derivation are irregular in this respect.* Many substantives formerly terminated in e, and some of these retain it in the plural, though they have lost it in the singular, probably because an unpleasant clashing of harsh letters is thus avoided. Thus we say, a box, plu. boxes; a lash, plu. lashes; a church, plu. churches; or sometimes to preserve the due length of the syllable, as, a hero, plu. heroes; an echo, plu. echoes; but in words more. lately adopted from foreign langnages, the s of the plural is added simply; as, a folio, plu. folios; a punctilio, plu. punctilios; a nuntio, plu. nuntios. Words ending in y make their plural by changing y into ies; as a harpy, plu. harpies: and finally, many words of Latin and Greek derivation retain their respective plural, as a phenomenon, plu. phenomena; the aroma, plu. aromata, &c. The English substantive, according to the universal rule, has three genders; but unlike most other languages, ancient or modern, the larger part of the words of this description belong to the neuter gender; for unless in poetry, or in a very few instances of technical phrase, none are held masculine or feminine without an actual distinction of sex. Even a ship, which by seamen is constantly spoken of as feminine, is neuter in common parlance. From this general rule, however, we must except THE DEITY, GOD, or any other terms of the same Other signification, which are constantly masculine. names there are, such as those of the planets, which admit of being made masculine or feminine; and here the English differs somewhat from its parent language; for though the sun is feminine and the moon masculine in the German dialects in general, the English in this follows the Greek and the Latin, and reverses the gender. In more ornate composition the virtues and vices are also made masculine and feminine. In some cases nouns may be considered as of either gender, as fox, goat, &c.: but the animals more commonly spoken of have a different term for the two sexes; as horse, mare; bull, cow; lion, lioness. The cases of English substantives are five: that is, there are five different relations which it stands in with regard to other things, and which are understood in the word itself, without the aid of a preposition. These, according to the phraseology of the Latin, are as follows: Although the difference of inflection be but trifling, it will be easy to show that these are true cases of the substantive, by placing them in conjunction with a verb, as thus, A MAN (N) may beat ANOTHER MAN (A) if he can, but it is A MAN's (G) part to give HIM,* i. e. a man (D), "In those and the like phrases may not me, thee, him, her, us, which in Saxon are the dative cases of their respective pronouns, be considered as still continuing such in the English, fair play. MAN! (V) hold your hand. Here we have the agent, or nominative, that beats; the patient, or accusative, that is beaten; the person standing in the relation of possession, or genitive, and of giving, or dative; finally, in that of being addressed by another, or vocative: and all this without the intervention of any other word to mark the relative position or state. They are therefore genuine cases. In the Anglo-Saxon the first declension of substantives is Sing. Nom. SmiŎ Smith Gen. Smider Smithes Acc. Smid Smith Plu. Smiðar Smithas. In the Dano-Saxon the plural nominative and accusative are written Smider Smithes. and including in their very form the force of the prepositions to and for? There are certainly some other phrases which are to be resolved in this manner: Wo is me!' The phrase is pure Saxon,' wa is me!' me is the dative case: in English, with the preposition, to me. So, methinks;' Saxon, 'methincth;' ques Soxel. 'As us thoughte,' Sir John Maundevylle. Methoughte, this short interval of silence has had more music in it than any of the same space of time before or after it.' Addison, Tatler, No. 133. See also Spect. No. 63. It ought to be methought. 'The Lord do that which seemeth him good,' 2 Sam. x. 12. See also 1 Sam. iii. 18; 2 Sam. xviii. 4. O well is thee! Psal. cxxviii. 2. Wel his the, id est bene est tibi,' Simeon Dunelm, apud x. Scriptores. col. 135. Wel is him that ther mai be,' Anglo-Saxon Poem in Hickes's Thesaur. vol. i. p. 231. 'Well is him that dwelleth with a wife of understanding,' 'Well is him that hath found prudence,' Ecclus. xxv. S, 9. The translator thought to correct his phrase afterward; and so hath made it neither Saxon nor English: Wel is he that is defended from it,' Ecclus. xxviii. 19. Wo worth the day!' Ezek. xxx. 2, that is, Wo be to the day.' The word worth is not the adjective, but the Saxon verb weorthan, or worthan fieri, to be, to become; which is often used by Chaucer, and is still retained as an auxiliary verb in the German language."-Lowth's Grammar, p. 166, note 6. 6 6 It will easily be seen that the declension of our substantives is lineally descended from this, and that our Smith's is but the abbreviation of Smithes and not of Smith his as some have fancied, and, in ignorance of the parent language, written.* This becomes yet more evident if we take the genitive case of a feminine noun: for it is clear that the phrase "the Queenes Majestie," so frequently used by the writers of Elizabeth's reign, can never be made into the Queen his majesty; any more than it can be Elizabeth his reign. Take a farther example from Shakspeare. -"Who taught you this? I learned it out of women's faces." The Anglo-Saxon has several declensions of substantives, and in all of them the accusative has its own peculiar termination, as pitega witega, a prophet, acc. pitegan witegan. Andzic andgit, the understanding, acc. Andzice andgite. Sunu sunu, a son, acc. Suna suna. In the other declensions the accusative and nominative terminate alike. The English seems to have retained the form of the first only, and even there to have dropped the peculiar termination of the dative both in the singu lar and plural. This is to be regretted, for much ambiguity of expression necessarily follows the want of a distinguishing termination for the accusative and dative cases. * It is, however, a fault rather common among our elder writers. The framers of the Liturgy have sanctified it, and Lord Bacon has carried it so far as to write "the Sphinx her riddles," and elsewhere "Epimetheus his sect."-Prometheus his scholars." Yet in other places he uses the genitive case freely, as "Certainly there be whose fortunes are like Homer's verses that have a slide and easiness more than the verses of other poets, as Plutarch saith of Timoleon's fortune in respect of that of Agesilaus or Epaminondas; and that this should be no doubt it is much in a man's self."-Essays. III. NOUN ADJECTIVE. This was appropriately called by the Anglo-Saxons, Namer gerena or Noun's companion. In English it is wholly indeclinable, excepting when it receives a different termination in the degrees of comparison. In the Anglo-Saxon it is fully declined, as it is still in the German, excepting where it stands alone, when in that language as well as in English it is not declined, but its complete unchangeableness may be reckoned among the peculiarities of our own tongue. The regular form of the degrees of comparison is Words of three Syllables and more are usually compared by means of more and most, as charitable, more charitable, most charitable. In most languages the numerals are declined up to a certain point: in English they are wholly indeclinable. IV. PRONOUN. Pronouns are commonly divided into 1. PERSONAL OF PRIMITIVE, namely, those which form the ground of all the rest, represent the noun per |