Page images
PDF
EPUB

Greek

The derivation and formation of the middle and Greek passive voices, would certainly afford matter of curious Language. speculation; but the labour necessary to investigate this connection would greatly overbalance the benefit 152 expected.

which had a radix that would not admit this conjuncLanguage. tion, they hardened the h into x, as in rw, preterite Ti-xx, Axou-xx. Many other ways were contrived to facilitate this re-union. These are detailed in every Greek grammar, and so need not be mentioned.What has been said with respect to this configuration, we offer as a pure conjecture, without the most remote intention of obtruding it upon our readers.

If it is admitted, that the auxiliary ha formed the conjugating termination of the active verb among the Greeks, it will likewise be admitted, that the radical verb and the other made originally two distinct words: that, according to this scheme, the preterite would proceed thus, y ha, said I have; y has, said thou hast; Ay he, said he hath, &c. This process to us appears rational, elegant, and advantageous. The pluperfect was not then invented, and therefore it does not come under our consideration. The other tenses were all deduced from those described; and in forming these intermediate distinctive tenses, we believe that both critics and grammarians, and perhaps philosophers too, were employed. See GRAMMAR.

The eastern nations have diversified their verbs, by affixing fragments of the personal pronouns to the radix, by which they gained only the advantage of exhibiting the genders of the persons engaged in being, acting, and suffering; but a perpetual repetition of these was unavoidable. The Greeks, by their artificial combination of the radix with the two auxiliaries, avoided the necessity of repeating their personal pronouns, as we and the other modern inhabitants of Europe are obliged to do; and at the same time, by diversifying the terminations of their nouns and verbs, wonderfully improved the beauty and harmony of their language. The arrangement above insisted on is so very different from that of the orientals, and so entirely Gothic, that we think there can be no doubt that the Greeks borrowed this manœuvre from the Thracians. Every person moderately acquainted with the Greek language will, upon examination, discover a wonderful coincidence between the structure, idioms, and phraseology, of the English and Greek languages; so many congenial features must engender a strong suspicion that there once subsisted a pretty intimate relation between them.

In the preceding deduction, we find ourselves obliged once more to differ from the very learned author of the Origin and Progress of Language. As we took the liberty to question his originality of the Greek language, and at the same time presumed to attack the goodly structure raised by philosophers, critics, and grammarians; so we now totally differ from that learned writer as to his theory of the creation of verbs out of the inhabile matter of aw, sw, &c. This whole fabric, in our opinion, leans on a feeble foundation.

The apparatus of intermediate tenses, of augments, derivation of tenses, with their formation, participles, and idiomatical constructions, and other essentials or appendages, we omit, as not coming within the verge of the disquisition.

Derivation

and forma

However, to complete our plan, we shall subjoin a tion of the few strictures with respect to the formation of the middle middle voice, which was, in our opinion, immediately voice. formed from the active.

We have seen already, that the active voice in its original state was formed by annexing fragments of the substantive or auxiliary verb to the radix. The same economy was observed in fabricating the flexible parts of the verb of the middle voice. To demonstrate this, we shall first conjugate the present tense of the auxiliary passive upon the principles above laid down.

[ocr errors]

Present, Εομαι, εεσαι, είται, εομεθα, εεσθε, εονται. Soch was the passive present of the auxiliary. We shall now take our example from the verb Tτ; second future run-opa, struck I am, ruïn-siai, struck thou art, τεεται, struck he is, &c. contracted τυπούμαι, τυπη, τυπείThe conjunction and formation here is obvious. Perhaps, in the second person, was inserted, which, however, is thrown out in the process of the persons. The future middle is clearly formed, by affixing the future-passive of the verb is, only as was introduced into the language for long, it was generally (T) substituted instead of that vowel in verbs ending in aw and w, and for. in verbs ending in ow; the two vowels 1 and being originally long as well as short, till was adopted to denote the long sound of the former, and w that of the latter. In many verbs, before the conjunction of the radix and auxiliary, was thrown out: Plate thus, τυπεσομαι became τυψομαι, λεγ-εσομαι, λεξομαι, CCCCXVI. &c.

The preterite was deduced from that of the active by a very slight variation, so trifling, indeed, that it need not be mentioned; only we may observe, that the aspirate h is never retained in this tense, which originally seems to have been the only distinguishing character by which that tense of the middle voice differed from the same tense of the active.

From the strict analogy between the mode of forming the three primary tenses of the active and middle voice, we are led to suspect that what is now the middle was originally the passive voice.

