Read here

The etymology and syntax of the English language explained and illustrated

Alexander Crombie · 1853 · Scanned text

110,565 words · about 7 h 45 min to read

Period artwork: Interior of the Bodleian Library, 1845
About this edition

Scanned text — may contain errors · view original scans

Licence: PD · Library of Congress states the book is in the public domain and free to use and reuse (https://data.labs.loc.gov/digitized-books/README.html); published 1853, author long deceased · Library of Congress, Selected Digitized Books (https://www.loc.gov/item/11008559); text via the Common Pile (CC BY 4.0 compilation, per-document rights preserved)

Text from Library of Congress, read from page scans by OCR and set out for reading on screen; no words of the book are rewritten or summarized. How RedLectern is built

About this book

Author
Alexander Crombie
Language
English
Published
1853
Length
110,565 words · about 7 h 45 min
Sections
24 reader sections
Text
Scanned text, read from page scans by OCR; may contain errors
Rights
Public domain

 

Contents (24)

Continue:

Preface

TO THE SECOND EDITION.

The success with which the principles of any art or science are investigated, is generally proportioned to the number of those, whose labours are directed to its cultivation and improvement. Inquiry is necessarily the parent of knowledge; error itself, proceeding from discussion, leads ultimately to the establishment of truth.

Were we to estimate our progress in the knowledge of English grammar from the number of works already published on the subject, we should perhaps be prompted to infer, that in afield so circumscribed, and at the same time so often and so ably explored, no object worthy of notice could have escaped attention. And yet in this, as in every other art or science, strict examination will convince us, that, though much may have been accomplished, still much remains, to stimulate the industry, and exercise the ingenuity, of future inquirers. The author indeed is fully persuaded, that it is impossible to examine the English language with any degree of critical accuracy, and not perceive, that its syntactical principles especially are yet but imperfectly illustrated, and that there are many of its idioms, which have entirely eluded the attention of our grammarians. That these defects are all supplied by the present work, the author is far from having the vanity to believe. That he has examined a few peculiarities, and elucidated some principles, which have escaped the observation of other grammarians, he trusts the intelligent reader will remark.

The Treatise, the second edition of which now solicits the notice of the public, is intended chiefly for the improvement

a 2

IV PREFACE.

of those, who have made some advancement in classic literature. That an acquaintance with Greek and Latin facilitates the acquisition of every other language, and that by a knowledge of these the classical scholar is therefore materially assisted in attaining a critical acquaintance with his native tongue, it would argue extreme perversity to deny. But that an extensive knowledge of Greek and Latin is often associated with an imperfect and superficial acquaintance with the principles of the English language, is a fact, which experience demonstrates, and it would not be difficult to explain. To make any tolerable progress in a classical course, without acquiring a general knowledge of English grammar, is indeed impossible ; yet to finish that course, without any correct acquaintance with the mechanism of the English language, or any critical knowledge of its principles, is an occurrence neither singular nor surprising. No language whatever can be critically learned, but by careful study of its general structure, and peculiar principles. To assist the classical scholar in attaining a correct acquaintance with English grammar, is the chief, though not the sole, end for which the present Treatise was composed. That it is, in some degree, calculated to answer this purpose, the author, from its reception, is willing to believe.

His obligations to his predecessors in the same department of literature, he feels it his duty to acknowledge. He trusts, at the same time, that the intelligent reader will perceive, that he has neither copied with servility nor implicitly adopted the opinions of others ; but has, in every question, exercised his own judgment, in observance of that respect, which all men owe to truth, and consistently, he hopes, with that deference, which is confessedly due to transcendent talents.

The Treatise, he believes, contains some original observations. That all of these deserve to be honoured with a favourable verdict in the court of Criticism, he has neither the presumption to insinuate, nor the vanity to suppose. If they be found subservient to the elucidation of any controverted point, be the ultimate decision what it may, the author will attain his aim.

PREFACE V

The work having been composed amidst the solicitudes and distractions of a laborious profession, the author has reason to apprehend, that some verbal inaccuracies may have escaped his attention. But, in whatever other respects the diction may be faulty, he trusts at least, that it is not chargeable with obscurity ; and that he may be able to say, in the humble language of the poet,

Hor. Art. Poet.

