Writers of THE Grammaire Raisonnée, and several others. But no Writer that has come to my Knowledge has given fuch an Account of the Conceptions annexed to Nouns and Verbs as enables us, from the Nature of thefe Conceptions, to deduce the Reasons of every Part of Construction: Yet till this is done, can it be imagined that the Theory of Language is compleat? It is clear that Noun SUBSTANTIVES in the Nominative or Vocative Cafe, and VERBS in the Infinitive Mood, are the Supports of all connected Language: For no Sort of Word expreffes compleat Senfe, but such a Substantive or Verb: Nor does any Series of Words express such Sense, unless fuch a Subftantive or Verb be employed in it, as the capital Word on which all the reft depend. I here confider the Pronouns Perfonal, Relative, and Demonftrative, as Noun Subftantives, and I except the Interjection; for Reasons which will fully appear in the following Treatife. Hence, the firft great Question that arifes in the Theory of Language is, How does the Mind of Man form the Conceptions that are annexed to Subftantives in the Nominative or Vocative Cafe, and to Verbs in the Infinitive Mood? The Solution of this Question is ufually confidered as belonging to Metaphificks; and much of what Mr. Locke has advanced concerning the Original and Formation of Ideas, has a near Relation to this Subject; but he had little Occafion, in his Essay, to apply bis Thoughts to the particular Purposes of Grammar. When this Queftion is refolved, another immediately arifes, viz. What is the Difference between the Conception that is annexed to a Subftantive in the Nominative Cafe, and that which is annexed to a Verb in the Infinitive Mood? As for Inftance, between the Meaning of a Being, and to be; Action, and to act; a Suffering, and to fuffer? Those who are unacquainted with the Theory of Grammar, may perhaps think the Solution of this Question very eafy; or, if it be of any Difficulty, that it is of fmall Confequence to the Science:

But

But if they should ever apply themselves closely to the Subject, they will find that it is not easy, and yet that it is abfolutely neceffary towards proceeding with Succefs, in the Theory or Science of Grammar. It is to Small Purpose to confider the Infinitive Mood as the Noun of the Verb, as I think Varro and Prifcian have done; or, as a Subftantive, as the Writers of the Grammaire Raisonnée have done: For the Difficulty still recurs, viz. If it be a Noun, or a Subftantive, in what does the Conception annexed to it differ from that which is annexed to a Subftantive of another Kind? When the Nature of the Conceptions that are annexed to fingle Subftantives and fingle Infinitive Verbs, is afcertained, the next Question that arifes is, How is the Mind enabled to circumftantiate one Conception that is formed separately in the Mind, by another that is likewife formed feparately. Here the Confideration of Substantives, in oblique or dependent Cafes, and Adjectives, necessarily arifes in Grammar: And perhaps there is nothing of a more fubtile abstracted Nature in any Science than this Part of Grammar is. It is afy to fee that the Signs of Cafes have a Reference to the Relations that exist amongst the Objects which are denoted by Nouns: But these two most difficult Queftions arife: How are thefe Relations reduced to Claffes; and what Clafs is to be denoted by each Sign? And How does the Mind proceed in uniting two or more Conceptions, each of which may be the fingle or feparate Object of its Contemplation, into one complex Conception, without Increase of Number? For it is manifeft, that Substantives, in dependent Cafes, never increase the Number of that which is denoted by the Expreffion in which they are concerned: As for Inftance, an Habitation of Men denotes the Conception of but one Habitation, although the Objects Men are concerned in the Expreffion of the Conception. When this Point is determined, the Nature of THE NOUN ADJECTIVE, and of the

ADVERB,

ADVERB, is eafily ascertained: For each of thefe Parts of Speech is equivalent to the oblique Cafe of a Subftantive: i. e. to an English Subftantive in Dependence on a Prepofition Thus, a Man of Discretion is equivalent to a discreet Man; and he acts discreetly, to he acts with Difcretion; and of and with Discretion, are oblique Cafes of the Subftantive Difcretion; but difcreet is an Adjective, and difcreetly an Adverb

