"The master"s slave." Master"s is in the possessive case, and _governed_ by slave! If grammars are true there can be no need of abolition societies, unless it is to look after the master and see that he is not abused. The rider"s horse; the captain"s ship; the general"s army; the governor"s cat; the king"s subject. How false it would be to teach scholars the idea of _property_ and _government_ in such cases. The _teacher"s scholars_ should never learn that by virtue of their grammars, or the _apostrophe_ and letter _s_, they have a right to _govern_ their teachers; nor the mother"s son, to govern his mother. Our merchants would dislike exceedingly to have the _ladies_ understand them to signify by their advertis.e.m.e.nts that the "ladies" merino shawls, the ladies"s bonnets and lace wrought veils, the ladies" gloves and elegant Thibet, silk and challa dresses, were the _property_ of the ladies; for in that case they might claim or _possess_ themselves of their _property_, and no longer trouble the merchant with the care of it.
"Peter"s wife"s mother lay sick of a fever." "_His_ physician said that _his_ disease would require _his_ utmost skill to defeat _its_ progress in _his_ limbs." Phrases like these are constantly occurring, which can not be explained intelligibly by the existing grammars. In fact, the words said to be nouns in the possessive case, have changed their character, by use, from nouns to adjectives, or definitive words, and should thus be cla.s.sed. Russia iron, Holland gin, China ware, American people, the Washington tavern, Lafayette house, Astor house, Hudson river, (formerly Hudson"s,) Baffin"s bay, Van Dieman"s land, John street, Harper"s ferry, Hill"s bridge, a paper book, a bound book, a red book, John"s book--one which John is known to use, it may be a borrowed one, but generally known as some way connected with him,--Rev. Mr.
Smith"s church, St. John"s church, Grace church, Murray"s grammar; not the property nor in the possession of Lindley Murray, neither does it _govern him_; for he has gone to speak a purer language than he taught on earth. It is mine. I bought it, have possessed it these ten years; but, thank fortune, am little _governed_ by it. But more on this point when we come to the proper place. What I have said, will serve as a hint, which will enable you to see the impropriety of adopting the "possessive case."
It may be said that more cases are employed in other languages. That is a poor reason why we should break the barriers of natural language.
Beside, I know not how we should decide by that rule, for none of them have a _case_ that will compare with the English possessive. The genitive of the French, Latin, or Greek, will apply in only a few respects. The former has _three_, the latter five, and the Latin six cases, neither of which correspond with the possessive, as explained by Murray and his satellites. We should be slow to adopt into our language an idiom which does not belong to it, and compel learners to make distinctions where none exist. It is an easy matter to tell children that the apostrophe and letter _s_ marks the possessive case; but when they ask the difference in the meaning between the use of the noun and those which all admit are adjectives, it will be no indifferent task to satisfy them. What is the difference in the construction of language or the sense conveyed, between Hudson"_s_ river, and _Hudson_ river?
Davis"s straits, or Ba.s.s straits? St. John"s church, or Episcopal church? the sun"s beams, or sun shine? In all cases these words are used to define the succeeding noun. They regard "property or possession,"
only when attending circ.u.mstances, altogether foreign from any quality in the form or meaning of the word itself, are so combined as to give it that import. And in such cases, we retain these words as adjectives, long after the property has pa.s.sed from the hands of the persons who gave it a name. _Field"s_ point, _Fuller"s_ rocks, _Fisher"s_ island, _Fulton"s_ invention, will long be retained after those whose names were given to distinguish these things, have slept with their fathers and been forgotten. Blannerha.s.sett"s Island, long since ceased to be his property or tranquil possession, by confiscation; but it will retain its specific name, till the inundations of the Ohio"s waters shall have washed it away and left not a wreck behind.
