20. Of the formation of prepositions.

We should remember, in considering the subject of artificial language, that it was originally framed by comparatively artless men, and that its different parts appeared, not in obedience to a sort of prophetic invention merely, but as they were called for by an urgent necessity. There is good reason to suppose, in view of the considerations already advanced, that the earliest denominations or classes of speech were those which were subsequently called verbs and common nouns. But soon there were framed other parts or classes of speech, that were not permanently included under the names of verbs and appellatives, but in time assumed a distinct denomination. And this was the case not only with adjectives, but with prepositions.

Prepositions are the names of real objects, actions, attributes, and relations, not less than the parts of speech from which they are, in a great measure, derived. The preposition WITH, for instance, is asserted by etymologists to have been originally the imperative mode of a Saxon verb, which means to unite or join. The sun with his rays enlightens and warms the earth; that is, the sun, JOIN his rays, enlightens, &c. In like manner, the preposition through is said to have been originally the Teutonic substantive THURUH, meaning a door, gate, or passage. The beams of the sun pass through the air; that is, the beams of the sun pass; the air is their door or passage-way. The preposition from is the Anglo-Saxon FRUM, which means beginning or origin. In the proposition, The rays came from the sun, we have the two distinct propositions, viz., the rays came, and the sun their beginning or source. The lamp falls from the ceiling; that is, the lamp falls; the ceiling is its beginning, or the place where the falling begins.*

§ 21. Of the origin and original import of conjunctions.

The general doctrine that nouns were first formed, afterward verbs, and that these were the sources of other classes of words, is strengthened by what we know in respect to that species of connectives called conjunctions.

* See this subject more fully considered in the EPEA PTEROENTA or Diversions of Purley of Horne Tooke.

1

The conjunction IF was originally a verb in the imperative mode, viz., GIF, the imperative of the Saxon word GIFAN, which is the same with the modern English infinitive TO GIVE. If we consider the original import of the words in this sentence, viz., If ye love me, ye will keep my commandments, it will stand thus: Give or grant this, viz., ye love me, ye will keep my commandments.

The conjunctions UNLESS, LEST, and ELSE, are derivatives from the Saxon verb LESAN, to dismiss. The meaning conveyed in this sentence, viz., Unless ye believe, ye shall not understand, may be thus analyzed: Dismiss, ye believe (the circumstance of belief being out of the way), ye shall not understand.

The conjunction THOUGH was originally a verb in the imperative, from the Saxon THAFIAN, meaning to grant or allow. The word was originally THAF or THOF, and is thus often pronounced by the people in some parts of England to this day. This sentence, Though he slay me, I will trust in him, may be thus explained, in conformity with the etymological derivation: Allow, grant this, he will slay me, I will trust in him.

◊ 22. Further remarks on the meaning of conjunctions and other particles. Observations similar to those which have been made in reference to conjunctions and prepositions, will apply to other subordinate parts of speech (which, including conjunctions and prepositions, are sometimes known under the name of particles). Accordingly, it will be found, on examination, that many adverbs were originally either nouns, verbs, or the participles of verbs. But this inquiry, interesting and important as it unquestionably is, cannot be further prosecuted here. It is proper, however, to guard the foregoing views by saying, that when a language is fully formed and settled upon, we would not advise a confident and indiscriminate reference to the etymology of particles, in order to determine their present significancy, although in many cases, as in those mentioned in the preceding section, such a reference throws light upon them. Whatever particles may have been at first, whether nouns or verbs, or whatever direct and positive significance they may have once had, they are at last, when the

language is fully formed, evidently without meaning, except so far as they are connected with other words.

The proper use of them seems to be, to express the states of our mind as we pass from one clause of a sentence to another, or from one proposition to another; also the restriction, distinction, and opposition of our thoughts. Admitting, then, that, in some instances, we can derive considerable aid from etymology, the surest method of ascertaining the meaning of this class of words is by observing the operations of our own minds as we connect together our ideas in clauses, sentences, and consecutive propositions.