The immediate formation of the former, by annexing the passive auxiliary, is obvious. The middle voice still partakes of the passive signification, since it has sometimes a passive, though more frequently an active. There are several parts of the present passive quite analogous to the same tenses in the middle: and, lastly, it is the common progress, in the course of improvement, to proceed step by step, and by approximation. What is most simple and easy is the first object, then succeeds what is only a little more difficult, and so on till we arrive at the last stage, when human ingenuity can go no farther. Now, it will readily be admitted, that the passive voice is much more embarrassed and intricate in its texture than the middle; and, therefore, the

(T) We say generally, because in verbs ending in se, the is sometimes retained, as TA, TEλEON, AGXEW-BOW,

Greek the former should have been posterior in point of time Language. to the latter.

153

and of the passive.

We are well aware, that the very learned Kuster, and most other moderns, deeply skilled in the origin, progress, and structure, of the Greek language, have thought otherwise. The general opinion has been, that the Greek middle voice answered exactly to the Hebrew conjugation hithpachal, and in its pristine signification imported a reciprocality, or when the agent acts upon itself. For our part, we only intended a few hints upon the subject, which our learned readers may pursue, approve, or reject, at pleasure.

If we might pretend to investigate the formation of the passive voice, we should imagine that the modern present was formed from the ancient one, by inserting such letters as were found necessary for beauty, variety, energy, &c.; the first future from the second future middle of the verb riu, once Diw. This future is Oncopas; and, joined to the radix, always occupies that place, τι θησομαι, τελέθησομαι, Φλέχθησομαι, τυφθησομαι, and so of the rest: whether pai, vai, Tai, which occur so frequently as the terminations of the middle and passive voices, are fragments of some obsolete verb, we will not pretend to determine.

From verbs in œw, sw, ow, vw, are formed verbs in μu; which in the present, imperfect, and second aorist, as it is called, only have a different form, by assuming with a long vowel preceding it, in the present active; which vowel is preserved in each person singular. This collection of irregular verbs seems to be formed from the verb up, which in some dialects might be nu.. Indeed the imperfect », »,, scems to imply as much in this, however, we dare not be positive.

In the whole of this analysis of the formation of verbs, we have laid down what to us appears most plausible. That metaphysical critics may discover inaccuracies in the preceding detail we make no doubt; but our candid readers will doubtless reflect, that no language was ever fabricated by philosophers, and that the elements of language were hammered out by peasants, perhaps by savages. Critics have created a philosophy of language we admit, and have a thousand times discovered wonderful acuteness and ingenuity in the mechanism of words and sentences, where the original onomathetæ never apprehended any, and which possibly never existed but in their own heated imagination. If our more enlightened readers should find any thing in the preceding detail worthy their attention, so much the better; if the contrary should happen, we presume they will take up with the hackneyed system. We have all along neglected the dual number, because it regularly follows the type of the other numbers.

Be that as it may, before we drop this subject we must take the liberty to subjoin an observation or two with respect to the consequences of the practice of new modelling the present, and of course the imperfect, tenses of verbs. Ist, After this arrangement they commonly retained all the other tenses exactly as they had stood connected with the primitive verb: this needs no example. 2d, They often collected the tenses of verbs, whose present and imperfect were now obsolete, in order

to supply this defect. Thus we have Qigw-Oliw, Iveyna, Greek ηνοχα. 3d, They often formed present and imperfect Language.. tenses without any other tenses annexed: The poets in particular seem to have fabricated these two tenses at pleasure.

If this procedure was convenient for the poets, it was certainly most incommodious with respect to the vulgar, as well as to foreigners who had an inclination to learn the language. The vulgar, some ages after Homer and Hesiod, must have found it as difficult to understand their poems as our people do to comprehend those of Chaucer and Spenser. By this disposition, too, the etymology of verbs w almost entirely confounded. The present second future being, as has been observed, the ancient present, the attention of the curious etymologist was naturally diverted to the modern present, where it was utterly impossible to discover the radical word. A few examples will clucidate this point: Tuvw, to stretch, to extend, old present Tava; Tay is the radix, which at once appears to be a Persian word signifying a large tract of country. Hence Mauritania "the land of the Mauri," Aquitania, Bretania; and with s prefixed, Hindo-stan, Chusi-stan, Turque-stan. The obsolete verb on, whence roux, is evidently derived from op, an Egyptian name of the moon: pana, second future pav, to show, from the Egyptian word phan or pan, a name of the sun: TT, future second run; TUT is obviously the offspring of on, thaph,” a drum or timbrel," from beating or striking, &c. In such etymological researches, the student must be careful to turn the Ionic into the Dorica; because the Dores were latest from the coast of Palestine, and consequently retained the largest share of the Phoenician dialect: thus new, to rejoice, turning into a becomes yata. This word, throwing away the termination, becomes gath, plainly signifying a wine press (u). It is likewise to be observed, that the Æolians often change & into v, as cugš instead of rags, &c.

