According to the method in which philosophical investigations of
language have generally been conducted, all our words should be
reduced to two classes; for it can be easily shown, that from the
noun and verb, all the other parts of speech have sprung. Nay, more.
They may even be reduced to one. Verbs do not, in reality, _express_
actions; but they are intrinsically the mere _names_ of actions. The
idea of action or being communicated by them, as well as the
_meaning_ of words in general, is merely _inferential_. The
principle of reasoning assumed by the celebrated Horne Tooke, if
carried to its full extent, would result, it is believed, in proving
that we have but one part of speech.
_Adnouns_ or _adjectives_ were originally nouns. _Sweet, red,
white_, are the _names_ of qualities, as well as _sweetness,
redness, whiteness_. The former differ from the latter only in their
_manner_ of signification. To denote that the name of some quality
or substance is to be used in connexion with some other name, or,
that this quality is to be _attributed_ to some other name, we
sometimes affix to it the termination _en, ed_, or _y;_ which
signifies _give, add,_ or _join_. When we employ the words wood_en_,
wooll_en_, wealth_y_, grass_y_, the terminations _en_ and _y_, by
their own intrinsic meaning, give notice that we intend to _give,
add, or join_, the names of some other substances in which are found
the properties or qualities of _wood, wool, wealth_, or _grass_.
_Pronouns_ are a class of nouns, used instead of others to prevent
their disagreeable repetition. Participles are certain forms of the
verb. Articles, interjections, adverbs, prepositions, and
conjunctions, are contractions of abbreviations of nouns and verbs.
_An_ (_a, one_, or _one_) comes from _ananad_, to add, to heap.
_The_ and _that_, from the Anglo-Saxon verb _thean_, to get, assume.
_Lo_ is the imperative of _look_; _fy_, of _fian_, to hate; and
_welcome_ means, it is _well_ that you are _come. In_ comes from the
Gothic noun _inna_, the interior of the body; and _about_, from
_boda_, the first outward boundary. _Through_ or _thorough_ is the
Teutonic noun _thuruh_, meaning passage, gate, door. _From_ is the
Anglo-Saxon noun _frum_, beginning, source, author. He came _from
(beginning)_ Batavia. _If_ (formerly written _gif, give, gin_) is
the imperative of the Anglo-Saxon verb _gifan_, to give. I will
remain _if_ (_give_ or _grant that fact_) he will (_remain_.) _But_
comes from the Saxon verb _beon-utan_, to be-out. I informed no one
_but (be-out, leave-out)_ my brother.
This brief view of the subject, is sufficient to elucidate the
manner in which, according to Horne Tooke's principles, the ten
parts of speech are reduced to one. But I am, by no means, disposed
to concede, that this is the _true_ principle of classification; nor
that it is any more _philosophical_ or _rational_ than one which
allows a more practical division and arrangement of words. What has
been generally received as "philosophical grammar," appears to
possess no stronger claims to that imposing appellation than our
common, practical grammars. Query. Is not Mr. Murray's octavo
grammar more worthy the dignified title of a "Philosophical
Grammar," than Horne Tooke's "Diversions of Purley," or William S.
Cardell's treatises on language? What constitutes a _philosophical_
treatise, on this, or on any other subject? _Wherein_ is there a
display of philosophy in a speculative, etymological performance,
which attempts to develop and explain the elements and primitive
meaning of words by tracing them to their origin, _superior_ to the
philosophy employed in the development and illustration of the
principles by which we are governed in applying those words to their
legitimate purpose, namely, that of forming a correct and convenient
medium by means of which we can communicate our thoughts? Does
philosophy consist in ransacking the mouldy records of antiquity, in
order to _guess_ at the ancient construction and signification of
single words? or have such investigations, in reality, any thing to
do with _grammar_?
Admitting that all the words of our language include, in their
_original_ signification, the import of nouns or names, and yet, it
does not follow, that they _now_ possess no other powers, and, in
their combinations and connexions in sentences, are employed for no
other purpose, than _barely_ to _name objects_. The _fact_ of the
case is, that words are variously combined and applied, to answer
the distinct and diversified purposes of _naming_ objects,
_asserting_ truths, _pointing out_ and _limiting_ objects,
_attributing qualities_ to objects, _connecting_ objects, and so on;
and on this _fact_ is founded the _true philosophical principle of
the classification of words_. Hence, an arrangement of words into
classes according to this principle, followed by a development and
illustration of the principles and rules that regulate us in the
proper use and application of words in oral and written discourse,
appears to approximate as near to a true definition _of
philosophical grammar_, as any I am capable of giving.
_Nouns_, or the names of the objects of our perceptions, doubtless
constituted the original class of words; (if I may be allowed to
assume such a hypothesis as an _original_ class of words;) but the
ever-active principle of association, soon transformed nouns into
verbs, by making them, when employed in a particular manner,
expressive of affirmation. This same principle also operated in
appropriating names to the purpose of attributing qualities to other
names of objects; and in this way was constituted the class of words
called _adjectives_ or _attributes_. By the same principle were
formed all the other classes.
In the following exposition of English grammar on scientific
principles, I shall divide words into seven classes; _Nouns_ or
_Names, Verbs, Adjectives, Adnouns_, or _Attributes, Adverbs,
Propositions, Pronouns_, and _Conjunctions_ or _Connectives_.
For an explanation of the noun, refer to the body of the work.
* * * * *