Anti-Tooke; or An analysis of the principles and structure of language, exemplified in the English tongue

Front matter

■Ar,

,0.0

At'

Preface

If any thing can be imagined more truly mortifying than another to the intellectual pretensions of our Species ; it is, that we should be doomed to signify our thoughts in a jargon of utterance, with regard to the true logical import of which we are profoundly ignorant. Every man of education, ■, when he happens to listen to the articulate effusions of a plough-boy, or untaught peasant, is filled with unmixed compassion, to behold a large number of his fellow creatures chained down, by their lot, to the dark necessity of expressing their ideas in a way that approximates, not a little, to the instinctive signs of brute animals. What, then, must be the reflections of the educated man, if it were had in proof, that, with regard to this sort of attainment, he is in a state not much elevated above the level of the Clown whom he pities and despises?

X PREFACE.

Assuredly, no stronger incentive than this ought to be requisite, to induce men to examine into any stated objections, which may be raised against, the doctrines concerning Language that now exist. But, in addition to this, Need it be said, that there are other and far more urgent reasons for such investigation; insomuch, that there is no human being, in a civilised country, of whatever rank or profession, who is not personally and most deeply affected by this Universal Medium of Communication, of men's Thoughts, Duties, and Engagements ?

It is but little to say, that the enacting and enforcing of laws ; the conducting of war and of politics ; the bequeathing of our possessions, and the disposition of our private affairs; are vitally interwoven with the import ascribed to Words considered as the Signs of our Ideas. If a familiar example of this truth can be requisite ; We have only to be reminded of the different and often incompatible constructions which are daily given, by different Lawyers and Magistrates, to the wording of a Will, the drawing of a Contract, or the intent of an Act of Parliament : by which construction, the Property, the Liberty, or the Life, of an Individual, or of a Number of Individuals, may be placed in jeopardy.

PREFACE,. *1

The Illustrious Pbilx)loger, to whose writings a very principal though unaccording reference will be had in the following volume, informs us("Div. " OF PuRLEY, Vol. I, page 75"j and dwells on the fact with a sensibility which vibrates throughout his Work, and tinges the whole color of his Philosophical views, that his own " life" was under imminent danger, and his *' civil crtinction' became the " co?2sequence,'' of a wrong import ascribed to " Two Prepositions and a Conjunction." And, without our here entering into the question of fact, Whether the matter was actually as he conceived ; it is quite certain that such a course and consequence MIGHT in SOME timcs cxist ; and equally certain, that a very near epoch might make such times our own. Any more stimulating example than this, therefore, cannot be necessary, to rouse men to a sense of the evils involved in the want of a True or Real Philosophy of Language.

It is a curious metaphysical fact, or question, What it is that occasions mankind, in every rank and calling, to acquiesce so uniformly, as they certainly do, under an evil of so vast a magnitude. The ruler, and the ruled, are alike sensible of this evil ; if not alike sufferers from it. The strong and the weak, in civilised society, are, in a greater or less extent, the victims of it. The timid and

Xll PREFACE.

the brave are equally incapable of protecting themselves from its effects. The sophist and the dealer in obliquity are alone gainers, and thrive upon it. And yet, it is vain, at least in ordinary life, to lift a voice against an affliction that appears no more to be done away with than death itself.

The truth seems to be, that the thing is acquiesced in, universally, under a belief that it is a Law of our Intellectual Constitution and is equally irresistible and irremediable : And the operation of it is regarded, like that of our evil passions ; which are deeply to be dreaded, and as far as possible guarded against ; but, in great part, never to be prevented, or removed.

But, What if it should come out, that the enormous mischief in question is Not a Law of our Nature ; but is merely the accidental and tempo- -t rary result of a darkness which the progress of cultivated reason can remove ?

If it be here asked, Whether there is any reasonable probability that the desideratum last mentioned shall ever be attained ? The brief and the only fit answer in this place is, to point to what has been done, almost within our own time, in the various departments of Physical Science : And, along with this, to remark, how small a proportion of human acumen has been applied, philosophically, to

PREFACE. Xm

the attainment in question. For example, it may be asked, Who would beheve, if the fact were not on record, that, Two Thousand years after the Stagy rite had furnished the World with a gigantic System of General Logic (no matter here how far true, or false,) the estimable English Philosopher Locke, with ingenuous simplicity, informs his readers, that *^ When he first began his discourse of the Under- " standing, and ix good while after, he had not the ** least thought that any consideration of words " was at all necessary to it."

