the circumlocutions and barbarisms of the language of sa vages, but into those of their manners, which attempted to possess the qualities of others by murdering their persons or their reputations.

The sixth chapter, OF ADJECTIVES, is a tissue of pertnesses and impertinences on Dr. Lowth, Mr Harris, &c.

That adjectives, like all other words, are derived from nouns, and that every word must have been the name of a thing, is not a discovery by Mr. Tooke. Indeed he alludes to several indirect authorities, but parades and dietates with the air of a master. Gunter Browne, in a small treatise, published a few years ago, called Hermes Unmasked," has treated this subject fully, but with the flippancy of the Wimbledon school. His principal object seems to be revenge on Dr. Vincent for the flagellations he formerly received from him at Westminster school; and he certainly exposes to just ridicule the Doctor's attempt to trace the origin of articulate language.

But in giving proofs that all words are derived from nouns, he relates the first efforts of his children to describe events by the junction of two or three nouns. Mr. Tooke has taken off the cream of this little book, without referring to it, or mentioning the name of Browne. The book has had but little circulation, and if we had not seen it in Mr. Tooke's possession, we might have imagined, though the sentiments are similar, that he had not perused it.

Browne says, and every old nurse will also say, that children always begin by associating nouns, unadjectived; and instead of saying, wood is burning, or milk is warm," saywood fire,' milk fire,' &c.

To such facts we can have no objection, as mere facts; but expressions of invective against those who state the changes of nouns in the several parts of speech as improvements, are extremely offensive, as they are extremely illiberal and unjust.

Mr. Harris and Dr. Lowth are not inquiring into the etymology of words, but into the propriety of their places and uses in a sentence; and into the denominations given them from the occupation of those places. It is highly unjust and impertinent to ridicule and degrade them, because they omit what they never had in contemplation, and what they must have deemed matters of mere curiosity.

The reader may judge by the following passages, and they are among the best of the book.

H. Well. I care not whether you call it Substance or Essence or Accident, that is attributed. Something must be attributed, and

therefore denoted by every adjective. And Essence, Substance and Accident, are all likewise denoted by substantives--by grammatical substantives at least. For, pray, what is Scaliger's own consequence from the words you have quoted? That Whiteness is not a substantive, but nomen essentiale. By which reasoning, you see, the far greater part of grammatical substantives are at once discarded, and become accidentalia, or philosophical adjectives. But that is not all the mischief: for the same kind of reasoning will likewise make a great number of the most common grammatical adjectives become philosophical substantives, as denoting substances. For both Substances and Essences (if you choose to have those terms, those ignes fatuos) are equally and indifferently denoted sometimes by grammati cal substantives and sometimes by grammatical adjectives."

He proceeds with the same trivial pomposity:

And this difficulty has at all times puzzled all the grammarians who have attempted to account for the parts of speech by the single difference of the Things or Ideas of which the different sorts of words were supposed to be the signs. And though every one who has made the attempt, has found it miscarry in his hands; still each has pur sued the beaten track, and employed his time and pains to establish a criterion which, in the conclusion, each has uniformly abandoned. And they all come at last to such paltry jargon as this of the authors of the Encyclopedie Cessont des Noms substantifs par Imitation.” They must equally be obliged to acknowledge that substantial adjectives are also des Noms adjectifs par imitation. Thus essential terms are grammatical substantives only by imitation: and substan tial terms are grammatical adjectives only by imitation: and unfortunately this does not happen only now and then, like an exception to a general rule; but this perplexing imitation is so universally practised, that there is not any Accident whatever which has not a grammatical substantive for its sign, when it is not attributed: nor is there any Substance whatever which may not have a grammatical adjective for its sign, when there is occasion to attribute it. They are therefore forced to give up at last every philosophical difference between the parts of speech, which they had at first laid down as the cause of the distinction; and are obliged to allow that the same words (without any alteration in their meaning) are sometimes of one part of speech and sometimes of another." Ces mots sont pris tantôt adjectivement, tantôt substantivement. Cela depend de leur service. Qualifient-ils? Ils sont adjectifs. Designent-ils des individus? Ils sont done substantifs.""

The author concludes his truisms and witticisms on this subject, in the following consolatory prophesy to the believers in a millennium on Wimbledon principles.

If in what I have said of the adjective, I have expressed myself clearly and satisfactorily, you will easily observe, that adjectives, though convenient abbreviations, are not necessary to language; and CRIT. REV. Vol 7. April, 1806,

Bb

are therefore not ranked by me amongst the parts of speech. And perhaps you will perceive in this useful and simple contrivance of language, (a contrivance of language, which is no part of speech !!) one of the foundations of those heaps of false philosophy and obscure (because mistaken) metaphysic, with which we have been bewildered. You will soon know what to do with all the technical impertinences about Qualities, Accidents, Substantives, Substrata, Essence, the adjunct Natures of things, &c. &c. And will, I doubt not, chearfully proceed with me, in some future conversation, to " a very different sort of Logic and Critic than what we have hitherto been acquainted with." Of which, a knowledge of the nature of language and of the meaning of words, is a necessary forerunner. P. 459.

The faithful may therefore live in hope; and such metaphysicians as Thomas Taylor must be in apprehension and jeopardy. We are of those blessed who have no expectations, and therefore shall not be disappointed.

In the seventh chapter, the philosophical verbotomists consider the PARTICIPLE; and the baronet, borrowing a little wit from his master (which no doubt he pays in some other way) calls the participle a Mule, which is the best thing in the chapter..

