however I can no where find in the book) thus is the Conjunction explained by Mr. Harris. - A found fignificant devoid of fignification, having at the fame time a kind of obfcure fignification; and yet having neither fignification nor no fignification; but a middle fomething between fignification and no fignification, fharing the attributes both of fignification and no fignification; and linking fignification and no fignification together.

"If others, of a more elegant taste for fine writing, are able to receive either pleafure or intruction from fuch truly philofophical language, I fhall neither dispute with them nor envy them but can only deplore the dullness of my own apprehenfion, who, notwithlanding the great authors quoted in Mr. Harris's treatife, and the great authors who recommend it, cannot help confidering this "perfect experfect example of analyfis," as an approved compilation of almost all the errors which grammarians have been accumulating from the time of Ariftotle down to our prefent days, of technical and learned affectation.

ter nominem, nifi ut laudem; fed nec peccata reprehenderem, nifi ut aliis prodeffem.-Indeed you have borne your teftimony for me in very trying fituations, where few befides yourfelf would have ventured fo. much honefly. At the fame time, I confefs, I fhould difdain to handle any ufeful truth daintily, as if I feared let it fhould fting me; and to employ a philofophical inquiry as a vehi le for interested or cowardly adulation.

"I protest to you, my notions of language were formed before I could account etymologically for any one of the words in question, and before I was in the leaft acquainted with the opinions of others. I addreffed myself to an inquiry into their opinions with all the diffidence of confcious igno rance; and, fo far from fpurning authority, was difpofed to admit of half an argument from a great name. So that it is not my fault, if I am forced to carry inilead of following the lanthorn: but at all events it is better than walking in total darkness.

"And yer, though I believe I differ from all the accounts which have hitherto been given of language, I am not fo much without authority as you may imagine. Mr. Harris himself and all the grammarians whom he has, and whom (though uting their words) he has not quoted, are my autho rities. Their own doubts, their difficulties, their diffatisfaction, their contradictions, their obfcurity on all thefe points are my authorities against them for their fyftem and their difficulties vanifh together. Indeed unlefs, with Mr. Harris, I had been repeating what others have written, it is impoffible I fhould quote any direct authorities for my own manner of explanation. But let us hear Wilkins, whofe in

E 3

:

dustry

dustry deferved to have been better employed, and his perfeverance better rewarded with difcovery; let us hear what he says.

"According to the true philofophy of fpeech, I cannot conce ve this kind of words" (he fpeaks of Adverbs and Conjunctions) to be properly a diftinct part of fpeech, as they are commonly called. But until they can be diftributed into their proper places, I have fo far complied with the Grammars of inftituted languages, as to place them here together."-And again, "For the accurate effecting of this [i. e. a real character] it would be neceflary that the theory itself [i.e. of language upon which fuch a defign were to be founded, fhould be exactly fuited to the nature of things. But upon fuppofa! that this theory [viz. of language] is defective, either as to the fulness or the order of it; this muft needs add much perplexity to any fuch attempt, and render it imperfect, And that this is the cafe with that common theory already received, peed not much be doubted.

"It appears evidently therefore that Wilkins (to whom Mr. Locke was much indebted) was well convinced that all the accounts hitherto given of language were erroneous. And in fact, the languages which are commonly ufed throughout the world, are much more fimple and eafy, convenient and philofophical, than Wilkins's fcheme for a real character; or than any other scheme that has been at any other time imagined or propofed for the purpofe. Mr. Locke's diffatisfaction with all the accounts which he had feen, is too well known to need repetition.

"Sanctius refcued QUOD particularly from the number of thefe

myfterious Conjunctions, though he left ur amongst them.

And Servius Scioppius, G. J. Voffius, Perizonius, and others, have explained and difplaced many other fuppofed Adverbs and Conjunctions.

"Skinner (though I knew it not previously) had accounted for 1 before me, and in the fame manner; which though fo palpable, Lye confirms and compliments. Even S. Johnson, though mistakenly, has attempted AND; and would find no difficulty with THEREFORE.