The small number of those who have cast at all WITH A PHILOSOPHICAL BENT, in this dircctioH, must be known to those who have looked into the writings of Mr. Tooke : Who, in alluding to the subject, has bestowed the end ofhis unsparing lash upon those Philosophers that have not cast this way ; but yet, in order to excuse themselves from the attempt, have affected a contempt of its importance, or have pretended engagements of a more weighty and urgent nature.

** The same sort of corruption," (says he, speaking of Conjunctions and Prepositions) " from the " same cause, has disguised both : and ignorance *' of their true origin has betrayed Grammarians " and Philosophers into the mysterious and con- " tradictory language which they have held con-

XfV PREFACE.

** cerning them. And it is really entertaining^ to ** observe the various shifts used by those who "were too sharp-witted and too ingenuous to re- " peat the unsatisfactory accounts of these Prepo- " sitions handed down by others ; and yet not " ingenuous enough to acknowledge their own " total ignorance on the subject. The Gramma- ** rian says, it is none of his business : and for that " reason only he omits giving an account of them. ** Whilst the Philosopher avails himself of his *' dignity ; and, when he meets with a stubborn 4- " difficulty which he cannot unravel, {and only then,) " disdains to be employed about Words : although " they are the necessary channel through which " his most precious liquors must flow."

Div. OF PuRLEY, Vol, 1, page 307. The last sentence, in this stricture of Mr. Tooke, contains a most important feature in a Preface to a Work on Language; upon which one might dwell, with proportionate interest, if the fact were not already too well known to Philosophers. It is therefore the more requisite matter, in this place, to insist that Speech is not only the necessary channel through which the most precious liquors of the Philosopher must flow ; but, that, at thesame time, it is the indispensable channel through which must proceed what may well be called all the

PREFACE. XV

issues of life. But we are here brought to a stand, in our reflections : For Two formidable, if not insuperable barriers present themselves : One of which, at least, must be removed ; else, mankind must remain, as hitherto they ever have done, under the progressive operation of the imperfection of Language. — First, The Structure of a Real Language must correspond to the Structure of Human Thoughts : And, Secondly, All Speculation concerning the Nature of Human Ideas has, in this enlightened age, become stamped for a Species of Alchemy. — It is a Pursuit, indeed, the Nothingness of which is now so completely ascertained, that, among persons of a liberal education, the contempt for it, or prejudice against it, is generally found to be nearly in proportion to the Square of their Distance from all Knowledge of what has been done concerning it. And the natural consequence of this is, that it amounts to an imputation on the Understanding of all persons who still heretically devote themselves to the study of it.

Is this fatuity to last? — Or, Is the Philosophy of Human Thought to Continue, henceforth, to be classed with the Mystery of turning Lead into Gold ? This Preface is not the place for me to attempt to answer, or say any thing with regard to the question now put. The reader will use his pleasure.

X\l PREFACE.

in examining, and judging, whether any thing in the following work tends, in any degree, to the illucidation of it.

With regard to my own labor or what I may have effected in the work ; I shall only embrace the professions of Mr. Harris ; (I hope the quotation of him, on this occasion, is not ominous ;) that, " if ** I have failed, the failure has been my misfortune, ** not my fault ;" — that it is *' not the hasty fruits of *' a few idle hours ;" — and, that " I do not wish to " shelter myself under any such method of anti- " cipating pardon for a bad performance."

One remark remains to be offered here, with respect to the Language in which the following Analysis of Grammar is embodied. There is no person, who possesses any knowledge at all of the subject, who does not know how immeasurably the English Language has risen, of late, in the estimation of learned men, as a medium of investigation of the Nature of Grammar. One testimony alone, to this fact, I shall herein quote. And, in so doing, I furnish the suffrage of the most profound of Etymologists: who, moreover, on this occasion, only reiterates and confirms the assertions of Mr.Tooke. " It is fortunate for this inquiry," (says Dr. Murray) " that, of all illustrations, those drawn from old,

PREFACE. XVll

^' commoi), or even vulgar English, are particular- " ly suitable. The mysteries of language in its ** rudest state can be explained by the vs^ords of our ** own tongue to better purpose, than by those of ** any other speech. By a careful study of the " Anglo-saxon, Visi-gothic, and the elder English '* writers, more knowledge may be obtained of the " original structure of the Greek, Latin, Celtic, or ** Sanscrit, than the deepest erudition can possibly " supply,"

Ami,

Chapter I

Introductory View of the 'Nature of Signs, and An Analysis of the Generic Structure of the Category of Relation, as forming the Foundation of the Structure of Language,

Page

Sect. I. Introductory View of the Nature of Signs.

