66

"The

80. "In the first of these two sentences."—Ib., p. 162; Lowth, p. 120. According to the rule, it should have been, "In the former of these two sentences;" but this would be here ambiguous, because former might mean maker. "When our sentence consists of two members, the longest should, generally, be the concluding one."-Blair's Rhet., p. 117: and Jamieson's, p. 99. shortest member being placed first, we carry it more readily in our memory as we proceed to the second."-Ib., & Ib. Pray consider us, in this respect, as the weakest sex."-Spect., No. 533. In this last sentence, the comparative, weaker, would perhaps have been better; because, not an absolute, but merely a comparative weakness is meant. So Latham and Child: "It is better, in speaking of only two objects, to use the comparative degree rather than the superlative, even where we use the article the. This is the better of the two, is preferable to this is the best of the two."-Elementary Gram., p. 155. Such is their rule; but very soon they forget it, and write thus: "In this case the relative refers to the last of the two."-Ib., p. 163.

OBS. 14.-Hyperboles are very commonly expressed by comparatives or superlatives; as, "My little finger shall be thicker than my father's loins."—1 Kings, xii, 10. "Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given."-Ephesians, iii, 8. Sometimes, in thus heightening or lowering the object of his conception, the writer falls into a catachresis, solecism, or abuse of the grammatical degrees; as, “Mustard-seed—which is less than all the seeds that be in the earth.”—Mark, iv, 31. This expression is objectionable, because mustard-seed is a seed, and cannot be less than itself; though that which is here spoken of, may perhaps have been "the least of all seeds:" and it is the same Greek phrase, that is thus rendered in Matt., xiii, 32. Murray has inserted in his Exercises, among "unintelligible and inconsistent words and phrases," the following example from Milton:

"And, in the lowest deep, a lower deep

Still threat'ning to devour me, opens wide."-Exercises, p. 122.

For this supposed inconsistency, he proposes in his Key the following amendment:

"And, in the lower deep, another deep

Still threat'ning to devour me, opens wide."—Key, p. 254.

But, in an other part of his book, he copies from Dr. Blair the same passage, with commendation: saying, "The following sentiments of Satan in Milton, as strongly as they are described, contain nothing but what is natural and proper:

"Me miserable! which way shall I fly
Infinite wrath, and infinite despair?

Which way I fly is Hell; myself am Hell;
And in the lowest depth, a lower deep,

Still threat'ning to devour me, opens wide,

To which the Hell I suffer seems a Heaven.' P. Lost, B. iv, 1. 73."

Blair's Lectures, p. 153; Murray's Grammar, p. 352.

OBS. 15.-Milton's word, in the fourth line above, is deep, and not depth, as these authors here give it nor was it very polite in them, to use a phraseology which comes so near to saying, the devil was in the poet. Alas for grammar! accuracy in its teachers has become the most rare of all qualifications. As for Murray's correction above, I see not how it can please any one who chooses to think Hell a place of great depth. A descent into his "lower deep" and "other deep," might be a plunge less horrible than two or three successive slides in one of our western caverns! But Milton supposes the arch-fiend might descend to the lowest imaginable depth of Hell, and there be liable to a still further fall of more tremendous extent. Fall whither? Into the horrid and inconceivable profundity of the bottomless pit! What signifies it, to object to his language as "unintelligible," if it conveys his idea better than any other could? In no human conception of what is infinite, can there be any real exaggeration. To amplify beyond the truth, is here impossible. Nor is there any superlation which can fix a limit to the idea of more and more in infinitude. Whatever literal absurdity there may be in it, the duplication seems greatly to augment what was even our greatest conception of the thing. Homer, with a like figure, though expressed in the positive degree, makes Jupiter threaten any rebel god, that he shall be thrown down from Olympus, to suffer the burning pains of the Tartarian gulf; not in the centre, but, "As deep beneath th' infernal centre hurl'd,

As from that centre to th' ethereal world."-Pope's Iliad, B. viii, 1. 19.

REGULAR COMPARISON.

Adjectives are regularly compared, when the comparative degree is expressed by adding er, and the superlative, by adding est to them: as, Pos. great, Comp. greater, Superl. greatest; Pos. mild, Comp. milder, Supe:1. mildest.

