Furthermore," says Ben Jonson, "the Adverbs more and most are added to the comparative and superlative degrees themselves, which should be before the positive."-As in Sir Thomas More

"Forasmuch as she saw the Cardinall more readier to depart then the remnant; For not only the high dignitie of the Civil Magistrate but the most basest handycrafts are holy, when they are directed to the honour of God."

"And this is a certaine kind of English Atticisme, or eloquent phrase of speech, imitating the manner of the most ancientest and finest Grecians, who, for more emphasis and vehemencies sake, used so to speake."

This "English atticisme," as Jonson calls it, is frequent in Shakspeare.

OF PRONOUNS.

In language, whether spoken or written, every conceivable portion of nature belongs to one or other of three divisions: It must either be that which speaks; that which is spoken to; or, that concerning which the speech is made. To the mind of man, all are either beings of consciousness, of sensation, or of memory. The I, the THOU, and the IT, constitute the whole of the individuals of the uniThese words are properly termed PERSONAL PRONOUNS; for they stand in the place of every noun or name; and from these all the other classes of pronouns are derived. It is, however, our present business to follow the course of the derivation of words without dwelling on the metaphysics of their origin.

verse.

In languages which have several variations in the noun, a particular termination is added when it denotes being subjected to the exertion of another. Thus Petrus and Maria are Latin nominatives or name, for Peter and Mary; if we say "Peter loves Mary," it is only from the one being placed before and the other after the verb loves, that we can distinguish the lover from the beloved; for, were we to say "Mary loves Peter," the two states would be exchanged. In the Latin," Petrus amat Mariam," the situation of the nouns is of no consequence. The relation of being the object of the verb is expressed by the change of the noun" Maria" to "Mariam"; and the sentence would be equally well understood though written "Mariam amat Petrus." The reciprocal phrase may be either" Maria amat Petrum," or Petrum amat Maria." This change in the noun is termed the ACCUSATIVE CASE [See To ACCUSE]; and sometimes, especially in English Grammars, the OBJECTIVE, because it designates the object towards which a transitive verb is directed.

Though English nouns have retained no case, except that part of the genitive which marks possession or property, a similarity to the Latin accusative is visible

in pronouns. He (or that male of whom we were speaking) may be the agent of certain actions; but when another agent appears in the sentence, and he becomes the patient or result, in fact when he ceases to be the nominative to the verb, the pronoun assumes a new Orthography and is written HIM; as, "He loved Mary" or "Mary loved him," which latter sentence would be perfectly intelligible though it were written "him Mary loved.”

Pronouns have also the possessive form, but in neither of the cases are the terminations completely regular. This, more than any other part of speech, is subjected to the anomalies of custom, the despotic Lawgiver of every language. In place of the word own, (which is added to the possessive case of nouns when the ownership is intended to be more precisely determined,) some of the pronouns have a double genitive affix. Thus her and my are the possessives of she and I; but hers and mine mark the owners in a distinctive manner, as might be done by the words her own and my own. In ordinary construction the simple possessive is placed before the noun to which it refers, while the double is separated by a verb. We say "her house" and "the house is hers;”—“ It is my horse" and "the horse is mine." My and mine, thy and thine, are however sometimes confounded, but their distinction is as evident as her and hers, or your and yours; and it is from their representing each two different words that the confusion has arisen. The possessives my, your, thy, &c. and indeed all Genitives, may, in a certain point of view, be regarded as adjectives. It is a quality of a noun that it belongs to another. The possessive pronouns, therefore, used as adjectives, were, in the Gothic and Saxon languages, subject to inflection; and they are the genitives of those adjectives that we have retained, and to which we shall here give the name of DOUBLE POSSESSIVES.

In the masculine singular, min and meina (my) were the Saxon and Gothic genitives of ic and ik, (I.) Again, min and meins were applied as adjectives, and had the secondary genitives mines and meinis. Thy and thine have been formed on a similar principle, as also our and ours; her and hers, &c. The Latin meus, tuus, and suus, &c. are adjectived-pronouns of a like kind, and differing from the genitives mei, tui, and sui. Unfortunately for my and thy their pronunciation does not readily coalesce with a succeeding vowel, which introduced the practice, less common now than formerly, ofinterjecting an n to avoid the hiatus, in the manner of the Greeks; but for the sake of uniformity, it is better, on all occasions, to leave to my and thy the undisturbed possession of the simple genitive.

We shall now proceed to give a tabular arrangement of those simple Pronouns which have forms of Declension; and, though the definitions of such words belong more properly to the body of the work, we shall serve ourselves with the facility of explanation which their joint exhibition presents.

