cular words, and have adjusted their practice to their own ideas of propriety. Dr. Lardner was defirous of reviving the old mode of fpelling in fome inftances, as in goodneffe, forgiveneffe, hiftorie, extraordinarie, &c. Benfon, a commentator on St. Paul's Epiftles, wrote præface, præfix, prævail, procede, perfue, and explane, like Lardner. Dr. Middleton, a more elegant writer, made fimilar attempts; and Upton, the learned commentator on Shakespeare, tires his readers by the repetitions of the word taft for the fubftantive tafte. Mr, Mitford, the Hiftorian of ancient Greece, has introduced fome novelties of this kind, such as iland, ingage, injoyment, unsteddy, foverein, and picture. He has made a more laudable attempt to reftore correct fpelling in proper names derived from Greek, as in Areiopagus, Epameinondas, Peififtratus, Peifander, Iphigeneia, &c. The moft ufeful reform of this kind would be to fpell all proper names, whether ancient or modern, exactly as they occur in their respective languages. The French would then change their ridiculous diminutives, fuch as Tite Live, and Quint Curce, for the genuine appellations of Titus Livius, and Quintus Curtius; and we should no longer degrade Marcus Antonius, and Tullius, into Marc Antony and Tully. Our Orthography remained in a fluctuating state, till at length what was the general with, what many had attempted in vain, and feemed to require the united efforts of numbers, was accomplished by the diligence and the acuteness of one, whom we are happy to mention repeatedly, for his eminent fervices to the literature of his country. Dr. Johnson published his Dictionary; and as the weight of truth and reason is irrefiftible, its authority has nearly fixed the external form of our language, and from its decifions few appeals have yet been made. been made. Indeed fo convenient is it to have one acknowledged standard to recur tofo much preferable, in matters of this nature, is a trifling degree of irregularity to a continual change, and fruitless pursuit of unattainable perfection; that it is earneftly to be hoped, that no author will henceforth on flight grounds be tempted to innovate. Dr. Johnfon is every where the declared enemy of unneceffary innovation. The principles on which he founds his improvements, are the ftable ones of etymology and analogy: the former science will not foon be more completely underftood than it was by him; and if in the latter, a few steps may have been made beyond the limits of his obfervation, they have been gained only by the purfuit of minute refearches, inconfiftent with the greatnefs of his undertaking." It is the opinion of this learned Lexicographer, that as we received many of our words originally of Latin derivation, through the medium of the French, we ought to follow the latter mode of fpelling in preference to the former. Good as this z Nares's Orthoepy, p. 269. general general rule may be thought, there are fome ex ceptions, which in compliance with prevailing cuftom he readily admits himself. "The rule required him to write enquire from the French enquerir, not inquire. The termination in our is one of thofe which has created much difpute. At prefent the practice feems to favour the rejection of u in all words of more than two fyllables. Johnson fpells author without a final u, but always writes honour and favour". It may be laid down as a general rule, that the moft judicious attention that can be paid to orthography, muft neceffarily confift in diftinguishing thofe irregularities which are inherent in the language itself, from those introduced by the capricious, the fashionable, and the ignorant. The preceding obfervations have chiefly related to words confidered by themselves. It may be proper, in the next place, to make fome remarks upon our compofition, or the arrangement and connexion of words, as they conftitute fentences. In this refpect all modern languages fall fhort of the ancient, which are diftinguifhed by a peculiar roundness, harmony, and compafs of period. The Greeks and Romans, by having different genders and terminations of their verbs and nouns, gave a precifion to their meaning, which enabled them to diverfify the order of conftruction, in an infinite variety of modes, without any injury to the fenfe. Of this advantage our language is in a great degree incapable. Our words in general are placed in the natural order of conftruction; and to this ftandard we endeavour to reduce both our literal and free tranflations of Greek and Latin authors: in the works of our writers we feek in vain for those clofely connected parts of a fentence, and that judicious pofition of the principal word in the moft advantageous place, which have fo ftriking an effect in the compofition of the claffics. III. Sir Thomas Brown Dr. Johnfon Mr. Gibbon. The cultivation of the learned languages, fince the reign of Henry VIII. has introduced many words of Latin origin into the converfation and the writings of the English. The attention paid to Italian literature, particularly in the reign of Elizabeth, contributed to increase their number. In the works of Shakespeare we find many fuch words; and thofe, which his imperfect knowledge of Latin and Greek did not afford him the opportunity of taking immediately from the claffics, he probably borrowed from the fame translations, which furnished many of his plots, speeches, and characters". Yet he seems to have confidered the too free admiffion of this ftrange phrafeology as an ob For a very curious Lift of these Translations, fee Dr. Farmer's Effay on the learning of Shakespeare. ject ject of occafional cenfure, and has therefore expofed it to ridicule with great effect in the ludicrous characters of Holofernes and Piftol. The dramatic productions of Ben Jonfon his contemporary are much more ftrongly marked by these exotic conceits. But of all our writers of thofe times no one feems to have been fo ambitious of the ftiff and pompous decorations of a latinifed, style, as Sir Thomas Brown, the author of a work on Vulgar Errors. His fentences are fo replete with words, which differ only from Latin in their terminations, that he is entitled to the first place in the school of pedantry. It is very extraordinary, that the force of his own obfervation, which was levelled against thofe who indulged in this practice, recoils upon himself." "If elegancie ftill pre-. cedeth, and English pens maintain that ftream we have of late obferved to flow from many, we fhall within few years be fain to learne Latine to understand English, and a work will prove of equal facility in either." The affected ftructure of his ftyle is apparent even from the firft fentence of the above mentioned work."Would truth difpenfe, we could be content with Plato, that knowledge were but remembrance, that intellectual acquifition were but reminifcential evocation, &c.". That many of his words may be tranflated into Latin with little more than a change in their terminations, the following. Preface to the Vulgar Errors. paffages |