In the variation of adjectives, final consonants are doubled, final e is omitted, and final y is changed to i, agreeably to the rules for spelling: as, hot, hotter, hottest; wide, wider, widest; happy, happier, happiest.

The regular method of comparison belongs almost exclusively to monosyllables, with dissyllables ending in w or y, and such others as receive it and still have but

one syllable after the accent: as, fierce, fiercer, fiercest; narrow, narrower, narrowest; gloomy, gloomier, gloomiest; serene, serener, serenest; noble, nobler, noblest; gentle, gentler, gentlest.

COMPARISON BY ADVERBS.

The two degrees of superiority may also be expressed with precisely the same inport as above, by prefixing to the adjective the adverbs more and most: as, wise, more wise, most wise; famous, more famous, most famous; amiable, more amiable, most amiable.

The degrees of inferiority are expresse 1, in like manner, by the adverbs less and least: as, wise, less wise, least wise; famous, less famous, least famous; amiable, less amiable, least amiable. The regular method of comparison has, properly speaking, no degrees of this kind.

Nearly all adjectives that admit of different degrees, may be compared by means of the adverbs; but, for short words, the regular method is generally preferable: as, quick, quicker, quickest; rather than, quick, more quick, most quick.

OBSERVATIONS.

OBS. 1.-The genius of our language is particularly averse to the lengthening of long words by additional syllables; and, in the comparison of adjectives, er and est always add a syllable to the word, except it end in le after a mate. Thus, free, freër, freest, increases syllabically; but ample, ampler, amplest, does not. Whether any particular adjective admits of comparison or not, is a matter of reasoning from the sense of the term; by which method it shall be compared, is in some degree a matter of taste; though custom has decided that long words shall not be inflected, and for the shorter, there is generally an obvious bias in favour of one form rather than the other. Dr. Johnson says, "The comparison of adjectives is very uncertain; and being much regulated by commoliousness of utterance, or agreeableness of sound, is not easily reduced to rules. Monosyllables are commonly compared. Polysyllables, or words of more than two syllables, aro seldon compared otherwise than by more and most. Dissyllables are seldom compared if they terminate in full, less, ing, ous, ed, id, al, ent, ain, or ive."—Gram. of the English Tongue, p. 6. "When the positive contains but one syllable, the degrecs are usually formed by adding er or est. When the positive contains two syllables, it is matter of taste which method you shall use in forming the degrees. The ear is, in this case, the best guide. But, when the positive contains more than two syllables, the degrees must be formed by the use of more and most. We may say, tenderer and tenderest, pleasanter and pleasantest, prettier and prettiest; but who could endure delicater and delicatest?"-Cobbett's E. Gram.,¶ 81. Quiet, bitter, clever, sober, and perhaps some others like them, are still regularly compared; but such words as secretest, famousest, virtuousest, powerfulest, which were used by Milton, have gone out of fashion. The following, though not very commonly used, are perhaps allowable. "Yet these are the two commonest occupations of mankind."-Philological Museum, i, 431. "Their pleasantest walks throughout life must be guarded by armed men."-Ib., i, 437. "Franklin possessed the rare talent of drawing useful lessons from the commonest occurrences."-Murray's Sequel, p. 323. "Unbidden guests are often welcomest when they are gone."-SHAK.: in Joh. Dict.

"There was a lad, th' unluckiest of his crew,

Was still contriving something bad, but new."-KING: ib.

OBS. 2.-I make a distinction between the regular comparison by er and est, and the comparison by adverbs; because, in a grammatical point of view, these two methods are totally different: the meaning, though the same, being expressed in the one case, by an inflection of the adjec tive; and in the other, by a phrase consisting of two different parts of speech. If the placing of an adverb before an adjective is to be called a grammatical modification or variation of the latter word, we shall have many other degrees than those which are enumerated above. The words may with much more propriety be parsed separately, the degree being ascribed to the adverb-or, if you please, to both words, for both are varied in sense by the inflection of the former. degrees in which qualities may exist in nature, are infinitely various; but the only degrees with which the grammarian is concerned, are those which our variation of the adjective or adverb enables us to express-including, as of course we must, the state or sense of the primitive word, as The reasoning which would make the positive degree to be no degree, would also make the nominative case, or the casus rectus of the Latins, to be no case.

one.

