eos LANG 
lifti. Nor is it lefs happy in that facility of conftruftion 
which renders it more peculiarly adapted to the genius of 
a free people than any other form of language. Of an 
idiom purely analogous, it has deviated lefs from the ge¬ 
nius of that idiom, and pofTelfes more of the charafleriftic 
advantages attending it, than any other language that now 
exifts; for, while others, perhaps by their more intimate 
connexion with the Romans, have adopted fome of their 
tranfpofitions, and clogged their language with unnecef- 
fary fetters, we have preferved ourielves free from the 
contagion, and ftill retain the primitive fimplicity of our 
language. Our verbs are varied by auxiliaries, our nouns 
remain free from the perplexing embarraflment of gen¬ 
ders, and our pronouns mark this diftinction, where ne- 
ceflary, with the moll perfect accuracy; our articles alfo 
are freed from this unnatural encumbrance, and our ad¬ 
jectives preferve their natural freedom and independence. 
Another advantage is in the polfeflive pronoun, and which 
we are enabled to take the advantage of, in confequence 
of the nonapplication of gender to inanimate fubftances. 
We fay his book or her booh, fhowing di(finely to whom the 
book belongs, which cannot be known either by the ejus 
liber of the Latins, or Jon livre of the French. From ttiefe 
caufes our language follows an order of conftruCtion fo 
natural and ealy, and the rules of lyntax are fo few and 
obvious, as to be within the reach of the moll ordinary 
capacity. So that from this, and the great clearnefs and 
diltinftnefs of meaning with which this mode of conftruc- 
tion is necdfarily accompanied, it is much better adapted 
for the familiar intercourfe of private fociety, and liable 
to fewer errors in ufing it, than any other language yet 
known; and on this account we may boaft, that in no na¬ 
tion of Europe do the lower clafs of people fpeak their 
language with fo much accuracy, or have their minds fo 
much enlightened by knowledge, as in Great Britain. 
What then (hall we fay of the difcernment of thofe gram¬ 
marians, who are every day echoing back to one another 
complaints of the poverty of our language on account of 
the few and fimple rules which it requires in fyntax? As 
juftly might we complain of an invention in mechanics, 
which, by means of one or two fimple movements, obvi¬ 
ous to an ordinary capacity, little liable to accidents, and 
eafily put in order by the rudeft hand, fhould pofl'efs the 
whole powers of a complex machine, which had acquired 
an infinite apparatus of wheels and contrary movements, 
the knowledge of which could only be acquired, or the 
various accidents to which it was expofed by ufing it be 
repaired, by the powers of the ingenious artift, as com¬ 
plain of this charafteriftic excellence of our language as a 
defeCt. 
But, if we thus enjoy in an eminent degree the advan¬ 
tages attending an analogous language, we likewife feel 
in a confiderable meafure the defers to which it is ex¬ 
pofed; as the number of monofyllables with which itmuft 
always be embarraffed, notwithftanding the great improve¬ 
ments which have been made fince the revival of letters 
in Europe, prevents in fome degree that fwelling fulnefs 
of found which fo powerfully contributes to harmonious 
dignity and graceful cadence in literary compofitions. 
And, as the genius of the people of Britain has always 
been more difpofed to the rougher arts of command than 
to the fofter infinuations of perfuafion, no pains have been 
taken to correft thefe natural defefts of our language ; 
but, on the contrary, by an inattention of which we have 
hardly a parallel in the hiftory of any civilized nation, we 
meet with many jnftances, even within this laft century, 
of the harmony of found being facrificed to that brevity 
fo defirable in converfation, as many elegant words have 
been curtailed, and harmonious fyllables fupprelfed, to 
fubftitute in their Head others, Ihorter indeed, but more 
barbarous and uncouth. Nay, fo little attention have our 
forefathers beitowed upon the harmony of founds in our 
language, that one would be tempted to think, on look¬ 
ing back to its primitive ftate, that they had on fome oc- 
•aiions ftudioufly debafed it. 
