Expression of Thought Connection. 
17 
The above examination of the thought-connective in so small 
a number of examples cannot be regarded as proving that it 
never has the values successively tested. It shows, however, 
that the possession of such values, if it ever occurs, cannot be 
regarded as essential — cannot, therefore, be properly made the 
basis of classification. It seems, accordingly, evident that the 
thought-connective must be classed as the only other element 
possible, namely a structural element. The doctrine of the 
growth of instructional sentence-elements from so-called empty 
words favors the expectation that the thought-connective, at 
least in primary usage, will be found to be fully structural. 
Fourth , then, and last, the thought-connective may be struct¬ 
ural. If such, it might be a term of the essential judgment. 
But this, to the most superficial observation, it is not. Recall¬ 
ing the example: “And George the dragon slew,” it is plain 
that “and” is not the first term, otherwise known as subject. 
It is not the last term, otherwise known as -sometimes object and 
sometimes predicate. It is not the mid-term or relation, other¬ 
wise known as verb or copula. 
WHAT VALUE THE THOUGHT-CONNECTIVE MUST HAVE. 
Turning from the discussion of what the thought-connective 
is not, it remains to show if possible what the thought-connec¬ 
tive is. There remains one class only of ideas from which, by 
the preceding argument, it has not been excluded, namely the 
class of adjuncts. It is therefore provisorily assumed that the 
thought-connective enters thought-structure as an adjunct. An 
a preceding statement.” It means rather “George slew the dragon — a 
statement to be joined by you to its predecessor.” That is, the order to 
join the statement is of less importance than the statement itself. Or, 
using the explanatory value of “ and,” the meaning is not “ I have joined 
George the dragon slew to a preceding statement,” but rather “ George slew 
the dragon — a statement joined by me to its predecessor.” That is, the 
explanation is much less important than the statement. Indeed, for my 
own part, I can not, in the given example, say either that I am telling 
you to do the joining or stating that I have done it myself. All that I feel 
sure of is that I do conceive a junction. Its particular form and method 
will be developed in another place. 
2 
