the negative!'. . . . These two excellent grammarians,' he adds, alluding to Lancelot and Du Marsais, 'agree that the cases of a noun consist in its different terminations. . . . . Now it is certain, that nouns have a termination in the nominative as well as in the other cases, for a noun without a termination is impossible.** He further justly remarks, that 'the distinction of cases is not universal in all languages, and the system is not uniform in those which have admitted them; but it may exist in all, because it does in some; and that should be sufficient to make it the foundation of a general theory, even if we should derive no other advantage from it, than the aid it would afford us in exhibiting the reasons for the different processes pursued in different idioms. †

Conformably to these views of the subject, we have always regretted, that our English grammarians have departed from the Greek and Latin cases and tenses, and we may add from the grammatical arrangement adopted by the modern nations of Europe, in whose languages generally those cases and tenses are retained, notwithstanding they must be formed by prepositions and auxiliaries. We should, if the matter were now res integra, prefer even an English grammar with the six cases; as was in fact adopted in a useful little work of this kind, published a few years ago by Walker, that truly practical writer, who, whatever may be the estimate of his genius, has done more real service to the student, than any of his predecessors in the same department of philology. His remarks, on the point now under consideration, are well deserving of the reader's attention. He says

'But it will be naturally demanded, of what use to an English scholar is retaining the Latin terms and forms of construction? It may be answered, that if these terms and forms of construction are as intelligible as any we can substitute in their stead, why should we depart from the ancient, and received grammatical language of Europe, without deriving any advantage from the change? If, indeed, the Latin terms and forms of construction were much more difficult, than such as must be substituted to supply their place, the objection would be a very strong one; but this is not really the case. In the declension of nouns we must have two cases, and in that of pronouns, three. Where would be the difficulty or embarrassment in extending the cases to six, the number of them in Latin? The answer will be, because we have no such cases in our language; and therefore why should we create them? It may be replied, that a case or termination of a noun adds no more to its signification, than a preposition prefixed to it; the difficulty therefore of adopting these additional cases is ideal; three cases would be as easily learned, as the two or three we are + Ibid. p. 103.

more

* Grammaire Générale, tom. ii, p. 103, ed. 1767.

obliged to adopt; and by doing so, we speak the general grammatical language of all the scholars in Europe; for it must be observed, that general utility, and not philosophical or abstract propriety, is the great object of Grammar, as well as of language.

What has been observed of the cases of nouns is applicable to the declensions. We are obliged to form nouns into classes, according to their several modes of forming their plurals; and as we have five varieties of this formation, where would be the impropriety of calling each of these modes a declension? I greatly mistake, if putting each of these varieties in a table declined, with all their cases, will not make a better and more lasting impression of the plurals and genitives of nouns, which are so often confounded, than the short transient way in which they are generally mentioned.

'The moods of Verbs in Latin, except the optative, have been gene. rally retained by some of the most respectable English grammarians; notwithstanding the strong reasons which may be brought to prove, that we have no more than one mood in English. To abolish these moods would be certainly to coin our grammar anew; but it is highly probable, that what it might gain by this in metaphysical value, it would lose in general currency.

It will scarcely be questioned, that for boys who are to have a Latin education, an English grammar in the Latin form would be by far the most eligible."*

But we have one or two further remarks to make on these changes in grammatical systems. After we commence the work of reform in the parts of speech, in the cases and declensions, we must go on and remodel our systems of moods and tenses, and, perhaps in Greek, the arrangement of the numbers also; for on this latter point some acute grammarians have doubted, whether we ought to admit the dual numbers in that language. As to the moods, in Greek, according to our usual divisions, they are made the class or genus, and the tenses are subdivisions or species under them, which is in fact reversing the order of things. Accordingly in one grammar of high repute, that of Professor Moor, of Glasgow, the tenses are more philosophically made the genus or class and the moods are arranged as subdivisions under them. His rule is, 'Tempora habent modos, numeros et personas.'

One additional remark upon the conjugations shall finish what we have to say, on the particulars now under consideration. If we may now mould the Greek conjugations anew by the terminations alone, as they appear in the written language, we should also do the same thing in Latin; and then, instead of four conjugations, we should

Walker's Outlines of English Grammar, Preface, p. v.

+ See the Arguments in Fischer's Animadversiones ad Welleri Gram. tom. i. p. 313.

have but one, ending in re, which we should only have to subdivide according to the long or short vowel, or the difference in the vowel, preceding that termination. But the truth is, that in the original arrangement of the conjugations, regard was not had to the written language alone, but to the spoken language also; in Latin, to the long and short vowels, and in Greek, to the accents, whether circumflex or barytone; and it should not be overlooked, that the old grammarians of both those nations distinguish the conjugations, not by the terminations of the infinitive, nor by the first person singular of the indicative, but by the second.

It is the less worth our while to break up the ancient grammatical arrangements, particularly in Greek, because we may yet find them of material use in Comparative Philology. Late investigations into the languages of the globe have shown affinities that were not dreamed of in the last century. The Sanscrit, that fruitful parent of so many dialects, as everybody knows at this day, is ascertained to have a striking affinity with the Greek, not only in etymology but in its syntax; and there no longer remains a doubt, that the Greek syntax had its origin in the Sanscrit. Now, when we find in the latter, not only voices corresponding to the active, passive, and middle in Greek, but also a similar class of verbs in mi, inflexions corresponding to those of the Greek verbs, the same persons of the verb denoted by the same letters, past tenses formed with augments, and other extraordinary resemblances, which, as a learned writer observes, prove the Greek and Latin to have been cast in the same mould with the Sanscrit, we had better pause, before we strike off at a blow the great advantages that we now possess in having grammatical systems, which, practically speaking, are common to so many of the languages of man.