[ocr errors]

154

used as

nouns.

It is not our intention to enter into the arrangement and peculiar constructions of the Greek language. There is, however, one, which we cannot well pass over in silence. As that tongue is destitute of those words Greek inwhich the Latins call gerunds, to supply this defect they finitives employ the infinitive with the article prefixed: thus, E To vai avtus Qıλus, in order to their being friends: απο τε έλεσθαι αυτους Βασιλεα, from their having elected a king; Εκ τε απο φεύγειν αυτές εκ της πολιος, from their flying out of the city. In these phrases the infinitive is said to assume the nature of a substantive noun; agreeing with the article before it, exactly as if it were a noun of the neuter gender. Idioms of this kind occur in our own tongue; only with us the verb, instead of being expressed in the infinitive, is turned into the participle. According to this arrangement, the first of the preceding phrases, which, according to the Greek, would stand toward to be friends, in English is, in order to their being friends. This anomaly, then, if indeed it be such, is of no manner of consequence. The French, if we are not mistaken, would express it in the very same manner with the Greek, that is, pour etre amis. From treating of verbs, we should naturally proceed U u 2

(H) Hence it came to signify rejoicing, from the mirth and revelry attending the treading of the vine-press.

to

Greek to the consideration of adverbs, which are so denominaLanguage. ted, because they are generally the concomitants of verbs. Every thing relating to that part of speech, in the Greek tongue, may be seen in the Port Royal or any other Greek grammar. Instead therefore of dwelling upon this beaten topic, we shall hazard a conjecture upon a point to which the critics in the Greek tongue, as far as we know, have not hitherto adverted.

155 Greek particles of oriental extraction.

The most elegant and most admired writers of Greece, and especially Homer, and after him Hesiod, abound with small particles, which appear to us pure expletives, created as it were to promote harmony, or fill up a blank without sense or signification. How those expletive particles should abound in that language beyond any other, we think, is a matter not easy to be accounted for. It has been said by the Zoili, that if you extract these nonentities from the poems of that bard, qui solus meruit dici poeta, a magnum inane, a mighty blank, would be left behind. We would willingly do justice to that pigmy race of words, and at the same time vindicate the prince of poets from that groundless imputation. Plato likewise, the prince of philosophers, has been often accused of too frequently employing these superfluous auxiliaries.

Those particles were no doubt imported from the east. It would be ridiculous to imagine that any description of men, however enthusiastically fond they might be of harmonious numbers, would sit down on purpose to fabricate that race of monosyllables purely to eke out their verses; mere sounds without significancy. In the first place, it may be observed, that there is a very strict connection among the particles of all cognate languages. To this we may add, that the not understanding the nature, relations, signification, and original import of those seemingly unimportant terms, has occasioned not only great uncertainty, but numberless errors in translating the ancient languages into the modern. The Greek language in particular loses a considerable part of its beauty, elegance, variety, and energy, when these adverbial particles with which it is replete are not thoroughly comprehended. An exact translation of these small words, in appearance insignificant, would throw new light not only on Homer and Hesiod, but even upon poets of a much posterior date. Particles, which are generally treated as mere expletives, would often be found energetically significant. It is however, altogether impossible to succeed in this attempt without a competent skill in the Hebrew, Chaldaic, Arabian, Persian, and old Gothic lanWe shall here take the liberty to mention a guages. few of these particles which are most familiar, one or other of which occur in almost every line of Homer, and which we believe are either not understood or misunderstood. Such are ▲, dn, μer, nutol, μav, ye, egi, aga, ga, yev. Az is nothing else but the Chaldaic particle da, the parent of the English the. It likewise signifies by turns, in your turn; dn is the same word in the Ionic dialect; v is a particle of the Hebrew affirmative amen, fides, veritas. May, a kind of oath by the moon, called mana, almost over all the east; hence Dor. ys, an oath by ya, that is, the earth; aga, another oath by the same element, probably from the oriental word of the same import; ga is a fragment of aga mentioned before; 8, of yta the earth, and ev or av, an Egyptian name of the sun; w, as, a particle which per

μανα;

Greek

vades all the dialects of the Gothic language. In this manner we believe all these small words that occur so Language frequently in the Greek tongue, and which have hitherto been held inexplicable, may be easily rendered in significant terms: and were this done, we believe they would add both beauty and energy to the clauses in which they stand. But this discussion must be left to more accomplished adepts.