Tho

OBS. 3.-Whenever the adjective itself denotes these degrees, and is duly varied in form to express them, they properly belong to it; as, worthy, worthier, worthiest. (Though no apology can be made for the frequent error of confounding the degree of a quality, with the verbal sign which expresses it.) If an adverb is employed for this purpose, that also is compared, and the two degrees thus formed or expressed, are properly its own; as, worthy, more worthy, most worthy. But these same degrees may be yet otherwise expressed; as, worthy, in a higher degree worthy, in the highest degree worthy. Here also the adjective worthy is virtually compared, as before; but

only the adjective high is grammatically modified. Again, we may form three degrees with several adverbs to each, thus: Pos., very truly worthy; Comp., much more truly worthy; Sup., much the most truly worthy. There are also other adverbs, which, though not varied in them selves like much, more, most, may nevertheless have nearly the same effect upon the adjective; as, worthy, comparatively worthy, superlatively worthy. I make these remarks, because many grammarians have erroneously parsed the adverbs more and most, less and least, as parts of the adjective.

OBS. 4.-Harris, in his Hermes, or Philosophical Inquiry concerning Universal Grammar, has very unceremoniously pronounced the doctrine of three degrees of comparison, to be absurd; and the author of the British Grammar, as he quotes the whole passage without offering any defence of that doctrine, seems to second the allegation. "Mr. Harris observes, that, 'There cannot well be more than two degrees; one to denote simple excess, and one to denote superlative. Were we indeed to introduce more degrees, we ought perhaps to introduce infinite, which is absurd. For why stop at a limited number, when in all subjects, susceptible of intension, the intermediate excesses are in a manner infinite? There are infinite degrees of more white between the first simple white and the superlative whitest; the same may be said of more great, more strong, more minute, &c. The doctrine of grammarians about three such degrees, which they call the Positive, the Comparative, and the Superlative, must needs be absurd; both because in their Positive there is no comparison at all, and because their Superlative is a Comparative as much as their Comparative itself.' Hermes, p. 197."-Brit. Gram., p. 98. This objection is rashly urged. No comparison can be imagined without bringing together as many as two terms, and if the positive is one of these, it is a degree of comparison; though neither this nor the superlative is, for that reason, a Comparative." Why we stop at three degrees, I have already shown: we have three forms, and only three.

OBS. 5.-"The termination ish may be accounted in some sort a degree of comparison, by which the signification is diminished below the positive, as black, blackish, or tending to blackness; salt, saltish, or having a little taste of salt:* they therefore admit of no comparison. This termination is seldom added but to words expressing sensible qualities, nor often to words of above one syllable, and is scarcely used in the solemn or sublime style."-Dr. Johnson's Gram. "The first [degree] denotes a slight degree of the quality, and is expressed by the termination ish; as, reddish, brownish, yellowish. This may be denominated the imperfect degree of the attribute."-Dr. Webster's Improved Gram., p. 47. I doubt the correctness of the view taken above by Johnson, and dissent entirely from Webster, about his "first degree of comparison." Of adjectives in ish we have perhaps a hundred; but nine out of ten of them are derived clearly from nouns, as, boyish, girlish; and who can prove that blackish, saltish, reddish, brownish, and yellowish, are not also from the nouns, black, salt, red, brown, and yellow? or that "a more reddish tinge," -"a more saltish taste," are not correct phrases? There is, I am persuaded, no good reason for noticing this termination as constituting a degree of comparison. All "double comparisons" are said to be ungrammatical; but, if ish forms a degree, it is such a degree as may be compared again: as,

"And seem more learnedish than those

That at a greater charge compose."-Butler.

