94 



ON THE CLASSIFICATION 



The formation of a real plural is certainly evidence of a 

 progress in thought, but unlike gender, which is of primitive 

 origin, it is always the product of a later period. Moreover 

 there will remain certain words in a dialect which will not 

 admit plural terminations. With the introduction of the 

 plural and the spreading of its use, dual forms, where previ- 

 ously of frequent and common use, will be gradually dropped. 

 Compare, e.g., the rare occurrence of the dual in Hebrew — 

 which language represents in its grammatical formations a 

 later state of development, or rather of decay, than does Arabic 

 — with the use of the dual in the latter language, where it 

 is still employed in conjugation, from which it has quite 

 disappeared in Hebrew. In old Grerman the dual is in 

 vogue ; in modern German it occurs only exceptionally. 



When discussing the subject of plurality, one must not 

 overlook the different position in which nouns and pronouns 

 are respectively placed. When one speaks, e.g., of 2, 3, or 4 

 horses, the number indicates that there are 2, 3, or 4 repre- 

 sentatives of the same animal ; but in the dual or plural of a 

 personal pronoun, the we or you does not represent a multipli- 

 cation of the same individual. The ive in the dual is either 

 "thou and I" or " he and I," and the "we " in the plural may 

 be " you and I " or " you, he and I," &c. 145 The pronominal 

 dual and plural formation differs in consequence from that of 

 nouns, and such deviation is only a natural result of the 

 dissimilar origin. The external form of these pronominal 

 terms is generally the most trustworthy witness respecting 

 its construction. The Cherokee 146 pronoun myself, &c, 



(145) The personal pronouns in most languages clearly prove that their dual 

 and plural formation is different from that of nouns. One need not quote in 

 support of this assertion the pronouns of such strange languages as Tahitian, 

 Hawaian, Cherokee, &c. , but abstract languages like Hebrew and Sanskrit 

 aver the truth of this fact in the formation of their abstract pronoun " we, " 

 both in the Dual and Plural. 



(146) See Morgan, I.e., page 137 note I, the pronunciation has been 

 altered according to page 292. 