Greenwich.

.

PREFACE

TO THE THIRD EDITION.

The following work, which has been for some time out of print, having been favoured with the gratifying approbation of the Rev. Professor Dale, and selected by that learned and worthy preceptor, as one of the text books for the class of English literature in the University of London, a new edition has become necessary. The author's time and attention having been recently devoted to another publication, which was not completed until it became indispensable that this volume should be sent to press, the only additions here introduced are such as occurred to the author while the work was proceeding through the hands of the printer. They will be found, however, to be in number not inconsiderable ; and it is hoped, that in quality they will be thought not unworthy of the student's attention. They consist chiefly of examples of solecism and impropriety, accompanied with such critical remarks as these errors have suggested, and such illustrations as they seemed to require. This mode of enlargement the author has preferred, persuaded of the truth of Dr. Lowth's observation, that one of the most successful methods of conveying instruction is, " to teach what is right, by showing what is wrong."

Chapter II

Critical Remarks and Illustrations Sect. I. — The Noun Sect. II. — The Adjective Sect. III. — The Pronoun Sect. IV.— The Verb .

Sect. V.— The Adverb Sect. VI. — The Preposition Sect. VII. — The Conjunction

ETYMOLOGY AND SYNTAX

THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

INTRODUCTION.

Language consists of intelligible signs, and is the medium by which the mind communicates its thoughts. It is either articulate or inarticulate ; artificial or natural. The former is peculiar to man ; the latter is common to all animals. By inarticulate language, we mean those instinctive sounds, or cries, by which the several tribes of inferior creatures are enabled to express their sensations and desires. By articulate language is understood a system of expression, composed of simple sounds, differently modified by the organs of speech, and variously combined.

Man, like every other animal, has a natural language intelligible to all of his own species. This language, however, is extremely defective, being confined entirely to the general expression of joy, grief, fear, and the other passions or emotions of the mind ; it is, therefore, wholly inadequate to the purposes of rational intercourse, and the infinitely-diversified ideas of an intelligent being. Hence arises the necessity of an artificial or articulate language ; a necessity coeval with the existence of man in his rudest state, increasing also with the enlargement of his ideas, and the improvement of his mind. Man, therefore, was formed capable of speech. Nature has furnished him with the necessary organs, and with ingenuity to render them subservient to his purposes. And

B

INTRODUCTION.

though at first his vocabulary was doubtless scanty, as his wants were simple, and his exigencies few, his language and his intellect would naturally keep pace. As the latter improved, the former would be enlarged.

Oral language, we have reason to suppose, continued long to be the only medium by which knowledge could be imparted, or social intercourse maintained. But, in the progress of science, various methods were devised for attaining a more permanent and more extensive vehicle of thought. Of these, the earliest were, as some think, picture-writing and hieroglyphics. Visible objects and external events were delineated by pictures, while immaterial things were emblematically expressed by figures representative of such physical objects as bore some conceived analogy or resemblance to the thing to be expressed. These figures or devices were termed hieroglyphics a . It is obvious, however, that this medium of communication must not only have embarrassed by its obscurity, but must have also been extremely deficient in variety of expression.

At length oral language, by an effort of ingenuity which must ever command admiration, was resolved into its simple

a Beattie seems to think that the antediluvians had an alphabet, and that hieroglyphical was posterior to alphabetical writing. " The wisdom and simple manners of the first men," says he, " would incline me to think, that they must have had an alphabet ; for hieroglyphic characters imply quaintness and witticism." In this reasoning I cannot concur. Alphabetic writing is indeed simple, when known ; so also are most inventions. But, simple and easy as it appears to us, we have only to examine the art itself, to be fully convinced, that science, genius, and industry, must have been combined in inventing it. Nay, the learned author himself acknowledges, "that though of easy acquisition to us, it is in itself neither easy nor obvious." He even admits, "that alphabetical writing must be so remote from the conceptions of those who never heard of it, that without divine aid it would seem to be unsearchable and impossible." I observe also that in passing from picture-writing to hieroglyphical expression, and in transferring the signs of physical to intellectual and invisible objects, fanciful conceits would naturally take place. It is true also that the manners of the antediluvians were simple ; but it is not from prudence nor simplicity of manners, but from human genius, gradually improved, that we are to expect inventions, which require the greatest efforts of the human mind.

