universal, so extreme, and such like, are therefore improper. The former is indeed common enough; but it is easy to see, as it has been already remarked, that whatever is universal cannot be increased or diminished; and that, what is less than universal, cannot be characterized by that epithet. The phrase so universal implies a gradation in universality, and that something is less so than another; which is evidently impossible.

It has been questioned, whether prior, superior, ulterior, exterior, and several others, which have the form of the Latin Comparative, should be deemed Comparatives. I am inclined to think, they ought not, for these reasons, 1st. They have not the form of the English Comparative; 2dly. They are never followed by than, which uniformly accompanies the English Comparative, when the subjects are opposed to each other, or referred to different classes; 3dly. It is not to be conceived, that every Adjective, which implies comparison, is therefore a Comparative or Superlative, otherwise preferable (better than) previous (prior to) might be deemed Comparatives; 4thly. Many of these have truly a positive meaning, not implying an excess of the quality, but merely the quality, as opposed to its contrary. The interior means simply the inside, as opposed to the exterior or outside; the anterior, "the one before," opposed to posterior, "the one behind."*

* Mr. Grant, the author of a very valuable work on Latiu

I dismiss this article with observing, that the signification of the positive is sometimes lessened by the termination ish; as, white, whitish; black, blackish. Johnson remarks, that the Adjective in this form may be considered as in a state of comparison; it may properly be called a Diminutive.

Grammar, has offered some judicious observations on this subject in vol. 25. of the Monthly Magazine. His Institutes of Latin Grammar, I would recommend to the perusal of every classical student.

CHAP, V.

Of the Verb.

A VERB has been defined to be that part of

66

speech, which signifies to be, to do, or to suffer;" or more correctly, that part of speech, which predicates some action, passion, or state of its subject," as, "I strike, I am wounded, I stand." Its essence consists in affirmation, and by this property it is distinguished from every other part of speech. The Adjective expresses an accident, quality, or property of a thing in concreto; that is, when joined to the name of a substance, it expresses that substance, as accompanied by some attribute: in other words, it limits a generic name, confining it to that part of the kind, which possesses the character, which the attributive specifies; but it affirms nothing. Thus, if we say, " a "wise man," which is equivalent to "a man with," or join wisdom," there is no affirmation; an individual is singied from a species, under the character of wisdom, but nothing is asserted of this individual. If we say," the man is wise," there is something affirmed of the man, and the affirma

tion is expressed by is. If the attribute and the assertion be combined in the expression, as in Latin vir sapit, it is obvious, that the essence of the verb consists, not in denoting the attribute wisdom, but in affirming that quality, as belonging to the subject; for, if you cancel the assertion, the verb is immediately converted into an adjective, and the expression becomes vir sapiens, a wise man.

The simplest of all verbs is that, which the Grecks called a verb of existence, namely, the verb to be. This verb frequently denotes pure affirmation, as, "God is good;" where the verb, or copula, as it has been termed, serves to predicate of the Deity, the attribute denoted by the following word. Hence, as it expresses mere affirmation, the Latins called it a Substantive Verb, in contradistinction to those verbs, which, with an attribute, denote assertion, and were called by some Adjective Verbs.

Sometimes it predicates pure or absolute existence, as “God is," that is, God exists." In the

"We

following example it occurs in both senses. "believe that thou art, and that thou art the re"warder of them, who diligently seek thee."

As Nouns denote the subjects of our discourse, so Verbs predicate their accidents, or properties. The former are the names of things, the latter what we say concerning them. These two, therefore, must be the only essential parts of speech ; for to mental communication nothing else can be

indispensably requisite, than to name the subject of our thoughts, and to express our sentiments of its attributes or properties. And, as the verb essentially expresses affirmation, without which there could be no communication of sentiment, it has been hence considered as the principal part of speech, and was therefore called, by the ancient grammarians, verb, or the word, by way of eminence. The noun, however, is unquestionably of earlier origin. To assign names to surrounding objects would be the first care of barbarous nations; their next essay would be to express their most common actions, or states of being. This indeed is the order of nature-the progress of intellect.

66

66

Mr. Tooke observes, that "the Verb does not

imply any assertion, and that no single word

"" can. Till one single thing," says he, " can "be found to be a couple, one single word cannot "make an assertion or affirmation; for there is join

ing in that operation, and there can be no junc"tion of one thing." This theory he illustrates by the tense ilo, which he resolves thus:

The first of each triad are the simple verbs, equi

66

The third are the

valent to go." The second are the verbs, Wol, Vol, Boux, denoting "will." pronouns of the first person.

Whatever opinion