6

The plural we and its compounds, in place of I, &c. are employed by Kings when addressing their subjects. The same language is also sometimes held by Orators and Authors. In the former case, a King may be supposed to represent the collective power of the nation; and in the latter the Orator and Author may be conjoined, in imagination, with the hearer and the reader. In the second person, a similar, but more general, variation occurs; neither the singular THOU, nor any of its compounds, is ever expressed in ordinary style. They belong solely to the solemn, or to the burlesque when it affects solemnity. It is the language of adoration and of poetry, while You, your, and yours, are in common use. YE for you in the Nominative plural is fast approaching to a similar usage, if it has not already attained it. Formerly YE for you was written in the accusative both singular and plural, but this practice is now in desuetude,

Beside the nominative, genitive, and accusative, already mentioned, a substantive or a pronoun may occupy other situations in a sentence. The action of the verb is directed upon the accusative, but there may also exist an object on whose account that action is exerted. In the Greek, Latin, and some of the modern languages, the state of the noun which denominates that object is designated by a particular termination. It is a case termed the DATIVE, from the Latin datus, given, because, in many instances the action is understood to give something, advantageous or otherwise, to the person in that state. Thus in the Latin "Dedit librum Petro," he gave the book to Peter, the word liber is put

in the accusative, librum, while Petrus is changed into Petro, the Dative case. Although they have no distinctive terminations, the cases are the same in English, and the Dative is marked by the preposition to. In pronouns the to, for, and other signs of the Dative state, are placed before the accusative; thus we say "he gave the book to me," "I bought the book for him," &c. Though the English language has no regulated Dative case, there is, nevertheless, a form of construction (not generally attended to) which in a great degree supplies its place. When two substantives, or pronouns, are relative to the same transitive verb, as Accusative and Dative, the latter is sufficiently marked, without a preposition, provided it be put immediately after the verb. Thus, we may write "he gave Peter the book," and "I bought my boy a book," instead of " he gave the book to Peter," and "I bought a book for my boy." "Bring me my horse," " pay them their wages, "" I wrote him a letter," &c. are everyday expressions of the same kind. Neither is this form of construction confined to the language of common life. Examples might be cited from our most approved writers.

This twofold method of expressing the Dative, by prepositive particles, or by position, is peculiarly advantageous. It gives always a choice with regard to the harmony, and often directs the emphasis to the most effective part of the

sentence.

deviations from grammatical General rules are difficult to The study of the pronouns

The analysis of sentences, so as to detect latent propriety, requires considerable critical acumen. form, and collected examples are easily forgotten. will be found particularly useful, by comparing their cases with the various states of the nouns, which are less obvious on account of their want of declension. We shall here give an instance of a very general error in Syntax which may be so corrected :— “I heard of my ship being lost." To discover in what case the word ship is to be understood in the sentence, let us change the noun to one of the masculine gender, "I heard of my brother being lost." If the word brother were supposed to be in the nominative, the assertion would be equivalent to " I heard of he being lost," which is obviously wrong. "I heard of him being lost would be equally incorrect; because the phrase " being lost"

would be thrown loose in the sentence, and might be connected with the pronoun I; as if it were said "I, being lost, heard of him." The meaning of the word lost would perhaps prevent this construction, but suppose it were said "I heard of him being married," the transposition "I, being married, heard of him," would show nothing of impropriety, and the speaker's meaning would be at least doubtful. The genitive only remains, and should, therefore, be written in all similar phrases. "I heard of his being lost;" "I heard of my brother's being lost ;" and "I heard of the ship's being lost." It was not simply of the ship or of my brother that I heard, but of the circumstance of their being lost.

We have said that Pronouns are Adjectives, or qualities,* but the paragraph requires explanation. It were better to compare them to Numerals, of which we can speak without regard to the things numbered. All Adjectives, when viewed abstractedly, may be considered as substantives, but they are of different species, and therefore not always comparable with one another. White has no relation to large. Colour and magnitude are incommensurable. It is otherwise with Numbers and with Pronouns. Three and twelve are qualities of any system of bodies that can be numbered; but, even in the abstract, they are capable of comparison,-the one is four times the other. In a similar manner, I and thou are not only, each, applicable to any person whatever; but they also have a relation between themselves,-of a speaker and a person spoken to. Neither numbers nor pronouns constitute complete conceptions until they are conjoined with material objects. They are shapeless spirits, ready to enter into any body whose form we wish them to assume.

The substantive SELF, with a slight variation of orthography, is common to all the Gothic languages. It represents, emphatically, the essence, the very being of which we speak. The French même (formerly mesme) takes the same part in that language; but, in some of its usages, is translated by even and same. The Latin ipse (Greek psè) is equivalent to self; and hence the common saying, when a person expects that the truth of an assertion should be granted upon his own authority, that it is a mere ipse dixit," he said it." When a speaker talks much of himself, we call him an EGOTIST, he is EGOTISTICAL, that is, he EGOTIZES, or discourses EGOTISTICALLY, and the practice is EGOTISM: all from the Latin ego, I; and we should not be sorry to see the words IPSEDIXITIST and IPSEDIXITISM thus naturalized, for they are certainly wanted.

Were we to hazard a conjecture, we should say that self (as well as its synonymes in other languages) has arisen from the duplication of some ancient form of the personal pronouns; but, be that as it may, it coalesces easily with

See page xxviii.