Subs, I. Of the Proper Object of the Philosophical Grammarian. Comparison of Ordinary Language with Algebraical Notation. These Two apparently different Kinds of Signs generically and specifically identical. . . • 1

Subs. II. Of the Doctrine of Certain Philosophers, that a Science is nothing but a Language well arranged. . . . . .19

Subs, III. Of a Phrase and Assumption of Modern Logicians, that Language is an Instru^ ment of Thought. . . . .35

Subs, IV. Of the Different Methods which have been pursued by Philologists, with a view to solve the Problem of Language ; and, especially, of that which has been followed by Mr. Home Tooke. — Of the General Cause of past failure in the Subject of Language, . . .40

Sect. II. Analysis of the Generic Structure of Relatives and Relation, as forming the Primary Logical Structure of Things in the Universe and the Foundation of Language. — Collateral Statement of the Structure of Relation assumed by Grammarians and Logicians. — Vast incompatibility of those Two Structures.

Preliminary Observations. . . .51

XX COIs^TENTS.

Page A Dialogue concerning Relation. — Part First. . 54 A Dialogue concerning Relation. — Part Second. 75

CHAPTER II. Of Verbs

Preliminary Observations. . . .92

Sect. I. Of the General Nature and Office of Verbs.

Subs. I. Of the Doctrine of Grammarians, that Verbs are not Copulas between a Nominative and an Accusative Noun. — Statement of the Fundamental Principle of Language. — Suggestion of the Principle of Alternation of a Verb in a Sentence. . . . . .98

Subs. II. 1. Of the Verb Substantive. — 2. Remarks on Dr. Murray's Etymological Account of this and other Neuter Verbs of Grammarians. . 123

Sect. II. Of the Universal Neutrality of Verbs. — Brief Analysis of the Nature of Physical Action, as being the Object signified by a large proportion of Verbs. . . . . .136

Sect. III. Of the Division of the Objects of Language into Action itself, the State of One Co-agent with respect to Action, and the State of the other Co-agent, or the Patient. — And, of the consequent Formation and Use of a Principal Class of Adverbs. ..... 153

Sect. IV^ Of the Principle and the Act of Assertion.

Subs, I. 1. Of the Doctrine of Grammarians that the Essence of the Verb consists in Assertion ; And, otherwise, that the Verb consists in an Assertion and an Attribute.-— 2. Suggestion that both Verbs and Adjectives involve a Sign of Assertion. — 3. Profound Error of Locke and other Grammarians, acquiesced in by Mr. Tooke, in Asserting that the

CONTENTS. XXI

Page

Verb Substantive is the General Sign of Affirmation. . . . . . 168

Subs, II. 1. Concerning some Strictures which have been offered by Professor Stewart, upon the Doctrine of Mr. Tooke that Every Word in Language belongs, in all situations, absolutely and unchangeably, to One and the Same Part of Speech.— 2. Of the United Doctrines of Mr. Tooke and Mr. Stewart concerning the Composition and the Comparison of Ideas. Their Doctrine Fallacious. — 3. Fallacy of Logicians in supposing that the bulk of a Language is made up of Abstract General Terms. . .182

Subs. III. Examination of the Assumption of Dr. Murray, and of Other Eminent Etymologists, that Verbs existed prior to Nouns. . , 213

Sect. V. Of the Views of Some Grammarians with regard to the Nature of the Verb considered as a Copula or Connective ; involving some consideration of Juxtaposition or Grammatical Contact. . 217 Sect. VI. Of So-called participles, and of Tense,

Mode, Voice, Number, and Person.