OBS. 6.-Among the degrees of comparison, some have enumerated that of equality; as when we say, "It is as sweet as honey." Here is indeed a comparison, but it is altogether in the positive degree, and needs no other name. This again refutes Harris; who says, that in the positive there is no comparison at all. But further: it is plain, that in this degree there may be comparisons of inequality also; as, "Molasses is not so sweet as honey."-"Civility is not so slight a matter as it is commonly thought."—Art of Thinking, p. 92. Nay, such comparisons may equal any superlative. Thus it is said, I think, in the Life of Robert Hall: "Probably no human being over before suffered so much bodily pain." What a preeminence is here! and yet the form of the adjective is only that of the positive degree. "Nothing so uncertain as general reputation." -Art of Thinking, p. 50. "Nothing so nauseous as undistinguishing civility."—Ib., p. 88. These, likewise, would be strong expressions, if they were correct English. But, to my apprehension, every such comparison of equality involves a solecism, when, as it here happens, the former term includes the latter. The word nothing is a general negative, and reputation is a particular affirmative. The comparison of equality between them, is therefore certainly improper: because nothing cannot be equal to something; and, reputation being something, and of course equal to itself, the proposition is evidently untrue. It ought to be, "Nothing is more uncertain than gencral reputation." This is the same as to say, "General reputation is as uncertain as any thing that can be named." Or else the former term should exempt the latter; as, "Nothing else—or, * L. Murray copied this passage literally, (though anonymously,) as far as the colon; and of course his book teaches us to account "the termination ish, in some sort, a degree of comparison.”—Octavo Gram., p. 47. But what is more absurd, than to think of accounting this, or any other suffix, “a degree of comparison?" The inaccuracy of the language is a sufficient proof of the haste with which Johnson adopted this notion, and of the blindness with which he has been followed. The passage is now found in most of our English grammars. Sanborn expresses the doctrine thus: "Adjectives terminating with ish, denote a degree of comparison less than the positive; as, saltish, whitish, blackish."—Analytical Gram., p. 87. But who does not know, that most adjectives of this ending are derived from nouns, and are compared only by adverbs, as childish, foolish, and so forth? Wilcox says, "Words ending in ish, generally express a slight degree; as, reddish, bookish.”. Practical Gram., p. 17. But who will suppose that foolish denotes but a slight degree of folly, or bookish but a slight fondness for books? And, with such an interpretation, what must be the meaning of more bookish or most foolish?

66

"No other thing, is so uncertain as" this popular honour, public esteem, or general reputation." And so of all similar examples.

OBS. 7.—In all comparisons, care must be taken to adapt the terms to the degree which is expressed by the adjective or adverb. The superlative degree requires that the object to which it relates, be one of those with which it is compared; as, "Eve was the fairest of women." The comparative degree, on the contrary, requires that the object spoken of be not included among those with which it is compared; as, "Eve was fairer than any of her daughters." To take the inclusive term here, and say, "Eve was fairer than any woman," would be no less absurd, than Milton's assertion, that "Eve was the fairest of her daughters:" the former supposes that she was not a woman; the latter, that she was one of her own daughters. But Milton's solecism is double; he makes Adam one of his own sons:—

"Adam the goodliest man of men since born

His sons, the fairest of her daughters Eve."-P. Lost, B. iv, 1. 324. OBS. 8.-"Such adjectives," says Churchill, "as have in themselves a superlative signification, or express qualities not susceptible of degrees, do not properly admit either the comparative or [the] superlative form. Under this rule may be included all adjectives with a negative prefix.”— New Gram., p. 80. Again: "As immediate signities instant, present with regard to time, Prior should not have written 'more immediate.' Dr. Johnson."-Ib., p. 233. "Hooker has unaptest; Locke, more uncorrupted; Holder, more undeceivable: for these the proper expressions would have been the opposite signs without the negation least apt, less corrupted, less deceivable. Watts speaks of a most unpassable barrier.' If he had simply said an unpassable barrier,' we should have understood it at once in the strongest sense, as a barrier impossible to be surmounted: but, by attempting to express something more, he gives an idea of something less; we perceive, that his unpassable means difficult to pass. This is the mischief of the propensity to exaggeration; which, striving after strength, sinks into weakness."-Ib., p. 234.