In the next chapter, he has several just observations on the subject of abbreviations, but they are too numerous and tedious. To relieve the reader's weariness, the bold baronet turns upon his master, and asks (P. 490)

F. Do you then propose to reform these abuses? H. Reform! God forbid. I tremble at the very name of Reform. The Scotch and the English lawyer in conjunction,

and

with both the Indies in their patronage, point to the Ecce Homo with a sneer; and insultingly bid us-" Behold the fate of a Refor mer!" No-with our eyes open to the condition of them all, you know that your friend Bosville and I' (well paired!) have entered into a strict engagement,' (not money-bonds,we trust) to belong for ever to the established government, to the established church, and to the established language of our country: because they are established. Establish what you please: do but establish; and, whilst that establishment shall last, we shall be perfectly convinced of its propriety.

No. I shall venture no farther than to explain the nature and convenience of these abbreviations. And I venture so far, only beCause our religious and devout have not yet passed an act to restrain me individually to the Liturgy (as a sort of half-sacrament) and to forbid my meddling with any words out of it.

F. However fearful and backward you may be, or pretend to be, upon the occasion, I do not think a slow reform either dangerous or difficult or unlikely in this particular. Your principle is simple

and incontestable :-One word or one termination should be used with one signification and for one purpose.'

What a lesson this passage holds out to reformers! What an example of latitude and elasticity of conscience in such eminent sages as Bosville and Horne Tooke! What encoùragement to rich men to bleed freely-to be happily fraternized, and see their names printed in great books. This is laying out money and supplying forage to good account. He proceeds (in page 493):

'Take notice, I am not a partner in your proposal. The corrup tion of most of these words is now so inveterate, that those authors must be very hardy indeed who would risque the ridicule of the innovation and their numbers and merit must be great to succeed in any reformation of the language: or in any other reformation in England, if Reason and Truth are the only bribes they have to offer." and the volume terminates thus:

Now in regard to all these which I have mentioned, and many other abbreviations which I have not yet mentioned; our modern English authors (not being aware of what the language had gained) have been much divided in their opinions: whether we should praise or censure those who, by adopting a great number of foreign words and incorporating them into the old Anglosaxon language, have by degrees produced the modern English. While some have called this Enriching, others have called it Deforming the original language of our ancestors: which these latter affirm to have been sufficiently adapted to composition to have expressed with equal advantage, propriety, and precision, by words from its own source, all that we can now do by our foreign helps. But in their declamations (for they cannot be called arguments) on this subject, it is evident that, on both sides, they confined themselves to the consideration merely of complex terms, and never dreamed of the abbreviations in the manner of signification of words. Which latter has however been a much more abundant cause of borrowing foreign words than the former. And indeed it is true that almost all the complex terms (merely as such) which we have adopted from other languages, might be, and many of them were, better expressed in the Anglosaxon:-I mean, better for an Anglosaxon: because more intelligible to him, and more homogeneous with the rest of his language. Yet I am of opiion (but on different ground from any taken by the declaimers on either side) that those who by thus borrowing have produced our present English speech, deserve from us, but in a very different degree, both thanks and censure. Great thanks, in that they have introduced into the English some most useful abbreviations in manner of signification; which the Anglosaxon, as well as all the other Northern languages wanted; and some censure in that they have done this incompleatly, and in an improper manner. The fact certainly is, that our predecessors did not themselves know what they were

doing; any more than their successors seem to have known hitherto the real importance and benefit of what has been done. And of this the Grammars and Philosophy both of ancients and moderns are a sufficient proof. An oversight much to be deplored: for I am strongly persuaded (and I think I have good reason to be so) that had the Greek and Latin Grammarians known and explained the nature and intrinsic value of the riches of their own language, neither would their descendants have lost any of those advantages, nor would the languages of Europe have been at this day in the corrupt and deficient state in which we, more and less, find them. For those languages which have borrowed these abbreviations, would have avoided the partiality and patchwork, as well as the corrup tions and improprieties with which they now abound, and those living languages of Europe which still want these advantages wholly, would long ere this have entirely supplied their defects.

F. It seems to me that you rather exaggerate the importance of these abbreviations. Can it be of such mighty consequence to gain a little time in communication?

'H. Even that is important. But it rests not there. A short, close, and compact method of speech, answers the purpose of a map upon a reduced scale: it assists greatly the comprehension of our understanding and, in general reasoning, frequently enables us, at one glance, to take in very numerous and distant important relations and conclusions, which would otherwise totally escape us. But this objection comes to me with an ill grace from you, whə have expressed such frequent nausea and disgust at the any-leng thian Lord with his numerous strings, that excellent political swimmer: whose tedious reasons, you have often complained, are as"two grains of wheat hid in two bushels of chaffe."

And here, if you please, we will conclude our discussion for the present.

F. No. Ifyou finish thus, you will leave me much unsatisfied; nor shall I think myself fairly treated by you.

You have told me that a Verb is (as every word also must be) a Noun; but you added, that it is also something more: and that the title of Verb was given to it, on account of that distinguishing something more than the mere nouns convey. You have then proceeded to the simple Verb adjectived, and to the different adjectived Moods, and to the different adjectived Tenses of the verb. But you have not all the while explained to me what you mean by the naked simple Ferb unadjectived. Nor have you uttered a single syllable concerning that something which the naked veib unattended by Mood, Tense, Number, Person, and Gender, (which last also some languages add to it) signifies More or Eesides the mere Noun.

What is the Ferb? What is that peculiar differential circumstance which, added to the definition of a Noun, constitutes the Verb?

Is the Verb, 1. "Dictio variabilis, quæ significat actionem aut passionem,"