CHAPTER XIV.

THE ARTICLES.

s. 336. In the generality of grammars the definite article _the_, and the

indefinite article _an_, are the very first parts of speech that are

considered. This is exceptionable. So far are they from being essential to

language, that, in many dialects, they are wholly wanting. In Greek there

is no indefinite, in Latin there is neither an indefinite nor a definite

article. In the former language they say [Greek: aner tis]=_a certain man_:

in the Latin the words _filius patris_ mean equally _the son of the

father_, _a son of a father_, _a son of the father_, or _the son of a

father_. In Moeso-Gothic and in Old Norse, there is an equal absence of the

indefinite article; or, at any rate, if there be one at all, it is a

different word from what occurs in English. In these the Greek [Greek: tis]

is expressed by the Gothic root _sum_.

Now, as it is very evident that, as far as the sense is concerned, the

words _some man_, _a certain man_, and _a man_, are, there or thereabouts,

the same, an exception may be taken to the statement that in Greek and

Moeso-Gothic there is no indefinite article. It may, in the present state

of the argument, be fairly said that the words _sum_ and [Greek: tis] are

pronouns with a certain sense, and that _a_ and _an_ are no more;

consequently, that in Greek the indefinite article is [Greek: tis], in

Moeso-Gothic _sum_, and in English _a_ or _an_,

A distinction, however, may be made. In the expression [Greek: aner tis]

(_anaer tis_)=_a certain man_, or _a man_, and in the expression _sum

mann_, the words _sum_ and [Greek: tis] preserve their natural and original

meaning; whilst in _a man_ and _an ox_ the words _a_ and _an_ are used in a

secondary sense. These words, as is currently known, are one and the same,

the _n_, in the form _a_, being ejected through a euphonic process. They

are, moreover, the same words with the numeral _one_; {282} Anglo-Saxon,

_['a]n_; Scotch, _ane_. Now, between the words _a man_ and _one man_, there

is a difference in meaning; the first expression being the most indefinite.

Hence comes the difference between the English and the Moeso-Gothic

expressions. In the one the word _sum_ has a natural, in the other the word

_an_ has a secondary power.

The same reasoning applies to the word _the_. Compared with _a man_, the

words _the man_ are very definite. Compared, however, with the words _that

man_, they are the contrary. Now, just as _an_ and _a_ have arisen out of

the numeral _one_, so has _the_ arisen out of the demonstrative pronoun

_thaet_, or at least from some common root. It will be remembered that in

Anglo-Saxon there was a form _the_, undeclined, and common to all the cases

of all the numbers.

In no language in its oldest stage is there ever a word giving, in its

primary sense, the ideas of _a_ and _the_. As tongues become modern, some

noun with a _similar_ sense is used to express them. In the course of time

a change of form takes place, corresponding to the change of meaning;

_e. g._, _one_ becomes _an_, and afterwards a. Then it is that articles

become looked upon as separate parts of speech, and are dealt with

accordingly. No invalidation of this statement is drawn from the Greek

language. Although the first page of the etymology gives us [Greek: ho],

[Greek: he], [Greek: to] (_ho_, _hae_, _to_), as the definite articles, the

corresponding page in the syntax informs us, that, in the oldest stage of

the language, [Greek: ho] (_ho_)=_the_, had the power of [Greek: houtos]

(_howtos_)=_this_.

The origin of the articles seems uniform. In German _ein_, in Danish _en_,

stand to _one_ in the same relation that _an_ does. The French _un_,

Italian and Spanish _uno_, are similarly related to _unus_=_one_.

And as, in English _the_, in German _der_, in Danish _den_, come from the

demonstrative pronouns, so in the classical languages are the French _le_,

the Italian _il_ and _lo_, and the Spanish _el_, derived from the Latin

demonstrative, _ille_.

In his Outlines of Logic, the present writer has given reasons for

considering the word _no_ (as in _no man_) an article.

That _the_, in expressions like _all the more_, _all the better_, &c., is

no article, has already been shown.

* * * * *

{283}

The English Language · 第 14 / 41 章