OBS. 9.-The foregoing remarks from Churchill appear in general to have been dictated by good sense; but, if his own practice is right, there must be some exceptions to his rule respecting the comparison of adjectives with a negative prefix; for, in the phrase “less imprudent," which, according to a passage quoted before, he will have to be different from "more prudent," he himself furnishes an example of such comparison. In fact, very many words of that class are compared by good writers: as, "Nothing is more unnecessary."-Lowth's Gram., Pref., p. v. "What is yet more unaccountable."-ROGERS: in Joh. Dict. "It is hard to determine which is most uneligible." -Id., ib. "Where it appears the most unbecoming and unnatural.”—ADDISON: ib. "Men of the best sense and of the most unblemished lives."-Id., ib. "March and September are the most unsettled and unequable of seasons."-BENTLEY : ib. "Barcelona was taken by a most unexpected accident."-SWIFT: ib. "The most barren and unpleasant."-WOODWARD: ib. "O good, but most unwise patricians !"-SHAK.: ib. "More unconstant than the wind."-Id., ib. "We may say more or less imperfect."-Murray's Gram., p. 168. "Some of those [passions] which act with the most irresistible energy upon the hearts of mankind, are altogether omitted in the catalogue of Aristotle."-Adams's Rhet., i, 380. "The wrong of him who presumes to talk of owning me, is too unmeasured to be softened by kindness.”—Channing, on Emancipation, p. 52. "Which, we are sensible, are more inconclusive than the rest."-Blair's Rhet., p. 319.

"Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears

Had left the flushing in her galled eyes.”—Shak.

OBS. 10.-Comparison must not be considered a general property of adjectives. It belongs chiefly to the class which I call common adjectives, and is by no means applicable to all of these. Common adjectives, or epithets denoting quality, are perhaps more numerous than all the other classes put together. Many of these, and a few that are pronominal, may be varied by comparison; and some participial adjectives may be compared by means of the adverbs. But adjectives formed from proper names, all the numerals, and most of the compounds, are in no way susceptible of comparison. All nouns used adjectively, as an iron bar, an evening school, a mahogany chair, a South-Sea dream, are also incapable of comparison. In the title of "His Most Christian Majesty," the superlative adverb is applied to a proper adjective; but who will pretend that we ought to understand by it "the highest degree" of Christian attainment? It might seem uncourtly to suggest that this is "an abuse of the king's English," I shall therefore say no such thing. Pope compares the word Christian, in the following couplet :

"Go, purified by flames ascend the sky,

My better and more Christian progeny.”—Dunciad, B. i, 1. 227.

IRREGULAR COMPARISON.

The following adjectives are compared irregularly: good, better, best; bad, evil, or ill, worse, worst; little, less, least; much, more, most; many, more, most.

OBSERVATIONS.

OBS. 1.-In English, and also in Latin, most adjectives that denote place or situation, not only form the superlative irregularly, but are also either defective or redundant in comparison. Thus:

I. The following nine have more than one superlative: far, farther, farthest, farmost, or farther

most; near, nearer, nearest or next; fore, former, foremost or first; hind, hinder, hindmost or hindermost; in, inner, inmost or innermost; out, outer, or utter, outmost or utmost, outermost or uttermost; up, upper, upmost or uppermost; low, lower, lowest or lowermost; late, later or latter, latest or last.

II. The following five want the positive: [aft, adv.,] after, aftmost or aftermost; [forth, adv., formerly furth,*] further, furthest or furthermost; hither, hithermost; nether, nethermost; under, un

dermost.

III. The following want the comparative: front, frontmost; rear, rearmost; head, headmost; end, endmost; top, topmost; bottom, bottommost; mid or middle, midst,† midmost or middlemost; north, northmost; south, southmost; east, eastmost; west, westmost; northern, northernmost; southern, southernmost; eastern, easternmost; western, westernmost.