Subs. I- Of the Nominal Part of Speech above first

mentioned. — No Participles in Language. . 230

Subs. IL Of the Tense of Verbs. . . 239

Subs. III. Of the So-called Modes of Verbs. . 249

Subs. lY. Of Voice. . . . .251

Subs.y. Of Number and Person. . . 252

Sect. VII. Of Auxiliary Verbs. . .254

CHAPTER III. Of Minor VerbSf by Grammarians called Prepositions

Sect. I. Of the Theory of Prepositions furnished by Mr. Tooke, stated here as preparatory to going into the Analysis of this Part of Speech.

XXU CONTENTS-

Page

Subs. I. Of Mr. Tooke's Theory in general. — Inconsistent in his Method. — Mistaken in asserting the Use of Prepositions to be that of preventing a Multiplicity of Complex Terms in Language ; — and in asserting Prepositions to be Imperatives. . 262

Subs. II. Prepositions, if construed as Imperatives, invert the Relative Situations of the Subjects, or Objects, intended to be expressed. . 285

Sect. II. Of the General Nature and Office of Minor Verbs.

Subs. I. General Remarks on the Doctrine of Grammarians with regard to the Nature and Use of Prepositions. — Mr. Tooke's Theory of Prepositions more prejudicial to Grammar than that advanced by Mr. Harris. . . . 296

Subs. II. General Definition of the Nature of Minor Verbs, by Grammarians called Prepositions. — Suggestion of the Triplicate Structure of Action ; Upon which Structure is founded a Principal Class of Minor Verbs. . . . 304

Subs. III. The Triplicate Structure of Action not adverted to by Mr. Tooke, or by Other Grammarians. Hence One Cause of their not having discerned the Real Nature of Prepositions. . 315

Subs. IV. 1. Continuation of the Analysis of So-called Prepositions, as founded in Necessary Principles. — 2. Remarks on the View of Prepositions entertained by Dr. Murray. . . 332

Notice of the Conclusion of the first volume : And an intimation concerning the Contents of the second. ..... 362

ANTI-TOOKE;

ANALYSIS

THE PRINCIPLES AND STRUCTURE

LANGUAGE,

EXEMPLIFIED IN THE

ENGLISH TONGUE.

ERRATA.

1.32.

dele " here."

for / lay myself read I lay on tnyself.

—

— on which latter — which latter.

— represents — represent.

— is — in.

— Ha Have Have — HaveHav£, or Ha H^yr

— " Actors" — an Actor.

— Tooke — Mr. Tooke.

ANTI-TOOKE;

AN ANALYSIS, &c.

Chapter I

INTRODUCTORY VIEW OF THE NATURE OF SIGNS, AND AN ANALYSIS OF THE GENERIC STRUC- TURE OF THE CATEGORY OF RELATION, AS FORMING THE FOUNDATION OF THE STRUC- TURE OF LANGUAGE.

Section First. Introductory View Of The Nature Of Signs

SUBSECTION I.

Of the Troper Object of the Philosophical Grammarian.— Comparison of Ordinary Language with Algebraical Notation. These Two apparently different kinds of Signs generically and specifically identical.

The justly celebrated grammatical speculations of the late Mr. Home Tooke, which, after every due deduction, must continue to mark a splendid epoch in the History of Language, have been followed by other very elaborate and important contributions to the public stock, from the stores of Etymology — works which have advanced to a great additional depth into the arcana of ancient AnaL a dialects: And although the farther harvest, which this field is capable of yielding, appears to be great, if not inexhaustible ; yet, in so far as concerns the nature of Language, considered as a Signature of Thought, it is unquestionably warrantable to anticipate the future, from the past. More extended researches of this nature may throw light upon the affinity, or the migration of nations; upon the origin, or original country of mankind, or the remote origin of speech ; or may solve other problems of a less dark and difficult nature. But, with regard to the Principles of Grammar, there cannot exist a hope, in the minds of those who have consulted the past labors on the subject, that Etymology can ever do more than it has done. Still, the Nature of Language — its Structure and its Elements — might well claim a part of that mysterious inscription which is said to have been found graven in a temple dedicated to the Egyptian Minerva : '^ # #* *##

" NO mortal ever removed."