The distinctions I have made in the positions of nouns, will be clearly understood when we come to the verbs. A few remarks upon p.r.o.nouns will close the present lecture.
p.r.o.nOUNS.
p.r.o.nouns are such as the word indicates. _Pro_ is the latin word _for_; pro-nomen, _for nouns_. They are words, originally nouns, used specifically _for_ other nouns, to avoid the too frequent repet.i.tion of the same words; as, Washington was the father of his country; _he_ was a valiant officer. _We_ ought to respect _him_. The word _we_, stands for the speaker and all present, and saves the trouble of naming them; _he_ and _him_, stand for Washington, to avoid the monotony which would be produced by a recurrence of his name.
p.r.o.nouns are all of one kind, and few in number. I will give you a list of them in their respective positions.
_Agents._ _Objects._ { 1st person, I, me, { 2d " thou, thee, _Singular_ { 3d " mas. { he, him, { " fem. { she, her, { it, it.
{ 1st person, we, us, _Plural_ { 2d " ye, or you, you, { 3d " they, them, who, whom.
The two last may be used in either person, number, or gender.
The frequent use of these words render them very important, in the elegant and rapid use of language. They are so short, and their sound so soft and easy, that the frequency of their recurrence does not mar the beauty of a sentence, but saves us from the redundancy of other words.
They are subst.i.tuted only when there is little danger of mistaking the nouns for which they stand. They are, however, sometimes used in a very broad sense; as, "_they say_ it is so;" meaning no particular persons, but the general sentiment. _It_ frequently takes the lead of a sentence, and the thing represented by it comes after; as, "It is currently reported, that things were thus and so." Here _it_ represents the single idea which is afterward stated at length. "_It_ is so." "_It_ may be that the nations will be destroyed by wars, earthquakes, and famines."
But more of this when we come to speak of the composition of sentences.
The words now cla.s.sed as p.r.o.nouns were originally _names_ of things, but in this character they have long been obsolete. They are now used only in their secondary character as the representatives of other words. The word _he_, for instance, signified originally _to breathe_. It was applied to the living beings who inhaled air. It occurs with little change in the various languages of Europe, ancient and modern, till at length it is applied to the male agent which lives and acts. The word _her_ means _light_, but is specifically applied to females which are the objects of action.
Was it in accordance with the design of these lectures, it would give me pleasure to go into a minute examination of the origin, changes and meaning of these words till they came to be applied as specific words of exceeding limited character. Most of them might be traced thro all the languages of Europe; the Arabic, Persic, Arminian, Chaldean, Hebrew, and, for ought I know, all the languages of Asia. But as they are now admitted a peculiar position in the expression of thought from which they never vary; and as we are contending about philosophic principles rather than verbal criticisms, I shall forbear a further consideration of these words.
In the proper place I shall consider those words formerly called "Adjective p.r.o.nouns," "p.r.o.noun Adjectives," or "p.r.o.nominal Adjectives,"
to suit the varying whims of those grammar makers, who desired to show off a speck of improvement in their "simplifying" works without ever having a new idea to express. It is a query in some minds whether the seventy-two "simplifiers" and "improvers" of Murray"s grammar ever had any distinct notions in their heads which they did not obtain from the very man, who, it would seem by their conduct, was unable to explain his own meaning.
LECTURE VI.
ON ADJECTIVES.
Definition of adjectives.--General character.--Derivation.--How understood.--Defining and describing.--Meaning changes to suit the noun.--Too numerous.--Derived from nouns.--Nouns and verbs made from adjectives.--Foreign adjectives.--A general list.--Difficult to be understood.--An example.--Often superfluous.--Derived from verbs.--Participles.--Some prepositions.--Meaning unknown.--With.-- In.--Out.--Of.
The most important sub-division of words is the cla.s.s called Adjectives, which we propose to notice this evening. _Adjective_ signifies _added_ or _joined to_. We employ the term in grammar to designate that cla.s.s of words which are _added to nouns to define or describe them_. In doing this, we strictly adhere to the principles we have already advanced, and do not deviate from the laws of nature, as developed in the regulation of speech.
