The late wars and political relations between the countries of Europe have added somewhat to the list of similar words.

A very large number of words compounded with in, im, and un, for the most part in a privative sense, and some of them being mere varieties in the initial spelling, and being also interchangeable, are added to Johnson's list, by Mr. Todd. Of these we believe there are not far from a thousand. There are also seventy or eighty compounded with all, as all-admiring, all-approved, &c. And if we add to them other words variously compounded, such as high-aimed, high-swollen, slopseller, grass-green, choir-service, dram-drinker, plain-hearted, manor-house, manor-seat, &c. which are found throughout the book, we shall swell the catalogue of compounds to a great amount. How far such compounds are entitled to admission into a dictionary, we will not decide very peremptorily; but they scarcely deserve to be called new words, or additional words. There are many words of this kind in Johnson, and consistency seems to demand, therefore, that, as far as they are well authorized, a subsequent compiler should insert such as are not already recorded. But it is very manifest that there is no end to caprice and fashion in the composition of such words, and that it is impossible for a dictionary to keep pace with the fancies of writers in their formation and use.

Another prolific source of increase to the English vocabulary is the analogical formation of words of different classes. Such for instance as adjectives in able or ible. There is something worthy of a passing notice in this kind of words, denominated by Horne Tooke' potential passive adjectives.' This name is for the most part descriptive of their meaning. They were originally learned words derived from the Latin words in bilis through the French. But we have not been satisfied with forming those merely which we borrowed from the Latin; for having once found the convenience of the form, that analogical process, which is always taking place in some degree in the changes and improvements of language, has given the same form to many genuine English words; such, for instance, as the familiar terms teachable and tameable. When it was first adopted from the Latin, it was thought necessary to translate it for the common reader, into an equivalent expression. As in an old manuscript version of the New Testament, which we have seen cited, supposed to be written in the reign of Edward the Third, is found the following, among other examples

of the same kind; From henceforth, brethren, whatever things be amyable, or' (with the explanation annexed) ' able to be loved.'

The dictionary before us shows, that, being in full possession of this form, words of this kind have been multiplying in our language, as occasion or convenience demands. Thus we find, forgivable, deprivable, unpleadable, bewailable, devisable, enjoyable, extirpable, and a multitude more.

Again words terminating in ful, denoting abundance or excess, constitute a considerable addition to this dictionary. Among these are abuseful, deviceful, taleful, faultful, toilful, &c. So also those terminating in less, expressive of the diminution or absence of something. We have witnessed the prevalence of fashion in this class of words, and their consequent tendency to increase. In the dictionary we are examining, we find, among numerous others added for the first time, flameless, waveless, brimless, rayless, passionless, passless, lossless, and many more.

Another class which we shall mention .consists of substantives in er, sometimes or, denoting agency, such as blackener, blandisher, caller, desolater, despoiler, desponder, fluter, which are introduced among many others of the same kind, by Mr Todd. There are no limits to terms of this description, and a vast many pass without animadversion in conversation, and might do so in writing, which have not found a place in any printed vocabulary.

Then, again, there is that boundless catalogue of abstract nouns formed from adjectives, usually by the termination ness, sometimes ity. Words of this kind are constantly increasing, and must continue to increase. Many, it is difficult to form an estimate of the number, are added by Todd. Inhability, abstractedness, fabulousness, involuntariness, manifoldness, unqualifiedness, unsupportableness, are a sufficient sample of the additions of these long words.

So also adverbs from adjectives by the addition of y or ly make a considerable addition; as abstinently, bigotedly, calumniously, inherently, unobservably, &c.

Again, there are additions occasioned by repeating the verb, when it is used both as a transitive and an intransitive. Johnson was not very exact in this particular, and Walker was negligent, overlooking sometimes what his predecessor had done correctly in this way. There are additions also of verbs

522

Worcester's Edition of Johnson and Walker. [Oct.

converted from nouns, as, to extinct, livery, quick, quip, rook c; so likewise of nouns from verbs without any change, as, abbreviate, fluster, foreshew; of adjectives from substantives, as, absorbent, fiscal; of substantives from adjectives, as bitter, desperate, positive.

Last and not least in this enumeration, are the active participial nouns, which are added to the vocabulary by Mr Todd, to a great extent; such as biting, fading, deserving, despising, ingratiating, interfering, loathing. These additions are of questionable utility, though, if they are admitted at all, it may be done upon very slight authority. We are sure that we could furnish a large catalogue of such additions. Indeed, if we examine the nature of these words, not only in English, but in other languages, we may readily perceive how easily they perform the office of substantives, and how hopeless it is, by singling out a part of them, to do justice to the whole class.

