of things is founded in nature, but the general manner of expressing that difference in words, seems to contain no necessary implication of it. The plural terminations appear to be only variations of the singular, not radically or numerically different in signification."

"There was probably no original alteration of the noun, either by termination or otherwise; but persons in speaking, sound indifferently, one foot, or five foot, or twenty foot, as the vulgar do still; always using a numeral to denote the plural, when the amount could be exactly ascertained; and a word expressive of multitude, when the number was uncertain."

"In time this numeral, or word of plurality, used in many languages, coalesced with its principal; and in some instances, as it was troublesome to use different words to denote the exact number, when exactness was of no consequence, they agreed to use the same sign to express both the singular and the plural; placing it before the noun for the one purpose, and after it for the other, as if we were to say in English, -singular, one foot; plural, foot one. In Anglo-Saxon,

thus:

It has already been shown, that we possess a list of nouns purely classical: these retain their originality also in their plural forms, as phenomenon, phenomena; datum, data; some few of these have begun to yield to the ordinary rules of formation, as memorandum, the plural of which, in addition to its native form memoranda, is frequently written memorandums; the others will doubtless follow this example, should they become as generally used.

We have next to examine how far the structure of our language admits of case.

The meaning of the term is less obvious than that of number or gender. It is derived from the word casus, cases or fallings, in allusion to the progress of sound from the organs of speech, as words are said to drop or fall from the lips. The ancient grammarians, therefore, represented the progress of articulate sounds, the fallings of verbal signs, by several lines proceeding from one point, as all words proceed from the mouth. When the noun fell in its simple primary sense, they represented it by a perpendicular line,

calling it the upright case. When the noun proceeded from the mind, varied from its primitive meaning, it was denoted by an oblique line, and denominated the oblique case.

It is a little singular that the compiler of our deservedlypopular grammar should have omitted to define this term. Although he generally commences each section with a definition of the term on which it treats, he begins the section on case, thus: "In English, substantives have three cases," &c.

Case, however, as applied to a noun, denotes a change of termination, or peculiarity of position, expressive of its relation to the words with which it is connected in a sentence. Of these, the Anglo-Saxons employed four,-we retain but three; the nominative or naming case, the possessive, and the objective, or word which is the object of the action. As no orthographical distinction exists between the nomina tive and the objective, the situation of the word alone can determine its case.

It is otherwise with the possessive, which terminates with what has been very distinctively called the apostrophic 's, the apostrophe placed before the s in the singular, after it in the plural.

This termination has, with great probability, been considered identical with the genitive termination of the third declension of the Latin-is, which was derived from the Greek as, and signified one; for it should be recollected, that the classical terminations are abbreviations of monosyllables, originally annexed to denote the variations of case. Thus this case was formerly in English expressed by the addition of the syllables es or is, now contracted to s with the apostrophe, to denote the omission of the vowel: thus, a smith's shop would formerly have been written a smithes shop. "The relation of property or possession is suggested by the appearance of the case, and supplied or understood by the mind."*

66

seems

* In Bosworth's Elements of Saxon Greek, p. 2, c. 2, there are some ingenious remarks on this subject, from the MS. of Mr. Webb, who considered the original meaning of the annexed particle is was one, thus: a smith's shop, i. e. a smithes shop, was literally saying smith one shop, or a shop smith one, or one smith being the owner of it. George's hat, i.e. a hat George one owning it. "One George," says this writer, an awkward explication, since George is here spoken of as a well-known person; but the general form of declension having been introduced and found convenient, and the precise primitive signification of it being overlooked, it was applied to all nouns without distinction. Yet, from this instance, it seems probable, that the indefinite declining particle was applied primarily to common names, and subsequently to proper ones; which latter, for a time, might, be indeclinable, or at least not be

Besides number, substances have the natural distinction of gender, and it was therefore indispensable that language should possess a mode of denoting it.

Things must be of the masculine or feminine gender, partake of both or neither; and, as the monstrous objects possessing both genders, are happily confined to the regions of romance, it only remained that language should have the means of expressing the masculine, feminine, and neuter. No language can exceed the English in the philosophical propriety and simplicity of its sexual distinctions, which is the more remarkable, seeing the Anglo-Saxons, as the Latins, resorted to the artificial mode of characterizing their genders by certain terminations; which were often applied indiscriminately to males, females, and neuters. With us, males are masculine, females feminine, and inanimate things are neuter.

*

The exceptions to this rule are few, and of a mature so interesting, that we could not wish it otherwise. When the occasion warrants the liberty, there is a pleasure in witnessing the triumphs of rhetoric over logical precision, and we unreluctantly surrender our judgments to the enchanting influence of imagination. Thus we say of the sun, he is setting; and of the moon, she shines. A ship is made feminine, as a great receiver and container. In addition to the neuters, which custom, by a figure of speech, has thus converted into the masculine and feminine, our language affords every facility to the personifications of eloquence and poetry :

i

used without declining. Thus an infant pratler says, "This is brother George hat," without producing obscurity; but, at an advanced age, he will of course say, George's hat. We still say indifferently, he follows the plough tail, or the plough's tail; and we always say, a shirt collar. These and many other undeclined nouns, we generally get over by saying, they are employed as adjectives, without any alteration of form, whereas they appear to be properly considered as nouns in the genitivecase, without the distinguishing particle of declension.