In speaking of things, we had occasion to observe that the mind not only conceived ideas of things, but of their properties; as, the hardness of flint; the heat of fire; and that we spoke of one thing in reference to another. We come now to consider this subject more at large.
In the use of language the mind first rests on the thing which is present before it, or the word which represents the idea of that thing.
Next it observes the changes and att.i.tudes of these things. Thirdly, it conceives ideas of their qualities and relations to other things. The first use of these words is to name things. This we call _nouns_. The second is to express their actions. This we call _verbs_. The last is to define or describe things. This we call _adjectives_. There is a great similarity between the words used to name things and to express their actions; as, builders build buildings; singers sing songs; writers write writings; painters paint paintings. In the popular use of language we vary these words to avoid the monotony and give pleasantness and variety. We say builders _erect_ houses, barns, and other buildings; singers perform pieces of music; musicians play tunes; the choir sing psalm tunes; artists paint pictures.
From these two cla.s.ses a third is derived which partakes somewhat of the nature of both, and yet from its secondary use, it has obtained a distinctive character, and as such is allowed a separate position among the cla.s.ses of words.
It might perhaps appear more in order to pa.s.s the consideration of adjectives till we have noticed the character and use of verbs, from which an important portion of them is derived. But as they are used in connexion with nouns, and as the character they borrow from the verb will be readily understood, I have preferred to retain the old arrangement, and consider them in this place.
_Adjectives are words added to nouns to define or describe them._ They are derived either, 1st, from nouns; as, _window_ gla.s.s, _gla.s.s_ window, a stone house, building stone, maple sugar, sugar cane; or, 2d, from verbs; as, a _written_ paper, a _printed_ book, a _painted_ house, a _writing_ desk. In the first case we employ one noun, or the name of one thing, to define another, thus giving it a secondary use. A _gla.s.s_ window is one made of gla.s.s, and not of any thing else. It is neither a _board_ window, nor a _paper_ window. _Maple_ sugar is not _cane_ sugar, nor _beet_ sugar, nor _mola.s.ses_ sugar; but it may be _brown_ sugar, if it has been browned, or _white_ if it has been whit_ed_ or whit_ened_. In this case, you at once perceive the correctness of our second proposition, in the derivation of adjectives from verbs, by which we describe a thing in reference to its condition, in some way affected by the operation of a prior action. A _printed_ book is one on which the action of printing has been performed. A _written_ book differs from the former, in as much as its appearance was produced by writing and not by printing.
In the definition or description of things, whatever is best understood is employed as a definitive or descriptive term, and is attached to the object to make known its properties and relations. Speaking of nations, if we desire to distinguish some from others, we choose the words supposed to be best known, and talk of European, African, American, or Indian nations; northern, southern, eastern, or western nations. These last words are used in reference to their relative position, and may be variously understood; for we speak of the northern, eastern, western, and southern nations of Europe, of Africa, and the world.
Again, we read of civiliz_ed_, half-civilized, and barbarous nations; learned, unlearned, ignorant, and enlightened; rich, powerful, enterprising, respected, ancient or modern, christian, mahomedan or pagan. In these, and a thousand similar cases, we decide the meaning, not alone from the word employed as an adjective, but from the subject of remark; for, were we to attach the same meaning to the same word, wherever used, we could not receive correct or definite impressions from the language of others--our inferences would be the most monstrous. A _great_ mountain and a _great_ pin, a _great_ continent and a _great_ farm, a _great_ ocean and a _great_ pond, a _great_ grammar and a _great_ scholar, refer to things of very different dimensions and character; or, as Mr. Murray would say, "_qualities_." A mountain is great by comparison with other mountains; and a pin, compared with other pins, may be very large--exceeding great--and yet fall very far short of the size of a very small mountain. A _small_ man may be a _great_ scholar, and a rich neighbor a poor friend. A sweet flower is often very bitter to the taste. A _good_ horse would make a _bad_ dinner, but _false_ grammar can never make _true_ philologists.