We have thus given something like a classification of some of the principal additions made to the English vocabulary, by Mr Todd. The classification is not complete, but it is sufficiently so, to account in a great degree for the fact of such a large increase of words, and to quiet much of the alarm which this increase might occasion to those who are not accustomed to speculations of this kind.

The vocabulary,' says Mr Worcester, the editor, with the definitions, &c. is formed chiefly by a union of Mr Chalmers's Abridgment and Walker's Pronouncing Dictionary; but with the omission of Walker's definitions, except with regard to those words in his Dictionary (not much exceeding one hundred in number), which are not found in Mr Todd's edition of Johnson.'The Appendix contains all the words newly added by Mr Todd in his second edition; a number of words that are found in the body of the dictionary, here repeated for the sake of some correction or remark; a few words of unquestionable authority which were omitted by Dr Johnson and Mr Todd; and some words which are more or less used in America.'

It is manifest from this account, that the Dictionary thus edited by Mr Worcester, contains the most complete vocabulary in our language. And the following remarks of the editor show how the benefits of Walker's system of pronunciation are extended to this enlarged dictionary.

To the words contained in this dictionary, which are not found

1828.] Worcester's Edition of Johnson and Walker. 523

in Walker's, the pronunciation has been added, according to Walker's principles, as far as those principles could be applied; and this was easily done with respect to most of them.'- With respect to many words of doubtful pronunciation, or concerning which orthoëpists differ, and particularly those, respecting which Walker has omitted to exhibit this difference, the editor has introduced the pronunciation of others, with the names of the authorities, enclosed in brackets, yet, in all cases, making use of Walker's method of notation.'

The whole apparatus of Walker concerning pronunciation is furnished in this dictionary, not excepting his 'Key to the Classical Pronunciation of Greek, Latin, and Scripture proper names,' and his 'Observations on the Greek and Latin Accent and Quantity'; so that the worst charge against it that can be made, if any, is that of superfluity. In his Preface, Mr Worcester, while he speaks of Walker with that high commendation which he deserves, has made certain strictures upon his system of pronunciation, which appear to us to be just and discriminating, but which we have not time to remark upon in this place.

In regard to orthography, Mr Worcester has assumed no responsibility farther than by making a few valuable improvements for the sake of consistency, which he has carefully specified. Some debateable ground on this subject is open for philological critics. There will always probably remain a variable orthography in some words, such as choose or chuse, intire or entire, despatch or dispatch, and others that might be mentioned. We find cases of this kind, in other languages, where we should expect it less than in English. But the examples of fluctuating orthography are now so few, as to occasion little inconvenience.

We intended earlier to examine the dictionary before us, and to give the fruits of our researches at greater length. We have sufficient knowledge of the history and the progress of the work, so far as Mr Worcester was concerned in it, to enable us to speak with confidence upon the subject. In the execution of the plan adopted, he has been laborious, faithful, and judicious. The materials of which the body of the work, the English Dictionary, is composed, we have spoken of sufficiently to show how they have been combined. And our readers will be satisfied, we think, that this is the most complete manual of the kind that has yet appeared, and competent to all the purposes for which it was intended.

Another opportunity will soon be afforded us of recurring to this subject, if we shall have the resolution to meet it, in the great and long expected work of Mr Noah Webster. His extensive and ardent researches in philology are well known, and calculated to excite the impatient curiosity of the scholar. We shall certainly welcome all productions of this kind, which shall tend to make the English language more studied and better understood; and we shall not feel the less grateful to the authors of them, because they labor in a vocation, which to most scholars is far from being attractive.

ART. XIII.-Yu-Kiao-Li, ou les Deux Cousines; Roman Chinois, traduit par M. Abel Remusat; précédé d'une Préface où se trouve un Parallèle entre les Romans de la Chine et ceux de l'Europe. 4 vol. 12mo. Paris.

1828.

'You have made me bounce off my chair,' said lady Bradshaigh in a letter to the author of Sir Charles Grandison, you have made me bounce off my chair with reading that two good girls were in love with your hero, and that he was fond of both. I have such despicable notions of a divided love, that I cannot have an idea how a worthy object can entertain such a thought.' It is so long since we indulged ourselves with a reperusal of the celebrated work in question, that we are not able to say from our own recollection how far her ladyship's censure of the conduct of Sir Charles and his two enamoradas is justified by the standing rules of the code of romance, and the multiplied reports of cases illustrating it, that occupy the shelves of the circulating libraries. But if such was the horror of this sentimental person at the mere imagination of a double attachment, what would have been her astonishment and indignation, had Richardson wound up the novel, by actually marrying his pink of moral perfection to both the fair pretenders? The least violent result of such a proceeding would doubtless have been the immediate termination of the quiet little practical romance, which her immaculate ladyship (without disparagement to the claims of good Mrs Richardson) was enacting in connexion with the ingenious bookseller. Such, however, is in fact the