or elementary sounds, and these were characterized by appropriate symbols a . Words, the signs of thought, came thus to be represented by letters, or characters arbitrarily formed, to signify the different sounds of which the words were severally composed. The simplest elementary part of written language is, therefore, a letter : and the elements or letters into which the words of any language may be analyzed, form the necessary alphabet of that language. In the English alphabet are twenty-six letters.

ABCDEFGHIJKLMN.OPQRSTUVWXYZ.

abcdefghijklmnopqr stuvwxyz.

Of these there are six vowels, or letters which by themselves make every one a perfect sound. The remaining twenty are called consonants, or letters which cannot be sounded without a vowel.

This alphabet is both redundant and defective. It is redundant ; for of the vowels, the letters i and y are in sound the same : one of them therefore is unnecessary. Of the con-

a Cicero regards the invention of alphabetic writing as an evidence of the celestial character of the soul ; and many have ascribed its origin to the inspiration of the Deity. To resort to supernatural causes, to account for the production of any rare or striking event, is repugnant to the principles of true philosophy. And how wonderful soever the art of alphabetical writing may appear, there can be no necessity for referring its introduction to divine inspiration, if the inventive powers of man be not demonstrably unequal to the task. Picture-writing is generally believed to have been the earliest mode of recording events, or communicating information by permanent signs. This was probably succeeded by hieroglyphical characters. How these pictures and hieroglyphical devices would, either through negligence or a desire to abbreviate, gradually vary their form, and lose their resemblance to the objects which they represented, may be easily conceived. Hence that association, which existed between the sign and the thing signified, being founded in resemblance, would in process of time be entirely dissolved. This having taken place, hieroglyphical characters would naturally be converted into a mere verbal denotation, representative of words and not of things. Hence, as Goguet, in his work, " De l'Origine des Loix," &c, reasonably conjectures, would arise by a partial and easy analysis, a syllabic mode of denotation, which would naturally introduce a literal alphabet. This conjecture must seem highly probable, when it is considered, that both a verbal and syllabic mode of notation are still practised by some Eastern nations.

INTRODUCTION.

sonants, the articulator c having sometimes the sound of k, and sometimes of s, one of these must be unnecessary. Q, having in all cases the sound of k, may likewise be deemed superfluous. W appears to me in every respect the same with the vowel u (oo), and is therefore supernumerary 1 . The double consonant x might be denoted by the combination of its component letters, gs or ks.

It is to be observed also, that g, when it has the soft sound, is a double consonant, and performs the same office as the letter j ; each having a sound compounded of the sounds of d and the French j. Thus, g in general has the same sound as j in join. J, however, is not, as some have supposed, resolvable into two letters, for we have no character to express the simple sound of the French j, of which, with the consonant d, the sound of the English j is compounded. To resolve it into dg, as some have done, is therefore an error ; as the soft g, without the aid of the other consonant, is precisely identical, in respect to sound, with the consonant j. The letter It is no consonant ; it is merely the note of aspiration.

Our alphabet is likewise defective. There are nine simple vowel sounds, for which we have only six characters, two of which, as it has been already observed, perforin the same office. The simple vowel sounds are heard in these words,

Hall, hat, hate, met, mete, fin, hop, hope, but, full.

Some of these characters occasionally perform the office of diphthongs. Thus, in the word fine, the vowel i has the diphthongal sound of the letters a e, as these are pronounced in French ; and the vowel u frequently represents the diphthong eu (e-oo), as fume (fe-oom).

There are, besides, four different consonants for which we have no proper letters ; namely, the initial consonant in the word thin, the initial consonant in then, the sibilating sound of sh, and the final consonant (marked ng), as in the word a lam aware, that in considering the letters y and w to be the same with i and u (oo), I maintain an opinion, the truth of which has been disputed. The reasons, however, which have been assigned for rejecting it do not appear to me satisfactory.

