Page images

cessity, in order "to circumscribe the latitude of genera and species,” and therefore treats of it separately; but has raised it to a degree of importance much beyond all other modern Grammarians. And though he admits of only two Articles, "properly and strictly so called,” viz. ▲ and THE; yet has he assigned to these two little words full one fourth part in his distribution of language: which, you know, is into-"Substantives, Attributives, Definitives, and Connectives."


If Mr. Harris has not intirely secured my concurrence with his Doctrine of Definitives, I must confess he has at least taken effectual care to place it compleatly beyond the reach of confutation. He says,

1. "The Articles have no meaning, but when associated to some other word."

2. "Nothing can be more nearly related than the Greek article 'O to the English article THE."

3. "But the article A defines in an imperfect man

[merged small][ocr errors]

4. "Therefore the Greeks have no article correspondent to our article A.”

5. However, "they supply its place."

—And How, think you?

6. "By a Negation"-(observe well their method

of supply)" by a negation of their article 'O;" (that is, as he well explains himself,)— "without any thing prefixed, but only the arcle 'O withdrawn."

7. "Even in English, we also express the force of the article A, in plurals, by the same nega

tion of the article THE *."

Now here I acknowledge myself to be compleatly thrown out; and, like the philosopher of old, merely for want of a firm resting-place on which to fix my machine for it would have been as easy for him to raise the earth with a fulcrum of ether, as for me to establish any reasoning or argument on this sort of negation. For, "nothing being prefixed," I cannot imagine in what manner or in what respect a negation of 'O or of THE, differs from a negation of Harris or of Pudding. For lack however of the light of comprehension, I must

* "It is perhaps owing to the imperfect manner in which the Article A defines, that the Greeks have no article correspondent to it, but supply its place by a negation of their Article '0. -Oaveρшπos ETTEσEY, THE man fell; aveρwжоç еTEσev, A man fell;— without any thing prefixed, but only the Article withdrawn."

"Even in English, where the Article A cannot be used, as in plurals, its force is expressed by the same negation.-Those are THE men, means, Those are individuals of which we possess some previous knowledge.-Those are men, the Article apart, means no more than they are so many vague and uncertain individuals; just as the phrase,-A man, in the singular, implies one of the same number." Book 2. chap. 1.

do as other Grammarians do in similar situations, attempt to illustrate by a parallel.

I will suppose Mr. Harris (when one of the Lords of the Treasury) to have addressed the Minister in the same style of reasoning. "Salaries, Sir, produce

no benefit, unless associated to some receiver: my salary at present is but an imperfect provision for myself and family but your salary as Minister is much more compleat. Oblige me therefore by withdrawing my present scanty pittance; and supply its place to me, by a negation of your salary."-I think this request could not reasonably have been denied: and what satisfaction Mr. Harris would have felt by finding his theory thus reduced to practice, no person can better judge than myself; because I have experienced a conduct not much dissimilar from the Rulers of the Inner Temple who having first inticed me to quit one profession, after many years of expectation, have very handsomely supplied its place to me by a negation of the other.


THE three following chapters (except some small alterations and additions) have already been given to the public in A Letter to Mr. DUNNING in the year 1778: which, though published, was not written on the spur of the occasion. The substance of that Letter, and of all that I have further to communicate on the subject of Language, has been amongst the loose papers in my closet now upwards of thirty years; and would probably have remained there some years longer, and have been finally consigned with myself to oblivion, if I had not been made the miserable victim of-Two Prepositions and a Conjunction.

The officiating Priests indeed * were themselves of

* Attorney General Thurlow-since Chancellor and a Peer. Solicitor General Wedderburne-since Chancellor and a


Earl Mansfield, Chief Justice.

Mr. Buller-since a Judge.

Mr. Wallace-since Attorney General.

Mr. Mansfield-since Solicitor General and C. J. of the C. Pleas.

Mr. Bearcroft—since Chief Justice of Chester.

« PreviousContinue »