and specifies by the tenses; and also, (with the exception of the
infinitive,) of an assertion or affirmation; if we take away the
affirmation and the distinction of tenses, there will remain the attribute
and the general notion of time; and these form the essence of an English
participle. So that a participle is something less than a verb, though
derived immediately from it; and something more than an adjective, or mere
attribute, though its manner of attribution is commonly the same. Hence,
though the participle by rejecting the idea of time may pass almost
insensibly into an adjective, and become truly a participial adjective; yet
the participle and the adjective are by no means one and the same part of
speech, as some will have them to be. There is always an essential
difference in their meaning. For instance: there is a difference between _a
thinking man_ and _a man thinking_; between _a bragging fellow_ and _a
fellow bragging_; between _a fast-sailing ship_ and _a ship sailing fast_.
A thinking man, a bragging fellow, or a fast-sailing ship, is contemplated
as being habitually or permanently such; a man thinking, a fellow bragging,
or a ship sailing fast, is contemplated as performing a particular act; and
this must embrace a period of _time_, whether that time be specified or
not. John Locke was a _thinking man_; but we should directly contradict his
own doctrine, to suppose him _always thinking_.

OBS. 5.--The English participles are all derived from the _roots_ of their
respective verbs, and do not, like those of some other languages, take
their names from the _tenses_. On the contrary, they are reckoned among the
principal parts in the conjugation of their verbs, and many of the tenses
are formed from them. In the compound forms of conjugation, they are found
alike _in all the tenses_. They do not therefore, of themselves, express
any particular time; but they denote the state of the being, action, or
passion, in regard to its progress or completion. This I conceive to be
their principal distinction. Respecting the participles in _Latin_, it has
been matter of dispute, whether those which are called the _present_ and
the _perfect_, are really so in respect to time or not. Sanctius denies it.
In _Greek_, the distinction of tenses in the participles is more apparent,
yet even here the time to which they refer, does not always correspond to
their names. See remarks on the Participles in the _Port Royal Latin and
Gr