All words are to be understood according to their use. Their meaning can be determined in no other way. Many words change their forms to express their relations, but fewer in our language than in most others, ancient or modern. Other words remain the same, or nearly so, in every position; noun, adjective, or verb, agent or object, past or present. To determine whether a word is an adjective, first ascertain whether it names a thing, defines or describes it, or expresses its action, and you will never be at a loss to know to what cla.s.s it belongs.
The business of adjectives is twofold, and they may be distinguished by the appellations of _defining_ or _describing_ adjectives. This distinction is in many cases unimportant; in others it is quite essential. The same word in one case may _define_, in others _describe_ the object, and occasionally do both, for we often specify things by their descriptions. The learner has only to ascertain the meaning and use of the adjective to decide whether it defines or describes the subject of remark. If it is employed to distinguish one thing from the general ma.s.s, or one cla.s.s from other cla.s.ses, it has the former character; but after such thing is pointed out, if it is used to give a description of its character or properties, its character is different, and should be so understood and explained.
_Defining adjectives_ are used to _point out_, specify or distinguish certain things from others of their kind, or one sort from other sorts, and answer to the questions _which_, _what_, _how many_, or _how much_.
_Describing adjectives_ express the character and qualities of things, and give a more full and distinct knowledge than was before possessed.
In a case before mentioned, we spoke of the "Indian nations." The word _Indian_ was chosen to specify or define what nations were alluded to.
But all may not decide alike in this case. Some may think we meant the aborigines of America; others, that the southern nations of Asia were referred to. This difficulty originates in a misapprehension of the definitive word chosen. India was early known as the name of the south part of Asia, and the people there, were called Indians. When Columbus discovered the new world, supposing he had reached the country of India, which had long been sought by a voyage round the coast of Africa, he named it India, and the people Indians. But when the mistake was discovered, and the truth fully known, instead of effecting a change in the name already very generally understood, and in common use, another word was chosen to distinguish between countries so opposite and _West_ India became the word to distinguish the newly discovered islands; and as India was little better known in Europe at that time, instead of retaining their old name unaltered, another word was prefixed, and they called it _East_ India. When, therefore, we desire to be definite, we retain these words, and say, East Indians and West Indians. Without this distinction, we should understand the native people of our own country; but in Europe, Asia, and Africa, they would think we alluded to those in Asia. So with all other adjectives which are not understood. _Indian_, as an adjective, may also be employed to _describe_ the character and condition of the aborigines. We talk of an indian temper, indian looks, indian blankets, furs, &c.
In writing and conversation we should employ words to explain, to define and describe, which are better understood than those things of which we speak. The pedantry of some modern writers in this respect is ridiculous. Not satisfied to use plain terms which every body can understand, they hunt the dictionaries from alpha to omega, and not unfrequently overleap the "king"s english," and ransack other languages to find an unheard of word, or a list of adjectives never before arranged together, in so nice a manner, so that their ideas are lost to the common reader, if not to themselves. This fault may be alleged against too many of our public speakers, as well as the affected gentry of the land. They are like Shakspeare"s Gratiano, "who speaks an infinite deal of nothing, more than any man in all Venice; his reasons are as two grains of wheat hid in two bushels of chaff: you shall seek all day ere you find them; and, when you have found them, they are not worth the search." Such sentences remind us of the painting of the young artist who drew the form of an animal, but apprehensive that some might mistake it, wrote under it, "_This is a horse._"
In forming our notions of what is signified by an adjective, the mind should pause to determine the meaning of such word when used as a distinct name for some object, in order to determine the import of it in this new capacity. A _tallow_ candle is one made of a substance called tallow, and is employed to distinguish it from wax or spermaceti candles. The adjective in this case, names the article of which the candle is made, and is thus a noun, but, as we are not speaking of tallow, but of candles, we place it in a new relation, and give it a new grammatical character. But you will perceive the correctness of a former a.s.sertion, that all words may be reduced to two cla.s.ses, and that adjectives are derived from nouns or verbs.
