ENGLISH GRAMMAR,

Southern District of New-York, ss.

BE IT REMEMBERED, That on the 22d day of August, A.D. 1829, in the L. S. 54th year of the Independence of the United States of America, Samuel Kirkham, of the said district, hath deposited in this office the title of a book, the right whereof he claims as author, in the words following, to wit:

"English Grammar in familiar Lectures, accompanied by a Compendium, embracing a new systematic order of Parsing, a new system of Punctuation, exercises in false Syntax, and a System of Philosophical Grammar in notes: to which are added an Appendix, and a Key to the Exercises: designed for the use of Schools and Private Learners. By Samuel Kirkham. Eleventh Edition, enlarged and improved." In conformity to the act of Congress of the United States, entitled "an act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the time therein mentioned." And also to an act entitled "an act supplementary to an act entitled an act for the encouragement of learning, by securing the copies of maps, charts, and books, to the authors and proprietors of such copies, during the times therein mentioned, and extending the benefits thereof to the arts of designing, engraving, and etching historical and other prints."

FRED. J. BETTS, Clerk of the Southern District of New-York.

This work is mainly designed as a Reading-Book for Schools. In the first part of it, the principles of reading are developed and explained in a scientific and practical manner, and so familiarly illustrated in their application to practical examples as to enable even the juvenile mind very readily to comprehend their nature and character, their design and use, and thus to acquire that high degree of excellence, both, in reading and speaking, which all desire, but to which few attain.

The last part of the work, contains Selections from the greatest master-pieces of rhetorical and poetical composition, both ancient and modern. Many of these selections are taken from the most elegant and classical American authors—writers whose noble productions have already shed an unfading lustre, and stamped immortality upon the literature of our country.—In the select part of the work, rhetorical marks are also employed to point out the application of the principles laid down in the first part.—The very favorable reception of the work by the public, and its astonishingly rapid introduction into schools, since its first publication in 1833, excites in the author the most sanguine hopes in regard to its future success.

After a careful perusal of this work, we are decidedly of opinion, that it is the only successful attempt of the kind. The rules are copious, and the author's explanations and illustrations are happily adapted to the comprehension of learners. No school should be without this book, and it ought to find a place in the library of every gentleman who values the attainment of a just and forcible elocution.—Pittsburgh Mer. April, 1834.

Mr. Kirkham has given rules for inflections and emphasis, and has followed them by illustrative examples, and these by remarks upon the inflection which he has adopted, and the reasons for his preference of one inflection to another—a most admirable plan for such a work. Copious examples occur in which all the various inflections and the shades of emphasis are distinguished with great accuracy and clearness. The catechetical appendages of each chapter, give the work new value in a school, and the selections made for the exercise of scholars, evince good taste and judgment. U.S. Gazette, Philadelphia, Sept. 17, 1834.

The Essay now before us, needs not depend on any former work of its author for a borrowed reputation; it has intrinsic merits of its own. It lays down principles clearly and concisely. It presents the reader with many new and judicious selections, both in prose and poetry; and altogether evinces great industry combined with taste and ingenuity.—Courier of Upper Canada, York, Oct. 12, 1833.

Of the talent and judgment of Mr. Kirkham, we have already had occasion to speak in terms of honest praise. His work on Elocution raises him still higher in our estimation.—The book would be of great utility in schools—such a one as has long been wanted; and we are glad to see it forthcoming.—Baltimore Visitor, July, 1833.

Every facility for teaching Elocution, which I have so often needed, but never before found, is exactly furnished in this work:—principles are clearly and concisely laid down, and are very happily adapted to the comprehension of the learner. Thoroughly convinced of its utility, I shall lose no time in introducing it into my school. Hartford, Conn. Aug.. 20, 1834. NATHANIEL WEBB.

It is well known that the recommendations which generally accompany new books have very little weight with the public. This is as it should be, for that work which rests more on its written testimonials, than on its intrinsic merits for support, asserts no claims to permanent patronage. But recommendations which analyze the merits of a work, and which, by exhibiting its prominent features in a striking light, are calculated to carry conviction to the reader that the system recommended is meritorious, the author is proud to have it in his power to present in this volume. The following are some of the numerous testimonials which he has received, and for which he tenders his grateful acknowledgments to those literary gentlemen to whose liberality and politeness he is indebted for them. More than six hundred others presented to the author, and many of which are equally flattering with these, he has not room to insert.

The following notice of this work is extracted from the "Western Review." This journal is ably conducted by the Rev. Timothy Flint, author of "Francis Berrian," "History and Geography of the Miss. Valley," and many other popular and valuable works.

We had not, at that time, seen Mr. Kirkham's "Grammar in familiar Lectures," but have since given it a cursory perusal. If we comprehend the author's design, it is not so much to introduce new principles, as to render more easy and intelligible those which have been long established, and to furnish additional facilities to an accurate and thorough knowledge of our language. In this we think he has been successful.

It is to be expected that a modest, unassuming writer, on presenting himself before the public tribunal as an author, will, as far as is consistent with his plan, avail himself of the authority of such as have written well on the subject before him. Mr. Kirkham has accordingly followed Mr. Murray in the old beaten track of English writers on grammar, in the general principles of his science; endeavoring, at the same time, to avoid whatever appeared to be erroneous or absurd in the writings of that author, and adopting an entirely new arrangement. The most useful matter contained in the treatise of Mr. Murray, is embraced in this; but in the definitions and rules, it is simplified, and rendered much more intelligible. Though our author follows Mr. Murray, in the general principles of his work, he has, in numerous instances, differed from him, pursuing a course that appears to be his own, and introducing some valuable improvements.

Among these may be mentioned some additional rules and explanatory notes in syntax, the arrangement of the parts of speech, the mode of explaining them, manner of parsing, manner of explaining some of the pronouns, and the use of a synopsis which presents the essentials of the science at one view, and is well calculated to afford assistance to learners.

In his arrangement of the parts of speech, Mr. Kirkham seems to have endeavored to follow the order of nature; and we are not able to see how he could have done better. The noun and verb, as being the most important parts of speech, are first explained, and afterwards those which are considered in a secondary and subordinate character. By following this order, he has avoided the absurdity so common among authors, of defining the minor parts before their principals, of which they were designed to be the appendages, and has rationally prepared the way for conducting the learner by easy advances to a correct view of the science.

In his illustrations of the various subjects contained in his work, our author appears to have aimed, not at a flowery style, nor at the appearance of being learned, but at being understood. The clearness and perspicuity of his remarks, and their application to familiar objects, are well calculated to arrest the attention, and aid the understanding of the pupil, and thereby to lessen the labor of the instructor. The principles of the science are simplified, and rendered so perfectly easy of comprehension, we should think no ordinary mind, having such help, could find them difficult. It is in this particular that the work appears to possess its chief merit, and on this account it cannot fail of being preferred to many others.

It gives us pleasure to remark, in reference to the success of the amiable and modest author whose work is before us, that we quote from the fifth edition.

Cincinnati, Aug. 24, 1827.

The following is from the pen of a gentleman of the Bar, formerly a distinguished Classical teacher. [Extract from the "National Crisis."]

As a friend to literature, and especially to genuine merit, it is with peculiar pleasure I allude to a notice in a late paper of this city, in which Mr. S. Kirkham proposes to deliver a course of Lectures on English Grammar. To such as feel interested in acquiring a general and practical knowledge of this useful science an opportunity is now presented which ought not to be neglected. Having myself witnessed, in several instances, within the last ten months, the practical results of Mr. Kirkham's plan, I am enabled to give a decisive opinion of its merits. The extensive knowledge acquired in one course by his class in Pittsburgh, and the great proficiency evinced by his classes elsewhere, are a demonstration of the utility and superiority of his method of teaching, and a higher encomium on him than I am able to bestow.

The principles on which Mr. Kirkham's "New system of Grammar" is predicated, are judiciously compiled, and happily and briefly expressed; but the great merit of his work consists in the lucid illustrations accompanying the principles, and the simple and gradual manner in which it conducts the learner along from step to step through the successive stages of the science. The explanations blended with the theory, are addressed to the understanding of the pupil in a manner so familiar, that they cannot fail to excite in him a deep interest; and whatever system is calculated to bring into requisition the mental powers, must, I conceive, be productive of good results. In my humble opinion, the system of teaching introduced into this work, will enable a diligent pupil to acquire, without any other aid, a practical knowledge of grammar, in less than one-fourth part of the time usually devoted.

My views of Mr. Kirkham's system are thus publicly given, with the greater pleasure, on account of the literary empiricisms which have been so extensively practised in many parts of the western country.

Cincinnati, April 26, 1826.

From Mr. Blood, Principal of the Chambersburgh Academy, Pa.

Mr. Kirkham,—It is now almost twenty years since I became a teacher of youth, and, during this period, I have not only consulted all, but have used many of the different systems of English grammar that have fallen in my way; and, sir, I do assure you, without the least wish to flatter, that yours far exceeds any I have yet seen.

Your arrangement and systematic order of parsing are most excellent; and experience has convinced me, (having used it, and it only, for the last twelve or thirteen months), that a scholar will learn more of the nature and principles of our language in one quarter, from your system, than in a whole year from any other I had previously used. I do, therefore, most cheerfully and earnestly recommend it to the public at large, and especially to those who, anxious to acquire a knowledge of our language, are destitute of the advantages of an instructer.

Yours, very respectfully, SAMUEL BLOOD.

Chambersburgh Academy, Feb. 12, 1825.

From Mr. N.R. Smith, editor of a valuable literary journal, styled "The Hesperus."

Mr. Kirkham,

Sir, I have examined your Lectures on English Grammar with that degree of minuteness which enables me to yield my unqualified approbation of the work as a grammatical system. The engaging manner in which you have explained the elements of grammar, and accommodated them to the capacities of youth, is an ample illustration of the utility of your plan. In addition to this, the critical attention you have paid to an analytical development of grammatical principles, while it is calculated to encourage the perseverance of young students in the march of improvement, is sufficient, also, to employ the researches of the literary connoisseur. I trust that your valuable compilation will be speedily introduced into schools and academies.

With respect, yours, N.R. SMITH, A.M.

Pittsburgh, March 22, 1825.

From Mr. Jungmann, Principal of the Frederick Lutheran Academy:—Extract.

Having carefully examined Mr. S. Kirkham's new system of "English Grammar in familiar Lectures," I am satisfied that the pre-eminent advantages it possesses over our common systems, will soon convince the public, that it is not one of those feeble efforts of quackery which have so often obtruded upon our notice. Its decided superiority over all other systems, consists in adapting the subject-matter to the capacity of the young learner, and the happy mode adopted of communicating it to his mind in a manner so clear and simple, that he can easily comprehend the nature and the application of every principle that comes before him.

In short, all the intricacies of the science are elucidated so clearly, I am confident that even a private learner, of common docility, can, by perusing this system attentively acquire a better practical knowledge of this important branch of literature in three months, than is ordinarily obtained in one year.

Frederick, Md. Sept 17, 1824. JOHN E. JUNGMANN.

Extract: from De Witt Clinton, late Gov. of New-York.

I consider the Compendium of English Grammar, by Samuel Kirkham, a work deserving encouragement, and well calculated to facilitate the acquisition of this useful science. DE WITT CLINTON.

Albany, Sept 25, 1824.

S. Kirkham, Esq.—I have examined your Grammar with attention, and with a particular view to benefit the Institution under my charge. I am fully satisfied, that it is the best form in which Murray's principles have been given to the public. The lectures are ample, and given in so familiar and easy language, as to be readily understood, even by a tyro in grammar.

I feel it due to you to say, that I commenced the examination of your work, under a strong prejudice against it, in consequence of the numerous "improved systems" with which the public has been inundated, of late, most of which are by no means improvements on Murray, but the productions of individuals whom a "little grammar has rendered grammatically insane." My convictions, therefore, are the result of investigation. I wish you, Sir, success in your publication.

Respectfully, EBER. WHEATON,

Pr. of Mechanics' Society School

With the opinion of Mr. Wheaton respecting Mr. Kirkham's English Grammar, we heartily concur.

From the Rev. C.P. McIlvaine, and others.

So far as I have examined the plan of grammatical instruction by Samuel Kirkham I am well satisfied that it meets the wants of elementary schools in this branch, and deserves to be patronised. CHARLES P. McILVAINE.

Brooklyn, L.I. July 9, 1829.

EXTRACT.

From the partial examination which I have given Mr. S. Kirkham's English Grammar, I do not hesitate to recommend it to the public as the best of the class I have ever seen, and as filling up an important and almost impassable chasm in works on grammatical science. D.L. CARROLL.

Brooklyn, L.I. June 29, 1829.

From A.W. Dodge, Esq.

New-York, July 15, 1829.

The experience of every one at all acquainted with the business of instruction, must have taught him that the study of grammar, important as it is to every class of learners, is almost invariably a dry and uninteresting study to young beginners, and for the very obvious reason, that the systems in general use in the schools, are far beyond the comprehension of youth, and ill adapted to their years. Hence it is, that their lessons in this department of learning, are considered as tasks, and if committed at all, committed to the memory, without enlightening their understandings; so that many a pupil who has been through the English grammar, is totally unacquainted with the nature even of the simplest parts of speech.

The work of Mr. Kirkham on grammar, is well calculated to remedy these evils, and supply a deficiency which has been so long and so seriously felt in the imperfect education of youth in the elementary knowledge of their own language. By a simple, familiar, and lucid method of treating the subject, he has rendered what was before irksome and unprofitable, pleasing and instructive. In one word, the grammar of Mr. Kirkham furnishes a clew by which the youthful mind is guided through the intricate labyrinth of verbs, nouns and pronouns; and the path which has been heretofore so difficult and uninviting, as to dampen the ardor of youth, and waste their energies in fruitless attempts to surmount its obstacles, is cleared of these obstructions by this pioneer to the youthful mind, and planted, at every turn, with friendly guide-boards to direct them in the right road. The slightest perusal of the work alluded to, will convince even the most skeptical of the truth of these remarks, and satisfy every one who is not wedded by prejudice to old rules and forms, that it will meet the wants of the community.