156

We shall not explain the nature of prepositions, be- Preposi cause we are convinced that few people will take the tions, trouble to peruse this disquisition who are not already acquainted with their import in language. The Greek prepositions are eighteen in number, which need not be enumerated here. Most of these might be easily shown to be particles, or fragments deduced from oriental or Gothic words. The use of these words is to connect together terms in discourse, and to show the relation between them. In languages where, as in English, all these relations are expressed without any change on the termination of the nouns to which they are prefixed, the process is natural and easy. The whole is performed by juxtaposition. But in the Greek and Latin tongues, this effect is produced, partly by prefixing prepositions and partly varying the terminations of Had the Greeks been able to intimate all those relations by varying the terminations, or had they multiplied their prepositions to such a number as would have enabled them to express these relations without the casual variations, as the northern languages have done; in either case their language would have been less embarrassing than it is in its present state. According to the present arrangement both prepositions and the casual variations are used promiscuously to answer that purpose; a method which appears to us not altogether uniform. Though this plan might occasion little embarrassment to natives, it must, in our opinion, have proved somewhat perplexing to foreigners. The difficulty would be, as to the latter, when to adopt the one and when the other expedient.

nouns.

Another inconveniency arises from the exceeding small number of prepositions in that language, which bear too small a proportion to the great variety of relations which they are appropriated to express. This deficiency obliged them often to employ the same preposition to denote different relations: For instance, Exi intimates, 1st, upon; as 171 78 λils, upon the stone; and then it takes the genitive. 2d, It denotes near upon; as in To λife, and then it governs the dative. 3d, The same preposition signifies motion towards; as Exto imi Tov Xibor, he fell upon the stone. In these instances the same preposition intimates three different relations; and, which is still more embarassing, each of these requires a different case. The difficulty in this instance is so considerable, that even the most accurate of the Greek writers themselves often either forget or neglect the. true application. Many examples of this might be adduced, did the limits assigned us admit such illustrations. Every man who has carefully perused the Grecian authors will readily furnish himself with examples.

157

Again, some prepositions, which indicate different re- irregularly lations, are prefixed to the same case. Thus, & signifies used, from; as, Ex Aios agxouela, from Jupiter we begin; an quov biov, from my life, or my course of life; go τWY θυρων, before the doors ; προ νικης εγκωμιον, an encomium before the victory; αντι αγαθών αποδιδοναι κακα, to render

Greek evil for good; avti rov, against you. In these examples, Language, and indeed every where, those prepositions intimate different relations, and yet are prefixed to the same cases. Sometimes the same preposition seems to assume two opposite significations: this appears from the preposition I just mentioned, which intimates both for, instead of, and against or opposite to.

[blocks in formation]

What has been observed with respect to the prepositions above mentioned, the reader will readily enough apply to κατα, μετά, δια, περί These incongruities certainly imply something irregular; and seem to intimate that those anomalies were so deeply incorporated with the constitution of the language, that the subsequent improvers found it impossible to correct them. Indeed to prefix a preposition to a case already distinguished by the affixed termination, appears to us a superfluity at least, if not an absurdity; for certainly it would have been more natural to have said x Zevs agxoresta, than be Aros agxouida. Some very learned men, who have inquired into the origin of language, have been of opinion that prepositions were the last invented species of words. If this opinion be well founded, we may suppose (and we think that this supposition is not altogether improbable) that the casual terminations of the Greek language were first affixed to the radix, in the manner above exhibited; and that prepositions were afterwards fabricated and prefixed to the cases already in use.

The syntax or construction of the Greek language does not, according to our plan, come within the compass of our present inquiry. This the curious Greek student will easily acquire, by applying to the grammars composed for that purpose. We have already hazarded a few conjectures with respect to the formation of the most important and most distinguished classes of words into which it has been divided by the most able grammarians, without, however, descending to the minutiæ of the language. As prepositions are the chief materials with which its other words, especially verbs, are compounded, we shall briefly consider the order in which they probably advanced in this process.

