GRAMMAR. 
Scan, $e is 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 considered as the 
fundamental form : and in the Latin, in par- 
ticular, the variations of flexion are traced 
with the greate: > advantage from this 
source. But without enlarging on this 
point, with which our language in the pre- 
sent state of it has no concern, we must 
repeat, that the imperative form 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 said : 
if I say, Bring some bread, in like manner 
it is understood, that I wisli him to bring 
me bread, but all that is expressed, is the 
name of the action, and the object of the 
action. It has, indeed, been supposed, that 
an affirmation is understood, as, 1 desire 
you to bring some bread ; but this supposi- 
tion is rather to show, that bring ’ , &c., in 
such situations, are verbs, than to show the 
actual procedure. The fact is, full as 
much is done by inference, as by actual ex- 
pression, in every branch of language, and 
even as it is, thought is too quick for words. 
Admitting the justness of this account of the 
imperative mood we need not be surprised 
at the plan adopted by the Greek writers, 
ot using the infinitive instead of it; nor 
need we resort to a sub-auditur, in order to 
show the ground of this use, or to complete 
the grammatical construction. And it may 
be considered as confirmatory of it, that 
the Hebrew imperative is the same with 
the radical form of the verb in its several 
conjugations, excepting Niplial, 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 greater 
proportion of them add ed to the noun state. 
Whether this alteration was originally in- 
tended to refer the meaning of the verb to 
past time, or that the change had a different 
object, and the reference has been gradually 
formed in consequence of an appropriation 
similar to what we spoke of respecting the 
objective form of pronouns we have vet to 
learn; but there seems little room to doubt 
but that all the common changes which 
have taken place in the verbs of all lan- 
guages, whether to denote time, person, 
number, or mode of signification, have been 
formed in consequence of the coalescence 
of words of appropriate 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 ex- 
pect 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 blfimer, and je bUtmerai means I have 
to blame, which mode of expression is in 
our own language used with a future force: 
the leading distinction between 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 bfe made 
respecting the persons of verbs. In the 
Hebrew they are formed, as one would ex- 
pect, by the coalescence of syllables, which 
are still acknowledged as pronouns: the 
same plan has doubtless been adopted in 
the Latin and Greek verbs, and in some 
few cases it can be traced with much pro- 
bability. In our own language there are 
additions made to the verb, in both the past 
and present form, when thou is the subject 
ot affirmation, and in the present, when 
any singular word excepting T and tliou is 
the subject. We are not aware of any ad- 
vantage derived from these changes (and 
the same remark may be applied to the 
French veib;) for they do not supersede 
the necessity of expressing the subject of 
affirmation, as in the case of the Latin and 
Gieek verbs ; but probably in their original 
import they contained in them the subject 
of affirmation, unless indeed they were dif- 
ferent dialects of the verb, which by degrees 
were appropriated to particular subjects. 
34. The variations in the Greek and 
Latin verbs, which denote time and manner 
of signification, are supplied in English by 
other verbs, which, from their employment, 
aie called auxiliary, or helping verbs: these 
are be, do, have, shall, will, may, and can, 
which admit of the variations of other verbs, 