The possessive plural is but a repetition or reduplication of the possessive singular. We have stated that a smith's shop is a contraction of a smithes shop; so smiths' shops is a farther contraction of smitheses shops: We thus decline an English noun :

N. Smith,
P. Smith's,

O. Smith,

N. Smiths;
P. Smiths';

O. Smiths;

N. Smith, N. Smithes.
P. Smithes, P. Smitheses.
O. Smith, O. Smithes.

It must be recollected, therefore, that the ideas of plurality and possession, are by no means inherent, in the terms employed, but are superadded by the associations of the mind.

The chastity of the English language, which, in common usage, dis tinguishes by genders no words but what signify beings, male and female, give thus a fine opportunity for the prosopopæia; a beauty unknown to other languages where every word is masculine or feminine.-Kames's Elements of Criticism, ch, 20, s. 4.

hence the earth is rendered feminine, as the great mother of created things, &c. :

O Earth, behold, I kneel upon thy bosom,
And bend my flowing eyes to stream upon
Thy face, imploring thee that thou wilt yield
Open thy bowels of compassion, take
Into thy womb the last and most forlorn
Of all thy race.

Hear me, thou common parent,
I have no parent else. Be thou a mother,
And step between me and the curse of heav'n,
Who was who was, but is no more a father;
But brands my innocence with horrid crimes;
And, for the tender names of child and daughter,
Now calls me murderer and parricide.

CONGREVE.

Night is rendered feminine from its peaceful influence :

Night, sable goddess! from her ebon throne,
In rayless majesty now stretches forth
Her leaden sceptre o'er a slumb'ring world.

The Seasons are personified agreeably to their diversified

nature:

Now Summer with her wanton court is gone
To revel on the south side of the world,
And flaunt and frolic out the live-long day;
While Winter, rising pale from northern seas,
Shakes from his hoary locks the drizzling rheum.

ARMSTRONG.

Death is masculine, from its irresistible force. "Even the vulgar," says Harris, "with us, are so accustomed to this notion, that a female death they would treat as ridiculous."

Dire was the tossing, deep the groans Despair,
Tended the sick, busiest from couch to couch:
And over them triumphing Death his dart
Shook; but delayed to strike.

MILTON.

On the same principle, our immortal bard has energized Thunder :

The Thunder

Wing'd with red light'ning and impetuous rage,
Perhaps has spent his shafts.

This matchless power of our language is still more strikingly conspicuous, in the following beautifully spirited lines :~

At his command th' uprooted hills retir'd

Each to his place; they heard his voice and went
Obsequious; Heav'n his wonted face renew'd,
And with fresh flowrets hill and valley smil'd.

VOL. III. PART I.

H

On which the author of Hermes makes these just reflections: "Here all things are personified; the hills hear, the valleys smile, and the face of heaven is renewed. Suppose, then, the poet had been necessitated by the laws of his language to have said, each hill retir'd to its place,Heaven renewed its wonted face ;-how prosaic and lifeless would these neuters have appeared; how detrimental to his prosopopeia which he was aiming to establish. In this, therefore, he was happy, that the language in which he wrote imposed no such necessity, and he was too wise to impose it on himself."

The English language has three methods of denoting sex, by different words, as boy, girl; by a change of termination, as hunter, huntress; or by prefixing a masculine or feminine term, as a man-servant, a maid-servant.

It does not comport with our design to particularize the terminations of gender, but it may be interesting to notice, that the termination er has been traced from the Saxon word oer, which was the Gothic term for man: thus a pleader was equivalent in meaning to a plead-man; a widower, a widowman; a philosopher, a philosophy-man; hence, the impropriety of applying such terms to females; nor is it surprising that we have no suitable words, whereby to designate the character of our fair friends who devote themselves to philosophy, astronomy, &c. seeing the interesting occurrence is comparatively recent; much rather, however, would we that a term should be invented, that a circumlocution should be employed, or an anomaly exist, to describe the new character, than that, if the genius of language possessed the power, it should forbid the character for want of a descriptive term..

DISCUSSION:

IS THERE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THE DOCTRINES OF PHRENOLOGY ARE FOUNDED IN TRUTH?

THE ADVOCATES, of PHRENOLOGY commenced the Discussion by observing, that, whatever might be the essence or elemental nature of the human mind, it was manifest that the brain was the seat of its faculties-it was the instrument by which the mental functions were performed-it was the organ, or series of organs, of all intellectual power.