Consonants are generally divided into mutes and semi-vowels. The mutes are those which entirely, and at once, obstruct the sound of the vowel, and prevent its continuation. These are called perfect mutes. Those which do not suddenly obstruct it are called imperfect mutes.

Semi-vowels are those consonants which do not entirely obstruct the voice : but whose sounds may be continued at pleasure, thus partaking of the nature of vowels.

The nature of these consonants I proceed briefly to explain.

A vowel sound may be continued at pleasure, or it may be terminated, either by discontinuing the vocal effort, in which case it is not articulated by any consonant, as in pronouncing the vowel o ; or by changing the conformation of the mouth, or relative position of the organs of speech, so that the vowel sound is lost by articulation, as in pronouncing the syllable or. It is to be observed, also, that a vowel may be articulated, not only by being terminated by a consonant, as in the example now given, but likewise by introducing the sound with that position of the organs, by which it had, in the former case, been terminated, as in pronouncing the syllable ro.

In pronouncing the consonants, there are five distinguishable positions of the organs a . The first is the application of the lips to each other, so as to close the mouth. Thus are formed the consonants p, b, and m.

In the second position, the under lip is applied to the fore teeth of the upper jaw; and in this manner we pronounce the consonants/ 1 and v.

The third position is, when the tongue is applied to the fore teeth ; and thus we pronounce th.

In the fourth position we apply the fore part of the tongue to the fore part of the palate, and by this application we pronounce the letters t, d, s, z, r, I, n.

The fifth position is, when the middle part of the tongue is applied to the palate, and thus we pronounce k, the hard sound of g (as in ga), sh, j, and ng.

In the first position we have three letters, of which the most simple, and indeed the only articulator, being abso-

a The mouth is not the proper organ for producing sound ; but merely the organ for modulating and articulating the specific sounds.

lutely mute, is p. In the formation of this letter, nothing is required but the sudden closing of the mouth, and stopping the vowel sound ; or the sound may be articulated by the sudden opening of the lips, in order to emit the compressed sound of the vowel.

Now, if instead of simply expressing the vowel sound by opening the lips, in saying for example pa, we shall begin to form a guttural sound, the position being still preserved ; then, on opening the lips, we shall pronounce the syllable ba. The guttural sound is produced by a compression of the larynx, or windpipe ; and is that kind of murmur, as Bishop Wilkins expresses it, which is heard in the throat, before the breath is emitted with the vocal sound. B, therefore, though justly considered as a mute, is not a perfect mute.

The mouth being kept in the same position, and the breath being emitted through the nostrils, the letter m is produced.

In the first position, therefore, we have a perfect mute p, having no audible sound ; a labial and liquid consonant m, capable of a continued sound ; and between these two extremes we have the letter b, somewhat audible, though different from any vocal sound.

Here, then, are three things to be distinguished. 1st, The perfect mute, having no sound of any kind : 2dly, The perfect consonant, having not only a proper, but continued sound : and 3dly, Between these extremes we find the letter b, having a proper sound, but so limited, that, in respect to the perfect consonant, it may be termed a mute, and in relation to the perfect mute may be properly termed imperfect.

In the second position, we have the letters/* and v, neither of which are perfect mutes. The letter/ is formed by having the aspiration not altogether interrupted, but emitted forcibly between the fore teeth and under lip. This is the simple articulation in this position. If to this we join the guttural sound, we shall have the letter v, a letter standing in nearly the same relation to f, as b and m, in the first position, stand to p. The only difference between f and v is, that, in the former, the compression of the teeth and under lip is not so strong as in the latter ; and that the former is produced by the breath only, and the latter by the voice and breath combined.

The consonant f, therefore, though not a mute like p, in having the breath absolutely confined, may notwithstanding be considered as such, consistently with that principle, by which a mute is understood to be an aspiration without guttural sound.

Agreeably to the distinction already made, v may be termed a perfect consonant, andean imperfect one, having no proper sound, though audible. Thus we have four distinctions in our consonantal alphabet ; namely, of perfect and imperfect consonants ; perfect and imperfect mutes : thus,

p is a perfect mute, having no sound.

b an imperfect mute, having proper sound, but limited.

m a perfect consonant, having sound, and continued, /"an imperfect consonant, having no sound, but audible.