OBS. 2.-Many of these irregular words are not always used as adjectives, but oftener as nouns, adverbs, or prepositions. The sense in which they are employed, will show to what class they belong. The terms fore and hind, front and rear, right and left, in and out, high and low, top and bottom, up and down, upper and under, mid and after, all but the last pair, are in direct contrast with each other. Many of them are often joined in composition with other words; and some, when used as adjectives of place, are rarely separated from their nouns: as, inland, outhouse, mid-sea, after-ages. Practice is here so capricious, I find it difficult to determine whether the compounding of these terms is proper or not. It is a case about which he that inquires most, may perhaps be most in doubt. If the joining of the words prevents the possibility of mistaking the adjective for a preposition, it prevents also the separate classification of the adjective and the noun, and thus in some sense destroys the former by making the whole a noun Dr. Webster writes thus: "FRONTROOM, n. A room or apartment in the forepart of a house. BACKROOM, n. A room behind the front room, or in the back part of the house."-Octavo Dict. So of many phrases by which people tell of turning things, or changing the position of their parts; as, inside out, outside in; upside down, downside up; wrong end foremost, but-end foremost; forepart back, fore-end aft; hind side before, backside before. Here all these contrasted particles seem to be adjectives of place or situation. What grammarians in general would choose to call them, it is hard to say; probably, many would satisfy themselves with calling the whole "an adverbial phrase,"-the common way of disposing of every thing which it is difficult to analyze. These, and the following examples from Scott, are a fair specimen of the uncertainty of present usage:

"The herds without a keeper strayed,

The plough was in mid-furrow staid."-Lady of the Lake. "The eager huntsman knew his bound,

And in mid chase called off his hound."—Ibidem.

OBS. 3.-For the chief points of the compass, we have so many adjectives, and so many modes of varying or comparing them, that it is difficult to tell their number, or to know which to choose in practice. (1.) North, south, east, and west, are familiarly used both as nouns and as adjectives. From these it seems not improper to form superlatives, as above, by adding most; as, "From Aroar to Nebo, and the wild of southmost Abarim."-Milton. "There are no rivulets or springs in the island of Feror, the westmost of the Canaries."- White's Nat. Hist. (2.) These primitive terms may also be compared, in all three of the degrees, by the adverbs farther and farthest, or further and furthest; as, "Which is yet farther west."-Bacon. (3.) Though we never employ as separate words the comparatives norther, souther, easter, wester, we have northerly, southerly, easterly, and westerly, which seem to have been formed from such comparatives, by adding ly; and these four may be compared by the adverbs more and most, or less and least: as, "These hills give us a view of the most easterly, southerly, and westerly parts of England."-GRAUNT: in Joh. Dict. (4.) From these supposed comparatives likewise, some authors form the superlatives northermost, southermost, eastermost, and westermost; as, “From the westermost part of Oyster bay."-Dr. Webster's Hist. U. S., p. 126. "And three miles southward of the southermost part of said bay."-Trumbull's Hist. of Amer., Vol. i, p. 88. "Pockanocket was on the westermost line of Plymouth Colony."-Ib., p. 44. "As far as the northermost branch of the said bay or river."-Ib., p. 127. The propriety of these is at least questionable; and, as they are neither very necessary to the language, nor recognized by any of our lexicographers, I forbear to approve them. (5.) From the four primitives we have also a third series of positives, ending in ern; as, northern, southern, eastern, western. These, though they have no comparatives of their own, not only form superlatives by assuming the termination most, but are sometimes compared, perhaps in both degrees, by a separate use of the adverbs: as, Southernmost, a. Furthest towards the south."-Webster's Dict. "Until it shall intersect the northernmost part of the thirty-first degree of north latitude."-Articles of Peace. "To the north-westernmost head of Connecticut river."-Ib. "Thence through the said lake to the most north-western point thereof." -16.

OBS. 4.-It may be remarked of the comparatives former and latter or hinder, upper and under or nether, inner and outer or utter, after and hither; as well as of the Latin superior and inferior, • "A rodde shall come furth of the stocke of Jesse. Primer, Hen. VIII."—Craven Glossary. ↑ Midst is a contraction of the regular superlative middest, used by Spenser, but now obsolete. Midst, also, seems to be obsolete as an adjective, though still frequently used as a noun; as, "In the midst."-Webster. is often a poetic contraction for the preposition amidst. In some cases it appears to be an adverb. In the following example it is equivalent to middlemost, and therefore an adjective: "Still greatest he the midst, Now dragon grown."-Paradise Lost, B. x, 1. 528.

It