110 
'GRAMMAR. 
appeared more eafy to apply thefe to any verb what- 
ever; as, “ I am loved ; I was loved ; I have loved;” 
than to remember that variety of terminations which 
w'gre reqiiifife in conjugating the ancient verbs, a^nor, 
■ainahar, amav!. See. Two or three varieties only in.tlie 
termination of the verb w'ere reta'ined, as, love, loved, 
loving ; and all the reft were dropped. The confeqiience 
however of this pradtice, waS the fame as that of abo- 
liftiing declenfions. It rendered language more fimple 
and eafy in its 'ftrudhire ; but withal more prolix and 
lefs graceful. The life of auxiliary verbs in the con- 
jugationsof the Italian, Spanifti, and French, languages, 
feems to have been borrowed from the German, fince 
tlieir mother-tongue, the Latin, makes no ufe of them 
but in the compound tenfes of the paflive voice. 
Participles are in our grammars made a feparate 
part of fpeech, though evidently a part of the verb, 
ivhile adjedlivcs are confounded with nouns, to which 
they have no relation whatever. They are two in num¬ 
ber 5 the participle of the prefent, and the participle of 
thepo/?^ loving, loved•, learning, learned. They are called 
participles becaufe they partake of the nature of the verb. 
Loving, learning, may be applied to perfons, as may/evcif, 
learned, the former implying the adlual exiftence of the 
qiiality in the perfon at the time fpoken of; the latter 
that the quality had exifted in the perfon. He is learn- 
^ zng French, or he has been learning French for fame time pajl. 
The prefent tenfe of the Englifh language being rather 
an indefinite tenfe, this participle is alfo indefinite: 
learning in both of the above inftances fhowing that the 
quality was exifting in the man for an indefinite time. 
In the feutences, “he is loved,” or, “he has been 
loved,” the participle loved ftiows that the quality had 
exifted in the man at a former period; “he has been 
loved,” namely, at a diftant time ; “ he is loved,” im¬ 
plies that the perfon at the prefent time is one who had 
love, and no intimation being given that the love of 
him ceafed to exift, it naturally follows that we pre- 
lume he will continue to be beloved. In all languages 
the participle has thus the circumftance of time attend¬ 
ing the quality exprefl'ed, wliich-may belong to a perfon; 
and in this chiefly it differs from the adjedtive. 
Adverbs form a very numerous clafs of words in 
every language, redutible in general to the head of at¬ 
tributives ; as they ferve to modify or to denote fome, 
circumftance of an adfion or of a quality, relative to its 
time, place, order, degree, and the other properties of 
it which we have occafion to fpecify. They are for 
the moft part no more than an abridged mode of fpecch, 
exprefting by one word what might by a circumlocu¬ 
tion be refolved into two or more words belonging to 
the other parts of fpeech. Exceedingly, for inftance, is 
tile fame as “ in a high degree;” bravely, the lame as 
“ with bravery or valour ;” here, the fame as “ in this 
place ;” often, and feldom, the fame as “for many, and 
tor few, times;” and fo of the reft. Hence, adverbs 
may be conceived as of lefs neceffity, and of later in¬ 
troduction into the fyftem of fpeech, than many other 
clafles of words ; and accordingly the great body of 
them are derived from other words formerly eftablilhed 
in the language. 
Prepositions and Conjunctions, arewords more 
efl'ential td difeourfe than the greateft part of adverbs. 
They form that clafi of words called conneBives, with¬ 
out which there could be no language ; ferving to ex- 
prefs the relations which things bear to one another, 
their mutual influence, dependencies, and coherence; 
thereby joining w'ords together into intelligible and fig- 
nificant propofitions. . 
Conjunctions are defined as words which are to 
“connect words, either two or more words in a fen- 
tence, or to make of two fimple fentences one compound 
fentence.” This is the general account : but unfortu¬ 
nately we ftumble at the next ftep without having en¬ 
quired after any of thefe words ; for thefe conjunctions 
are immediately after divided into two clafTes, the one 
called conneBive, and the other disjmBive ; that is, one 
clafs of thefe connecting words, inftead of connefting, 
disjoin ; and hence arifes an abfurdity. There are cer¬ 
tain words in all languages, which by frequent repeti¬ 
tion have loft their original form, and their meaning is 
not obvious. Such are the words f, and, becaufe, or. 
From their meaning not being known, fome wuiters liave 
fuppofed them to have no meaning at all, and that they 
were mere founds to conneCl or disjoin, were efintinu- 
ative, fubcontinuative, collective, &c. But Mr. Horne 
Tooke has fliown, that many of thefe words are the im¬ 
peratives of old Saxon verbs ; and the Hebrew language 
is a confirmation of Iris theory. We ftiall fubjoin his 
table : 
5 
G 
To 
e>' 
H 
fif 1 
'gif 
an 
an 
unlefs 
onles 
eke 
cac 
_C 
yet 
get 
> 
ftill 
> 
fell 
g . 
elfe 
ales 
72 
though 
Q- 
thafig 
C /3 
or 
or 
tho’ 
aj 
thaf 
but 
bot 
•p 
but 
< 
be-utan 
u 
’flj 
M 
without 
wyrth-ulan 
U- 
0 
and 
an-ad 
jef is the 
participle bfed of Ifat 
onlefan 
) 
to grant 
to difmifiJ 
to add 
to get 
to put 
to diminiflt 
to allow 
to boot; to 
fuperadd 
to be out 
7 tobeout 
Ulan i 
j C dare con- 
ana??.ad 
t genem 
Since < 
is the participle of feon, to fee. 
’ fiththan 
fine 
fcandes 
fiththe 
I or 
\_fn-es 
That is the Saxon article or pronoun As is es, a 
German article, meaning it, that, or which. And fo is 
fa ox fo, a Gothic article of the fame import with as. 
From confidering the above fynoplis, and referring to 
a fimilar derivation in other languages, we have rcafon 
to believe that there is no fuch feparate dais as con¬ 
junctions, or words without meaning, to conneCt and dif. 
join, but that theconneClion or disjunction is to befound 
in the meaning of the word. See Etymology, vol. 
vn. p. 44. 
If we are right in our opinion with refpeCt to coji- 
junCtions, we ftiall naturally be little inclined to admit 
PREPOSITIONS as another clafs of words without mean¬ 
ing themfclves, but merely intended “to unite two 
words of meaning together, which without this alfift- 
ance could not coalefce.” We lhall look to derivation 
for the meaning of thefe words ; and if we have any 
grounds for giving them a meaning, we ftiall dal's them 
accordingly. Let us try then with the fuppofed prepo- 
fitions, with, without, chez, fonder. 
With means, in all cales where it is employed, addi¬ 
tion ; without, the contrary. “The king of England', 
with the lords and commons, can make a law : without 
the lords and commons, cannot make a law.” Join the 
lords and commons to the king, and his aCt is good : 
take them away, and in law making he becomes a ci¬ 
pher. There is an Anglo-Saxon verb, withan, whofe 
imperative is with ; this imperative, we fay, remains in 
ufe in what is culled the prepolltion with ; the other 
parts of the verb are obfolete. Without comes from the 
Saxon wyrthan-utan, be out. Thus in French avec, cor- 
refponding to our with, is from the imperative of avoir 
and the adjeCIive ce, have that. Chez is called a prepo- 
fition in French; but it is in realfty a corruption of cc/a, 
a houfe ; chez moi, at my houfe. may very rea- 
4 fonably 