The Confideration of THE PRONOUNS arifes next in Order. And here it is eafy to fee that a Perfonal, Relative, or Demonftrative Pronoun may be used as a Subftitute for any Name of any Object whatfoever: But what is the Reason that these Pronouns have this Property? Why do they require Antecedents to be used along with them in Difcourfe? And above all, What is the Difference between the Effect of a Relative Pronoun, and that of a Perfonak Pronoun? And, Why muft a Relative always ftand in the Beginning of its Claufe? As to the Poffeffive Pronouns, it is clear that they are Adjectives, derived from the Perfonal Pronouns; fo that when the Nature of the Noun Adjective is known, there is little Difficulty in explaining them. The Interrogative Pronouns are only the Relatives applied in asking Questions: Therefore when the Nature of the Relative Pronoun is known, that of an Interrogative is easily fhewn. The Demonftrative Pronouns may be either used as Substantives, or as Adjectives; and the Reajon must be fhewn why they are capable of being fo ufed. Their Ufe, as Adjectives, leads us by an afy Tranfition to perceive the Nature and Ufe of THE ARTI

CLE.

THE VERB comes next to be confidered: And if (as I have Suppofed it to be) the exact Difference is already determined between the Conception annexed to any Sort of Noun, either Subftantive or Adjective, and that annexed to any Sort of Verb

in any of its Forms (Participles not excepted) the Way will be opened in a great Measure towards a compleat Discovery of the Reason of the feveral Uses of the Verb. Here the following Questions arife: Why does the Verb affume fo many different grammatic Forms? Why are fome of thefe Forms used in Construction like Subftantives, and others like Adjectives? Why, in English, does the fame Participial Form admit of being used both like a Subftantive and like an Adjective? Why is a Verb neceffary in every Sentence, and that Verb not of an Infinitive or Participial, but of a Definitive Form? And What is the Import of that Form, independent of the reft of the Signification of the Verb? The Solution of this last Question opens the Way to a clear Account of the Nature of Affirmation or Affertion. It is manifeft, that this is the great End of connected Speech: For why does any one put Words together in connected Construction, but to assert or declare what he perceives or thinks on any Occafion that offers? It is furprising that this main Point of Grammar fhould never have been explained by former Writers: Yet I have not been able to find any Writer who has attempted to explain it; but the Writers of the Grammaire Raifonnée; and they have not fully fucceeded.

AS THE ADVERB in its general Nature is fhewn to be the fame with that of a Subftantive in Dependence on a Prepofition, THE CONJUNCTION is the next Part of Speech that will require our particular Confideration. Here we shall foon perceive that the Conjunctions exprefs Declarations or Affertions, concerning the Words or Sentences themselves, which are connected by their Means: And here this Question arifes: What is the Import of the Declaration that is made by each Sort of Conjunction? And in particular, What is the Import of the Particle THAT, when it is not a Relative, and yet fhews a Sentence as depending

pending on other Words? THE PREPOSITION must be explained in English, before the Import of a Subftantive, in an oblique Cafe, can be fhewn: Therefore, if fuch Import be already fhewn, as I have fuppofed it to be, there will be few Difficulties remain when this Part of Speech comes to be particularly confidered. THE INTERJECTION is now the only remaining Part of Speech: And as it is manifeft that this Part of Speech is, of itself, a compleat Declaration or Assertion, the Question that now arifes is, What is the Reason that fingle Words are fufficient for the Affertions to which Interjections relate, whilft yet thefe fingle Words are not Verbs.

When the above-mentioned Questions are refolved, concerning the feveral Parts of Speech confidered fingly, the Conftruction of Words, in connected Series, comes next to be confidered: And here the following Questions arise: Why muft connected Words take the Form of a compleat Sentence on almost all Occafions, in order to give new Information to those who hear or read the Words? Is the whole Process of applying Words, in connected Expreffion, reducible to one fimple Proceeding; and if it be, what is that Proceeding?

THE CONCORDS must likewise be here confidered, and the Ufe and Import of them must be fhewn; and then this Question must be answered, Why are they fewer, and more easily observed in English, than in Latin or Greek, or even in French and other modern Languages?

Thus I have given in Effect, and with its principal Difficulties, the whole Plan of a Speculative or Theoretic Grammar, with regard to the English Language: And my Reason for doing it is, that by fome Letters which I have received, and by fome Strictures which have been made in Print on my former Work,

C