GRAMMAR. 



and in the modern languages of time ; 

 but is seems erroneous to consider this as 

 the fundamental form of the verb, where 

 it has any distinguishing termination: it 

 is then the noun-state of the word with a 

 termination added to it, to show that it is 

 to be employee' as a verb. Thus in the 

 Anglo-Saxon Sean, 8eis the fundamental 

 form of the verb, and AN is the verbalising 

 adjunct. Now as the imperative form of 

 the verb is nothing more or less than the 

 simple verbal name, unattended with the 

 inference of affirmation, this may be con- 

 sidered as the fundamental form : and in 

 the Latin, in particular, the variations of 

 flexion are traced with the greatest ad- 

 vantage from this source. But without 

 enlarging on this point, with which our 

 language in the present state of it has no 

 concern, we must repeat, that the impe- 

 rativeform of the verb is merely the noun- 

 state, or verbal name ; and that command, 

 entreaty, &c. supposed to be conveyed by 

 it, are merely the inference of custom. If 

 I say to a servant, Bread, it is understood 

 that I wish him to bring me bread, but it 

 is not suid : if I say, Bring some bread, in 

 like manner it is understood, that I wish 

 him to bring me bread, but all that is ex- 

 pressed is the name of the action, and 

 the object of the action. It has, indeed, 

 been supposed, that an affirmation is un- 

 derstood, as, I desire you to bring some 

 bread ; but this supposition is rather to 

 show, that bring, &c. in such situations, 

 are verbs, than to show the actual pro- 

 cedure. The fact is, full as much is done 

 by inference, as by actual expression, in 

 every branch of language, and even as it 

 is, thought is too quick for words. Ad- 

 mitting the justness of this account of the 

 imperative mood, we need not be sur- 

 prised at the plan adopted by the Greek 

 writers, of using the infinitive instead of 

 it ; nor need we resort to a sub-auditor, 

 in order to show the ground of this use, 

 or to complete the grammatical construc- 

 tion. And it may be considered as con- 

 firmatory of it, that the Hebrew impera- 

 tive is the same with the radical form of 

 the verb in its several conjugations, ex- 

 cepting Niphal, where it is the same as 

 the infinitive. 



32. When the verbal energy is referred 

 to past time, a change is made in the form 

 of nearly all our English verbs: the great- 

 er proportion of them add eJto the noun- 

 state. Whether this alteration was ori- 

 S'nally intended to refer the meaning of 

 e verb to past time, or that the change 

 had a different object, and the reference 

 Kas been gradually formed in consequence 



of an appropriation similar to what we : 

 spoke of, respecting the objective form of 

 pronouns, we have yet to learn; but there 

 seems little room to doubt but that all the 

 common changes which have taken place 

 in the verbs of all languages, whether to 

 denote time, person, number, or mode of 

 signification, have been formed in conse- 

 quence of the coalescence of words of ap- 

 propriate signification ; and though the 

 gradual refinements of language may have 

 greatly varied the associations of words 

 from what they originally possessed, yet 

 that these changes were originally found 

 sufficient to answer their respective pur- 

 poses. In some cases, the contrivances 

 adopted can be traced even yet ; and from 

 the new turn which has lately been given 

 to etymological investigation, we may 

 expect other discoveries respecting the 

 causes or origin of particular flexions : 

 the future of the French verb is nothing 

 more than the infinitive of the verb, with 

 the present tense of avoir following it : 

 thus, blamer-ai is ai blamer, andje bldmerai 

 means I have to blame, which mode of ex- 

 pression is in our own language used with 

 a future force ; the leading distinction be- 

 tween the past and future tense of the 

 Hebrew verb is, that in the former the 

 verb is placed before the fragment of the 

 pronoun forming the person, and in the 

 latter after it, as one would suppose to 

 indicate that the verbal denotement is in 

 one case past, in the other case future. 



33. Similar observations may be made 

 respecting the persons of verbs. In the 

 Hebrew they are formed, as one would 

 expect, by the coalescence of syllables, 

 which are still acknowledged as pronouns: 

 the same plan his doubtless been adopt- 

 ed in the Latin and Greek verbs, and in 

 some few cases it can be traced with 

 mush probability. In our own language 

 there are additions made to the verb, in 

 both the past and present form, when thou 

 is the subject of affirmation, and in the 

 present, when any singular word, except- 

 ing /and thou, is the subject. We are not 

 aware of any advantage derived from 

 these changes (and the same remark may 

 be applied to the French verb ;) for they 

 do not supersede the necessity of express- 

 ing the subject of affirmation, as in the 

 case of Latin and Greek verbs ; but pro- 

 bably in their original import they con- 

 tained in them the subject of affirmation, 

 unless indeed they were different dialects 

 of the verb, which by degrees were ap- 

 propriated to particular subjects. 



34. The variations in the Greek and 

 Latin verbs., which denote time and man- 