The existing state of Philosophy, in the department of Language, presents, perhaps, the most wonderful phenomenon that has resulted from the whole course of human speculation. The mind of man expatiates in knowledge through the medium of Two remarkably distinct Systems of Signs: One, or Other of, which he must employ, to '' mark" his ideas for the purpose of recalling them to his own recollection, or " signify" them when he would communicate them to other per* sons. But the Scheme of Notation by which he proceeds, in One of these systems, is of a nature the most definite and precise ; and it expresses the various Relations between the Subjects of his reasonings, with a truth that is absolutely perfect: Whereas the Other has at all times proved so vague and defective, not to say absurd or fallacious, that no one ever pretends it is capable of expressing any thing like certainty, or precision, of the various Relations between its Subjects. It hardly needs to be explained, that, in the former of these Systems, I allude to the Symbols and Characters of Algebraical Notation ; and, in the latter, to Words — or the Signs by which we express the Subjects of Ordinary Discourse.

Can any thing, indeed, be more wonderful, when we reflect upon it, than to observe, upon one hand, a perfect model of logical signification, in the System of Algebraical Signs ; while, upon the other, of all the Ordinary or Popular Languages which have been invented, whether of ancient or of modern use, (although some of these have undergone every cultivation which art and labor could contribute) the Philosopher has never been able to assign the true, or any thing like the true, grammatical import of the Signs which they comprise ; or, in other words, the most enlightened individuals of the species have nemr known what General Notions, or Ideas, of Relations between Things, they had, or ought to have had, in their minds, when they have employed the Signs in question ? It is, however, at the same time, scarcely less wonderful, that Philosophers uniformly agree to lay the fault upon the Signs, in the case of Ordinary Language ; when it is a self-evident truth, which can admit of no controversy, that the defect of these Signs is altogether bottomed in men's ignorance of the Relations which they ought to express.

The difference of knowledge betw^een the man of learning and the mere mechanic, with regard to this subject, has always in reality been so small, when compared with the actual amount of darkness in bothy that, of itself alone, it would hardly be worthy of a commentary. And, in fact, no vanity could be imagined more empty, or unfounded, than the assumed vast superiority of the former, to the latter, in so far as regards the Principles and Structure of Language.

The absolute truth of this statement will not be controverted ; especially, down to a very recent period. Mr. Tooke, in entering upon the course of his etymological speculations, has declared, and declared with a force of truth whiph has never been contradicted, that, after the mention of Names, ** From this moment Grammar quits the day-light, " and plunges into an abyss of utter darkness." Down, therefore, until the commencement of the labors of this illustrious Etymologist, the ignorance of the learned, with regard to the nature of Speech, is a matter which no one will ever pretend either to dispute or dissemble. And I shall depend upon the reasonings and evidences contained in the following pages, to justify the assertion that the light thrown upon the subject by Mr. Tooke, and by his meritorious Successors, although it is undeniably very great in its kind, is not of that

SEC. I.] THE NATURE OF SIGNS. 5

KIND that could illustrate the Structure of Language ; and, in point of fact, has not, in any material or consolatory degree, lessened that ignorance which has hitherto so nearly levelled the Scholar and the Clown, with regard to it.

Nothing, indeed, I am aware, is less awakened in the public mind, than any suspicion that such an opprobrium at this moment hangs over Philosophy, in the department of Language. The very contrary has become a universal and a deep-rooted opinion with the learned. But if, in the course which I have been led to embrace in the prosecution of the subject, I have not fallen into a very rare degree of human illusion, (concerning which, I confess, I feel not much anxiety) such will be found to be the real amount of reproach due to the reasoning powers of man on account of it, after all that has been done by Philosophers for its advancement, that, even if there were no other utility, or incentive, it would form a sufficient stimulus, and an object of high philosophic attainment, to rescue the Human Understanding from a state of darkness so profound, as that in which the most successful writers have both found and left it, in its conceptions of the Science of Grammar.

And here, in the contemplation and commencement of such an undertaking, inasmuch as some of our first-rate Philosophers have been led into a most egregious error with regard, even, to what is the Province of the Grammarian, it becomes necessary to enter into a concise view, or explanation, of the proper Object of the latter ; — especially, as heitig preparatory to submitting a specific example, which, (for a particular purpose,) I consider it requisite to furnish in this place, of the nature and degree of that contrast, which subsists between the efficacy of the Language of Science and that of Ordinary Language, as already adverted to.