"In thort, there is not fuch a thing as a Conjunction in any language, which may not, by a skilfull herald, be traced home to its own family and origin; without having recourfe to contradiction and mystery with Mr. Harris: or with Mr. Locke, cleaving open the head of man to give it fuch a birth as Minerva's from the brain of Jupiter,

B.

"Call you this authority in your favour? When the full ftream and current fets the other way, and only fome little brook or rivulet runs with you? You know very well that all the authorities which you have alleged, except Wilkins, are upon the whole against you. For though they have explained the meaning, and traced the derivation of many Adverbs and Conjunctions; yet (except Sanctius in the particular inftance of Quod,

whofe conjunctive ufe in Latin he too ftrenuously denies) they all acknowledge them ftill to be Adverbs or Conjunctions. It is true, they diftinguished them by the title of reperta or ufurpata: but they at the fame time acknowledged (indeed the very diftinction itfelf is an acknowledgment) that there are

others

nativa, pura.

"H.

"True. Because there are fome, of whofe origin they were totally ignorant. But has any philofopher or grammarian ever yet told us what a real, original, native, pure Adverb or Conjunction is? Or which of thefe Conjunctions of fentences are fo? Whenever that is done, in any language, I may venture to promife you that I will flew thofe likewife to be repertas and ufurpatas, as well as the rest: And till then I fhall take no more trouble about them. I fhall only add, that though abbreviation and corruption are always bufieft with the words which are most frequently in ufe; yet the words moft frequently ufed are leaft liable to be totally laid afide. And therefore they are often retained, (I mean that branch of them which is most frequently ufed) when most of the other words (and even the other branches of these retained words)-are, by various changes and accident, quite loft to a language. Hence the difficulty of accounting for them. And hence (because only one branch of each of thefe declinable words is retained in a language) arifes the notion of their being indeclinable; and a feparate fort of words, or part of fpeech by themfelves. But that they are not indeclinable, is fufficiently evident by what I have already faid. For LIF, An, &c. certainly could not be called indeclinable, when all the other branches those verbs, of which they are the regular impe ratives, were likewife in ufe. And that the words IF, AN, &c. (which ftill retain their original fignification, and are ufed in the very fame manner and for the fame purpofe as formerly) fhould now be

from the ignorance of those who could not account for them; and, who therefor, with Mr. Harris, were driven to fay that they have neither meaning nor inflection s whilft notwithstanding they were till forced to acknowledge (either directly, or by giving them different titles of conditional, adverfative, &c.) that they have a "kind of obfcure meaning."

"How much more candid and ingenuous would it have been, to have owned fairly that they did not

understand the nature of these Conjunctions; and, infte d of wrapping it up in mystery, to have exhorted and encouraged others to a farther fearch.

"B.

"You are not the first perfon who has been mifled by a fanciful etymology. Take heed that your derivations be not of the fame ridiculous caft with theirs who deduced Conftantinople from Conflantine the noble,-Breeches from bear-riches, Donna from Dono-and King Pepin from wig. " H.

"If I have been mifled, it most certainly is not by etymology: of which I confefs myself to have been fhamefully ignorant at the time when thefe my notions of language were first formed. Though even that previous ignorance is now a circumftance which confirms me much in my opinion concerning thefe Conjunctions: for I knew not even the character of the language from which my particular proofs of the English Conjunctions were to be drawn. And (notwithstanding lord Monboddo's difcouraging fneer), it was general reafoning a priori, that led me to the particular inftances; not particular inftances to the general reasoning. This etyE 4

mology,

mology, against whofe fafcination you would have me guard myself, did not occur to me till many years after my fyftem was fettled: and it occurred to ne fuddenly, in this manner;" If my reafoning concerning thefe Conjunctions is well founded, there must then be in the original language from which the English (and to of all other languages) is derived, literally fuch and fuch words bearing precifely fuch and fuch fignifications."was the more pleafed with this fuggeflion, because I was entirely ignorant even of the Anglo-Saxon and Gothic characters: and the experiment prefented to me a mean, either of dilabufing myself from error (which I greatly feared;) or of obtaining a confirmation fufficiently strong to encourage me to believe (what every man knowing any thing of human nature will always be very backward in believing of himfelt) that I had really made a difcovery. For if upon trial I should find in an unknown language precifely thofe very words both in found, and fignification, and application, which in my perfect ignorance I had foretold; what must I conclude, but either that fome dæmon had malicioufly

