the collocation is concerned, the construction of the two words is the same, i. e. it is either that of an adjective agreeing with, or that of a possessive case governed by, a substantive.

§ 533. A common genitive case can be used in two ways; either as part of a term, or as a whole one.—1. This is John's hat. 2. This hat is John's: in which case it is said to be used as a Predicate, or Predicatively. And a common adjective can be used in two ways; either as part of a term, or as a whole term. 1. These are good hats. 2. These hats are good. Now, whether we consider my, and the words like it, as adjectives or cases, they possess only one of the properties just illustrated, i. e. they can only be used as part of a term— this is my hat; and not this hat is my. And whether we consider mine, and the words like it, as adjectives or cases, they possess only one of the properties just illustrated, i. e. they can only be used as whole terms, or Predicatively-this hat is mine; not this is mine hat.

Hence, for a full and perfect construction, whether of an adjective or a genitive case, the possessive pronouns present the phenomenon of being, singly, incomplete, but complementary to each other when taken in their two forms.

§ 534. In expressions like my hat, from which we are unable to separate my and use it as a single word, the construction is, nearly, that of the Articles. It is scarcely, however, safe to say that my, thy, our, and your, are actual articles. Nevertheless, they are incapable of being used by themselves.

§ 535. In the predicative construction of a genitive case, the term is formed by the single word only so far as the expression is concerned. A substantive is always understood from what has preceded.—This discovery is Newton's this discovery is Newton's discovery.

The same with adjectives.-This weather is fine = this weather is fine weather.

=

And the same with absolute pronouns.-This hat is mine =this hat is my hat; and this is a hat of mine this is a hat of my hats.

CHAPTER VI.

SYNTAX OF PRONOUNS. THE INDETERMINATE CONSTRUCTION.

§ 536. DIFFERENT languages have different modes of expressing indeterminate propositions. In Greek, Latin, and English, the passive voice is used-EyeTai, dicitur, it is said. The Italian uses the reflective pronoun; as, si dice it says itself. Sometimes the plural pronoun of the third person is used. Thus, in our language, they the world at large says. say = Finally, man has an indeterminate sense in the Modern German; as, man sagt = man says = they say. The same word was also used indeterminately in the Old, although it is not so used in the Modern, English. In the Old English, the -n was occasionally lost, and man or men became me.

=

§ 537. The present indeterminate pronoun is one; as, one says = they say = it is said = man sagt, German on dit, French si dice, Italian. It has already been stated that the indeterminate pronoun one has no etymological connection with the numeral one; but that it is derived from the French on homme = homo =man.

§ 538. Two other pronouns, or, to speak more in accordance with the present habit of the English language, one pronoun, and one adverb of pronominal origin, are also used indeterminately, viz. it and there.

§ 539. It can be either the subject or the predicate of a sentence,—it is this—this is it—I am it—it is I. When it is the subject of a proposition, the verb necessarily agrees with it, and can be of the singular number only; no matter what be the number of the predicate—it is this-it is these. When it is the predicate of a proposition, the number of the verb depends upon the number of the subject.

$540. There can only be the predicate of a proposition; differing in this respect from it. Hence, it never affects the number of the verb; which is determined by the nature of the subject-there is this-there are these. When we say there is these, the analogy between the words these and it misleads us; the expression being illogical. Furthermore, although a predicate, there always stands in the beginning of propositions, i. e. in the place of the subject. This also may mislead.

§ 541. Although it, when the subject, being itself singular, absolutely requires that its verb should be singular also, there is, in German, such an expression as-es sind menschen = it are men; where es the English

there.

§ 542. In such phrases as it rains, it snows, it freezes, it would be hard to say, in express terms, what it stands for. Suppose we are asked what rains? what snows? what freezes?—the answer is difficult. We might say the rain, the weather, the sky, or what not. Yet, none of these answers is satisfactory. To say the rain rains, the sky rains, &c., sounds strange. Yet we all know the meaning of the expression-obscure as it may be in its details. We all know that the word it is essential to the sentence; and that if we omitted it and simply said rains, the grammar would be faulty. We also know that it is the subject of the proposition. In the old grammars, the word Deus (God) was held to be the subject.

See Wright's volume of Vocubularies from the Tenth Century to the Fifteenth.

111

Deus meus.

tuus.

suus.

ipsius.

sanctus.

omnipotens.

creator.

CHAPTER VII.

SYNTAX OF PRONOUNS.-ARTICLES.

very

first

§ 543. IN the generality of grammars the definite article the, and the indefinite article an, are the parts of speech that are considered. This is exceptionable. So far are they from being essential to language, that, in many dialects, they are wholly wanting. In Latin the words filius patris mean equally the son of the father, a son of a father, a son of the father, or the son of a father. But, though the Latin language has no article, each and all of the languages derived from it have one. The French has the article le = the, and un one. So have the Italian, the Spanish, &c. But the Wallachian is the most remarkable. In Wallachian, or Moldavian, the article follows the noun to which it belongs. It also coalesces with it, so that the two form one word. Thus if om = man, the

=

combination om-ul: the man. In this case it is postpositive, or placed after the substantive. This post-position is, by no means, rare. Neither is its amalgamation

=

with the substantive. What occurs in the Wallachian occurs in the Icelandic also. So it does in the Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, and Feroic, derived from it. All this suggests the likelihood of the article being one of those parts of speech which originate during the later rather than the earlier stages of language. It also suggests a manner in which a part of speech, originally non-existent in a language, may be developed. If the Latin be the mother-tongue of the French, &c., and these contain articles, how came those articles there? Though, wanting in the old Roman, the materials out of which they might be developed, were present. The Latin had the word unus = one. It had also the words ille, illa he and she. Now the French una = unus; the indefinite article having grown out of the numeral. And the French leille; the definite article having grown out of the demonstrative pronoun. Neither was the French process of evolution or development peculiar. The articles of all the allied languages arose out of unus and ille; and, mutatis mutandis, the origin of the articles in the languages allied to our own is the same. What is the but a word of the same origin with the demonstrative this or tha-t? What is a but an; and an but án or ane, and án or ane but one? The article, however, differs from the Pronoun, in being incapable of existing, except in conjunction with either a substantive or some other pronoun.

§ 544. The articles in English are the, an, no, and every. More than one competent writer has already suggested that no is an article. If so, it must, of course, be considered as different in its construction from the ordinary negative. It has no independent existence. It has an existence when coupled with a substantive or another pronoun. It =not one, and попе, in power. The construction of every is exactly the construction