In order to this, it may in the first place be laid down, as a position which will be abundantly supported by proof throughout the progress of analysis, that Each of the Systems in question is made up of Two, and OnhY Two, Kinds of Signals—na^mely — Signs of Subjects or Quantities, and Signs of Operations between these Subjects or Quantities. Now it is to be remarked briefly, here, but will be noticed more particularly hereafter, that some very eminent writers have cherished an opinion, not only that the imperfection of Ordinary or Popular Language consists in both the Kinds of Signals which it employs ; (which indeed is true and is a most important truth ;) but, also, that it lies within the power or province of the Grammarian, by the invention of some new species of Notation, to remove the existing defect in both kinds ! Contrary to this view of the subject, however, I shall proceed upon an assumption, the truth of which I apprehend will never be deliberately controverted, that the Philosopher of Grammar has nothing to do with those Signs of Subjects, in Ordinary Language, which may be called Quantities and whose Signs are called Nouns, any farther than to ascertain and lay down their general gram^ matical characters and accidents : Their imperfection as particular Signs, or, rather, the imperfection

SEC.l.] THE NATURE OF SIGNS. f

of the particular ideas or notions which we attach to them, is a defect which lies entirely beyond the province of the Grammarian, or the Structure of Language, to remove. In other words, The whole business of definition of particular Nouns must be left to the Logician, the Natural Philosopher, the Natural Historian, and the Philosopher of every department, the Philosopher of Language alone excepted : and it is the province of the latter to determine (together with that of the grammatical characters and adjuncts of Nouns, as already mentioned) the nature of All the different Signs of Operations between the Nouns of Ordinary Language ; beyond which, his proper research, as a Grammarian, neither does nor can extend.

The position, thus laid down, enables me now to explain, that the great disparity of efficiency between the Two Distinct Systems under consideration ; and which, I conceive, when duly examined, must present to our contemplation such a wonderful enigma ; is owing to the defect of Ordinary Language in its Signs of Operations ; altogether BESIDE the acknowledged and vast defect of the particular ideas which we attach to its various Nouns. And What I suggest, as being so wonderful, is the fact, that human reason has succeeded so perfectly in the invention and use of Signs of Operations in Algebraical Science; and, yet, has never bee?i able to approach to any thing like an imitation of this perfection, in the corresponding Signs of Ordinary Speech : While, from well-known causes, wholly foreign to Grammar, there is no wonder at all that we find the Signs of Subjects or Quantities^ m Org INTRODUCTORY VIEW OF [chap.1.

dinary Language, as defective as they certainly are.

Having furnished this preliminary view of the Nature of that defect, v^hich I suppose it should be the Object of the Philosophical Grammarian to remove from Language ; I shall now proceed to offer the proposed specific example of it, with a design to afford some immediate conception of its actual Degree, and thus awaken the attention of my readers to the existing state of what is called the Philosophy of Speech, compared with what is, in the present day, tolerated, as Knowledge, or Science, in any other department of human speculation. Such an insular example, indeed, as is here proposed, can by no means approach to convey an idea of any thing like the whole magnitude of the contrast. But I entertain little doubt, that the fact will at least afford matter of surprise, or astonishment, to the highest classes of readers who suppose that the Science of Grammar may, assuredly, (since the speculations of Mr. Tooke,) be numbered among the branches of Human Knowledge.

In furnishing this comparison, it is evident, I must draw the requisite illustrations from the Symbols and Nature of Algebra. But the examples necessary for this purpose will be so elementary and obvious, that no person who is likely to take an interest in Universal Grammar can find any difficulty in apprehending them ; nor could they, in fact, be misunderstood by any one who is acquainted with the Notation of common Arithmetic : And, as no other medium, or analogy, could serve the desired purpose, I trust that no apology is required for their introduction. At the same time I intimate, that there will, I believej be no occasion, of any consequence, to resort to this medium, in any subsequent part of the work.

First, then, I observe, that Every Sign of an Opera lion, in Algebra, must have a Sign of Some Quantity on each side of it ; between which Two Signs of Quantities the Sign of an Operation serves as a Bridge of Logical Connection : In other words. Every Operation in Algebra being an instance of a Species of Logical Action between Some Two Quantities, the Sign of this Action must necessarily have a Sign of Some Quantity on Each side of it; else, it could not be Any Sign of an Action or Operation,