plainer and more fimple style of compofition which we now call Profe. Thus the ancient metaphorical and poetical dress of Language was at length laid afide in the intercourse of men, and referved for thofe occafions only, on which ornament was profeffedly ftudied.

RISE AND PROGRESS OF LANGUAGE AND OF WRITING.

WHEN we examine the order in which the

words are arranged in a fentence, we find a very remarkable difference between ancient and modern tongues. The confideration of this will serve to unfold farther the genius of Language, and to fhew the causes of thofe alterations, it has undergone in the progrefs of fociety.

To conceive diftin&tly the nature of this alteration, we must go back, as before, to the earliest period of Language. Let us figure to ourselves a Savage beholding fome fruit, which he earnestly defires, and requefts another to give him. Suppose him unacquainted with words, he would ftrive to make himself understood by pointing eagerly at the object defired, and uttering at the fame time a paffionate cry. Suppofing him to have acquired words, the first word which he would utter would be the name of that ob

ject. He would not exprefs himfelf according to our order of conflruction, "Give me fruit;" but according to the Latin order, "Fruit give me," " Fructum "da mihi," for this plain reafon, that his attention was wholly directed toward fruit, the object defired.

Hence we might conclude a priori, that this was the order in which words were moft commonly arranged in the infancy of Language; and accordingly we find in reality that in this order words are arranged in most of the ancient tongues, as in the Greek and Latin; and it is faid likewife in the Ruffian, Sclavonick, Gaëlick and feveral American tongues.

The modern languages of Europe have adopted a different arrangement from the ancient. In their profe compofitions very little variety is admitted in the collocation of words; they are chiefly fixed to one order, which may be called the Order of the Understanding. They place first in the sentence the perfon or thing, which speaks or acts; next, its action; and laftly, the object of its action. Thus an English writer, paying a compliment to a great man, would fay, "It is im"poffible for me to pafs over in filence so distinguish"ed mildness, so fingular and unheard of clemency, "and fo uncommon moderation, in the exercise of

fupreme power." Here is first presented to us the perfon who speaks, "It is impoffible for me;" next, what the fame perfon is to do," to pass over in filence;" and lastly, the object which excites him to action, "the mildnefs, clemency, and moderation of his pa tron." Cicero, from whom these words are translated, reverses this order. He begins with the object; places that first, which was the exciting idea in the speaker's mind, and ends with the speaker and his action. "Tantam manfuetudinem, tam inufitatam in- "auditamque clementiam, tantumque in fumma pc"teftate rerum omnium modum, tacitus nullo modo 66 præterire poffum." Here, it must be observed, the Latin order is more animated; the English more clear and distinct.

Our language naturally allows greater liberty for transposition and inversion in poetry, than in profe. Even there however this liberty is confined within når• row limits, in comparison with the ancient languages. In this refpect, modern tongues vary from each other. The Italian approaches the nearest in its character to the ancient tranfpofition; the English has more inverfion than the reft; and the French has the leaft of all.

Writing is an improvement upon Speech, and confequently was posterior to it in order of time. Its characters are of two kinds, figns of things, and figns of words. Thus the pictures, hieroglyphicks, and fymbols, employed by the ancients, were of the former fort; the alphabetical characters, now employed by Europeans, of the latter.

Pictures were certainly the first attempt toward writing. Mankind in all ages and in all nations have been prone to imitation. This would foon be employed for defcribing and recording events. Thus, to fignify that one man had killed another, they painted the figure of one man lying on the ground, and of another ftanding by him with a hoftile weapon in his hand. When America was first discovered, this was the only kind of writing with which the Mexicans were acquainted. It was however a very imperfect mode of recording facts; fince by pictures external events only could be delineated.

Hieroglyphical characters may be confidered as the second stage of the Art of Writing. They confift of certain fymbols, which are made to stand for invisible objects on account of their fuppofed refemblance of the objects themselves. Thus an eye reprefented

knowledge; and a circle, having neither beginning nor end, was the symbol of eternity. Egypt was the country where this kind of writing was moft ftudied, and brought into a regular art. By these characters all the boasted wisdom of their priests was conveyed. They pitched upon animals to be the emblems of moral objects, according to the qualities with which they fuppofed them to be endued. Thus imprudence was denominated by a fly; wifdom, by an ant; and victory, by a hawk. But this fort of writing was in the highest degree enigmatical and confufed; and confequently a very imperfect vehicle of knowledge.

From hieroglyphicks fome nations gradually advanced to fimple arbitrary marks, which stood for objects, though without any resemblance of the objects fignified. Of this nature was the writing of the Peruvians. They used small cords of different colours; and by knots upon thefe, of different fizes and variously ranged, they invented figns for communicating their thoughts to one another. The Chinese at this day use written characters of this nature. They have no alphabet of letters or fimple founds of which their words are compofed; but every fingle character, which they use, is expreffive of an idea; it is a mark which fignifies some one thing or object. The number of these characters must consequently be immense. They are faid indeed to amount to feventy thousand. To be perfectly acquainted with them is the business of a whole life; which must have greatly retarded among them the progrefs of every kind of science.

It is evident that the Chinese characters, like hieroglyphicks, are figns of things, and not of words. For we are told, that the Japanese, the Tonquinese, and

the Corceans, who fpeak different languages from each other, and from the inhabitants of China, ufe, however, the fame written characters with them, and thus correfpond intelligibly with one another in writing, though mutually ignorant of each other's language. Our arithmetical figures, 1, 2, 3, 4, &c. are an example of this fort of writing. They have no dependence on words; each figure reprefents the number for which it ftands; and confequently is equally understood by all nations, who have agreed in the use of these figures.

The first step, to remedy the imperfection, the ambiguity, and the tediousness of each of the methods of communication, which have been mentioned, was the invention of figns, which fhould stand not directly for things, but for words by which things were named and diftinguished. An alphabet of fyllables feems to have been invented previously to an alphabet of letters. Such a one is faid to be

retained at this day in Ethiopia and fome countries of India. But at beft it muft have been imperfect and ineffectual; fince the number of characters, being very confiderable, muft have rendered both reading and writing very complex and laborious.

To whom we are indebted for the fublime and refined discovery of letters is not determined. They were brought into Greece by Cadmus, the Phoenician, who, according to Sir Isaac Newton's Chronology, was contemporary with king David. His alphabet contained only fixteen letters. The reft were afterward added, according as figns for proper founds were found to be wanting. The Phoenician, Hebrew, Greek, and Roman alphabets agree fo much in the