In the third position we have th as heard in the words then and thin, formed by placing the tip of the tongue between the teeth, and pressing it against the upper teeth. The only difference between these articulations is, that like f and v, the one is formed by the breath only, and the other by the breath and voice together a .

Here also may be distinguished the perfect and the imperfect consonant ; for the th in thin has no sound, but is audible, whereas the th in this, there, has a sound, and that continued b .

In the fourth position there are several consonants formed.

1st, If the breath be stopped, by applying the fore part of the tongue forcibly to that part of the palate, which is contiguous to the fore teeth, we produce the perfect mute t, having neither aspiration nor guttural sound. By accompanying this operation of the tongue and palate with the guttural sound, we shall pronounce the letter d, which, like b, of the first position, may be considered as a mute, though not perfect. For in pronouncing ed, the tongue at first gently touches the gum, and is gradually pressed closer, till the sound is obstructed ; whereas in pronouncing et, the tongue is at once pressed so close, that the sound is instantly intercepted.

2dly, If the tip of the tongue be turned up towards the

a The sound of th in thin, is usually marked with a stroke through the h, to distinguish it from its other sound ; thus, thick. This distinction is by some writers reversed.

b Hutton*s Investigation of the Principles of Knowledge, vol. ii. p. 688.

upper gum, so as not to touch it, and thus the breath be cut by the sharp point of the tongue passing through the narrow chink left between that and the gum, we pronounce the sibilating sound of s. If we accompany this operation with a guttural sound, as in b, ?;, and th in then, we shall pronounce the letter z; the same difference subsisting between s and z as between f and v, p and b, tfi and th.

3dly, If we make the tip of the tongue vibrate rapidly between the upper and lower jaw, so as not to touch the latter, and the former but gently, we shall pronounce the letter r. The more closely and forcibly the tongue vibrates against the upper jaw, the stronger will the sound be rendered. It is formed about the same distance from the teeth as the letter d, or rather somewhat behind it.

4thly, If the end of the tongue be gently applied to the fore part of the palate, a little behind the seat of the letter d, and somewhat before the place of r, and the voice be suffered to glide gently over the sides of the tongue, we shall pronounce the letter I. Here the breadth of the tongue is contracted, and a space left for the breath to pass from the upper to the under part of the tongue, in forming this the most vocal of all the consonants.

5thly, If the aspirating passage, in the formation of the preceding consonant, be stopped, by extending the tongue to its natural breadth, so as to intercept the voice, and prevent its exit by the mouth, the breath emitted through the nose will give the letter n.

In the fifth position, namely, when we apply the middle or back part of the tongue to the palate, we have the consonants k, $,sh,j, and ^.

If the middle of the tongue be raised, so as to press closely against the roof of the mouth, and intercept the voice at once, we pronounce the letter k (ek). If the tongue be not so closely applied at first, and the sound be allowed to continue a little, we have the letter g {eg). Thus ek and eg bear the same analogy to each other, as et and ed of the fourth position. If the tongue be protruded towards the teeth, so as not to touch them, and be kept in a position somewhat flatter than in pronouncing the letter s, the voice and breath passing over it through a wider chink, we shall have the sound of esh.

INTRODUCTION.

If we apply the tongue to the palate as in pronouncing sh, but a little more forcibly, and accompanying it with the guttural sound, we shall have the sound of the French j. Thusy is in this position analogous to the letters b, v, th, in the first, second, and third positions, and is a simple consonant : j in English is a double consonant, compounded of d and the French j, as in join.

If we raise the middle of the tongue to the palate gently, so as to permit part of the voice to issue through the mouth, forcing the remainder back through the nose, keeping at the same time the tongue in the same position as in pronouncing eg, we shall have the articulating sound of ing, for which we have no simple character.

The only remaining letter h is the note of aspiration, formed in various positions, according to the vowel with which it is combined.

The characters of the several letters may be seen in the following table :

Perfect Mutes.

Sounded, or Imperfect.

Imperfect Consonants.

Perfect.