But you may inquire if there are not some adjectives in use which have no corresponding verb or noun from which they are derived. There are many words in our language which in certain uses have become obsolete, but are retained in others. We now use some words as verbs which originally were known only as nouns, and others as nouns which are unknown as verbs. We also put a new construction upon words and make nouns, verbs and adjectives promiscuously and with little regard to rule or propriety. Words at one time unknown become familiar by use, and others are laid aside for those more new or fashionable. These facts are so obvious that I shall be excused from extending my remarks to any great length. But I will give an example which will serve as a clew to the whole. Take the word _happy_, long known only as an adjective.
Instead of following this word _back_ to its primitive use and deriving it directly from its noun, or as a past participle, such as it is in truth, we have gone _forward_ and made from it the noun _happiness_, and, in more modern days, are using the verb _happify_, a word, by the way, in common use, but which has not yet been honored with a place in our dictionaries; altho Mr. Webster has given us, as he says, the _unauthorised_ (un-author-ised) word "_happifying_." Perhaps he had never heard or read some of our greatest savans, who, if not the authors, employ the word _happify_ very frequently in the pulpit and halls of legislation, and at the bar, as well as in common parlance.
_Happy_ is the past participle of the verb _to hap_, or, as afterwards used, with a nice shade of change in the meaning, _to happen_. It means _happied_, or made happy by those favorable circ.u.mstances which have _happened_ to us. Whoever will read our old writers no further back than Shakspeare, will at once see the use and changes of this word. They will find it in all its forms, simple and compound, as a verb, noun, and adjective. "It may _hap_ that he will come." It happened as I was going that I found my lost child, and was thereby made quite happy. The man desired to _hap_pify himself and family without much labor, so he engaged in speculation; and _hap_pily he was not so _hap_less in his pursuit of _hap_piness as often _hap_pens to such _hap_-hazard fellows, for he soon became very _hap_py with a moderate fortune.
But to the question. There are many adjectives in our language which are borrowed from foreign words. Instead of _adjectiving_ our own nouns we go to our neighbors and _adjective_ and anglicise [english-ise] their words, and adopt the pampered urchins into our own family and call them our favorites. It is no wonder that they often appear aukward and unfamiliar, and that our children are slow in forming an intimate acquaintance with them. You are here favored with a short list of these words which will serve as examples, and enable you to comprehend my meaning and apply it in future use. Some of them are regularly used as adjectives, with or without change; others are not.
ENGLISH NOUNS. FOREIGN ADJECTIVES.
Alone Sole, solitary Alms Eleemosynary Age Primeval Belief Credulous Blame Culpable Breast Pectoral Being Essential Bosom Graminal, sinuous Boy, boyish Puerile Blood, b.l.o.o.d.y Sanguinary, sanguine Burden Onerous Beginning Initial Boundary Conterminous Brother Fraternal Bowels Visceral Body Corporeal Birth Natal, native Calf Vituline Carca.s.s Cadaverous Cat Feline Cow Vaccine Country Rural, rustic Church Ecclesiastical Death Mortal Dog Canine Day Diurnal, meridian, ephemeral Disease Morbid East Oriental Egg Oval Ear Auricular Eye Ocular Flesh Carnal, carnivorous Father Paternal Field Agrarian Flock Gregarious Foe Hostile Fear Timorous, timid Finger Digital Flattery Adulatory Fire Igneous Faith Fiducial Foot Pedal Groin Inguinal Guardian Tutelar Gla.s.s Vitreous Grape Uveous Grief Dolorous Gain Lucrative Help Auxiliary Heart Cordial, cardiac Hire Stipendiary