GRAMMAR. 



kings of Israel.'* The comparative is used, 

 when we speak of an object as distinct 

 from those with which we compare it ; the 

 superlative, when it is spoken of as one of 

 those with which we compare it. Man is 

 the noblest of animals, but not the noblest 

 of the brute creation, otherwise he must be 

 one of the brute creation: he is nobler than 

 the brutes, but not than all animals, or 

 he must be nobler than himself. The cus- 

 tom of our language makes one distinc- 

 tion between the comparative and super- 

 lative, which does not coincide with this 

 grand distinction. We use the compara- 

 tive with the force of the superlative when 

 we speak of two; as, he is the wiser of the 

 two, and the wisest of any great number. 

 This is not an unjustifiable usage ; but it 

 has no particular foundation in the force 

 of the comparative and superlative. 



Few of the modern European lan- 

 guages vary the words themselves to ex- 

 press comparison. The French, e. g. ex- 

 press by/>/wsand le phis, what we express 

 by more and most ; or (what is obviously 

 equivalent, though custom limits their 

 use to particular cases) by the termina- 

 tions er and est. What is the meaning of 

 these terminations ? is a natural question : 

 the answer is not so easy. It appears,, 

 however, very probable, that er is nothing 

 more or less than the word which we 

 still use in the form ere, signifying before,- 

 and that wiser signifies -wise before. Now, 

 as has been well remarked by Mr. Dai- 

 ton, then and than are the same in origin 

 and signification : hence, wiser than I, is 

 exactly represented by, wise before then 

 I, i. e. wise before, then (that is, next in 

 order) /. This derivation, if correct, ex- 

 plains the ground of the peculiarity above 

 stated, in the use of the comparative : he 

 is the -wiser of the two, means, simply, he 

 is wise before (the other) of the two. 

 It might be conjectured, that the super- 

 lative termination est) is an abbreviation 

 of most annexed to an adjective, in the 

 same manner as in topmost, undermost, &c.; 

 but Mr. H. Tooke has shewn, that more 

 is merely mo-er, and most mo-est, which 

 leaves the origin of the terminations er 

 and est as it was found. 



25. Those adnouns, which, without ex- 

 pressing qualities, vary or determine the 

 extent of the signification of the nouns to 

 which they belong we call restrictives. 

 Some restrictives are, by the custom of 

 our language, applicable to singular nouns 

 only ; as one, a or an, anotJier, this, that, 

 each, evert/, &c. : others to plural nouns 

 only ; as two, three, these, those, other, few, 

 nil, &c, ; but most restrictives, like all ad- 



jectives, are applicable to both singular 

 and plural nouns. Of the restrictives, 

 two are called articles, the and an, which 

 last is abbreviated into a before conso- 

 nants, h when pronounced, u long as in 

 use, and one. Jin is simply another form 

 of the numeral one, still used in North 

 Britain under the form ane ; and in the 

 French, the numeral and the article cor- 

 responding to one are the same. But 

 though an and one have the same origin 

 and primary signification, there is occa- 

 sionally an obvious difference in the mode 

 of their employment. This difference is 

 well expressed by Dr. Crombie : " If, in- 

 stead of saying, 'A horse, a horse, a king- 

 dom for a horse,' I should say, * One 

 horse, one horse, one kingdom for one 

 horse,' the sentiment, I conceive, would 

 not be strictly the same. In both ex- 

 pressions, the species is named, and in 

 both, one of that species is demanded ; 

 but with this difference, that, in the for- 

 mer, the name of the species is the em- 

 phatic word, and it opposes that species 

 to every other; in the Latter, unity of ob- 

 ject seems the leading idea." Jin is call- 

 ed the indefinite article, because it leaves 

 undetermined what one individual is 

 meant ; the determines the application of 

 the noun to some particular individual, 

 and hence it is termed the definite arti- 

 cle. It lias the same primary signification 

 with Ma*/ but they vary in the mode of 

 their employment, the former never be- 

 ing employed without a noun, the latter 

 having its noun frequently understood ; 

 and farther, that is more emphatic than 

 the: these, however, are the refinements 

 of language, and have no foundation in 

 the origin of words. Mr. H. Tooke con- 

 siders that as the past particle, and the as 

 the imperative mood of the verb DEAX, 

 to get, to take, to assume : and the, he ob- 

 serves, may very well supply the place of 

 the corresponding Anglo-Saxon article 

 FC which is the imperative of peon, to see; 

 for it answers the same purpose in dis- 

 course to say see man, or take man. We 

 really like the import of our forefathers' 

 article so much better than that of our 

 own, that we shall cheerfully give up 

 the forse, unless it should appear, that 

 the and that have their origin in some 

 verb signifying to point at. Of that large 

 class of restrictives called numerals, the 

 origin of some may be traced ; and as we 

 wish to give our readers some insight in- 

 to the labours of Mr. H. Tooke, we shall 

 mention his derivation of words in this 

 class. It is in the highest degree proba- 

 ble, that all numeration was originally 

 performed by the fingers, the actual re- 