§ 23. Of the origin of particular or proper names.

spe

Although general names or appellatives, as appeared in § 13, were first applied to particular objects, as soon as they became general and were employed to denote classes of objects, they were no longer of use in the cification of individuals. Their utility in that respect necessarily ceased. Hence arose the class of substances or nouns called particular or proper names, designed especially to indicate individual objects. In ascertaining to what objects terms of this kind shall be assigned, it can only be said that we give proper names to such things as we have frequent and urgent occasion to mention; no other rule can readily be laid down.-We accordingly give particular names to rivers, lakes, cataracts, mountains, because we have frequent occasion to speak of them individually; of the Mississippi, the La Plata, the Alps, and the Apennines. There is still greater reason why we should give names of this sort to our fellow-beings, with whom we constantly associate, and on whom our happiness is in no small degree dependant. But the assignation of proper names is far from being limited to men, or to rivers, or to mountains, or to cataracts. We continually meet with them.-The merchant gives names to his vessels, the farmer to his oxen, the hunter to his dogs, the jockey to his horses, on the same principles and for the same reason that one river is called Ganges and another Danube, and that one man is called John and another William.

24. Principle of selection and significancy of proper names.

But a question arises, On what principle are the names themselves selected? Proper names undoubtedly were at first expressive of some qualities or events pertaining to the individuals or objects to which they were applied. Thus, in the Hebrew, certainly one of the most ancient of languages, the name Benjamin signifies a favourite or prosperous son; Joshua intimates help or deliverance; Samuel implies a disposition to hear or obey God; MoSES, although perhaps not originally a Hebrew word, is supposed to denote à person drawn from the waters.

In the Gaelic language, Cairbar, the strong man ; Morna, the well-beloved; Cathmor, great in battle; and a multitude of other significant names might be referred to, as illustrating and confirming this view.

In the Latin, the celebrated name of Brutus alludes to the fact that Lucius Junius acted the assumed part of a brutish or foolish person in order to conceal his patriotic designs. The renowned cognomen of Coriolanus was first given in reference to the assault of Corioli by a Roman soldier. The name of Publicola expressed the attachment of the first individual who bore it to the rights and interests of the people. Every reader of Roman history knows what splendid associations of an historical kind are connected with the names of Capitolinus and Africanus. And names were not only given by the Romans in reference to personal achievements and historical events, but as expressive of mental qualities, occupations, and situations in life. Accordingly, one man is called Egerius for his poverty; another is called Serranus in allusion to his business as a cultivator of the soil; another is called Cato out of regard to his wisdom.

25. Of the origin and significancy of the names of places. The names of places also have a meaning; it is sometimes a direct and positive significancy, at others only an allusion to historical facts. There is ample reason for believing that this is true almost without exception, although the original import is now, in many cases, lost.

The ancient Hebrews came to a mountainous ridge; they saw that it was plentifully watered, and that it was VOL. II.-P P

clothed, even to its summit, with oaks and firs, with laurels and olives; and they named it Mount Carmel, which means in the Hebrew tongue the mount of the garden of God. An early Christian teacher, according to the traditions of the country, having been put to death on a certain hill, it was thence called Montmartre; the name, to this day, of a celebrated eminence in the neighbourhood of Paris. When Columbus entered a capacious and safe harbour, with a rich and beautiful surrounding country, he called the place Puerto Bello, by a name descriptive of its predominant features. And so of instances without number.

On this subject a careful examination of the various dialects of the North American Savages would undoubtedly throw light. The meaning of very many proper names has already been ascertained, with a greater or less degree of probability, by careful inquirers into those languages. A company of Indians, seated on the banks of a river, and seeing it opposed and violently driven in different directions by the projecting rocks, would naturally enough call it the Kenaway, which means, in the Shawanese tongue, the river of whirlpools. Among many other similar instances, the words Mississippi and Niagara, which have no meaning for an Anglo-American, are accurately descriptive in the Aboriginal dialects; the former signifying the great river, and the latter the thunder of waters.

CHAPTER III.

WRITTEN SIGNS.

26. Of the causes which led to the formation of written signs. THE formation of oral language preceded that of WRITTEN language, by which we understand those artificial signs which are addressed to the eye instead of the ear. With all the advantages of oral language, men could not long be insensible to the great convenience of a mode of