P

B

M

F

V th th the

T

D

S

Z

R i

L

N

K

G

Sh

J French

»g

What effect the compression of the larynx has in articulation may be seen by comparing these pairs of consonants :

ith compression.

B

Without compression.

P

G

K

D

T

Z

S

Th

Th

V

F

J

Sh

These, as Mr. Tooke observes, differ, each from its partner, by a certain unnoticed and almost imperceptible motion or compression of or near the larynx. This compression, he remarks, the Welsh never use. For instead of

I vow by God, that Jenkin is a wizard ; they say,

The consonants have been distributed into different classes, according to the organs chiefly employed in their formation.

Dental ed, et, eth, eth.

Nasal em, en, ing.

The association of two vowels, whether the sound of each be heard or not, is called -a diphthong, and the concurrence of three is called a triphthong.

Of diphthongs there are twenty, viz. ai, au, ea, ee, ei, eo, eu, ie, oa, oo, ui, ay, ey, uy, oi, oy, ou, aw, ew, ow. Of the diphthongs seventeen have a sound purely monophthongal ; hence they have been called improper diphthongs. It would be idle to dispute the propriety of a term almost universally adopted; but to call that a diphthong whose sound is monophthongal is an abuse of language, and creates confusion. The only proper diphthongs in our language are eu, oi, ou, in which each vowel is distinctly heard, forming together one syllable. The triphthongs are three, eau, ieu, iew. Of these, the first eau is sometimes pronounced eu, as in beauty ; sometimes o, as in beau ; the other two have the diphthongal sound of eu.

Part I. Etymology

OF WORDS IN GENERAL, AND THE PARTS OF SPEECH.

A word, in oral language, is either a significant simple sound, or a significant combination of sounds. In written language, it may be defined to be a simple character, or combination of characters, expressive of significant sounds, simple or compound.

A word of one syllable is called a monosyllable ; of two syllables, a dissyllable ; a word of three syllables, a trisyllable ; and a word of more than three syllables is called a polysyllable. The last term, however, is frequently applied to words exceeding two syllables.

Words are either derivative or primitive.

A primitive is that which is formed from no other word, being itself a root, whence others spring, as angel, spirit, school.

A derivative is that which is derived from some other word, as angelic, spiritual, scholar.

A compound is a word made up of two or more words, as archangel, spiritless, schoolman.

In examining the character of words as significant of ideas, we find them reducible into classes, or denominations, according to the offices which they severally perform. These classes are generally called parts of speech ; and how many of these belong to language has long been a question among philosophers and grammarians. Some have reckoned two.

some three, and others four; while the generality have affirmed, that there are not fewer than eight, nine, or ten a . This strange diversity of opinion has partly arisen from a propensity to judge of the character of words more from their form, which is a most fallacious criterion, than from their import or signification. One thing appears certain, how much soever the subject may have been obscured by scholastic refinements, that to assign names to objects of thought, and to express their properties and qualities, are the only indispensable requisites in language. If this be admitted, it follows, that the noun and the verb are the only parts of speech which are essentially necessary ; the former being the name of the thing of which we speak, and the latter, verb, (or the word, by way of eminence,) expressing what we think of it b . All other sorts of words must be regarded as subsidiaries, convenient perhaps for the more easy communication of thought, but by no means indispensably requisite.

Had we a distinct name for every individual object of sensation or thought, language would then be composed purely of proper names, and thus become too great a load for any memory to retain. Language, therefore, must be composed of general signs, that it may be remembered ; and as all our sensations and perceptions are of single objects, it must also be capable of denoting individuals. Now, whatever mode be adopted to render general terms significant of individual objects, or whatever auxiliaries be em-

a Plato and Aristotle, when they treat of prepositions, considered the noun and the verb as the only essential parts of speech ; these, without the aid of any other word, being capable of forming a sentence. Hence they were called ra iy^yxoTara fxeprj tov \6yov, "the most animated parts of speech." The latter of these philosophers, in his Poetics, admits four, adding to the noun and the verb the article and the conjunction. The elder Stoics made five, dividing the noun into proper and appellative. b Noun, Nomen de quo loquimur.

The opening of the book is shown; the full text loads in the reader.

Loading the full text…