of words, no project can be more monstrous, than the attempt to confine this operation within the limits of the peculiar language, which is the object of enquiry. In our Greek Vocabularies, as the compilation of Hederic, &c. &c. the humble Philologist has soon arrived at the termination of his labours, as they relate to the derivations which are more immediately connected with the genius of the language. He will readily discover the composition of some words from known particles, and the formation of others by established analogies; but beyond these limits all is obscurity and confusion. If the lively Greek, the speaker and the writer of the language, were perchance capricious-negligent or forgetful -if in expressing portions of a similar idea, he sometimes recorded his feelings under the symbol x6, KB, and again under the form of x, CB, our Philologists are at once lost and confounded in their enquiries. This shade of a shade of difference (if I may so express it) is to them the Wall of Semiramis; through which no powers of mind can penetrate-which no force of intellect can break down. The kindred words, which the same ideas have produced, become at once remote and distant from each other, as creatures of another world; and all traces of their affinity are for ever obliterated. Even the change in the symbol of a breathing is able to derange the system of our Lexicographers; and the devices of their art grow feeble and inefficient before such formidable difficulties. In the writings of the Greek the idea of privation has been represented by the symbol a: In his mouth it is a fleeting breathing; and if perchance the recorder of this varying sound should unfortunately be no Etymologistif he should forget or be ignorant, that his word was a compound formed from this privative breathing, which was commonly represented by this privative symbol a; if, I say, he should think nothing about all this or care nothing about all this, and unwittingly record the breathing by E, 0, 1, W, XI, Ei, qi, (e, o, i, u, ai, ei, oi,) &c. &c. the word is again lost for ever to the Etymologist-It stands alone-It is derived from nothingHis a privativa has disappeared, and all his resources are exhausted.

Though

Though our Lexicographer is unable to see the things which do exist, he is singularly sagacious in discovering those which do not. He not only tells us from what source a word is really derived, but he likewise informs us from what source it ought to be derived. This precious idea exceeds all the specimens of his craft. For every future in now, (Eso) &c. he has a verb in w, (Eo,) from which in his conception it ought to be derived. His system is built on the hypothesis, that a Greek never ventured to open his mouth, when he had occasion to express a future action by the analogy Eso, till he had perfectly ascertained by the most diligent researches, that a verb in sw, (Eo) was already in existence, from which it ought to be derived. In what terms can I seriously reply to such an 'infinite mock' as this? It is true indeed that the Greeks talk in analogies, and it is equally certain that they cannot talk otherwise. It is true moreover that a race of words is to be found in the Greek language, in which (Eo) added to something signifies I do an action, and now, (Eso) added to the same, means I shall do the action (Diλ-tw, Diλ-now.;) as in our language a race of words exists, in which a term in its simpler state denotes the present, I love, and with the addition of d or ed, signifies the past, I loved; but do our children or do our men, when they are desirous of expressing a past action by the analogy of d or ed, stop to consider, whether a word is in existence, without the d or the ed, signifying the action in the present? They think nothing-they know nothing about the relation of the past or the future to the present. They feel only, that they have been accustomed to Eso and to Ed, (if I may so express myself,) when. they are desirous of denoting what they are to do, or what they have done. And this is all which they think or know about the matter:-This is all the analogy, which operates on the minds of those who form languages; and a more potent analogy, conducting to a more consummate regularity, cannot well be imagined. If the Being, who is accustomed to Eso, when he wishes to denote some future action, is likewise accustomed to Eo, when he expresses some action present, there will necessarily exist an

abundant

Man.

