FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246  
247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   >>   >|  
y of verbs, nouns, and conjunctions: as the verb is what we say, and the noun, that of which we say it, they judged the power of discourse to be in _verbs_, and the matter in _nouns_, but the connexion in _conjunctions_. Little by little, the philosophers, and especially the Stoics, increased the number: first, to the conjunctions were added _articles_; afterwards, _prepositions_; to nouns, was added the _appellation_; then the _pronoun_; afterwards, as belonging to each verb, the _participle_; and, to verbs in common, _adverbs_. Our language [i. e., the _Latin_] does not require articles, wherefore they are scattered among the other parts of speech; but there is added to the foregoing the _interjection_. But some, on the authority of good authors, make the parts only eight; as Aristarchus, and, in our day, Palaemon; who have included the vocable, or appellation, with the noun, as a species of it. But they who make the noun one and the vocable an other, reckon nine. But there are also some who divide the vocable from the appellation; making the former to signify any thing manifest to sight or touch, as _house, bed_; and the latter, any thing to which either or both are wanting, as _wind, heaven, god, virtue_. They have also added the _asseveration_ and the _attrectation_, which I do not approve. Whether the vocable or appellation should be included with the noun or not, as it is a matter of little consequence, I leave to the decision of others."--See QUINTIL. _de Inst. Orat._, Lib. i, Cap. 4, Sec.24. 11. Several writers on English grammar, indulging a strange unsettlement of plan, seem not to have determined in their own minds, how many parts of speech there are, or ought to be. Among these are Horne Tooke, Webster, Dalton, Cardell, Green, and Cobb; and perhaps, from what he says above, we may add the name of Priestley. The present disputation about the sorts of words, has been chiefly owing to the writings of Horne Tooke, who explains the minor parts of speech as mere abbreviations, and rejects, with needless acrimony, the common classification. But many have mistaken the nature of his instructions, no less than that of the common grammarians. This author, in his third chapter, supposes his auditor to say, "But you have not all this while informed me _how many parts of speech_ you mean to lay down." To whom he replies, "That shall be as you please. Either _two_, or _twenty_, or _more_." Such looseness comported well en
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   222   223   224   225   226   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237   238   239   240   241   242   243   244   245   246  
247   248   249   250   251   252   253   254   255   256   257   258   259   260   261   262   263   264   265   266   267   268   269   270   271   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

vocable

 

appellation

 

speech

 
conjunctions
 
common
 

articles

 
matter
 

included

 

chiefly

 

disputation


present
 

Webster

 

determined

 

grammar

 

indulging

 
strange
 

unsettlement

 

Dalton

 

Cardell

 
Priestley

replies

 
informed
 

looseness

 

comported

 

Either

 

twenty

 

acrimony

 
classification
 

mistaken

 

nature


needless

 

rejects

 

explains

 

abbreviations

 

instructions

 

chapter

 

supposes

 

auditor

 

author

 

English


grammarians

 

writings

 

wherefore

 

scattered

 

foregoing

 

require

 
language
 

interjection

 

authority

 

Palaemon