ALLEN W. DODGE.

Philadelphia, Aug. 10, 1829

Having, for several years, been engaged in lecturing on the science of grammar and, during this period, having thoroughly tested the merits of Mr. S. Kirkham's system of "English Grammar in Familiar Lectures" by using it as a text-book for my classes, I take pleasure in giving this testimonial of my cordial approbation of the work. Mr. Kirkham has attempted to improve upon this branch of science, chiefly by unfolding and explaining the principles of grammar in a manner so clear and simple, as to adapt them completely to the understanding of the young learner, and by adopting a new arrangement, which enables the pupil to commit the principles by a simultaneous application of them to practical examples. The public may rest assured, that he has been successful in his attempt in a pre-eminent degree. I make this assertion under a full conviction that it will be corroborated by every candid judge of the science who becomes acquainted with the practical advantages of this manual.

The explicit brevity and accuracy of the rules and definitions, the novel, the striking, the lucid, and critical illustrations accompanying them, the peculiar and advantageous arrangement of the various parts of the subject, the facilities proffered by the "systematic mode of parsing" adopted, the convenient and judicious introduction and adaptation of the exercises introduced, and the deep researches and critical investigations displayed in the "Philosophical Notes," render this system of grammar so decidedly superior to all others extant, that, to receive general patronage, it needs but to be known.

My knowledge of this system from experience in teaching it, and witnessing its effects in the hands of private learners, warrants me in saying, that a learner will, by studying this book four months without a teacher, obtain a more clear conception of the nature and proper construction of words and phrases, than is ordinarily obtained in common schools and academies, in five times four months.

It is highly gratifying to know, that wherever this system has been circulated, it is very rapidly supplanting those works of dulness which have so long paralyzed the energies of the youth of our country.

I think the specimens of verbal criticism, additional corrections in orthography and ortheopy, the leading principles of rhetoric, and the improvements in the illustrations generally, which Mr. K. is about introducing into his ELEVENTH EDITION, will render it quite an improvement on the former editions of this work. H. WINCHESTER.

From the Rev. S. Center, Principal of a Classical Academy.

I have examined the last edition of Kirkham's Grammar with peculiar satisfaction. The improvements which appear in it, do, in my estimation, give it a decided preference to any other system now in use. To point out the peculiar qualities which secure to it claims of which no other system can boast, would be, if required, perfectly easy. At present it is sufficient to remark, that it imbodies all that is essentially excellent and useful in other systems, while it is entirely free from that tediousness of method and prolixity of definition which so much perplex and embarrass the learner.

The peculiar excellence of Mr. Kirkham's grammar is, the simplicity of its method, and the plainness of its illustrations. Being conducted by familiar lectures, the teacher and pupil are necessarily brought into agreeable contact by each lesson. Both are improved by the same task, without the slightest suspicion, on the part of the pupil, that there is anything hard, difficult, or obscure in the subject: a conviction, this, which must inevitably precede all efforts, or no proficiency will be made. In a word, the treatise I am recommending, is a practical one; and for that reason, if there were no others to be urged, it ought to be introduced into all our schools and academies. From actual experiment I can attest to the practicability of the plan which the author has adopted. Of this fact any one may be convinced who will take the pains to make the experiment. SAMUEL CENTER.

Albany, July 10, 1829.

From a communication addressed to S. Kirkham, by the Rev. J. Stockton, author of the "Western Calculator" and "Western Spelling-Book."

Dear Sir,—I am much pleased with both the plan and execution of your "English Grammar in Familiar Lectures." In giving a systematic mode of parsing, calculated alike to exercise the understanding and memory of the pupil, and also free the teacher from the drudgery of continued interrogation, you have made your grammar what every elementary school book ought to be—plain, systematic, and easy to be understood.

This, with the copious definitions in every part of the work, and other improvements so judiciously introduced, gives it a decisive superiority over the imperfect grammar of Murray, now so generally used. JOSEPH STOCKTON, A.M.

Allegheny-Town, (near Pittsburgh,) March 18, 1825.

The author is free to acknowledge, that since this treatise first ventured on the wave of public opinion, the gales of patronage which have waited it along, have been far more favorable than he had reason to anticipate. Had any one, on its first appearance, predicted, that the demand for it would call forth twenty-two thousand copies during the past year, the author would have considered the prediction extravagant and chimerical. In gratitude, therefore, to that public which has smiled so propitiously on his humble efforts to advance the cause of learning, he has endeavored, by unremitting attention to the improvement of his work, to render it as useful and as unexceptionable as his time and talents would permit.

It is believed that the tenth and eleventh editions have been greatly improved; but the author is apprehensive that his work is not yet as accurate and as much simplified as it may be. If, however, the disadvantages of lingering under a broken constitution, and of being able to devote to this subject only a small portion of his time, snatched from the active pursuits of a business life, (active as far as his imperfect health permits him to be,) are any apology for its defects, he hopes that the candid will set down the apology to his credit. This personal allusion is hazarded with the additional hope, that it will ward off some of the arrows of criticism which may be aimed at him, and render less pointed and poisonous those that may fall upon him. Not that he would beg a truce with the gentlemen critics and reviewers. Any compromise with them would betray a want of self-confidence and moral courage which he would, by no means, be willing to avow. It would, moreover, be prejudicial to his interest; for he is determined, if his life be preserved, to avail himself of the advantages of any judicious and candid criticisms on his production, that may appear, and, two or three years hence, revise his work, and present to the public another and a better edition.

The improvements in the tenth edition, consisted mainly in the addition of many important principles; in rendering the illustrations more critical, extensive, accurate, and lucid; in connecting more closely with the genius and philosophy of our language, the general principles adopted; and in adding a brief view of philosophical grammar interspersed in notes. The introduction into the ELEVENTH EDITION, of many verbal criticisms, of additional corrections in orthography and orthoepy, of the leading principles of rhetoric, and of general additions and improvements in various parts of the work, render this edition, it is believed, far preferable to any of the former editions of the work.

Perhaps some will regard the philosophical notes as a useless exhibition of pedantry. If so, the author's only apology is, that some investigations of this nature seemed to be called for by a portion of the community whose minds, of late, appear to be under the influence of a kind of philosophical mania; and to such these notes are respectfully submitted for just what they may deem their real value. The author's own opinion on this point, is, that they proffer no material advantages to common learners; but that they may profitably engage the attention of the curious, and perhaps impart a degree of interest to the literary connoisseur.

New-York, August 22, 1820.

There appears to be something assuming in the act of writing, and thrusting into public notice, a new work on a subject which has already employed many able pens; for who would presume to do this, unless he believed his production to be, in some respects, superior to every one of the kind which had preceded it? Hence, in presenting to the public this system of English Grammar, the author is aware that an apology will be looked for, and that the arguments on which that apology is grounded, must inevitably undergo a rigid scrutiny. Apprehensive, however, that no explanatory effort, on his part, would shield him from the imputation of arrogance by such as are blinded by self-interest, or by those who are wedded to the doctrines mid opinions of his predecessors, with them he will not attempt a compromise, being, in a great measure, indifferent either to their praise or their censure. But with the candid, he is willing to negotiate an amicable treaty, knowing that they are always ready to enter into it on honorable terms. In this negotiation he asks nothing more than merely to rest the merits of his work on its practical utility, believing that, if it prove uncommonly successful in facilitating the progress of youth in the march of mental improvement, that will be its best apology.

When we bring into consideration the numerous productions of those learned philologists who have labored so long, and, as many suppose, so successfully, in establishing the principles of our language; and, more especially, when we view the labors of some of our modern compilers, who have displayed so much ingenuity and acuteness in attempting to arrange those principles in such a manner as to form a correct and an easy medium of mental conference; it does, indeed, appear a little like presumption for a young man to enter upon a subject which has so frequently engaged the attention and talents of men distinguished for their erudition. The author ventures forward, however, under the conviction, that most of his predecessors are very deficient, at least, in manner, if not in matter; and this conviction, he believes, will be corroborated by a majority of the best judges in community. It is admitted, that many valuable improvements have been made by some of our late writers, who have endeavored to simplify and render this subject intelligible to the young learner, but they have all overlooked what the author considers a very important object, namely, a systematic order of parsing; and nearly all have neglected to develop and explain the principles in such a manner as to enable the learner, without great difficulty, to comprehend their nature and use.

By some this system will, no doubt, be discarded on account of its simplicity; while to others its simplicity will prove its principal recommendation. Its design is an humble one. It proffers no great advantages to the recondite grammarian; it professes not to instruct the literary connoisseur; it presents no attractive graces of style to charm, no daring flights to astonish, no deep researches to gratify him; but in the humblest simplicity of diction, it attempts to accelerate the march of the juvenile mind in its advances in the path of science, by dispersing those clouds that so often bewilder it, and removing those obstacles that generally retard its progress. In this way it endeavors to render interesting and delightful a study which has hitherto been considered tedious, dry, and irksome. Its leading object is to adopt a correct and an easy method, in which pleasure is blended with the labors of the learner, and which is calculated to excite in him a spirit of inquiry, that shall call forth into vigorous and useful exercise, every latent energy of his mind; and thus enable him soon to become thoroughly acquainted with the nature of the principles, and with their practical utility and application.

Content to be useful, instead of being brilliant, the writer of these pages has endeavored to shun the path of those whose aim appears to have been to dazzle, rather than to instruct. As he has aimed not so much at originality as utility, he has adopted the thoughts of his predecessors whose labors have become public stock, whenever he could not, in his opinion, furnish better and brighter of his own. Aware that there is, in the public mind, a strong predilection for the doctrines contained in Mr. Murray's grammar, he has thought proper, not merely from motives of policy, but from choice, to select his principles chiefly from that work; and, moreover, to adopt, as far as consistent with his own views, the language of that eminent philologist. In no instance has he varied from him, unless he conceived that, in so doing, some practical advantage would be gained. He hopes, therefore, to escape the censure so frequently and so justly awarded to those unfortunate innovators who have not scrupled to alter, mutilate, and torture the text of that able writer, merely to gratify an itching propensity to figure in the world as authors, and gain an ephemeral popularity by arrogating to themselves the credit due to another.

The author is not disposed, however, to disclaim all pretensions to originality; for, although his principles are chiefly selected, (and who would presume to make new ones?) the manner of arranging, illustrating, and applying them, is principally his own. Let no one, therefore, if he happen to find in other works, ideas and illustrations similar to some contained in the following lectures, too hastily accuse him of plagiarism. It is well known that similar investigations and pursuits often elicit corresponding ideas in different minds: and hence it is not uncommon for the same thought to be strictly original with many writers. The author is not here attempting to manufacture a garment to shield him from rebuke, should he unjustly claim the property of another; but he wishes it to be understood, that a long course of teaching and investigation, has often produced in his mind ideas and arguments on the subject of grammar, exactly or nearly corresponding with those which he afterwards found, had, under similar circumstances, been produced in the minds of others. He hopes, therefore, to be pardoned by the critic, even though he should not be willing to reject a good idea of his own, merely because some one else has, at some time or other, been blessed with the same thought.

As the plan of this treatise is far more comprehensive than those of ordinary grammars, the writer could not, without making his work unreasonably voluminous, treat some topics as extensively as was desirable. Its design is to embrace, not only all the most important principles of the science, but also exercises in parsing, false syntax, and punctuation, sufficiently extensive for all ordinary, practical purposes, and a key to the exercises, and, moreover, a series of illustrations so full and intelligible, as completely to adapt the principles to the capacities of common learners. Whether this design has been successfully or unsuccessfully executed, is left for the public to decide. The general adoption of the work into schools, wherever it has become known, and the ready sale of forty thousand copies, (though without hitherto affording the author any pecuniary profit,) are favorable omens.

In the selection and arrangement of principles for his work, the author has endeavored to pursue a course between the extremes, of taking blindly on trust whatever has been sanctioned by prejudice and the authority of venerable names, and of that arrogant, innovating spirit, which sets at defiance all authority, and attempts to overthrow all former systems, and convince the world that all true knowledge and science are wrapped up in a crude system of vagaries of its own invention. Notwithstanding the author is aware that public prejudice is powerful, and that he who ventures much by way of innovation, will be liable to defeat his own purpose by falling into neglect; yet he has taken the liberty to think for himself, to investigate the subject critically and dispassionately, and to adopt such principles only as he deemed the least objectionable, and best calculated to effect the object he had in view. But what his system claims as improvements on others, consists not so much in bettering the principles themselves, as in the method adopted of communicating a knowledge of them to the mind of the learner. That the work is defective, the author is fully sensible: and he is free to acknowledge, that its defects arise, in part, from his own want of judgment and skill. But there is another and a more serious cause of them, namely, the anomalies and imperfections with which the language abounds. This latter circumstance is also the cause of the existence of so widely different opinions on many important points; and, moreover, the reason that the grammatical principles of our language can never be indisputably settled. But principles ought not to be rejected because they admit of exceptions.—He who is thoroughly acquainted with the genius and structure of our language, can duly appreciate the truth of these remarks.

Should parents object to the Compendium, fearing it will soon be destroyed by their children, they are informed that the pupil will not have occasion to use it one-tenth part as much as he will the book which it accompanies: and besides, if it be destroyed, he will find all the definitions and rules which it contains, recapitulated in the series of Lectures.