abundant race of words, in which he will be found to Eso and to Eo on the same occasion, or in representing the same idea; and hence it is, that a race of words would be generated, in which the future is formed, as the Grammarians would tell us, from the present, by changing Eo into Eso. With this process of formation in his head, the simple Grammarian is at once lost and confounded. Having established this necessary dependance of the future on the present, which his own jargon only has created; he is not satisfied with the safe possession of a word in Eso, till he has discovered a verb in Eo, from which it ought to be derived." In languages there are no anomalies--there can be no anomalies. cannot attempt to convey an idea, unless the words are accommodated to some order-form-or analogy, which before existed. The language of our children, in endeavouring to express their meaning, is constructed on the most scrupulous laws of the more general analogy; and if they are wrong, as we should call it, that is, if they offend against the common usage of the language, it is in those cases, where a less general analogy has operated in producing a race of words, which are not yet so familiar to their knowledge. I do not say that insulated words may not be found in every language, which we shall be unable to refer to any existing analogy; but these are the effects of change and accident, about which the speaker is equally indifferent as he was about the existence of these analogies. I must again repeat, that the Beings who have formed and who utter language, care nothing and think nothing about the anomalies or analogies with which it may abound:-Still however those Beings do not and cannot utter language without adopting words, which are related to some analogy; and the anomalies, which are said to exist, will be found only in the maxims of the Grammarian. Thus in Greek Orw and Hvey are both accommodated to the most familiar analogies of that language. In the Ow, (Oiso) the speaker does, what he has been accustomed to do in the expressing something future; and in the Hveyna, (Eenegka) he has the same form, which he has been used to adopt, when he expresses a

past

α

past action-the preceding » (ce) and final « (a;) and his terms are derived from a race of words in which the sounds of Ois or Enk prevail, signifying to bear-take, &c. In short, they belong to what, in the language of my hypothesis, are called the Elements 'S and ^NK, which the reader will find discussed in the succeeding pages (265. 495.) If however Oow and Hey (Oiso and Eenegka) are referred to the same system, and called the Future and the Aorist of Dew; then indeed. they are truly anomalies. But this, we perceive, is not an anomaly, for which the Grecks are answerable. They were totally unconscious of this system, and had formed these words according to the strict rules of an analogy, which was before impressed upon their minds. It is an anomaly, which exists only in the brain of the Grammarian, who has entangled himself, and others like himself, in the toils of his own gibberish. It is in learning this craft, that our poor boys are beaten to mummies by enraged Pedagogues; and the precious days of youth are passing away, which can never again be recalled or repaired. We may treat in the language of ridicule the inanity of the jargon; but emotions far different will be excited, when we reffect on the enormity of the abuse.

I have now unfolded the general principles, on which my Theory is established; and with respect to the various observations, which might be made on the changes of letters, and the modes by which they pass into each other; I shall reserve the discussion of these points, till I arrive at the examples, by which they are illustrated. The reader must be contented to acquire the knowledge of this subject by a patient investigation, of the examples themselves, from which he will gradually learn the stile -the manner-the genius (if I may so express it) of these mutations; and be himself enabled to apply the same principles with effect and success.. We have already seen, that different Radicals denoting the same object will each produce a series of words impregnated with the same train of similar ideas. It will be instantly understood, that the first attempt to

unfold a subject of this nature will be encumbered with difficulties, which on a more ample view of the question would be converted into the fullest evidence for the illustration of the Theory. If, for example, I had undertaken to develope the Element ^RT, and had been desirous of convincing the reader, that certain ideas were attached to it, as denoting the Earth, because in other Elements, TR, &c. by which the name of the Earth is represented, the same ideas were to be found; it is evident, that my illustrations must be necessarily imperfect, till the nature of those Elements had been fully discussed and unfolded. In such cases, which will perpetually occur, I must request from the patience and the justice of my reader, that he will suspend his judgment and repress his doubts, till more ample and expanded scenes are presented to his view. I have perhaps some claim on the confidence of the candid, when they consider the body of evidence, which I have adduced to illustrate the force of the Element CP; nor have I ventured to explain the sense of any Radical, which I had not examined with equal diligence, and, I trust, with equal

success.

If it should be asked why I have chosen to commence my work with an illustration of the Element CB; I must answer, that my enquiries into the subject of languages were first excited by considering the force of this Element; and I have accordingly conducted the mind of the reader through the same train of ideas, in which I was myself originally occupied. On again reviewing, with the most attentive consideration, the various portions of my subject, which might have been chosen for the spot, where I could best plant my foot to impose the first motion on this world of words, I can discover no point, which would have proved more favourable to my purpose. The consideration of the name for the EARTH is connected with a variety of important enquiries, which were but little adapted to the commencement of such a work. As I have before traced the progress of my ideas through the various stages of this enquiry, I