Hurt Noxious Hatred Odious Health Salutary, salubrious Head Capital, chief Ice Glacial Island Insular King Regal, royal Kitchen Culinary Life Vital, vivid, vivarious Lungs Pulmonary Lip l.a.b.i.al Leg Crural, isosceles Light Lucid, luminous Love Amorous l.u.s.t Libidinous Law Legal, loyal Mother Maternal Money Pecuniary Mixture Promiscuous, miscellaneous Moon Lunar, sublunary Mouth Oral Marrow Medulary Mind Mental Man Virile, male, human, masculine Milk Lacteal Meal Ferinaceous Nose Nasal Navel Umbilical Night Nocturnal, equinoctial Noise Obstreperous One First Parish Parochial People Popular, populous, public, epidemical, endemical Point Punctual Pride Superb, haughty Plenty Copious Pitch Bituminous Priest Sacerdotal Rival Emulous Root Radical Ring Annular Reason Rational Revenge Vindictive Rule Regular Speech Loquacious, garrulous, eloquent Smell Olfactory Sight Visual, optic, perspicuous, conspicuous Side Lateral, collateral Skin Cutaneous Spittle Salivial Shoulder Humeral Shepherd Pastoral Sea Marine, maritime Share Literal Sun Solar Star Astral, sideral, stellar Sunday Dominical Spring Vernal Summer Estival Seed Seminal Ship Naval, nautical Sh.e.l.l Testaceous Sleep Soporiferous Strength Robust Sweat Sudorific Step Gradual Sole Venal Two Second Treaty Federal Trifle Nugatory Tax Fiscal Time Temporal, chronical Town Oppidan Thanks Gratuitous Theft Furtive Threat Minatory Treachery Insidious Thing Real Throat Jugular, gutteral Taste Insipid Thought Pensive Thigh Femoral Tooth Dental Tear Lachrymal Vessel Vascular World Mundane Wood Sylvan, savage Way Devious, obvious, impervious, trivial Worm Vermicular Whale Cutaceous Wife Uxorious Word Verbal, verbose Weak Hebdomadal Wall Mural Will Voluntary, spontaneous Winter Brumal Wound Vulnerary West Occidental War Martial Women Feminine, female, effeminate Year Annual, anniversary, perennial, triennial
Such are some of the adjectives introduced into our language from other nations. The list will enable you to discover that when we have no adjective of our own to correspond with the noun, we borrow from our neighbors an adjective derived from one of their nouns, to which we give an english termination. For example:
_English Noun._ _Latin Noun._ _Adjective._
Boy Puer Puerile Grief Dolor Dolorous Thought Pensa Pensive Wife Uxor Uxorious Word Verb.u.m Verbal, verbose Year Annum Annual Body Corpus Corporeal Head Caput Capital Church Ekklesia (_Greek_) Ecclesiastical King Roi (_French_) Royal Law Loi " Loyal
It is exceedingly difficult to understand the adjectives of many nouns with which we are familiar, from the fact above stated, that they are derived from other languages, and not our own. The most thoro scholars have found this task no easy affair. Most grammarians have let it pa.s.s un.o.bserved; but every person has seen the necessity of some explanation upon this point, to afford a means of ascertaining the etymological derivation and meaning of these words. I would here enter farther into this subject, but I am reminded that I am surpa.s.sing the limits set me for this course of lectures.
The attention I have bestowed on this part of the present subject, will not be construed into a mere verbal criticism. It has been adopted to show you how, in the definition or description of things, the mind clings to one thing to gain some information concerning another. When we find a thing unlike any thing else we have ever known, in form, in size, in color, in every thing; we should find it a difficult task, if not an impossibility, to describe it to another in a way to give any correct idea of it. Having never seen its like before, we can say little of its character. We may give it a _name_, but that would not be understood. We could say it was as large as--no, it had no size; that it was like--but no, it had no likeness; that it resembled--no, it had no resemblance.
How could we describe it? What could we say of it? Nothing at all.