Complex ideas are compounded of a certain number or collection of simple ones. Of those complex notions, some contain a greater and some a smaller number of simple conceptions. In language, then, there In language, then, there are two ways of expressing those complex ideas, either by coining a word to express every simple idea separately, according to the order in which they stand in the mind; or by trying to combine two or more simple terms into one, and by that method to intimate one complex idea by one single word. The Arabians, notwithstanding all the boasted excellencies of their language, have never arrived at the art of compounding their words, in order to answer this noble purpose; and the sister dialects are but slenderly provided with this species of vocables. The Greeks, of all other nations (except perhaps those who spake the Sanscrit language), are unrivalled in the number, variety, propriety, elegance, energy, and expression of their compound terms, The Greeks, like the Arabians, in the earliest stages of their language, had only a collection of radical disjointed words, consisting of the jargons of the aboriginal Greeks, of the Pelasgi, Thracians, &c. How these words were arranged and constructed, we have no data remaining upon which we can found

a critical investigation. We must therefore remain sa- Greek tisfied with such probable conjectures as the nature of the Language. case, and the analogy of the language, seem to suggest.

The prepositions were originally placed before the nouns, whose relations they pointed out. For example, let us take the vast as anλos, he died along with the rest, or he died out of hand along with the others. These words were arranged thus: aritmoxilo συν τοις άλλοις ; and αποθνησκον συν τοις άλλοις. In this manner the parts of every compound word were placed separately, at least as much as other words which had no connection.

159

words in

The first compound words of the Greek language The first were the radical nouns with the article, and the radical compound part of the substantive or auxiliary verb. The success Greek. of this experiment encouraged them to attempt the same in other words. By this noble invention they found themselves able to express, in one word, with ease and significancy, what in other languages, and formerly in their own, required a tedious ambages or circumlocution. In process of time, as their language was gradually mellowed, they increased the number of their compounds, till their language, in that respect, infinitely excelled all its parent dialects. In this process they were careful to unite such letters as not only prevented asperity and difficulty of pronunciation, but even promoted harmony and elegance. But this was the labour of posterior ages.

The Greeks were entirely ignorant of the derivation or etymology of their language: for this we need only consult Plato's Cratylus, Aristotle's Rhetoric, Demetrius Phalereus, Longinus, &c. In deducing patronymics, abstracts, possessives, gentiles, diminutives, verbals, &c. from radicals of every kind, they have shown the greatest art and dexterity. Examples of this occur almost in every page of every Greek author. But this extended no farther than their own language; every foreign language was an abomination to the Greeks. But more of this in the sequel.

160

guage;

The original materials of the Greek tongue were un- Original doubtedly rough and discordant, as we have described materials them above. They had been collected from different of the quarters, were the produce of different countries, and Greek lanhad been imported at very distant periods. It would therefore be an entertaining, if not an instructing, speculation, if it were possible to discover by what men and by what means, this wonderful fabric was founded, erected, and carried to perfection. The writers of Greece afford us no light. Foreigners were unacquainted with that originally insignificant canton. Every thing beyond Homer is buried in eternal oblivion. Orpheus is indeed reported to have composed poems; but these were soon obliterated by the hand of time. The verses now ascribed to that philosophical hero are none of his*. Linus wrote, in the Pelasgic dialect, the a-* Pausan.. chievements of the first Bacchus; Thamyris the Thra- lib. i. cian wrote; and Pronapides the master of Homer was a celebrated poet. The works of all these bards did not long survive; and it is a certain fact that the Greek tongue was highly polished even more early than the age in which these worthies flourished. Homer, no doubt, imitated their productions, and some are of opinion that he borrowed liberally from them. The Greeks knew no more of the original character of their language, than of the original character and complexion

of.

cap. 22.

ventions. The chief of them were employed in the Greek temples of the gods; and the less illustrious, like our Language. minstrels of old, strolled about from place to place, and exercised their functions wherever they found employ

Greek of their progenitors. They allowed, indeed, that their Language. language was originally barbarous and uncouth; but by what means or by what persons it was polished, enriched, and finally arranged, was to them an impenetrable secret.

161

carried to its utmost

at a very early pe

ried.