U AGE. 
Our language, at its firft formation, feems to have la¬ 
boured under a capital defedt in point of found, as fuch a- 
number of S’s enter into the formation of our words, and 
fuch a number of letters and combinations of other letters 
aflume a fimilar found, as to give a general hifs through 
the whole tenor of our language, which mult be exceed¬ 
ingly difagreeable to every unprejudiced ear. We fhould 
therefore have naturally expected, that at the revival of 
letters, when our forefathers became acquainted with the 
harmonious languages of Greece and Rome* they would 
have acquired a more corredt tafte, and endeavoured, if 
poflible, to diminifh the prevalence of this difgufting 
found. But fo far have they been from thinking of this, 
that they have multiplied this letter exceedingly. The 
plurals of almoft all our nouns were originally formed by 
adding the fyllable en to the fingular, which has giver* 
place to the letter s; and, inftead of houfen formerly, we 
now fay houfes. In like manner, many of the variations 
of our verbs were formed by the fyllable et/i, which we 
have likewife changed into the fame difagreeable letter; 
fo that, inftead of loveth, moveth, writetk, walketh, See. we 
have changed into the more modifh forms of loves, moves, 
writes, walks, See. Our very auxiliary verbs have fuffered 
the fame change ; and inftead of hath and doth, we now 
make ufe of has and does. From thefe caufes, notwith- 
ftanding the great improvements which have been made in 
the language, within thefe few centuries, in other refpedts j 
yet, with regard to the pleafingnefs of found alone, it was 
perhaps much more perfedt in the days of Chaucer than 
at prefent; and, although cuftom may have rendered thefe, 
founds fo familiar to our ear, as not to affedt us much 
yet to an unprejudiced perfon, unacquainted with our lan¬ 
guage, we have not the fmalleft doubt but the language 
of Bacon or Sidney would appear more harmonious than 
that of Johnfon or Hume. 
But, notwithftanding this great and radical defedt with 
regard to pleafingnefs of found, which mu ft be fo ftrongly 
perceived by every one who is unacquainted with the 
meaning of our words; yet to thofe who underftand the 
language, the exceeding copioufnefs which it allows in 
the choice of words proper for the occafion, and the ner¬ 
vous force which the perfpicuity and graceful elegance 
of theemphafis beftow upon it, make this defedl be totally 
overlooked; and we could produce fuch numerous works 
of profe, which excel in almoft every different ftyle of 
compofition, as would be tirefome to enumerate ; every 
reader of tafte and difcernment will be able to recolledt a 
fufficient number of writings which excel in point of ftyle. 
But, although we can equal, if not furpafs, every modern 
language in work of profe, it is in its poetical powers that 
our language fliines forth with the greateft lultre. The 
brevity to which we mu ft here neceffarily confine ourfelves, 
prevents us from entering into a minute examination of 
the poetical powers of our own, compared with other lan¬ 
guages ; otherwife it would be eafy to fhow, that every 
other modern language labours under great reftraints in 
this refpedt which ours is freed from ; that our language 
admits of a greater variety of poetic movements, and di- 
verfity of cadence, than any of the admired languages of 
antiquity; that it diltinguifhes with the greateft accuracy 
between accent and quantity, and is pofTeffed of every 
other poetic excellence which their languages were capable 
of; fo that we are poffeffed of all the lources of harmony 
which they could boaft ; and, befides all thefe, have one 
fuperadded, which is the caufe of great variety and more 
forcible exprefiion in numbers than all the reft ; that is, the 
unlimited power given by the emphafis over quantity and 
cadence ; by means whereof, a necefiary union between 
found and fenfe, numbers and meaning, in verfification 
unknown to the ancients, has been brought about, which 
gives our language in this refpecl a fuperiority over all 
thofe juftly-admired languages. Thefe great and diftin- 
guifhing excellences far more than counterbalance the in¬ 
conveniences we have mentioned; and although, in mere 
pleafantnefs of founds, or harmonious flow of fyllables, 
i QUC 
