1808.} Othe Construction of certain Comparative Words. 5 
Zo the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SER, 
EFORE I saw Mr. Singleton’s 
query, (Vol, 24. No. 165, p. 528,) 
in regard to superior and inferior, 1 had 
Bey coll -cting the comparative or rela- 
tive. words not usually followed in 
English by than, but by to. They area 
little more numerous than he imagines 
them to be. Yo the above-mentioned 
words I have added prior, posterior, an- 
terior, and ulterior. Nor do Jeter and 
senior admit the construction with than. 
It may also be observed that the English 
comparatives former and latter are, like 
other comparatives, followed by of, de- 
noting partition, but not by than, de- 
noting comparison. We gay, too, ‘ the 
older of the two,” and “ the one is older 
than the othey;” also, “ the elder of the 
two,” but, I-believe, not commonly, 
“ the one is elder than the other.” 
The truth, certainly, is, that the words 
ending in er are, orig einally, Latin com- 
paratives; but, although they may still 
retain, 1 Enclish, something of their 
comparative meaning, yet they do not 
all possess the full nature and import of 
the words deemed, in the English lan- 
guage, comparatives, So much is this 
the case, that we find some of them used 
in a way in which no real Enghsh com 
parative. is correctly “employed. Thus, 
we cannot, in English, add very, as the 
sign of the comparison of emenence, to 
higher, and say, “ He is very higher ;” 
but we meet every day, in the pages>-of 
the correctest writers, “ this is very supe- 
rior,” “ this is very inferior to the 
other ;” a plain proof that such words, 
atleast, are not esteemed to be in the 
comparative degree. Indeed, if we ex- 
amine some of these in the language 
whence we have taken them, we shall 
perbaps find, that, when used with a 
construction equivalent to the English fo, 
they may be said to have lost their com- 
parative nature; thus Padus nullt am- 
nium claritate inferior—Piin. Vir nulla 
arte cuiguam inferior—Sall. Frag. tiist. 
in both which the adjective inferior seems 
to be used absolutely, as equivalent to 
second or yielding, to secundus or con- 
cedens. 
In many English coe may the ana- 
logy of Latin comparison be traced; but, 
although a resemblance may be supposed 
to exist between their respective natures, 
yet such words are not regarded, in both 
languages, as of precisely the same full 
meanwg and import, J will mention an 
example or two; external, exterior, 6a- 
treme; internal, interior, intimate; su 
perior, supreme ; prior, prime. I do not 
mean to deny that these may imply some 
kind of comparison, or relative state; 
but they have not been admitted into 
the English language as the usual, ac- 
knowledged forms of comparison, like 
good, better, best; great, greater, great= 
est; atleast, 1: do not know any ‘English 
grammarian "that has characterised, nor 
any reputable writer that has adopted, 
such formations as instances of legitimate 
English comparison. When we say, 
“ the interior form,” and “ the erterzor 
form,” we mean, in English, nothing 
more than the inward and the outward 
form, as contradistinguished from each 
other, and not the one which is more 
inward, nor that which is more outward, 
as compared with another which: is also 
inward cr outward... 'Vhatis, exterior and. 
interior are considered as, in English, 
little diferent irom erternal and wmnter~ 
nal; so that ‘ exterior than,” for a 
comparative expression, would be just as 
unmeaning as * external than.” Why 
such words are not considered, as mM 
Latin, comparatives, it 1s not for me to 
determine, The circumstance depends 
upon usage, the arbitress of living lan- 
guages. Again, when we write prior 
to this,” we express nothing essentially 
different from “ previous to this,” In- 
deed, it appears to me, that no word 
construed with éo can then tke said to im= 
port comparison. Such constructions 
may certainly refer to a-relative state; 
yet although grammatical comparison 
presupposes such a state, the converse is 
not true, that all forms implying this 
state do necessarily import what is tech- 
nically dexominat ted, in grammar, com- 
parison. 
Once more: mtimute does, 1f etymo~ 
logically considered, denote the inner- 
most ; still we use it asa positive, and 
say, * he is more intimate with me than 
with my brother ;” ‘“ he is my most inti- 
mace friend.” Nay, extreme, which dee 
notes the outmost, utmost, or uttermost, 
is often found, in English, [ vill not say 
how. correctly, in a state of comparison. 
One thing, however, is certain, that it is 
commonly used in a& way repusnant to 
the nature of a superlative; thus .we 
write, “in an extreme degree,” in which 
were extreme regarded as a superlative, 
an could not have been used, since, then, 
for an obvious reason, the definite arti- 
cle must have been preiixe ed, for we say, 
‘“‘ the greatest man,” and cannot write 
“ w greatest man.” "Thus also, we write, 
necording 
