AD J 



Bnftion, anJMic obfcrvation of religious fe(lival« and u'prt"- 

 llitious rittfs. Hciicc fjjriing the aiUaphoryiic coutioverfy, 

 as il was called, whieli divided the church for many years, 

 end obllnnfted the progrefs of the reformation. See Ponn 

 nfCoKCriKT). 



ADIAPHOROUS is a denomination given by Mr. 

 Eoyle to a kind of fpirit diililkd from tartar and feme otiier 

 vegetable bodies, and which is neither acid, vinous, nor 

 urinous ; but in many refpeds different from any other fort 

 of fpirit. 



ADIAPNEUSIA, from «, J.a, and tv.x, I breathe, in 

 Medicine, llgnifies defeiitive perfpiration, from denfe pores, SiC. 



ADIAPTOTOS, a Greek word fignifying /;•«, and 

 applied by fome medical writers to a remedy for the colic, 

 whieli is llone-parfley, heubane-fccd, white pepper, 5cc. made 

 into an eled^narv. 



ADIARRllCEA, from a, cV,, and pv, / Jo'm, fignifies 

 a total fuppreffioii of all the neceflary evacuations. 



ADJAZZO. SeeAjAzzo. 



ADICARA, in jlndent Geography, a town of Afia, 

 near tlie Ptriian gulf, which Ptolemy places in long. 79", 

 and h'.t. 29% 36'. 



ADICE, in Botntty. See Nettle. 



ADiDA, Addiba, or Adiada, in Jtneicn! Geography, 

 a city of Judea, not far from Jenifalem. Jofcplnis fays, 

 (De J3ell. Jud. 1. iv. c. 9. tom. 2. p. 300. Ed. Haverc.) 

 that v.'hcn V^efpafiaa bcfiegcd Jenifalsm, he ellablifhed a 

 camp and guards in this place as well as in Jericho. Simon 

 ?rlacchabxus alfo encamped in this place to difpute the 

 entrance into the country witli Tryphon, who had bar- 

 baroutly feized his brother Jonathan, at Ptolemais. I Mac- 

 cab, xiii. 13. cli. xii. 3S. Jof. Ant. 1. xiii. c. 6. § 14. 

 tom. I. p. 653. yiilida is probably the fame with Addus. 



ADJECTIVE, in Grammar, a kind of noun joined 

 with a fubftantive, either exprelTed or implied, to fhew its 

 (lualities or accidents. 



The word is formed of tlie Latin adjicere, to add to ; as it 

 is dcfigned to be added to a fubftantive, without which it 

 has no precife fignification. 



Fatlier Buflier defines adjeftives in a manner fomewhat 



different from other grammarians Nouns, according to 



bim, are fubftantives, when the objefts which they repre- 

 fent are confidered fimply, and in themfelves, without any 

 regard to their quaUties ; on the contraiy, they are adjec- 

 tives, when they exprefs the quality of an objeft. Thus, 

 when I fay, fimply, a heart, the word heart is a fubftantive, 

 becaufe none of its quahties are exprelTed ; but when I fay, 

 a generous heart, the word generous is an adjeBive ; becaufe it 

 adds a quality, or attribute, to the heart. Adjeftives, then, 

 appear to be nothing elfe but modificatives. 



In efFecl, the end of an adjeftive being only to exprefs 

 the quality of an objeiSl ; if that quality be the objeft itfelf 

 whereof we fpeak, it becomes a fubftantive ; e. gr. If I fay, 

 this book is good ; good here is an adjeftive ; but if I fay, good 

 is a/ways to he chojen, it is evident ^oo;/ is the fubjedt I fpeak 

 of ; and confequently good, there, is the fubftantive. 



On the conti-ai-y, it often happens in other languages, and 

 fometimes in our own, that a fubftantive becomes an adjec- 

 tive ; as, for inftance, in thefe words : the king, hero as he is, 

 remetjiliers he is a man, where the word hero, though ordi- 

 iiarily a fubftantive, is apparently an adjeftive. From this 

 idea of an adjeSive, it appears that many of the nouns, 

 which, in the common grammars, are accounted fubftantives, 

 are really adjeftives, and vice verfa : grammar in this, and a 

 jthpufand other inftances, depending upon cuftom. 



Aa adjedlive, according to the definition of Mr. Harris, 



AD J 



(Henries, p. t85.) hnS no aflvrtion, and only denotes fucli sa 

 attribute, as has not its elTenee cither in motion or its priva- 

 tion. Thus in general the attributes of quar.tity, quality, 

 and relation, fuch as many and few, great and little, bl.iek 

 and white, good and bad, double, treble, quadruple, S:c. 

 are all denoted by adjeftives. Every adjtdive may alfo be 

 confidered as capable of being refolvcd into a fubftantive, 

 and an expreffion of connection equivalent to cf, e. g. a good 

 man, is a man of goodnefs ; in v.hich caie the adjedive cx- 

 preffes not only an attribute, but alfo the connediou be- 

 tween the attribute and its fubftance : and the particular 

 kind of connedion is afcatained by experience. In this 

 view of the fubicd the adjedive appears to have two ufes. 

 The firft and principal is that of reihiding or modifying a 

 general term, as in the inftances above recited. Tlie lecond 

 is, when the abftrad fubftantive contained ui the adjedive is 

 modified by the noun, with which, in the concrete or adjec- 

 tive form, that abftrad fubftantive is joined. The former 

 may be called the dired, and the latter the inverfe, accepta- 

 tion of adjeSives. In the following pailage, Livy fays, 

 Regnatum eji Rorrnc ah urbe condita ad hberatam annos ducenlos 

 quadraginta quatuor, i. e. monarchy fubfifted at P..ome from 

 the building of the city to its deliverance : here the partici- 

 ples, or adjectives, condita and liheraiam, are ufcd inverfely ; 

 i. e. the abftrad fubftantives contained in thefe words are 

 modified or reftrided by the fubftantives urle and urbem, 

 with which they are fuppofed to unite. Mr. Harris obferves 

 (ubi fupra, p. 187), that attributes fometimes aflume an 

 afTertion, and appear as verbs : as albeo, or albus fum, tumet 

 or tumidus eft, and ij-a^-i q. d. 1(70; eh, is equal. Of thefe 

 there are but few, and they may be called verbal adjeHi'ves. 

 Participles likewife infenlibly pafs into adjedives, as doBus 

 or learned, lofe their power as participles, and mean a per- 

 fon poffefled of an habitual quahty. Thus alfo "vir eloquens 

 denotes a perfon who poffefles the habit of fpeaking, and 

 not a perfon now fpeaking. Subftantivcs may be alio con- 

 verted into adjedives ; when we fay the party of Pompey, 

 the ttyle of Cicero, the philofophy of Socrates, the perfons 

 perfonn the part of attributes, or ftamp and charaderifc 

 their fubjeds ; fo that they affume the form of adjeeT;ives. 

 And we accordingly fay, the Pompeian party, the Cicero- 

 nian ftyle, and the Socratic philofophy. Even pronominal 

 fubftantives admit the like mutation. Inftead of faying the 

 book of me, of thee, and of him, we fa)', my book, thy book, 

 and his book ; or the country of us, of you, and of them, 

 we fay our country, your countiy, and their oountrv ; 

 which words maybe c?X[i:& pronominal adjeSives. In Englilli 

 the adjedive is not varied on account of gender, number, 

 or cafe. Dr. Lowth, indeed, (Introd. to Eng. Grammar, 

 p. 56.) excepts fome few pronominal adjedives, which have 

 the poffeffive cafe, as. 



Teach me to feel anolhcr''s woe. Pope. 



and the adjedives/onncr and laller, which may be confidered 

 as pronominal, and reprefenting the nouns, to which they 

 refer. The only variation which it admits of, is that of 

 the degrees of comparison. 



In the Greek and Latin, however, they have the fame 

 foiTn with fubftantive nouns ; and are declined, like them, 

 by cafes, and fubjeded to the hke diftindions of number 

 and gender. It is obvious, that neither number, nor gender, 

 nor cafes, nor relations, have any thing to do, in a proper 

 fenfe, with mere qualities, fuch as good or great, foft or hard: 

 and yet bonus, magmis, and tener, have their lingular and 

 plural, their mafculine and feminine, their genitives and 

 datives, hke any of the names of fubl1:ances, or perfons. 

 To account for this circumftance, Dr. Blair (Ledures, vol. i. 



p. 199.) 



