefore to conceive, that in 

 a great measure it would retain the radical part of the 

 verb, imKlifed however in such a manner, as to suit it 

 to assume the form and texture of an attributive. 

 Onpn f origin of the pronoun has been variously stated 



the pro- by writers on grammar ; yet pronouns, in fact, are only 

 *''- in their real nature, abstract nouns of a peculiar species. 



It has become fashionable of Lite, among certain philoso- 

 phers, to deny that the mind posscosci such a faculty a* 

 abttractiu*, and the notion of an abstract noun is treated 

 by them as chimerical. Without stickling for terms, we 

 may observe, however, that it cannot surely be denied, 

 that the mind does posseii a certain power, when se- 

 veral object* are presented in combination, to fix its at- 

 tention exclusively on one of them, and for the time to 

 keep out of tight all the rest That thin is a power 

 every day exercised, experience abundantly testifies, 

 nsidering any object therefore, any particular aua- 

 posseised by it may be made the sole object ot at- 

 n ; in viewing a marble globe, we may direct our 

 thoughts entirely to it* roundness, without taking into 

 view its other qualities of whiteness, smoothness, or 



hardness ; or we may think of its hardness independent Langusp*. 

 of its roundness or colour. If then, we find any parti- W ""Y""*' 

 cular mode in which objects may be placed sufficiently 

 important, and occurring with sufficient frequency to 

 force much of our attention to that, we shall naturally 

 be led to mark that mode of existence by a peculiar term 

 applicable to such a special relation, independent of any 

 object in which that relation or position occurs. In the 

 employment of speech, one of the most common rela- 

 tions and positions in which persons and objects occur 

 to us, and one which most forcibly arrests our attention, 

 is the situation of the speaker, the person spoken to, and 

 the subject spoken of. These peculiar relations perpetu- 

 ally recurring, would soon fix the attention exclusively 

 upon them, while the constant variations in the sub- 

 jects would irresistibly detach from the view any spe- 

 cific object with which they could be associated. Hence 

 the relations alone being kept in sight, terms expres- 

 sive of the relations merely would be formed, pos- 

 sessing all the characteristics of abstract nouns, and 

 in the application they are susceptible of the most 

 general of any. To these, the denomination of per- 

 sonal pronouns has been given ; a denomination not 

 perhaps in all respects strictly appropriate, but suffi- 

 ciently descriptive for the purposes of language. How 

 these j>ersonal pronouns were originally formed, is a 

 matter of much uncertainty. Some have conceived, 

 that they were derived from a word designating the 

 hand, pointing with the hand being probably first em- 

 ployed before a specific vocal sign, to denote these se- 

 parate relations, was introduced. This, however ingeni- 

 ous in perhaps somewhat too remote a derivation. A 

 more obvious one, we should think, may be found. Ad- 

 mitting, what we have endeavoured to prove, that the 

 radical part of all language was the verb, and that ne- 

 cessity gradually impelled man to introduce various mo- 

 difications of that radical sound, by means of accent, em- 

 phasis, elongation, or addition, to indicate its various ap- 

 plication*, whether for assertion, interrogation, suppo- 

 sition, promise, or desire, it may then be easily con- 

 ceived, tliat of these variations, some were uniform- 

 ly employed to mark also the relations of speaker, 

 person addressed, or subject of discourse. As such pe- 

 culiar modifications would, from the proneness of man 

 to imitation, be similar through the whole community, 

 it was an easy step to detach altogether from the com- 

 plete verb, that p;irt which had received the variations, 

 and these detached parts, of course, would form the 

 personal pronouns. 



The origin of all the other kinds of pronouns can 

 occasion no difficulty ; the possessive* are merely the 

 personal pronouns in an adjective form; the other pro- 

 nouns, as well as the article, are merely definitive ad- 

 jectives, marking a particular position or relation in the 

 tame way as adjectives in general denote a quality con* 

 sidered as belonging to an object. 



Of the variations of these different classes of words, 

 of verbs by means of words, tenses, and voices ; of 

 nouns by means of cases, numbers, and genders, this 

 in not the place to treat ; these belong to GRAMMAR, 

 and are particularly detailed under that article. 



The real nature and force, as well as the immediate Nature ani 

 derivation of the other parts of speech, adverbs, prepo- origin of 

 sitions, and conjunctions, have been perspicuously de- "J 

 tailed by some late etymological writers ; and we may 

 regard it as now universally admitted, that they are in 

 reality only nouns, adjectives, or verbs, in some abbre- 

 viated or mutilated form, employed for convenience or 

 dispatch, and easily resolved, by skilful investigation, 