infpired me with the spirit of true prophecy in order the more deeply to deceive me; or that my re..foning on the nature of language was not fantastical. The event was beyond my expectation: for I inftantly found upon trial, all my predictions verified. This his made me prefumptuous enough to affert it univerfally. Belides that I have fince traced thefe fuppof-d unmeaning indeclinable Conjunc. tions with the fame fuccefs in many other languages befides the Englifh. And because I know that the generality of minds receive conviction more calily from a number of particular intances, than from the furer but more abstracted arguments of general proof; if a multiplicity of uncommon avocations and engagements (ailing from a very peculiar fituation) had not prevented me, I should long before this have found time enough from my other purfuits and from my enjoyments (among which idleness is not the fmallet) to have fhewn clearly and fatisfactorily, the origin and precife meaning of each of thefe pretended unmeaning, indeclinable Conjunctions, at least in all the dead and living languages of Europe."

importance from knowing them. But the regularity thereby established, though highly proper, is by no means the first requifite in a dramatic compofition. Even waving all confideration of those finer feelings which a poet's imagination or fenfibility imparts, there is, within the colder provinces of judgment and of knowledge, a fubject for criticifm, more worthy of attention than the common topics of difcuffion: i mean the diftinétion and prefervation of character, without which the piece is at best a tale, not an action; for the actors in it are not produced upon the fcene. They were diftinguifhed by character; all men are; by that we know them, by that we are interested in their fortunes; by that their conduct, their fentiments, their very language is formed: and whenever, therefore, the proper marks of it are milling, we immediately perceive that the perfon before our eyes is but fuppofititious. Experience has fhewn, that how ever rigidly, and however tightly, the unities of action, time, and place have been infifted on, they may be difpenfed with, and the magic of the fcene may make the abfurdity invifible. Molt of Shakefpeare's plays abound with inftances of fuch a fafcination. It is certain, too, that it is not always neceflary ftrongly to affect, in order warmly to intereft, the fpectators: for many tragedies, which are not pathetic, are yet very engaging; and many comedies are amufing, though almost deftitute of humour: and as to the beauties of petry and of fancy, in fome very fit fubjects for a theatrical exhibition, they cannot be properly admitted; and very few abfolutely require them. But variety and truth of character arc indifpenfably neceflary to all,

both to comedy and to tragedy; and none of them deferve their name any farther than this merit belongs to them. Incidents, images, paflions, language, and numbers, are common to dramatic and to other compofitions; they might all be introduced into the relation of an affecting ftory; but characters can never be perfectly exhibited, except in a drama. When they, therefore, are wanting, the want cannot be fupplied, nor can it be concealed; the delufion fails, and the interest ceafes; the performers can only recite, they have nothing to act: for the performance is but a dialogue, not a reprefentation; and must be received by the dif appointed fpectators, at the best, with indifference.

"By the feeble attempts which every dramatic whiter makes to characterize his perfonages, and by the rude sketches which fome critics have drawn of a lew dramatic characters, the truth of thete principles is acknowledged, but the extent of them is not illustrated : for general marks of diftinction do not denote the individual, but only fhew the clafs he belongs to. Men difler as much in their minds as in their faces; and to each man belong fome general marks of diftinction in both: his complexion is brown, or it is fair; his features are hard or foft; and there is an expreffion of vivacity of fenfibility or of vacancy, in the conftruction and motion of his eyes. But faces, agreeing in many fuch circumftances, are not therefore, upon the whole, like to each other: nor would a picture be the portrait of any individual, to whom, in all thefe, and in many more particu 1rs, it were fimilar, unless the painter had alfo caught thofe peculiarities of countenance, which di

ftinguish