We intended to discuss in this place the other innovation in Greek grammar, to which we have before alluded; that is, the transposition of the perfect and pluperfect middle into the active voice, and there giving them the new names of second perfect and second pluperfect; but we have room for only one remark, which is, that we do not perceive, why it is not quite as well to let those tenses retain their ancient place in the middle voice, and to inform the pupil, that they are generally, perhaps always, used in an active sense, as to be obliged to teach him that certain other tenses, such as aorists and perfects, are sometimes used actively or passively according to circumstances, or that the present tenses of certain verbs are used like futures; with various other anomalies, or exceptions, which will forever prevent a strict classification in the grammar of this language.

From the preceding remarks the reader will have perceived that, of the two works at the head of this article, we should give the

preference, if we must choose between these two alone, to the Gloucester Grammar, as a school book for our country. But we frankly say, that if the University had not originally selected this, we should have considered it quite as well to have adopted, in an English translation, and with a few additions to the syntax, and some illustrative notes, either Ward's edition of the Westminster Grammar, or the Eton Grammar. We have good reasons for believing too, that this would have been the choice of the distinguished Greek scholar now at the University, to whom we have before alluded.* The Gloucester Grammar, it is well known, differs from these in the number of conjugations, and a few other particulars of less importance; which changes, upon the principles above discussed, we cannot consider as having been demanded by any urgent reaAnd though we have already extended this article to a much greater length than we ever intended, we cannot forbear adding here the judicious observations of a solid English scholar, made at the time when Valpy's Grammar was published. After some general commendation of that work, he says;

sons.

At the same time, and with all due deference to the great authorities both at home and abroad from whom I differ, I can never give my entire approbation to this or to any other Grammar, which deviates from the established number of Declensions and Conjugations, as taught and referred to by the Greek grammarians themselves. There can be but one reason for this deviation, and that is, to assist the scholar. It is worth while, therefore, to ascertain how much his labor is abridged by the consolidation of Declensions and Conjugations. If we compare the Accidents in Dr. Valpy's Grammar, with those in the Eton Grammar, and leave out of consideration the notes in both, it may be asserted, that there are not ten pages of text to be learned less in one Grammar than in the other. This, therefore, is the just amount of labor saved to the pupil. Now let me ask, what is the value of this saving to a boy, whose time is not very precious, and whose memory is fresh and active, and cannot well be too much exercised? But are we sure, that even this saving is a real and clear gain? On the contrary, when he is an adult and comes to the reading of the Greek Scholiasts, Commentators, and Grammarians, will be not find them perfectly unintelligible, in all their grammatical allusions, upon the principles of the new Grammar? The old Grammar must be got by heart, at last, by those who would understand the old Grammarians; and surely it is much better to learn their grammar at first, and once for all, at little or no waste of time and trouble, than after

* Since these remarks were written, we have had the satisfaction of receiving a communication from the eminent scholar alluded to in p. 302 by which we find that we were not mistaken in the general statement here made of his opinions upon this subject.

wards at a very great one. It is making two scaffoldings necessary, where one alone might be sufficient."*

With these views of the subject, we cannot but consider it as a great misfortune, that any of our principal colleges should have countenanced a departure from the old system, which had been so long followed in this country; but above all, that the conductors of those institutions should not have agreed among themselves in selecting the same elementary work. We cannot but still flatter ourselves, that they will one day concur; and we hope every teacher in the country will co-operate with them in the adoption of some one grammar, that shall not be changed, at least, in our day.† Under the present diversity of works of this kind, the students, that meet at any one of our colleges from every part of the United States, lose all benefit of having a common technical language; and, under the changes which are continually making, parents, who have been taught by one grammar, are deprived of the means of aiding the progress of their own children from the same cause.

Frequent changes in elementary works of any kind, are attended with the most mischievous effects: they occasion an actual retardation of the whole community for a time. The truth is, there are

Classical Journal, vol. xii, p. 312, notes.

+ We hope, too, for the reputation of our country, that we shall never again see an edition of a Grammar, or any other Greek book, published under the sanction of our Colleges, without the Accents. Both the editions now before us are without them; though we do not know that the Colleges are in any way responsible for it: we trust they are not. Our English brethren have been obliged to bear the taunts and sneers of the Continental scholars, on account of the unfortunate instance of the Oxford Theocritus,' as Bishop Horsley calls it with no little mortification, and a few other Greek publications without accents; and it is truly surprising, that we should be willing to encounter their jeers and reproaches for the same cause. This same whimsical notion of simplifying, as it is called, induced Masclef in France, and Parkhurst in England, and some followers of them in our own country, to teach the Hebrew language without the Masoretic points; but the opinion and practice of our best Hebrew scholars are fast correcting this affectation of improvement. In respect to Greek, we wish the advice of those eminent scholars, Wyttenbach and Porson, were a little more listened to.

In accentibus vero,' says Wyttenbach, ‘ne turbaretur eo magis cavimus, quod eorum observatione pars haud contemnenda accurate rationis grammaticæ continetur; ad cujus negligentiam subinde quoque magistros adeo proclives videmus, ut Græcum locum, vel prave positis, vel omnino omissis, accentibus, scribentes et edentes, eum sui quasi imaginem stuporis, prodere videantur. Wyttenbach. Selecta Princip. Historic. Præfat.

And Porson, with his accustomed tone of independence and contempt of blockheads, says:

Siquis igitur vestrûm (sc. adolescentium) ad accuratam Græcarum literarum scientiam aspirat, is probabilem sibi accentuum notitiam quàm maturrime comparet, in propositoque perstet, scurrarum dicacitate et stultorum irrisione immotus,' Porson. Medea, in Not.