We have already demonstrated that the Ionim or aborigines of Greece were a race of barbarians; that consequently their language, or rather their jargon, was of the same contexture. The Pelasgi found both the people and their speech in this uncultivated state. These people arrived in Greece about the year before Christ 1760. It was then that the language of Greece which was began to be cultivated. Before the age of Homer the work seems to have been completed. Nothing of conperfection sequence was afterwards added to the original stock; on the contrary, not a few moieties were deducted from the Homeric treasure. The Pelasgi, as was said before, arrived in Greece an. ant. Chr. 1760. Homer is thought to have been born an. ant. Chr. 1041; consequently the cultivation of the Greek tongue was completed in a period of about 700 years. But upon the supposition that Orpheus, Linus, Thamyris, &c. wrote long before Homer, as they certainly did, that language had arrived nearly at the standard of perfection two centuries before; by which computation the period of its progress towards its stationary point is reduced to 500 years. But as the Pelasgi were a colony of foreigners, we ought to allow them one century at least to settle and incorporate with the natives, and to communicate their language, laws, manners, and habits, to the aborigines of the country. By this deduction we shall reduce the term of cultivation to less than four centuries.

During this period Greece was furiously agitated by tumults and insurrections. That country was divided into a number of independent states, which were perpetually engaged in quarrels and competitions. The profession of arms was absolutely necessary for the protection and preservation of the state; and the man of conduct and prowess was honoured as a demi-god, and his exploits transmitted with eclat to posterity. The Greek tongue was then rough and unpolished; because, like the ancient Romans, the bravest men were more disposed to act than to speak. Every language will take its colour from the temper and character of those who employ it; and had it not been owing to one class of men, the Greek tongue would have continued equally rough to the era of Homer as it had been a century after the arrival of the Pelasgi.

There has appeared among barbarous or half civilized people a description of men whose profession it has been to frequent the houses or palaces of the great, in order to celebrate their achievements, or those of their ances tors, in the sublimest strains of heroic poetry. Accordingly, we find that the Germans had their bards, the Gauls their fads, the Scandinavians their scalds or scaldres, the Irish their fileas, all retained for that very purpose. They lived with their chieftains or patrons; attended them to battle; were witnesses of their heroic deeds; animated them with martial strains ; and celebrated their prowess, if they proved victorious; or, if they fell, raised the song of woe, and chanted the mournful dirge over their sepulchres. These bards were always both poets and musicians. Their persons were held sacred and inviolable. They attended pnblic entertainments, and appeared in all national con

[blocks in formation]

Among the ancient Greeks there was a numerous by the potribe of men of the very same description who were ets, whe at once poets and musicians, and whose office it was made a to celebrate the praises of the great, and to transmit their exploits to posterity in the most exaggerated encomiums. These poetical vagrants were styled Acidos or songsters. Some of these lived in the houses of great men; while others, less skilful or less fortunate, strolled about the country in the manner above described. The more illustrious of these Aada who were retained in the temples of the gods, were certainly the first improvers of the language of the Greeks. Among the Hebrews we find the first poetical compositions were hymns in ho. nour of Jehovah, and among the Pagans the same practice was established. In Greece, when all was confusion and devastation, the temples of the gods were held sacred and inviolable. There the Ado improved their talents, and formed religious anthems on those very models which their progenitors had chanted in the east.

distinction

The language of the Greeks was yet rugged and unmellowed their first care was to render it more soft and more flexible. They enriched it with vocables suited to the offices of religion; and these, we imagine, were chiefly imported from the east. Homer every where mentions a distinction between the language of gods and men. The language of gods imports the 163 oriental terms retained in the temples, and used in between treating of the ceremonies of religion; the language the lanof men intimates the ordinary civil dialect which sprung guage of from the mixed dialects of the country. The priests gods and no doubt concurred in promoting this noble and important purpose. From this source the strolling Aodo drew the rudiments of their art; and from these last the vulgar deduced the elements of a polished style.

To these Ador of the superior order we would ascribe those changes mentioned in the preceding part of this inquiry, by which the Greek tongue acquired that variety and flexibility, from which two qualities it has derived a great share of that ease, beauty, and versatility, by which it now surpasses most other languages. The diversity of its terminations furnishes a most charming variety, while at the same time the sense is communicated to the reader or hearer by the relation between them. By this economy the poet and orator are left at liberty to arrange their vocables in that order which may be most soothing to the ear, and best adapted to make a lasting impression on the mind.

Few colonies have emigrated from any civilized country without a detachment of priests in their train. The supreme powers, whoever they were, have always been worshipped with music and dancing. The Hebrews, Phoenicians, and Egyptians, delighted in these musical andjocund festivals. The priests who attended the Iones, Dores, Æolians, Thebans, Athenians, &c. from the east, introduced into Greece that exquisite taste, those delicate musical feelings, which distinguish the Greeks from all the neighbouring nations. Hence that numerous race of onomatapœas, by which the Greek language is invested with the power of expressing almost every passion of the human soul, in such terms as oblige it to feel and actually

of men.

« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »