THE VERBAL TERMINATIONS ARE MERELY
CONNECTIVE.

There is strictly but one verbal termination, though it be diversified by various spelling and pronunciation: ath, (the very same as the Hebrew ath,) aith, eth, or ith, &c. was the older form, which became ed, et, es, est, an, en, &c.; en (which is now in Dutch the conjunction answering to our and) is still connected with many words; as seen, known, &c. in what is called the past participle: it is also firmly grafted into many words, as brighten, lighten, drown, &c.; nay, it is both prefixed and postfixed to some words, as enlighten, enliven. The reader will perceive in these instances how liable words are to be used superfluously and insignificantly: in enliven the connective is put twice; in enliveneth it is put thrice; in enlivenedst it is put four times.

At one time eth was the only termination after all the pronouns without any distinction; as I loveth, or me loveth, (for both were used,) thou or thee loveth, he or him loveth, we loveth, ye loveth, they or them loveth. So late as the time of Chaucer this was the prevailing manner:-" Goeth now away ye mermaidens and suffereth this man to be heled of my muses." "But nevertheless suffiseth to the (thee), these true conclusions in Englishe as well as suffiseth

H 2

to these noble clerkes grekes, these same conclusions in Greke." "God save the kinge, and all that him faith beareth and obeieth." "Demith thyself that demist othiris dede." "Weivith thy lust and let thy ghost the lede." "The nedith not the gall of an hine, that curith eyin darke for theyr penaunce.' "And now mee likith to withdrawin me." "Me thinkith it accordaunt reason."-Chaucer.

These are a few of many quotations that might be brought from Chaucer and even later authors. Methinks, methinketh, thee thinks, they thinks, and similar expressions which still remain among the peasantry, and some of the quakers who adhere more tenaciously to the customs of their ancestors, are not solecisms as shallow philologers suppose, but relics of what was classic as well as vulgar usage-relics of what was once national, reputable and present usage. I shall have occasion to remark further on this, when I come to modern, arbitrary grammar; in the mean time the reader will observe, that eth was originally affixed to all the persons of the verb, (as they are called,) without distinction; and that the whole system of English syntax is founded on corruption and absurdity: it is a kind of grammatical idolatry instituted for the sake of est and eth or es, two relics of ancient usage. It is always a certain sign of idolatry or of a Babel-system, when the tongues of those employed about it are divided. There has been wonderful gibbering about the wonders of THE VERB; and among the rest Dr. Crombie is seriously alarmed lest this important part

of speech be degraded from its true dignity into a mere participle.

It would be superfluous to explain eth to the intelligent reader; he must perceive that like en, ed, es, it is merely a connective whether affixed to what is called a verb, an adjective, a noun, or any word whatever; and it would be easy to convince him that this is the primary use of all verbal terminations in all the dialects. It has been the fashion of late, indeed, with some Greek and Latin grammarians, to consider them as primarily pronouns: in this they are nearer the truth than themselves are aware of, (for eth however diversified, is originally the same as what are called pronouns,) yet it is not as they mean it. Horne Tooke seems to have considered th, do and to as the same word, but what he considered do he did not communicate. In Hebrew N ath, the grammarians say truly, "seldom admits of translation into English after an active verb, (nor does the verbal termination eth in English, admit of translation into any other language): when prefixed to a person it commonly signifies with." Wilson's Hebrew Grammar.-This is always its signification when it has any signification, whether it be called a preposition, as ad, at; or a conjunction, as and, et; a termination as in amat, amat-us, amans, amant-is, &c. The reader must be now convinced that verbal, participial and simple adjective terminations, (those which do not denote negation, diminution or augmentation,) are all alike merely connective, and in fact the same copula,

somewhat varied in its form by the accidents of pronunciation and spelling.

WHAT IS CALLED THE SUBSTANTIVE VERB IS MERELY A CONJUNCTION.

It is surprising (or rather a proof of their stupidity), that with the word copula in their mouth, the grammarians should make what they call the substantive verb, the everlasting theme of mysticism, vacuous unintelligibleness and sheer nonsense. It implies an attribute and time, or affirmation, or something; but they must be always talking about it and about it, without stopping to ascertain the meaning of those technical terms which are familiar in their mouths as household words, or learned language in the mouth of a magpie.

Be is precisely the same as by, signifying merely + or add, join, &c.: thus, Kant be a mystic, and mystical Kant, convey the same meaning though not in the same manner. There is as much affirmation in the one case as in the other: be is the copula between Kant and mystic in the first instance, and al in the second. The compositions of Dugald Stewart are vacuously indefinite, and would never have been read but for their prettiness. The vacuous, indefinite compositions of Dugald Stewart would never have been read but for their prettiness. The writings of Dugald Stewart are not sufficiently correct and defi

nite for philosophy, and can never establish any theory of mind.-The writings of Dugald Stewart not sufficiently correct and definite for philosophy, can never establish any theory of mind. It is evident that these different sentences express respectively the same sense, whatever technical nonsense shallow philologers may affirm concerning them.

The reader will perceive, that according to the Canon of Etymology, am and is are to be resolved into are; he will also perceive that are is the same as the infinitive termination in Latin are, ere, ire, &c.; and the termination or, aris, &c. in what are called passive and deponent verbs; and the adjective termination aris or alis, (for according to the Canon of Etymology, these two are to be considered as one termination); and the termination of nouns as amor, &c. it also appears as an English termination, as easter, that is east (or rising) + time, tide, &c.; baker, brewer; that is, brew + man, woman, or person. It has become an opinion with some grammarians, that the termination er, ir, or, &c. is a contraction of vir, but this, like most other boasted discoveries in philology is a mere fancy.