GREEK PREPOSITIONS. 337 



tl mine," — " to kill, — container of the mode of killing, — the ope- 

 " rations of fword and famine." 



Lastly, !i> is fometimes employed, when relation isfignified. 

 Ev tpo) If), " it is in my power, — within my reach," — " it is, — 

 '•• container or comprehender, — me, — container of this object, — 

 •' the line of my agency." 



By a particular mode of phrafeology, the Greeks fometimes ap- 

 pear to have made ufe of b, where we might have fuppofed \k or 

 aw mould have been employed. Ey $'ivbgt» xovreiv zXochv, " to cut 

 " a branch from the tree," — " to cut a branch, — container of the 

 " place where it was cut, — the tree." In our mode of expref- 

 fion, from would have been ufed, as denoting the point of depar- 

 ture. In the Greek phrafeology, it was fufficient to mention the 

 place where the action took effect:. 



The Greek prepofition h, it may juft be remarked in paffing, 

 appears evidently the primitive of the Latin prepofition in, and, 

 through it, of the fame prepofition in moft of the modern Euro- 

 pean languages. But, from fome of the preceding examples, it 

 will alfo appear, that the primitive word was made ufe of in a 

 more extended fenfe than is to be found in its various defen- 

 dants. 



Efl-<. 



This prepofition is one of thofe which Dr Moor has brought 

 forward as a principal illuflration of his ingenious theory of the 

 variations of the force of the Greek prepofitions, according to 

 the different cafes of their connected nouns. Some particular 

 examples, it is certain, feem to fupport this theory, but others 

 as ftrongly militate againft it; fo that I muft regard it as 

 by no means fufEciently eftablifhed : but whether true or not, 

 (does not much concern the fubject of the prefent inquiry ; for, 

 even admitting the truth of this theory it goes very little way 

 in afllfting us to develope the radical fenfe of the prepofitions. 



Xx 2 In 