As this work proposes a new mode of parsing, and pursues an arrangement essentially different from that generally adopted, it may not be deemed improper for the author to give some directions to those who may be disposed to use it. Perhaps they who take only a slight view of the order of parsing, will not consider it new, but blend it with those long since adopted. Some writers have, indeed, attempted plans somewhat similar; but in no instance have they reduced them to what the author considers a regular systematic order.

The methods which they have generally suggested, require the teacher to interrogate the pupil as he proceeds; or else he is permitted to parse without giving any explanations at all. Others hint that the learner ought to apply definitions in a general way, but they lay down no systematic arrangement of questions as his guide. The systematic order laid down in this work, if pursued by the pupil, compels him to apply every definition and every rule that appertains to each word he parses, without having a question put to him by the teacher; and, in so doing, he explains every word fully as he goes along. This course enables the learner to proceed independently; and proves, at the same time, a great relief to the instructer. The convenience and advantage of this method, are far greater than can be easily conceived by one who is unacquainted with it. The author is, therefore, anxious to have the absurd practice, wherever it has been established, of causing learners to commit and recite definitions and rules without any simultaneous application of them to practical examples, immediately abolished. This system obviates the necessity of pursuing such a stupid course of drudgery; for the young beginner who pursues it, will have, in a few weeks, all the most important definitions and rules perfectly committed, simply by applying them in parsing.

If this plan be once adopted, it is confidently believed that every teacher who is desirous to consult, either his own convenience, or the advantage of his pupils, will readily pursue it in preference to any former method. This belief is founded on the advantages which the author himself has experienced from it in the course of several years, devoted to the instruction of youth and adults. By pursuing this system, he can, with less labor, advance a pupil farther in a practical knowledge of this abstruse science, in two months, than he could in one year when he taught in the "old way." It is presumed that no instructor, who once gives this system a fair trial, will doubt the truth of this assertion.

Perhaps some will, on a first view of the work, disapprove of the transposition of many parts; but whoever examines it attentively, will find that, although the author has not followed the common "artificial and unnatural arrangement adopted by most of his predecessors," yet he has endeavored to pursue a more judicious one, namely, "the order of the understanding."

The learner should commence, not by committing and rehearsing, but by reading attentively the first two lectures several times over. He ought then to parse, according to the systematic order, the examples given for that purpose; in doing which, as previously stated, he has an opportunity of committing all the definitions and rules belonging to the parts of speech included in the examples.

The COMPENDIUM, as it presents to the eye of the learner a condensed but comprehensive view of the whole science, may be properly considered an "Ocular Analysis of the English language." By referring to it, the young student is enabled to apply all his definitions and rules from the very commencement of his parsing. To some, this mode of procedure may seem rather tedious; but it must appear obvious to every person of discernment, that a pupil will learn more by parsing five words critically, and explaining them fully, than he would by parsing fifty words superficially, and without understanding their various properties. The teacher who pursues this plan, is not under the necessity of hearing his pupils recite a single lesson of definitions committed to memory, for he has a fair opportunity of discovering their knowledge of these as they evince it in parsing. All other directions necessary for the learner in school, as well as for the private learner, will be given in the succeeding pages of the work. Should these feeble efforts prove a saving of much time and expense to those young persons who may be disposed to pursue this science with avidity, by enabling them easily to acquire a critical knowledge of a branch of education so important and desirable, the author's fondest anticipations will be fully realized; but should his work fall into the hands of any who are expecting, by the acquisition, to become grammarians, and yet, have not sufficient ambition and perseverance to make themselves acquainted with its contents, it is hoped that the blame for their nonimprovement, will not be thrown upon him.

TO THE YOUNG LEARNER.

You are about to enter upon one of the most useful, and, when rightly pursued, one of the most interesting studies in the whole circle of science. If, however, you, like many a misguided youth, are under the impression that the study of grammar is dry and irksome, and a matter of little consequence, I trust I shall succeed in removing from your mind, all such false notions and ungrounded prejudices; for I will endeavor to convince you, before I close these lectures, that this is not only a pleasing study, but one of real and substantial utility; a study that directly tends to adorn and dignify human nature, and meliorate the condition of man. Grammar is a leading branch of that learning which alone is capable of unfolding and maturing the mental powers, and of elevating man to his proper rank in the scale of intellectual existence;—of that learning which lifts the soul from earth, and enables it to hold converse with a thousand worlds. In pursuing any and every other path of science, you will discover the truth of these remarks, and feel its force; for you will find, that, as grammar opens the door to every department of learning, a knowledge of it is indispensable: and should you not aspire at distinction in the republic of letters, this knowledge cannot fail of being serviceable to you, even if you are destined to pass through the humblest walks of life. I think it is clear, that, in one point of view, grammatical knowledge possesses a decisive advantage over every other branch of learning. Penmanship, arithmetic, geography, astronomy, botany, chemistry, and so on, are highly useful in their respective places; but not one of them is so universally applicable to practical purposes, as this. In every situation, under all circumstances, on all occasions;—when you speak, read, write, or think, a knowledge of grammar is of essential utility.

Doubtless you have heard some persons assert, that they could detect and correct any error in language by the ear, and speak and write accurately without a knowledge of grammar. Now your own observation will soon convince you, that this assertion is incorrect. A man of refined taste, may, by perusing good authors, and conversing with the learned, acquire that knowledge of language which will enable him to avoid those glaring errors that offend the ear; but there are other errors equally gross, which have not a harsh sound, and, consequently, which cannot be detected without a knowledge of the rules that are violated. Believe me, therefore, when I say, that without the knowledge and application of grammar rules, it is impossible for any one to think, speak, read, or write with accuracy. From a want of such knowledge, many often express their ideas in a manner so improper and obscure as to render it impossible for any one to understand them: their language frequently amounts, not only to bad sense, but non-sense. In other instances several different meanings may be affixed to the words they employ; and what is still worse, is, that not unfrequently their sentences are so constructed, as to convey a meaning quite the reverse of that which they intended. Nothing of a secular nature can be more worthy of your attention, then, than the acquisition of grammatical knowledge.

The path which leads to grammatical excellence, is not all the way smooth and flowery, but in it you will find some thorns interspersed, and some obstacles to be surmounted; or, in simple language, you will find, in the pursuit of this science, many intricacies which it is rather difficult for the juvenile mind completely to unravel. I shall, therefore, as I proceed, address you in plain language, and endeavor to illustrate every principle in a manner so clear and simple, that you will be able, if you exercise your mind, to understand its nature, and apply it to practice as you go along; for I would rather give you one useful idea, than fifty high-sounding words, the meaning of which you would probably be unable to comprehend.

Should you ever have any doubts concerning the meaning of a word, or the sense of a sentence, you must not be discouraged, but persevere, either by studying my explanations, or by asking some person competent to inform you, till you obtain a clear conception of it, and till all doubts are removed. By carefully examining, and frequently reviewing, the following lectures, you will soon be able to discern the grammatical construction of our language, and fix in your mind the principles by which it is governed. Nothing delights youth so much, as a clear and distinct knowledge of any branch of science which they are pursuing; and, on the other hand, I know they are apt to be discouraged with any branch of learning which requires much time and attention to be understood. It is the evidence of a weak mind, however, to be discouraged by the obstacles with which the young learner must expect to meet; and the best means that you can adopt, in order to enable you to overcome the difficulties that arise in the incipient stage of your studies, is to cultivate the habit of thinking methodically and soundly on all subjects of importance which may engage your attention. Nothing will be more effectual in enabling you to think, as well as to speak and write, correctly, than the study of English grammar, according to the method of pursuing it as prescribed in the following pages. This system is designed, and, I trust, well calculated, to expand and strengthen the intellectual faculties, in as much as it involves a process by which the mind is addressed, and a knowledge of grammar communicated in an interesting and familiar manner.

You are aware, my young friend, that you live in an age of light and knowledge;—an age in which science and the arts are marching onward with gigantic strides. You live, too, in a land of liberty;—a land on which the smiles of Heaven beam with uncommon refulgence. The trump of the warrior and the clangor of arms no longer echo on our mountains, or in our valleys; "the garments dyed in blood have passed away;" the mighty struggle for independence is over; and you live to enjoy the rich boon of freedom and prosperity which was purchased with the blood of our fathers. These considerations forbid that you should ever be so unmindful of your duty to your country, to your Creator, to yourself, and to succeeding generations, as to be content to grovel in ignorance. Remember that "knowledge is power;" that an enlightened and a virtuous people can never be enslaved; and that, on the intelligence of our youth, rest the future liberty, the prosperity, the happiness, the grandeur, and the glory of our beloved country. Go on then, with a laudable ambition, and an unyielding perseverance, in the path which leads to honor and renown. Press forward. Go, and gather laurels on the hill of science; linger among her unfading beauties; "drink deep" of her crystal fountain; and then join in "the march of fame." Become learned and virtuous, and you will be great. Love God and serve him, and you will be happy.

Language, in its most extensive sense, implies those signs by which men and brutes communicate to each other their thoughts, affections, and desires.

Language may be divided, 1. into natural and artificial; 2. into spoken and written.

NATURAL LANGUAGE, consists in the use of those natural signs which different animals employ in communicating their feelings one to another. The meaning of these signs all perfectly understand by the principles of their nature. This language is common both to man and brute. The elements of natural language in man, may be reduced to three kinds; modulations of the voice, gestures, and features. By means of these, two savages who have no common, artificial language, can communicate their thoughts in a manner quite intelligible: they can ask and refuse, affirm and deny, threaten and supplicate; they can traffick, enter into contracts, and plight their faith. The language of brutes consists in the use of those inarticulate sounds by which they express their thoughts and affections. Thus, the chirping of a bird, the bleating of a lamb, the neighing of a horse, and the growling, whining, and barking of a dog, are the language of those animals, respectively.

ARTIFICIAL LANGUAGE consists in the use of words, by means of which mankind are enabled to communicate their thoughts to one another.—In order to assist you in comprehending what is meant by the term word, I will endeavor to illustrate the meaning of the term.

Idea. The notices which we gain by sensation and perception, and which are treasured up in the mind to be the materials of thinking and knowledge, are denominated ideas. For example, when you place your hand upon a piece of ice, a sensation is excited which we call coldness. That faculty which notices this sensation or change produced in the mind, is called perception; and the abstract notice itself, or notion you form of this sensation, is denominated an idea. This being premised, we will now proceed to the consideration of words.

Words are articulate sounds, used by common consent, not as natural, but as artificial, signs of our ideas. Words have no meaning in themselves. They are merely the artificial representatives of those ideas affixed to them by compact or agreement among those who use them. In English, for instance, to a particular kind of metal we assign the name gold; not because there is, in that sound, any peculiar aptness which suggests the idea we wish to convey, but the application of that sound to the idea signified, is an act altogether arbitrary. Were there any natural connexion between the sound and the thing signified, the word gold would convey the same idea to the people of other countries as it does to ourselves. But such is not the fact. Other nations make use of different sounds to signify the same thing. Thus, aurum denotes the same idea in Latin, and or in French. Hence it follows, that it is by custom only we learn to annex particular ideas to particular sounds.

SPOKEN LANGUAGE or speech is made up of articulate sounds uttered by the human voice.

The voice is formed by air which, after it passes through the glottis, (a small aperture in the upper part of the wind-pipe,) is modulated by the action of the throat, palate, teeth, tongue, lips, and nostrils.

WRITTEN LANGUAGE. The elements of written language consist of letters or characters, which, by common consent and general usage, are combined into words, and thus made the ocular representatives of the articulate sounds uttered by the voice.

Grammar may be divided into two species, universal and particular.

UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR explains the principles which are common to all languages.

PARTICULAR GRAMMAR applies those general principles to a particular language, modifying them according to its genius, and the established practice of the best speakers and writers by whom it is used. Hence,

The established practice of the best speakers and writers of any language, is the standard of grammatical accuracy in the use of that language.

By the phrase, established practice, is implied reputable, national, and present usage. A usage becomes good and legal, when it has been long and generally adopted.

The best speakers and writers, or such as may be considered good authority in the use of language, are those who are deservedly in high estimation; speakers, distinguished for their elocution and other literary attainments, and writers, eminent for correct taste, solid matter, and refined manner.

PHILOSOPHICAL GRAMMAR investigates and develops the principles of language, as founded in the nature of things and the original laws of thought. It also discusses the grounds of the classification of words, and explains those procedures which practical grammar lays down for our observance.

PRACTICAL GRAMMAR adopts the most convenient classification of the words of a language, lays down a system of definitions and rules, founded on scientific principles and good usage, illustrates their nature and design, and enforces their application.

PRINCIPLE. A principle in grammar is a peculiar construction of the language, sanctioned by good usage.

DEFINITION. A definition in grammar is a principle of language expressed in a definite form.

RULE. A rule describes the peculiar construction or circumstantial relation of words, which custom has established for our observance.

GRAMMAR teaches us how to use words in a proper manner. The most important use of that faculty called speech, is, to convey our thoughts to others. If, therefore, we have a store of words, and even know what they signify, they will be of no real use to us unless we can also apply them to practice, and make them answer the purposes for which they were invented. Grammar, well understood, enables us to express our thoughts fully and clearly; and, consequently, in a manner which will defy the ingenuity of man to give our words any other meaning than that which we ourselves intend them to express. To be able to speak and write our vernacular tongue with accuracy and elegance, is, certainly, a consideration of the highest moment.

ORTHOGRAPHY means word-making, or spelling. It teaches us the different kinds and sounds of letters, how to combine them into syllables, and syllables into words.

As this is one of the first steps in the path of literature, I presume you already understand the nature and use of letters, and the just method of spelling words. If you do, it is unnecessary for you to dwell long on this part of grammar, which, though very important, is rather dry and uninteresting, for it has nothing to do with parsing and analyzing language. And, therefore, if you can spell correctly, you may omit Orthography, and commence with Etymology and Syntax.

A.—A has four sounds; the long; as in name, basin; the broad; as in ball, wall; the short; as in fagot, glass; and the flat, Italian sound; as in bar, farther. The improper diphthong, aa, has the short sound of a in Balaam, Canaan, Isaac; and the long sound of a in Baal, Gaal, Aaron.

The Latin diphthong, ae, has the long sound of e in aenigma, Caesar, and some other words. But many authors reject this useless excrescence of antiquity, and write, enigma, Cesar.

The diphthong, ai, has the long sound of a; as in pail, sail; except in plaid, said, again, raillery, fountain, Britain, and some others.

Au is sounded like broad a in taught, like flat a in aunt, like long o in hautboy, and like short o in laurel.

Aw has always the sound of broad a; as in bawl, crawl.

Ay has the long sound of a; as in pay, delay.

B.—B has only one sound; as in baker, number, chub.

B is silent when it follows m in the same syllable; as in lamb, &c. except in accumb, rhomb, and succumb. It is also silent before t in the same syllable; as in doubt, debtor, subtle, &c.

C.—C sounds like k before a, o, u, r, l, t, and at the end of syllables; as in cart, cottage, curious, craft, tract, cloth; victim, flaccid. It has the sound of s before e, i, and y; as in centre, cigar, mercy. C has the sound of sh when followed by a diphthong, and is preceded by the accent, either primary or secondary; as in social, pronunciation, &c.; and of z in discern, sacrifice, sice, suffice. It is mute in arbuscle, czar, czarina, endict, victuals, muscle.

Ch is commonly sounded like tsh; as in church, chin; but in words derived from the ancient languages, it has the sound of k; as in chemist, chorus; and likewise in foreign names; as in Achish, Enoch. In words from the French, ch sounds like sh; as in chaise, chevalier; and also like sh when preceded by l or n; as in milch, bench, clinch, &c.

Ch in arch, before a vowel, sounds like k; as in arch-angel, except in arched, archery, archer; archenemy; but before a consonant, it sounds like tsh; as in archbishop. Ch is silent in schedule, schism, yacht, drachm.

D.—D has one uniform sound; as in death, bandage. It sounds like dj or j when followed by long u preceded by the accent; as in educate, verdure. It also sounds like j in grandeur, soldier.

The termination, ed, in adjectives and participial adjectives, retains its distinct sound; as, a wick-ed man, a learn-ed man, bless-ed are the meek; but in verbs the e is generally dropped; as, passed, walked, flashed, aimed, rolled, &c. which are pronounced, past, walkt, flasht, aimd, rold.

E.—E has a long sound; as in scheme, severe; a short sound; as in men, tent; and sometimes the sound of flat a; as in sergeant; and of short i; as in yes, pretty, England, and generally in the unaccented terminations, es, et, en.

F.—F has one unvaried sound; as in fancy, muffin; except in of, which, when uncompounded, is pronounced ov. A wive's portion, a calve's head, are improper. They should be, wife's portion, calf's head.

G.—G has two sounds. It is hard before a, o, u, l, and r, and at the end of a word; as in gay, go, gun, glory; bag, snug. It is soft before e, i, and y; as in genius, ginger, Egypt. Exceptions; get, gewgaw, gimlet, and some others. G is silent before n, as in gnash.

H.—H has an articulate sound; as in hat, horse, hull. It is silent after r; as in rhetoric, rhubarb.

I.—I has a long sound; as in fine; and a short one; as in fin. Before r it is often sounded like u short; as in first, third; and in other words, like short e; as in birth, virtue. In some words it has the sound of long e; as in machine, profile.

J.—J has the sound of soft g; except in hallelujah, in which it is pronounced like y.

K.—K has the sound of c hard, and is used before e, i, and y, where c would be soft; as kept, skirt, murky. It is silent before n; as in knife, knell, knocker.

L.—L has always a soft liquid sound; as in love, billow. It is often silent; as in half, talk, almond.

M.—M has always the same sound; as in murmur, monumental; except in comptroller, which is pronounced controller.

N.—N has two sounds; the one pure; as in man, net, noble; the other a compound sound; as in ankle, banquet, distinct, &c., pronounced angkl, bangkwet. N final is silent when preceded by m; as in hymn, autumn.

O.—O has a long sound; as in note, over; and a short one; as in not, got. It has the sound of u short; as in son, attorney, doth, does; and generally in the terminations, op, ot, or, on, om, ol, od, &c.

P.—P has but one uniform sound; as in pin, slipper; except in cupboard, clapboard, where it has the sound of b. It is mute in psalm, Ptolemy, tempt, empty, corps, raspberry, and receipt.

Ph has the sound of f in philosophy, Philip; and of v in nephew, Stephen.

Q.—Q is sounded like k, and is always followed by u pronounced like w; as in quadrant, queen, conquest.

R.—R has a rough sound; as in Rome, river, rage; and a smooth one; as in bard, card, regard. In the unaccented termination re, the r is sounded after the e; as in fibre, centre.

S.—S has a flat sound like z; as in besom, nasal; and, at the beginning of words, a sharp, hissing sound; as in saint, sister, sample. It has the sound of sh when preceded by the accent and another s or a liquid, and followed by a diphthong or long u; as in expulsion, censure. S sounds like zh when preceded by the accent and a vowel, and followed by a diphthong or long u as in brasier, usual. It is mute in isle, corps, demesne, viscount.

T.—T is sounded in take, temper. T before u, when the accent precedes, and generally before eou, sounds like tsh; as, nature, virtue, righteous, are pronounced natshure, virtshue, richeus. Ti before a vowel, preceded by the accent, has the sound of sh; as in salvation, negotiation; except in such words as tierce, tiara, &c. and unless an s goes before; as, question; and excepting also derivatives from words ending in ty; as in mighty, mightier.

Th, at the beginning, middle, and end of words, is sharp; as in thick, panther, breath. Exceptions; then, booth, worthy, &c.

U.—U has three sounds; a long; as in mule, cubic; a short; as in dull, custard; and an obtuse sound; as in full, bushel. It is pronounced like short e in bury; and like short i in busy, business.

V.—V has uniformly the sound of flat f; as in vanity, love.

W.—W, when a consonant, has its sound, which is heard in wo, beware. W is silent before r; as in wry, wrap, wrinkle; and also in answer, sword, &c. Before h it is pronounced as if written after the h; as in why, when, what;—hwy, hwen, hwat. When heard as a vowel, it takes the sound of u; as in draw, crew, now.

X.—X has a sharp sound, like ks, when it ends a syllable with the accent on it; as, exit, exercise; or when it precedes an accented syllable which begins with any consonant except h; as, excuse, extent; but when the following accented syllable begins with a vowel or h, it has, generally, a flat sound, like gz; as in exert, exhort. X has the sound of Z at the beginning of proper names of Greek original; as in Xanthus, Xenophon, Xerxes.

Y.—Y, when a consonant, has its proper sound; as in youth, York, yes, new-year. When y is employed as a vowel, it has exactly the sound that i would have in the same situation; as in rhyme, system, party, pyramid.

Z.—Z has the sound of flat s; as in freeze, brazen.

The following rules are deemed important in practice, although they assist us in spelling only a small portion of the words of our language. This useful art is to be chiefly acquired by studying the spelling-book and dictionary, and by strict attention in reading.

RULE I. Monosyllables ending in f, l, or s, double the final or ending consonant when it is preceded by a single vowel; as staff, mill, pass. Exceptions; of, if, is, as, lids, was, yes, his, this, us, and thus.

RULE II. Monosyllables ending in any consonant but f, l, or s, never double the final consonant when it is preceded by a single vowel; as, man, hat. Exceptions; add, ebb, butt, egg, odd, err, inn, bunn, purr, and buzz.

RULE III. Words ending in y, form the plural of nouns, the persons of verbs, participial nouns, past participles, comparatives, and superlatives, by changing y into i, when the y is preceded by a consonant; as, spy, spies; I carry, thou carriest, he carries; carrier, carried; happy, happier, happiest.

The present participle in ing, retains the y that i may not be doubled; as, carry, carrying.

But when y is preceded by a vowel, in such instances as the above, it is not changed into i; as, boy, boys; I cloy, he cloys; except in the words lay, pay, and say I from which are formed laid, paid, and said; and their compounds, unpaid, unsaid, &c.

RULE IV. When words ending in y, assume an additional syllable beginning with a consonant, the y, if it is preceded by a consonant, is commonly changed to i; as, happy, happily, happiness.

But when y is preceded by a vowel, in such instances, it is very rarely changed to i; as, coy, coyless; boy, boyish; boyhood; joy, joyless, joyful.

RULE V. Monosyllables, and words accented on the last syllable, ending with a single consonant that is preceded by a single vowel, double that consonant when they assume another syllable that begins with a vowel; as, wit, witty; thin, thinnish; to abet, an abetter.

But if a diphthong precedes, or the accent is not on the last syllable, the consonant remains single; as, to toil, toiling; to offer, an offering; maid, maiden.

RULE VI. Words ending in double l, in taking ness, less, ly, or ful, after them, generally omit one l; as, fulness, skilless, fully skilful.

But words ending in any double letter but l, and taking ness, less, ly, or ful, after them, preserve the letter double; as, harmlessness, carelessness, carelessly, stiffly, successful.

RULE VII. Ness, less, ly, or ful, added to words ending in silent e, does not cut it off; as, paleness, guileless, closely, peaceful; except in a few words; as, duly, truly, awful.

RULE VIII. When words ending in silent e, assume the termination, ment, the e should not be cut off; as, abatement, chastisement.

Ment, like other terminations, changes y into i when the y is preceded by a consonant; as, accompany, accompaniment; merry, merriment.

RULE IX. When words ending in silent e, assume the termination, able or ible, the e should generally be cut off; as, blame, blamable; cure, curable; sense, sensible. But if c or g soft comes before e in the original word, the e is preserved in words compounded with able; as, peace, peaceable; change, changeable.

RULE X. When ing or ish is added to words ending in silent e, the e is almost always omitted; as, place, placing; lodge, lodging; slave, slavish; prude, prudish.

RULE XI. Compound words are generally spelled in the same manner as the simple words of which they are compounded; as, glasshouse, skylight, thereby, hereafter. Many words ending in double l, are exceptions to this rule; as, already, welfare, wilful, fulfil; and also the words, wherever, christmas, lammas, &c.

You may now answer the following

What is language?—How is language divided?—What is natural language?—What are the elements of natural language in man?—Wherein consists the language of brutes?—What is artificial language?—What is an idea?—What are words?—What is grammar?—What does Universal grammar explain?—Wherein does Particular grammar differ from universal?—What is the standard of grammatical accuracy?—What is Philosophical grammar?—What is Practical grammar?—What is a principle of grammar?—A definition?—A rule?—What is English grammar?—Into how many parts is grammar divided?—What does Orthography teach?

The rules of syntax, which direct to the proper choice of words, and their judicious arrangement in a sentence, and thereby enable us to correct and avoid errors in speech, are chiefly based on principles unfolded and explained by Etymology. Etymological knowledge, then, is a prerequisite to the study of Syntax; but, in parsing, under the head of Etymology, you are required to apply the rules of Syntax. It becomes necessary, therefore, in a practical work of this sort, to treat these two parts of grammar in connexion.

Conducted on scientific principles, Etymology would comprehend the exposition of the origin and meaning of words, and, in short, their whole history, including their application to things in accordance with the laws of nature and of thought, and the caprice of those who apply them; but to follow up the current of language to its various sources, and analyze the springs from which it flows, would involve a process altogether too arduous and extensive for an elementary work. It would lead to the study of all those languages from which ours is immediately derived, and even compel us to trace many words through those languages to others more ancient, and so on, until the chain of research would become, if not endless, at least, too extensive to be traced out by one man. I shall, therefore, confine myself to the following, limited views of this part of grammar.

1. Etymology treats of the classification of words.

2. Etymology explains the accidents or properties peculiar to each class or sort of words, and their present modifications. By modifications, I mean the changes produced on their endings, in consequence of their assuming different relations in respect to one another. These changes, such as fruit, fruits, fruit's; he, his, him; write, writest, writeth, writes, wrote, written, writing, writer; a, an; ample, amply, and the like, will be explained in their appropriate places.

3. Etymology treats of the derivation of words; that is, it teaches you how one word comes from, or grows out of another. For example, from the word speak, come the words speakest, speaketh, speaks, speaking, spoke, spoken, speaker, speaker's, speakers. These, you perceive, are all one and the same word, and all, except the last three, express the same kind of action. They differ from each other only in the termination. These changes in termination are produced on the word in order to make it correspond with the various persons who speak, the number of persons, or the time of speaking; as, I speak, thou speakest, the man speaketh, or speaks, the men speak, I spoke; The speaker speaks another speaker's speech.

The third part of Etymology, which is intimately connected with the second, will be more amply expanded in Lecture XIV, and in the Philosophical notes; but I shall not treat largely of that branch of derivation which consists in tracing words to foreign languages. This is the province of the lexicographer, rather than of the philologist. It is not the business of him who writes a practical, English grammar, to trace words to the Saxon, nor to the Celtic, the Greek, the Dutch, the Mexican, nor the Persian; nor is it his province to explain their meaning in Latin, French, or Hebrew, Italian, Mohegan, or Sanscrit; but it is his duty to explain their properties, their powers, their connexions, relations, dependancies, and, bearings, not at the period in which the Danes made an irruption into the island of Great Britain, nor in the year in which Lamech paid his addresses to Adah and Zillah, but at the particular period in which he writes. His words are already derived, formed, established, and furnished to his hand, and he is bound to take them and explain them as he finds them in his day, without any regard to their ancient construction and application.

In arranging the parts of speech, I conceive it to be the legitimate object of the practical grammarian, to consult practical convenience. The true principle of classification seems to be, not a reference to essential differences in the primitive meaning of words, nor to their original combinations, but to the manner in which they are at present employed. In the early and rude state of society, mankind are quite limited in their knowledge, and having but few ideas to communicate, a small number of words answers their purpose in the transmission of thought. This leads them to express their ideas in short, detached sentences, requiring few or none of those connectives, or words of transition, which are afterwards introduced into language by refinement, and which contribute so largely to its perspicuity and elegance. The argument appears to be conclusive, then, that every language must necessarily have more parts of speech in its refined, than in its barbarous state.

The part of speech to which any word belongs, is ascertained, not by the original signification of that word, but by its present manner of meaning, or, rather, the office which it performs in a sentence.

The various ways in which a word is applied to the idea which it represents, are called its manner of meaning. Thus, The painter dips his paint brush in paint, to paint the carriage. Here, the word paint, is first employed to describe the brush which the painter uses; in this situation it is, therefore, an adjective; secondly, to name the mixture employed; for which reason it is a noun; and, lastly, to express the action performed; it therefore, becomes a verb; and yet, the meaning of the word is the same in all these applications. This meaning, however, is applied in different ways; and thus the same word becomes different parts of speech. Richard took water from the water pot, to water the plants.

Etymology treats, first, of the classification of words.

THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE is derived chiefly from the Saxon, Danish, Celtic, and Gothic; but in the progressive stages of its refinement, it has been greatly enriched by accessions from the Greek, Latin, French, Spanish, Italian, and German languages.

The number of words in our language, after deducting proper names, and words formed by the inflections of our verbs, nouns, and adjectives, may be estimated at about forty thousand.

Thus you perceive, that all the words in the English language are included in these ten classes: and what you have to do in acquiring a knowledge of English Grammar, is merely to become acquainted with these ten parts of speech, and the rules of Syntax that apply to them. The Noun and Verb are the most important and leading parts of speech; therefore they are first presented: all the rest (except the interjection) are either appendages or connectives of these two. As you proceed, you will find that it will require more time, and cost you more labor, to get a knowledge of the noun and verb, than it will to become familiar with all the minor parts of speech.

The principal use of words is, to name things, compare them with each other, and express their actions.

Nouns, which are the names of entities or things, adjectives which denote the comparisons and relations of things by describing them, and expressing their qualities, and verbs, which express the actions and being of things, are the only classes of words necessarily recognised in a philosophical view of grammar. But in a treatise which consults, mainly, the practical advantages of the learner, it is believed, that no classification will be found more convenient or accurate than the foregoing, which divides words into ten sorts. To attempt to prove, in this place, that nothing would be gained by adopting either a less or a greater number of the parts of speech, would be anticipating the subject. I shall, therefore, give my reasons for adopting this arrangement in preference to any other, as the different sorts of words are respectively presented to you, for then you will be better prepared to appreciate my arguments.

Nouns are often improperly called substantives. A substantive is the name of a substance only; but a noun is the name either of a substance or a quality.

Noun, derived from the Latin word nomen, signifies name. The name of any thing^[1] that exists, whether animate or inanimate, or which we can see, hear, feel, taste, smell, or think of, is a noun. Animal, bird, creature, paper, pen, apple, fold, house, modesty, virtue, danger, are all nouns. In order that you may easily distinguish this part of speech from others, I will give you a sign, which will be useful to you when you cannot tell it by the sense. Any word that will make sense with the before it, is a noun. Try the following words by this sign, and see if they are nouns: tree, mountain, soul, mind, conscience, understanding. The tree, the mountain, the soul, and so on. You perceive, that they will make sense with the prefixed; therefore you know they are nouns. There are, however, exceptions to this rule, for some nouns will not make sense with the prefixed. These you will be able to distinguish, if you exercise your mind, by their making sense of themselves; as, goodness, sobriety, hope, immortality.

Nouns are used to denote the nonentity or absence of a thing, as well as its reality; as, nothing, naught, vacancy, non-existence, invisibility.

Nouns are sometimes used as verbs, and verbs, as nouns, according to their manner of meaning; and nouns are sometimes used as adjectives, and adjectives, as nouns. This matter will be explained in the concluding part of this lecture, where you will be better prepared to comprehend it.

The distinction between a common and a proper noun, is very obvious. For example: boy is a common noun, because it is a name applied to all boys; but Charles is a proper noun, because it is the name of an individual boy. Although many boys may have the same name, yet you know it is not a common noun, for the name Charles is not given to all boys. Mississippi is a proper noun, because it is the name of an individual river; but river is a common noun, because it is the name of a species of things, and the name river is common to all rivers.

Nouns which denote the genus, species, or variety of beings or things, are always common; as, tree, the genus; oak, ash, chestnut, poplar, different species; and red oak, white oak, black oak, varieties. The word earth, when it signifies a kind or quantity of dirt, is a common noun; but when it denotes the planet we inhabit, it is a proper noun. The words person, place, river, mountain, lake, &c. are common nouns, because they are the names of whole species, or classes of things containing many sorts; but the names of persons, places, rivers, mountains, lakes, &c. are proper nouns, because they denote individuals; as, Augustus, Baltimore, Alps, Huron.

Physician, lawyer, merchant, and shoemaker, are common nouns, because these names are common to classes of men. God and Lord, when applied to Jehovah or Jesus Christ, are proper; but when employed to denote heathen or false gods, or temporal lords, they are common. The Notes and remarks throughout the work, though of minor importance, demand your attentive and careful perusal.

Neuter means neither: therefore neuter gender signifies neither gender; that is, neither masculine nor feminine. Hence, neuter gender means no gender. Strictly speaking, then, as there are but two sexes, nouns have but two genders; but for the sake of practical convenience, we apply to them three genders, by calling that a gender which is no gender. The English and the pure Persian, appear to be the only languages which observe, in the distinction of sex, the natural division of nouns.—The genders of nouns are so easily known, that a farther explanation of them is unnecessary, except what is given in the following

Nouns have but two persons, the second and third. When a man speaks, the pronoun I or we is always used; therefore nouns can never be in the first person. In examples like the following, some philologists suppose the noun to be in the first person:—"This may certify, that I, Jonas Taylor, do hereby give and grant," &c. But it is evident, that the speaker or writer, in introducing his own name, speaks of himself; consequently the noun is of the third person.

If you wish to understand the persons of nouns, a little sober thought is requisite; and, by exercising it, all difficulties will be removed. If I say, my son, have you seen the young man? you perceive that the noun son is of the second person, because I address myself to him; that is, he is spoken to; but the noun man is of the third person, because he is spoken of. Again, if I say, young man, have you seen my son? man is of the second person, and son is of the third.

"Hast thou left thy blue course in the heavens, golden-haired sun of the sky?"

"Father, may the Great Spirit so brighten the chain of friendship between us, that a child may find it, when the sun is asleep in his wig-wam behind the western waters."

In these examples, the nouns, sun, father, mountains, valleys, and hope, are of the second person, and, as you will hereafter learn, in the nominative case independent. Course, heavens, sky, Spirit, chain, friendship, child, sun, wig-wam, waters, earth, skies, wings, earth, bounds, ocean, and shore, are all of the third person.

I deem the essential qualities of case, in English, to consist, not in the changes or inflections produced on nouns and pronouns, but in the various offices which they perform in a sentence, by assuming different positions in regard to other words. In accordance with this definition, these cases can be easily explained on reasoning principles, founded in the nature of things.

Now, five grains of common sense will enable any one to comprehend what is meant by case. Its real character is extremely simple; but in the different grammars it assumes as many meanings as Proteus had shapes. The most that has been written on it, however, is mere verbiage. What, then, is meant by case? In speaking of a horse, for instance, we say he is in a good case, when he is fat, and in a bad case, when he is lean, and needs more oats; and in this sense we apply the term case to denote the state or condition of the horse. So, when we place a noun before a verb as actor or subject, we say it is in the nominative case; but when it follows a transitive verb or preposition, we say it has another case; that is, it assumes a new position or situation in the sentence: and this we call the objective case. Thus, the boy gathers fruit. Here the boy is represented as acting. He is, therefore, in the nominative case. But when I say, Jane struck the boy, I do not represent the boy as the actor, but as the object of the action. He is, therefore, in a new case or condition. And when I say, This is the boy's hat, I do not speak of the boy either as acting or as acted upon; but as possessing something: for which reason he is in the possessive case. Hence, it is clear, that nouns have three cases or positions.

As the nominative and objective cases of the noun are inseparably connected with the verb, it is impossible for you to understand them until you shall have acquired some knowledge of this part of speech. I will, therefore, now give you a partial description of the verb in connexion with the noun; which will enable me to illustrate the cases of the noun so clearly, that you may easily comprehend their nature.

In the formation of language, mankind, in order to hold converse with each other, found it necessary, in the first place, to give names to the various objects by which they were surrounded. Hence the origin of the first part of speech, which we denominate the noun. But merely to name the objects which they beheld or thought of, was not sufficient for their purpose. They perceived that these objects existed, moved, acted, or caused some action to be done. In looking at a man, for instance, they perceived that he lived, walked, ate, smiled, talked, ran, and so on. They perceived that plants grow, flowers bloom, and rivers flow. Hence the necessity of another part of speech, whose office it should be to express these existences and actions. This second class of words we call

The term verb is derived from the Latin word verbum, which signifies a word. This part of speech is called a verb or word, because it is deemed the most important word in every sentence: and without a verb and nominative, either expressed or implied, no sentence can exist. The noun is the original and leading part of speech; the verb comes next in order, and is far more complex than the noun. These two are the most useful in the language, and form the basis of the science of grammar. The other eight parts of speech are subordinate to these two, and, as you will hereafter learn, of minor importance.

For all practical purposes, the foregoing definition and division of the verb, though, perhaps, not philosophically correct, will be found as convenient as any other. I adopt them, therefore, to be consistent with the principle, that, in arranging the materials of this treatise, I shall not alter or reject any established definition, rule, or principle of grammar, unless, in my humble judgment, some practical advantage to the learner is thereby gained. The following, some consider a good definition.

In this example, which is the verb? You know it is the word writes, because this word signifies to do; that is, it expresses action, therefore, according to the definition, it is an active verb. And you know, too, that the noun John is the actor, therefore John is in the nominative case to the verb writes. In the expressions, The man walks—The boy plays—Thunders roll—- Warriors fight—you perceive that the words walks, plays, roll, and fight, are active verbs; and you cannot be at a loss to know, that the nouns man, boy, thunders, and warriors, are in the nominative case.

As no action can be produced without some agent or moving cause, it follows, that every active verb must have some actor or agent. This actor, doer, or producer of the action, is the nominative. Nominative, from the Latin nomino, literally signifies to name; but in the technical sense in which it is used in grammar, it means the noun or pronoun which is the subject of affirmation. This subject or nominative may be active, passive, or neuter, as hereafter exemplified.

Now, in this example, John is not represented as an actor, but, as the subject of the verb sits, therefore John is in the nominative case to the verb. And you know that the word sits does not express apparent action, but a condition of being; that is, it represents John in a particular state of existence; therefore sits is a neuter verb. In speaking of the neuter gender of nouns, I informed you, that neuter means neither; from which it follows, that neuter gender implies neither gender; that is, neither masculine nor feminine. Hence, by an easy transition of thought, you learn, that neuter, when applied to verbs, means neither of the other two classes; that is, a neuter verb is one which is neither active nor passive. In these examples, The man stands—The lady lives—The child sleeps—The world exists—the words stands, lives, sleeps, and exists, are neuter verbs; and the nouns, man, lady, child, and world, are all in the nominative case, because each is the subject of a verb. Thus you perceive, that when a noun is in the nominative case to an active verb, it is the actor; and when it is nominative to a neuter verb, it is not an actor, but the subject of the verb.

Some neuter verbs express being in general; as, The man is; Kingdoms exist. Others express being in some particular state; as, The man stands, sits, lies, or hangs.

I will now give you two signs, which will enable you to distinguish the verb from other parts of speech, when you cannot tell it by its signification. Any word that will make sense with to before it, is a verb. Thus, to run, to write, to smile, to sing, to hear, to ponder, to live, to breathe, are verbs. Or, any word that will conjugate, is a verb. Thus, I run, thou runnest, he runs; I write, thou writest, he writes; I smile, &c. But the words, boy, lady, child, and world, will not make sense with to prefixed—to boy, to lady, to world, is nonsense. Neither will they conjugate—I lady, thou ladiest, &c. is worse than nonsense. Hence you perceive, that these words are not verbs. There are some exceptions to these rules, for verbs are sometimes used as nouns. This will be explained by and by.

At present I shall speak only of the number and person of verbs; but hereafter I will give you a full explanation of all their properties. And permit me to inform you, that I shall not lead you into the intricacies of the science, until, by gradual and easy progressions, you are enabled to comprehend the principles involved in them. Only such principles will be elucidated, as you are prepared to understand at the time they are unfolded before you. You must not be too anxious to get along rapidly; but endeavor to become thoroughly acquainted with one principle, before you undertake another. This lecture will qualify you for the next.

NUMBER AND PERSON OF VERBS. You recollect, that the nominative is the actor or subject, and the active verb is the action performed by the nominative. By this you perceive, that a very intimate connexion or relation exists between the nominative case and the verb. If, therefore, only one creature or thing acts, only one action, at the same instant, can be done; as, The girl writes. The nominative girl is here of the singular number, because it signifies but one person; and the verb writes denotes but one action, which the girl performs; therefore the verb writes is of the singular number, agreeing with its nominative girl. When the nominative case is plural, the verb must be plural; as, girls write. Take notice, the singular verb ends in s, but the noun is generally plural when it ends in s; thus, The girl writes—the girls write.

Person, strictly speaking, is a quality that belongs not to verbs, but to nouns and pronouns. We say, however, that the verb must agree with its nominative in person, as well as in number; that is, the verb must be spelled and spoken in such a manner as to correspond with the first, second, or third person of the noun or pronoun which is its nominative.

I will now show you how the verb is varied in order to agree with its nominative in number and person. I, Thou, He, She, It; We, Ye or You, They, are personal pronouns. I is of the first person, and singular number; Thou is second person, sing.; He, She, or It, is third per. sing.; We is first per. plural; Ye or You is second per. plural; They is third per. plural. These pronouns are the representatives of nouns, and perform the same office that the nouns would for which they stand. When placed before the verb, they are, therefore, the nominatives to the verb.

Notice particularly, the different variations or endings of the verb, as it is thus conjugated in the

This display of the verb shows you, that whenever it ends in est, it is of the second person singular; but when the verb ends in s, or eth, it is of the third person singular. Walkest, ridest, standest, are of the second person singular; and walks or walketh, rides or rideth, stands or standeth, are of the third person singular.

I have told you, that when the nominative is singular number, the verb must be; when the nominative is plural, the verb must be; and when the nominative is first, second, or third person, the verb must be of the same person. If you look again at the foregoing conjugation of walk, you will notice that the verb varies if its endings in the singular, in order to agree in form with the first, second, and third person of its nominative; but in the plural it does not vary its endings from the first person singular. The verb, however, agrees in sense with its nominative in the plural, as well as in the singular. Exercise a little mind, and you will perceive that agreement and government in language do not consist merely in the form of words. Now, is it not clear, that when I say, I walk, the verb walk is singular, because it expresses but one action? And when I say, Two men walk, is it not equally apparent, that walk is plural, because it expresses two actions? In the sentence, Ten men walk, the verb walk denotes ten actions, for there are ten actors. Common sense teaches you, that there must be as many actions as there are actors; and that the verb, when it has no form or ending to show it, is as strictly plural, as when it has.—So, in the phrase, We walk, the verb walk is first person, because it expresses the actions performed by the speakers: Ye or you walk, the verb is second person, denoting the actions of the persons spoken to; third person, They walk. The verb, then, when correctly written, always agrees, in sense, with its nominative in number and person.

At present you are learning two parts of speech, neither of which can be understood without a knowledge of the other. It therefore becomes necessary to explain them both, in the same lecture. You have been already informed, that nouns have three cases; the nominative, the possessive, and the objective.

When I say, These are the men's, and those, the boys' hats, the two words, "boys' hats," plainly convey the idea, if they have any meaning at all, that the boys own or possess the hats. "Samuel Badger sells boys' hats." Who owns the hats? Mr. Badger. How is that fact ascertained? Not by the words, "boys' hats," which, taken by themselves, imply, not that they are Mr. Badger's hats, nor that they are for boys, but that they are hats of, or belonging to, or possessed by boys. But we infer from the words connected with the phrase, "boys' hats," that the boys are not yet, as the phrase literally denotes, in the actual possession of the hats. The possession is anticipated.

In the phrases, fine hats, coarse hats, high-crowned hats, broad-brimmed hats, woollen, new, ten, some, these, many hats, the words in italics, are adjectives, because they restrict, qualify, or define the term hats; but the term boys' does not describe or limit the meaning of hats. Boys', therefore, is not, as some suppose, an adjective.

"The slave's master." Does the slave possess the master? Yes. The slave has a master. If he has him, then, he possesses him;—he sustains that relation to him which we call possession.

A noun in the possessive case, is always known by its having an apostrophe, and generally an s after it; thus, John's, hat; the boy's coat. When a plural noun in the possessive case, ends in s, the apostrophe is added, but no additional s; as, "Boys' hats; Eagles' wings." When a singular noun ends in ss, the apostrophe only is added; as, "For goodness' sake; for righteousness' sake;" except the word witness; as, "The witness's testimony." When a noun in the possessive case ends in ence, the s is omitted, but the apostrophe is retained; as, "For conscience' sake."

Now please to turn back, and read over this and the preceding lecture three times, and endeavor, not only to understand, but, also, to remember, what you read. In reading, proceed thus: read one sentence over slowly, and then look off the book, and repeat it two or three times over in your mind. After that, take another sentence and proceed in the same manner, and so on through the whole lecture. Do not presume to think, that these directions are of no real consequence to you; for, unless you follow them strictly, you need not expect to make rapid progress. On the other hand, if you proceed according to my instructions, you will be sure to acquire a practical knowledge of grammar in a short time.—When you shall have complied with this requisition, you may commit the following order of parsing a noun, and the order of parsing a verb; and then you will be prepared to parse or analyze the following examples.

Do you recollect the meaning of the word analysis? If you do not, I will explain if: and first, I wish you to remember, that analysis is the reverse of synthesis. Synthesis is the act of combining simples so as to form a whole or compound. Thus, in putting together letters so as to form syllables, syllables so as to form words, words so as to form sentences, and sentences so as to form a discourse, the process is called synthetic. Analysis, on the contrary, is the act of decomposition; that is, the act of separating any thing compounded into its simple parts, and thereby exhibiting its elementary principles. Etymology treats of the analysis of language. To analyze a sentence, is to separate from one another and classify the different words of which it is composed; and to analyze or parse a word, means to enumerate and describe all its various properties, and its grammatical relations with respect to other words in a sentence, and trace it through all its inflections or changes. Perhaps, to you, this will, at first, appear to be of little importance; but, if you persevere, you will hereafter find it of great utility, for parsing will enable you to detect, and correct, errors in composition.

I will now parse two nouns according to the order, and, in so doing, by applying the definitions and rules, I shall answer all those questions given in the order. If you have perfectly committed the order of parsing a noun and verb, you may proceed with me; but, recollect, you cannot parse a verb in full, until you shall have had a more complete explanation of it.

John's hand trembles.

John's is a noun, [because it is] the name of a person—proper, the name of an individual—masculine gender, it denotes a male—third person, spoken of—singular number, it implies but one—and in the possessive case, it denotes possession—it is governed by the noun "hand," according to

RULE 12. A noun or pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the noun it possesses.

Declined—Sing. nom. John, poss. John's, obj. John. Plural—nom. Johns, poss. Johns', obj. Johns.

Hand is a noun, the name of a thing—common, the name of a sort or species of things—neuter gender, it denotes a thing without sex—third person, spoken of—sing. number, it implies but one—and in the nominative case, it is the actor and subject of the verb "trembles," and governs it agreeably to

RULE 3. The nominative case governs the verb:—that is, the nominative determines the number and person of the verb.

Declined—Sing. nom. hand, poss. hand's, obj. hand. Plur. nom. hands, poss. hands', obj. hands.

Trembles is a verb, a word which signifies to do—active, it expresses action—third person, singular number, because the nominative "hand" is with which it agrees, according to

RULE 4. The verb must agree with its nominative in number and person.

You must not say that the verb is of the third person because it is spoken of. The verb is never spoken of; but it is of the third person, and singular or plural number, because its nominative is.

Conjugated—First pers. sing. I tremble, 2 pers. thou tremblest, 3 pers. he trembles, or, the hand trembles. Plural, 1 pers. we tremble, 2 pers. ye or you tremble, 3 pers. they or the hands tremble.

ILLUSTRATION.

RULE 3. The nominative case governs the verb.

If you employ the pronoun I, which is of the first person, singular number, as the nominative to a verb, the verb must be of the first pers. sing, thus, I smile; and when your nominative is second pers. sing, your verb must be; as, thou smilest. Why, in the latter instance, does the ending of the verb change to est? Because the nominative changes. And if your nominative is third person, the verb will vary again; thus, he smiles, the man smiles. How clear it is, then, that the nominative governs the verb; that is, the nominative has power to change the form and meaning of the verb, in respect to num. and person. Government, thus far, is evinced in the form of the words, as well as in the sense.

RULE 4. The verb must agree with its nominative in number and person.

It is improper to say, thou hear, the men hears. Why improper? Because hear is first pers. and the nominative thou is second pers. Hears is singular, and the nom. men is plural. Rule 4th says, The verb must agree with its nominative. The expressions should, therefore, be, thou hearest, the men hear; and then the verb would agree with its nominatives. But why must the verb agree with its nominative? Why must we say, thou talkest, the man talks, men talk? Because the genius of our language, and the common consent of those who speak it, require such a construction: and this requisition amounts to a law or rule. This rule, then, is founded in the nature of things, and sanctioned by good usage.

RULE 12. A noun or pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the noun which it possesses.

It is correct to say, The man eats, he eats; but we cannot say, the man dog eats, he dog eats. Why not? Because the man is here represented as the possessor, and dog, the property, or thing possessed; and the genius of our language requires, that when we add to the possessor, the thing which he is represented as possessing, the possessor shall take a particular form to show its case, or relation to the property; thus, The man's dog eats, his dog eats. You perceive, then, that the added noun, denoting the thing possessed, has power to change the form of the noun or pronoun denoting the possessor, according to RULE 12. thus, by adding dog in the preceding examples, man is changed to man's, and he, to his.

Now parse the sentence which I have parsed, until the manner is quite familiar to you; and then you will be prepared to analyze correctly and systematically, the following exercises. When you parse, you may spread the Compendium before you; and, if you have not already committed the definitions and rules, you may read them on that, as you apply them. This mode of procedure will enable you to learn all the definitions and rules by applying them to practice.

Rain descends—Rains descend—Snow falls—Snows fall—Thunder rolls—Thunders roll—Man's works decay—Men's labors cease—John's dog barks—Eliza's voice trembles—Julia's sister's child improves—Peter's cousin's horse limps.

In the next place, I will parse a noun and a neuter verb, which verb, you will notice, differs from an active only in one respect.

"Birds repose on the branches of trees."

Birds is a noun, the name of a thing or creature—common, the name of a genus or class—masculine and feminine gender, it denotes both males and females—third person, spoken of—plural number, it implies more than one—and in the nominative case, it is the subject of the verb "repose," and governs it according to RULE 3. The nominative case governs the verb. Declined—Sing. nom. bird, poss. bird's, obj. bird. Plural, nom. birds, poss. birds', obj. birds.

Repose is a verb, a word that signifies to be—neuter, it expresses neither action nor passion, but a state of being—third person, plural number, because the nominative "birds" is with which it agrees, agreeably to RULE 4. The verb must agree with its nominative in number and person.

Declined—1. pers. sing. I repose, 2. pers. thou reposest, 3. pers. he reposes, or the bird reposes. Plur. 1. pers. we repose, 2. pers. ye or you repose, 3. pers. they repose, or birds repose.

Now parse those nouns and neuter verbs that are distinguished by italics, in the following

The book lies on the desk—The cloak hangs on the wall—Man's days are few—Cathmor's warriors sleep in death—Caltho reposes in the narrow house—Jocund day stands tiptoe on the misty mountain tops. The sunbeams rest on the grave where her beauty sleeps.

You may parse these and the preceding exercises, and all that follow, five or six times over, if you please.

A noun is in the objective case when it is the object of something. At present I shall explain this case only as the object of an action; but when we shall have advanced as far as to the preposition, I will also illustrate it as the object of a relation.

Transitive means passing. In this sentence the action of the verb strikes is transitive, because it passes over from the nominative Richard to the object John; and you know that the noun John is in the objective case, because it is the object of the action expressed by the active-transitive verb strikes. This matter is very plain. For example: Gallileo invented the telescope. Now it is evident, that Gallileo did not exert his powers of invention, without some object in view. In order to ascertain that object, put the question, Gallileo invented what? The telescope. Telescope, then, is the real object of the action, denoted by the transitive verb invented; and, therefore, telescope is in the objective case. If I say, The horse kicks the servant—Carpenters build houses—Ossian wrote poems—Columbus discovered America—you readily perceive, that the verbs kick, build, wrote, and discovered, express transitive actions; and you cannot be at a loss to tell which nouns are in the objective case:—they are servant, houses, poems, and America.

The nominative and objective cases of nouns are generally known by the following rule: the nominative does something; the objective has something done to it. The nominative generally comes before the verb; and the objective, after it. When I say, George struck the servant, George is in the nominative, and servant is in the objective case; but, when I say, The servant struck George, servant is in the nominative case, and George is in the objective. Thus you perceive, that Case means the different state or situation of nouns with regard to other words.

It is sometimes very difficult to tell the case of a noun. I shall, therefore, take up this subject again, when I come to give you an explanation of the participle and preposition.

Besides the three cases already explained, nouns are sometimes in the nominative case independent, sometimes in the nominative case absolute, sometimes in apposition in the same case, and sometimes in the nominative or objective case after the neuter to be, or after an active-intransitive or passive verb. These cases are illustrated in Lecture X. and in the 21 and 22 rules of Syntax.

You perceive that the verb walks, in this example, is intransitive, because the action does not pass over to an object; that is, the action is confined to the agent John. The following sign will generally enable you to distinguish a transitive verb from an intransitive. Any verb that will make sense with the words a thing or a person, after it, is transitive. Try these verbs by the sign, love, help, conquer, reach, subdue, overcome. Thus, you can say, I love a person or thing—I can help a person or thing—and so on. Hence you know that these verbs are transitive. But an intransitive verb will not make sense with this sign, which fact will be shown by the following examples: smile, go, come, play, bark, walk, fly. We cannot say, if we mean to speak English, I smile a person or thing—I go a person or thing:—hence you perceive that these verbs are not transitive, but intransitive.

If you reflect upon these examples for a few moments, you will have a clear conception of the nature of transitive and intransitive verbs. Before I close this subject, however, it is necessary farther to remark, that some transitive and intransitive verbs express what is called a mental or moral action; and others, a corporeal or physical action. Verbs expressing the different affections or operations of the mind, denote moral actions; as, Brutus loved his country; James hates vice; We believe the tale:—to repent, to relent, to think, to reflect, to mourn, to muse. Those expressing the actions produced by matter, denote physical actions; as, The dog hears the bell; Virgil wrote the Aenead; Columbus discovered America;—to see, to feel, to taste, to smell, to run, to talk, to fly, to strike. In the sentence, Charles resembles his father, the verb resembles does not appear to express any action at all; yet the construction of the sentence, and the office which the verb performs, are such, that we are obliged to parse it as an active-transitive verb, governing the noun father in the objective case. This you may easily reconcile in your mind, by reflecting, that the verb has a direct reference to its object. The following verbs are of this character: Have, own, retain; as, I have a book.

Active intransitive verbs are frequently made transitive. When I say, The birds fly, the verb fly is intransitive; but when I say, The boy flies the kite, the verb fly is transitive, and governs the noun kite in the objective case. Almost any active intransitive verb, and sometimes even neuter verbs, are used as transitive. The horse walks rapidly; The boy runs swiftly; My friend lives well; The man died of a fever. In all these examples the verbs are intransitive; in the following they are transitive: The man walks his horse; The boy ran a race; My friend lives a holy life; Let me die the death of the righteous.

The foregoing development of the character of verbs, is deemed sufficiently critical for practical purposes; but if we dip a little deeper into the verbal fountain, we shall discover qualities which do not appear on its surface. If we throw aside the veil which art has drawn over the real structure of speech, we shall find, that almost every verb has either a personal or a verbal object, expressed or implied. Verbal objects, which are the effects or productions resulting from the actions, being necessarily implied, are seldom expressed.

The fire burns. If the fire burns, it must burn wood, coal, tallow, or some other combustible substance. The man laughs. Laughs what? Laughs laughter or laugh. They walk; that is, They walk or take walks. Rivers flow (move or roll them-selves or their waters) into the ocean.

"I sing the shady regions of the west."

"And smile the wrinkles from the brow of age."

The child wept itself sick; and then, by taking (or sleeping) a short nap, it slept itself quiet and well again. "He will soon sleep his everlasting sleep"; that is, "He will sleep the sleep of death."

Thinkers think thoughts; Talkers talk or employ words, talk, or speeches; The rain rains rain. "Upon Sodom and Gomorrah the Lord rained fire and brimstone." "I must go the whole length." "I shall soon go the way of all the earth."

Now please to turn back again, and peruse this lecture attentively; after which you may parse, systematically, the following exercises containing nouns in the three cases, and active-transitive verbs.

The printer prints books.

Prints is a verb, a word that signifies to do—active, it expresses action—transitive, the action passes over from the nominative "printer" to the object "books"—third pers. sing. numb. because the nominative printer is with which it agrees.

RULE 4. The verb must agree with its nominative case in number and person.

Declined—1. pers. sing. I print, 2. pers. thou printest, 3. pers. he prints, or the printer prints, and so on.

Books is a noun, the name of a thing—common, the name of a sort of things,—neut. gend. it denotes a thing without sex—third pers. spoken of—plur. num. it implies more than one—and in the objective case, it is the object of the action, expressed by the active-transitive verb "prints," and is governed by it according to

RULE 20. Active-transitive verbs govern the objective case.

The noun books is thus declined—Sing. nom. book, poss. book's, obj. book—Plur. nom. books, poss. books', obj. books.

RULE 20. Transitive verbs govern the objective case; that is, they require the noun or pronoun following them to be in that case; and this requisition is government. Pronouns have a particular form to suit each case; but nouns have not. We cannot say, She struck he; I gave the book to they. Why not? Because the genius of our language requires the pronoun following a transitive verb or preposition (to is a preposition) to assume that form which we call the objective form or case. Accordingly, the construction should be, She struck him; I gave the book to them.—Read, again, the illustration of "government" on page 52.

As you have been analyzing nouns in their three cases, it becomes necessary to present, in the next place, the declension of nouns, for you must decline every noun you parse. Declension means putting a noun through the different cases: and you will notice, that the possessive case varies from the nominative in its termination, or ending, but the objective case ends like the nominative. The nominative and objective cases of nouns, must, therefore, be ascertained by their situation in the sentence, or by considering the office they perform.

Now, if you have parsed every word in the preceding examples, (except the, that, those, and his) you may proceed with me and parse the examples in the following exercises, in which are presented nouns and active-intransitive verbs.

"My flock increases yearly."

Flock is a noun, a name denoting animals—a noun of multitude, it signifies many in one collective body—masculine and feminine gender, denoting both sexes—third person, spoken of—singular number, it denotes but one flock—and in the nominative case, it is the active agent of the verb "increases," and governs it, according to RULE 3, The nominative case governs the verb. (Decline it.)

Increases is a verb, a word that signifies to do—active, it expresses action—intransitive, the action does not pass over to an object—of the third person, singular number, because its nominative "flock" conveys unity of idea, and it agrees with "flock" agreeably to

RULE 10. A noun of multitude conveying unity of idea, must have a verb or pronoun agreeing with it in the singular.

"The divided multitude hastily disperse."

Multitude is a noun, a name that denotes persons—a collective noun, or noun of multitude, it signifies many—masculine and feminine gender, it implies both sexes—third person, spoken of—singular number, it represents but one multitude, or collective body; (but in another sense, it is plural, as it conveys plurality of idea, and, also, implies more individuals than one;)—and in the nominative case, it is the actor and subject of the verb "disperse," which it governs, according to RULE 3. The nom. case governs the verb.—Declined.—Sing. nom. multitude, poss. multitude's, obj. multitude—Plur. nom. multitudes, poss. multitudes', obj. multitudes.

Disperse is a verb, a word that signifies to do—active, it expresses action—intransitive, the action does not terminate on an object—third person, plural number, because its nominative "multitude" conveys plurality of idea; and it agrees with "multitude" agreeably to RULE 11. A noun of multitude conveying plurality of idea, must have a verb or pronoun agreeing with it in the plural.

Rules 10, and 11, rest on a sandy foundation. They appear not to be based on the principles of the language; and, therefore, it might, perhaps, be better to reject than to retain them. Their application is quite limited. In many instances, they will not apply to nouns of multitude. The existence of such a thing as "unity or plurality of idea," as applicable to nouns of this class, is doubtful. It is just as correct to say, "The meeting was divided in its sentiments," as to say, "The meeting were divided in their sentiments." Both are equally supported by the genius of the language, and by the power of custom. It is correct to say, either that, "The fleet were dispersed;" "The council were unanimous;" "The council were divided;" or that, "The fleet was dispersed;" "The council was unanimous;" "The council was divided." But, perhaps for the sake of euphony, in some instances, custom has decided in favor of a singular, and in others, of a plural construction, connected with words of this class. For example; custom gives a preference to the constructions, "My people do not consider;" "The peasantry go barefoot;" "The flock is his object;" instead of, "My people doth not consider;" "The peasantry goes barefoot;" "The flock are his object." In instances like these, the application of the foregoing rules may be of some use; but the constructions in which they do not apply, are probably more numerous than those in which they do.

Your improvement in grammar depends, not on the number of words which you parse, but on the attention which you give the subject. You may parse the same exercises several times over.

For the gratification of those who prefer it, I here present another

Verbs are of two kinds, transitive and intransitive.

A verb is transitive when the action affects an object; as, "Earthquakes rock kingdoms; thrones and palaces are shaken down; and potentates, princes, and subjects, are buried in one common grave."

A verb is intransitive when it has no object; as, "The waters came upon me;" "I am he who was, and is, and is to come."

As an exercise on what you have been studying, I will now put to you a few questions, all of which you ought to be able to answer before you proceed any farther.

With what two general divisions of grammar does the second lecture begin?—Of what does Etymology treat?—Of what does Syntax treat?—On what is based the true principle of classification?—How do you ascertain the part of speech to which a word belongs?—What is meant by its manner of meaning?—Name the ten parts of speech.—Which of these are considered the most important?—By what sign may a noun be distinguished?—How many kinds of nouns are there?—What belong to nouns?—What is gender?—How many genders have nouns?—What is person?—How many persons have nouns?—What is number?—How many numbers have nouns?—What is case?—How many cases have nouns?—Does case consist in the inflections of a noun?—How many kinds of verbs are there?—By what sign may a verb be known?—What belong to verbs?—What is synthesis?—What is analysis?—What is parsing?—Repeat the order of parsing the noun.—Repeat the order of parsing the verb.—What rule do you apply in parsing a noun in the possessive case?—What rule, in parsing a noun in the nominative case?—What rule applies in parsing a verb?—What is meant by government?—Explain rules 3, 4, and 12.—By what rule are the nominative and objective cases of nouns known?—By what sign can you distinguish a transitive from an intransitive verb?—Do transitive verbs ever express a moral action?—Are intransitive and neuter verbs ever used as transitive?—Give some examples of transitive verbs with personal and verbal objects.—What rule do you apply in parsing a noun in the objective case?—Explain rule 20.—In parsing a verb agreeing with a noun of multitude conveying plurality of idea, what rule do you apply?

Thus you see, it is impossible for you to become a grammarian without exercising your judgment. If you have sufficient resolution to do this, you will, in a short time, perfectly understand the nature and office of the different parts of speech, their various properties and relations, and the rules of syntax that apply to them; and, in a few weeks, be able to speak and write accurately. But you must not take things for granted, without examining their propriety and correctness. No. You are not a mere automaton, or boy-machine; but a rational being. You ought, therefore, to think methodically, to reason soundly, and to investigate every principle critically. Don't be afraid to think for yourself. You know not the high destiny that awaits you. You know not the height to which you may soar in the scale of intellectual existence. Go on, then, boldly, and with unyielding perseverance; and if you do not gain admittance into the temple of fame, strive, at all hazards, to drink of the fountain which gurgles from its base.

NOTE 1, TO RULE 12. A noun in the possessive case, should always be distinguished by the apostrophe, or mark of elision; as, The nation's glory.

That girls book is cleaner than those boys books.

Thy ancestors virtue is not thine.

A mothers tenderness and a fathers care, are natures gift's for mans advantage. Wisdoms precept's form the good mans interest and happiness. They suffer for conscience's sake. He is reading Cowpers poems. James bought Johnsons Dictionary.

RULE 4. A verb must agree with its nominative in number and person.

Those boys improves rapidly. The men labors in the field. Nothing delight some persons. Thou shuns the light. He dare not do it. They reads well.

A variety of pleasing objects charm the eye. The number of inhabitants of the United States exceed nine millions. Nothing but vain and foolish pursuits delight some persons.

The small claims of the article to a separate rank as a distinct part of speech, ought not to be admitted in a scientific classification of words. A and the, this and that, ten, few, and fourth, and many other words, are used to restrict, vary, or define the signification of the nouns to which they are joined. They might, therefore, with propriety, be ranked under the general head of Restrictives, Indexes, or Defining Adjectives. But, as there is a marked distinction in their particular meaning and application, each class requires a separate explanation. Hence, no practical advantage would be gained, by rejecting their established classification, as articles, numerals, and demonstratives, and by giving them new names. The character and application of a and the can be learned as soon when they are styled articles, as when they are denominated specifying or defining adjectives.

The history of this part of speech is very brief. As there are but two articles, a or an and the, you will know them wherever they occur.

A noun used without an article, or any other restrictive, is taken in its general sense; as, "Fruit is abundant;" "Gold is heavy;" "Man is born to trouble" Here we mean, fruit and gold in general; and all men, or mankind.

When we wish to limit the meaning of the noun to one object, but to no particular one, we employ a or an. If I say, "Give me a pen;" "Bring me an apple;" you are at liberty to fetch any pen or any apple you please. A or an, then, is indefinite, because it leaves the meaning of the noun to which it is applied, as far as regards the person spoken to, vague, or indeterminate; that is, not definite. But when reference is made to a particular object, we employ the, as, "Give me the pen;" "Bring me the apple, or the apple." When such a requisition is made, you are not at liberty to bring any pen or apple you please, but you must fetch the particular pen or apple to which you know me to refer. The is, therefore, called the definite article.

"A star appears." Here, the star referred to, may be known as a particular star, definite, and distinguished from all others, in the mind of the speaker; but to the hearer, it is left, among the thousands that bedeck the vault of heaven, undistinguished and indefinite. But when the star has previously been made the subject of discourse, it becomes, in the minds of both speaker and hearer a definite object, and he says, "The star appears;" that is, that particular star about which we were discoursing.

"Solomon built a temple." Did he build any temple, undetermined which? No; it was a particular temple, pre-eminently distinguished from all others. But how does it become a definite object in the mind of the hearer? Certainly, not by the phrase, "a temple," which indicates any temple, leaving it altogether undetermined which; but supposing the person addressed was totally unacquainted with the fact asserted, and it becomes to him, in one respect only, a definite and particular temple, by means of the associated words, "Solomon built;" that is, by the use of these words in connexion with the others, the hearer gets the idea of a temple distinguished as the one erected by Solomon. If the speaker were addressing one whom he supposed to be unacquainted with the fact related, he might make the temple referred to a still more definite object in the mind of the hearer by a farther explanation of it; thus, "Solomon built a temple on mount Zion; and that was the temple to which the Jews resorted to worship."

"The lunatic, the poet, and the lover,
"Are of imagination all compact."

"The horse is a noble animal;" "The dog is a faithful creature;" "The wind blows;" "The wolves were howling in the woods." In these examples, we do not refer to any particular lunatics, poets, lovers, horses, dogs, winds, wolves, and woods, but we refer to these particular classes of things, in contradistinction to other objects or classes. The phrase, "Neither the one nor the other," is an idiom of the language.

You may proceed and parse the following articles, when you shall have committed this

"He is the son of a king."

The is an article, a word prefixed to a noun to limit its signification—definite, it limits the noun to a particular object—it belongs to the noun "son," according to

RULE 2. The definite article the belongs to nouns in the singular or plural number.

A is an article, a word placed before a noun to limit its signification—indefinite, it limits the noun to one of a kind, but to no particular one—it agrees with "king," agreeably to

RULE 1. The article a or an agrees with nouns in the singular number only.

A bird sings. An eagle flies. Mountains stand. The multitude pursue pleasure. The reaper reaps the farmer's grain. Farmers mow the grass. Farmers' boys spread the hay. The clerk sells the merchant's goods. An ostrich outruns an Arab's horse. Cecrops founded Athens. Gallileo invented the telescope. James Macpherson translated Ossian's poems. Sir Francis Drake circumnavigated the globe. Doctor Benjamin Franklin invented the lightning-rod. Washington Irving wrote the Sketch-Book.

I will now offer a few remarks on the misapplication of the articles, which, with the exercise of your own discriminating powers, will enable you to use them with propriety. But, before you proceed, please to answer the following

How many articles are there?—In what sense is a noun taken, when it has no article to limit it?—Repeat the order of parsing an article.—What rule applies in parsing the definite article?—What rule in parsing the indefinite?

NOTE TO RULE 1. An is used before a vowel or silent h, and a before a consonant or u long, and also before the word one.

A enemy, a inkstand, a hour, an horse, an herald, an heart, an heathen, an union, a umbrella, an useful book, many an one. This is an hard saying. They met with an heavy loss. He would not give an hat for an horse.

NOTE 1, TO RULE 2. The articles are often properly omitted: when used they should be justly applied, according to their distinct character; as, "Gold is corrupting; The sea is green; A lion is bold." It would be improper to say, The gold is corrupting; Sea is green; Lion is bold.

The grass is good for horses, and the wheat for men. Grass is good for the horses, and wheat for the men. Grass looks well. Wheat is blighted.

NOTE 2. When a noun is used in its general sense, the article should be omitted; as, "Poetry is a pleasing art;" "Oranges grow in New Orleans."

Corn in the garden, grows well; but corn in the field, does not. How does the tobacco sell? The tobacco is dear. How do you like the study of the grammar? The grammar is a pleasing study. A candid temper is proper for the man. World is wide. The man is mortal. And I persecuted this way unto the death. The earth, the air, the fire, and the water, are the four elements of the old philosophers.

In the phrases, a good apple, a bad apple, a large apple, a small apple, a red apple, a white apple, a green apple, a sweet apple, a sour apple, a bitter apple, a round apple, a hard apple, a soft apple, a mellow apple, a fair apple, a May apple, an early apple, a late apple, a winter apple, a crab apple, a thorn apple, a well-tasted apple, an ill-looking apple, a water-cored apple, you perceive that all those words in italics are adjectives, because each expresses some quality or property of the noun apple, or it shows what kind of an apple it is of which we are speaking.

The distinction between a noun and an adjective is very clear. A noun is the name of a thing; but an adjective denotes simply the quality or property of a thing. This is fine cloth. In this example, the difference between the word denoting the thing, and that denoting the quality of it, is easily perceived. You certainly cannot be at a loss to know, that the word cloth expresses the name, and fine, the quality, of the thing; consequently fine must be an adjective. If I say, He is a wise man, a prudent man, a wicked man, or an ungrateful man, the words in italics are adjectives, because each expresses a quality of the noun man. And, if I say, He is a tall man, a short man, a white man, a black man, or a persecuted man, the words, tall, short, white, black, and persecuted, are also adjectives, because they tell what kind of a man he is of whom I am speaking, or they attribute to him some particular property.

Some adjectives restrict or limit the signification of the nouns to which they are joined, and are, therefore, sometimes called definitives; as, one era, seven ages, the first man, the whole mass, no trouble, those men, that book, all regions.

Other adjectives define or describe nouns, or do both; as, fine silk, blue paper, a heavy shower, pure water, green mountains, bland breezes, gurgling rills, glass window, window glass, beaver hats, chip bonnets, blackberry ridge, Monroe garden, Juniata iron, Cincinnati steam-mill.

Some adjectives are secondary, and qualify other adjectives; as, pale red lining, dark blue silk, deep sea green sash, soft iron blooms, red hot iron plate.

You will frequently find the adjective placed after the noun; as, "Those men are tall; A lion is bold; The weather is calm; The tree is three feet thick."

Should you ever be at a loss to distinguish an adjective from the other parts of speech, the following sign will enable you to tell it. Any word that will make sense with the word thing added, or with any other noun following it, is an adjective; as, a high thing, a low thing, a hot thing, a cold thing, an unfinished thing, a new-fashioned thing:—or, a pleasant prospect, a long-deserted dwelling, an American soldier, a Greek Testament. Are these words adjectives, distant, yonder, peaceful, long-sided, double-headed? A distant object or thing, yonder hill, &c. They are. They will make sense with a noun after them. Adjectives sometimes become adverbs. This matter will be explained in Lecture VI. In parsing, you may generally know an adjective by its qualifying a noun or pronoun.

Most words ending in ing are present participles. These are frequently used as adjectives; therefore, most participles will make sense with the addition of the word thing, or any other noun, after them; as, a pleasing thing, a moving spectacle, mouldering ruins.

In the Latin language, and many others, adjectives, like nouns, have gender, number, and case; but in the English language, they have neither gender, person, number, nor case. These properties belong to creatures and things, and not to their qualities; therefore gender, person, number, and case, are the properties of nouns, and not of adjectives.

More and most form the comparative and superlative degrees by increasing the positive; and less and least, by diminishing it.

Comparison by increasing the positive

Comparison by diminishing the positive.

Read this Lecture carefully, particularly the NOTES; after which you may parse the following adjectives and neuter verb, and, likewise, the examples that follow. If you cannot repeat all the definitions and rules, spread the Compendium when you parse. But before you proceed, please to commit the

That great nation was once powerful; but now it is feeble.

Great is an adjective, a word added to a noun to express its quality—pos. great, com. greater, sup. greatest—it is in the positive degree, it expresses the quality of an object without any increase or diminution, and belongs to the noun "nation," according to

RULE 18. Adjectives belong to, and qualify, nouns expressed or understood.

Was is a verb, a word that signifies to be—neuter, it expresses neither action nor passion, but being or a state of being—third person singular, because its nominative "nation" is a noun of multitude conveying unity of idea—it agrees with "nation," agreeably to RULE 10. A noun of multitude conveying unity of idea, may have a verb or pronoun agreeing with it in the singular.

Powerful is an adjective belonging to "nation," according to Rule 18. Feeble belongs to "it," according to Note 1, under Rule 18. Is is a neuter verb agreeing with "it," agreeably to Rule 4.

"Bonaparte entered Russia with 400,000 men."

Four-hundred-thousand is a numeral adjective of the cardinal kind, it is a word used in counting, and belongs to the noun "men," according to Note 2, under Rule 18. Numeral adjectives belong to nouns, which nouns must agree in number with their adjectives.

If, in parsing the following examples, you find any words about which you are at a loss, you will please to turn back, and parse all the foregoing examples again. This course will enable you to proceed without any difficulty.

More is an adverb. Of and to are prepositions, governing the nouns that follow them in the objective case.

A benevolent man helps indigent beggars. Studious scholars learn many long lessons. Wealthy merchants own large ships. The heavy ships bear large burdens; the lighter ships carry less burdens. Just poets use figurative language. Ungrammatical expressions offend a true critic's ear. Weak critics magnify trifling errors. No composition is perfect. The rabble was tumultuous. The late-washed grass looks green. Shady trees form a delightful arbor. The setting sun makes a beautiful appearance; the variegated rainbow appears more beautiful. Epaminondas was the greatest of the Theban generals; Pelopidas was next to Epaminondas.

The first fleet contained three hundred men; the second contained four thousand. The earth contains one thousand million inhabitants. Many a cheering ray brightens the good man's pathway.

Before you proceed any farther, you may answer the following

What is the distinction between a noun and an adjective?—By what sign may an adjective be known?—Are participles ever used as adjectives?—Does gender, person, number, or case, belong to adjectives?—How are they varied?—Name the three degrees of comparison.—What effect have less and least in comparing adjectives?—Repeat the order of parsing an adjective.—What rule applies in parsing an adjective?—What rule in parsing a verb agreeing with a noun of multitude conveying unity of idea?—What Note should be applied in parsing an adjective which belongs to a pronoun?—What Note in parsing numeral adjectives?

NOTE 9, under RULE 18. Double Comparatives and Superlatives should be avoided; such as, worser, lesser, more deeper, more wickeder, &c.: chiefest, supremest, perfectest, rightest; or more perfect, most perfect, most supreme, &c.

Virtue confers the most supreme dignity on man, and it should be his chiefest desire.

He made the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night.

The pleasures of the understanding are more preferable than those of imagination or sense. The tongue is like a race-horse, which runs the faster the lesser weight it carries. The nightingale's voice is the most sweetest in the grove. The Most Highest hath created us for his glory, He was admitted to the chiefest offices. The first witness gave a strong proof of the fact; the next more stronger still; but the last witness, the most stronger of all. He gave the fullest and the most sincere proof of the truer friendship.

The term Participle comes from the Latin word participio, which signifies to partake: and this name is given to this part of speech, because it partakes of the nature of the verb and of the adjective.

By many writers, the participle is classed with the verb, and treated as a part of it; but, as it has no nominative, partakes of the nature of an adjective, requires many syntactical rules which apply not to the verb, and, in some other respects, has properties peculiar to itself, it is believed that its character is sufficiently distinct from the verb, to entitle it to the rank of a separate part of speech. It is, in fact, the connecting link between, not only the adjective and the verb, but also the noun and the verb.

All participles are compound in their meaning and office. Like verbs, they express action and being, and denote time; and, like adjectives, they describe the nouns of which they denote the action or being. In the sentences, The boatman is crossing the river; I see a man laboring in the field; Charles is standing; you perceive that the participles crossing and laboring express the actions of the boatman and the man, and standing the state of being of Charles. In these respects, then, they partake of the nature of verbs. You also notice, that they describe the several nouns associated with them, like describing adjectives; and that, in this respect, they participate the properties of adjectives. And, furthermore, you observe they denote actions which are still going on; that is, incomplete or unfinished actions; for which reason we call them imperfect participles.

Perhaps I can illustrate their character more clearly. When the imperfect or present and perfect participles are placed before nouns, they become defining or describing adjectives, and are denominated participial adjectives; as, A loving companion; The rippling stream; Roaring winds; A wilted leaf; An accomplished scholar. Here the words loving, rippling, roaring, wilted, and accomplished, describe or define the nouns with which they are associated. And where the participles are placed after their nouns, they have, also, this descriptive quality. If I say, I see the moon rising; The horse is running a race; The dog is beaten; I describe the several objects, as a rising moon, a running horse, and a beaten dog, as well as when I place these participles before the nouns. The same word is a participle or a participial adjective, according to its manner of meaning. The preceding illustration, however, shows that this distinction is founded on a very slight shade of difference in the meaning of the two. The following examples will enable you to distinguish the one from the other.

The present or imperfect participle is known by its ending in ing; as, floating, riding, hearing, seeing. These are derived from the verbs, float, ride, hear, and see. But some words ending in ing are not participles; such as evening, morning, hireling, sapling, uninteresting, unbelieving, uncontrolling. When you parse a word ending in ing, you should always consider whether it comes from a verb or not. There is such a verb as interest, hence you know that the word interesting is a participle; but there is no such verb as uninterest, consequently, uninteresting can not be a participle: but it is an adjective; as, an uninteresting story. You will be able very easily to distinguish the participle from the other parts of speech, when you shall have acquired a more extensive knowledge of the verb.

Speak the participles from each of these verbs, learn, walk, shun, smile, sail, conquer, manage, reduce, relate, discover, overrate, disengage. Thus, Pres. learning, Perf. learned, Comp. having learned. Pres. walking, Perf. walked, Compound, having walked, and so on.

You may now commit the order of parsing a participle, and then proceed with me.

"I saw a vessel sailing"

Sailing is a participle, a word derived from a verb, and partakes of the nature of a verb, and also of an adjective—it comes from the verb to sail—pres. sailing, perf. sailed, comp. having sailed—it is a present or imperfect participle, because it denotes the continuance of an unfinished action—and refers to the noun "vessel" for its subject, according to

RULE 27. The present participle refers to some noun or pronoun denoting the subject or actor.

"Not a breath disturbs the sleeping billow."

Sleeping is a participial adjective, a word added to a noun to express its quality—it cannot, with propriety, be compared—- it belongs to the noun "billow," agreeably to

RULE 18. Adjectives belong to, and qualify, nouns expressed or understood.

You will please to parse these two words several times over, and, by a little reflection, you will perfectly understand the 27th RULE. Recollect, the participle never varies its termination to agree with a noun or pronoun, for, as it has no nominative, it has no agreement; but it simply refers to an actor. Examples: I see a vessel sailing; or, I see three vessels sailing. You perceive that the participle sailing refers to a singular noun in the first example, and to a plural noun in the second; and yet the participle is in the same form in both examples. The noun vessel is in the objective case, and governed by the transitive verb see. But when a verb follows a noun, the ending of the verb generally varies in order to agree with the noun which is its nominative; as, the vessel sails; the vessels sail.

In this place it may not be improper to notice another Rule that relates to the participle. In the sentence, "The man is beating his horse," the noun horse is in the objective case, because it is the object of the action expressed by the active-transitive participle "beating," and it is governed by the participle beating, according to