diftant regions; fo that in fearch of the progenitors of our fpeech, we may wander from the tropick to the frozen zone, and find fome in the vallies of Paleftine, and fome upon the rocks of Norway.

Befide the derivation of particular words, there is likewife an etymology of phrafes. Expreffions are often taken from other languages; fome apparently, as to run a rifque, courir un rifque; and fome even when we do not feem to borrow their words; thus, to bring about or accomplish, appears an English phrase, but in reality our native word about has no fuch import, and is only a French expreffion, of which we have an example in the common phrafe venir à bout d'une affaire.

In exhibiting the defcent of our language, our etymologifts feem to have been too lavish of their learning, having traced almoft every word through various tongues, only to fhew what was fhewn fufficiently by the firft derivation. This practice is of great ufe in fynoptical lexicons, where mutilated and doubtful languages are explained by their affinity to others more certain and extenfive, but is generally fuperfluous in English etymologies. When the word is eafily deduced from a Saxon original, I shall not often enquire further, fince we know not the parent of the Saxon dialect; but when it is borrowed from the French, I fhall fhew whence the French is apparently derived. Where a Saxon root cannot be found, the defect may be fupplied from kindred languages, which will be generally furnished with much liberality by the writers of our gloffaries; writers who deferve often the highest praife, both of judgment and industry, and may expect at least to

be

be mentioned with honour by me, whom they have freed from the greateft part of a very laborious work, and on whom they have impofed, at worft, only the eafy task of rejecting fuperfluities.

By tracing in this manner every word to its origin, and not admitting, but with great caution, any of which no original can be found, we fhall fecure our language from being over-run with cant, from being crowded with low terms, the fpawn of folly or affectation, which arife from no juft principles of fpeech, and of which therefore no legitimate derivation can be fhewn.

When the etymology is thus adjusted, the analogy of our language is next to be confidered; when we have difcovered whence our words are derived, we are to examine by what rules they are governed, and how they are inflected through their various terminations. The terminations of the English are few, but thofe few have hitherto remained unregarded by the writers of our dictionaries. Our fubftantives are declined only by the plural termination, our adjectives admit no variation but in the degrees of comparifon, and our verbs are conjugated by auxiliary words, and are only changed in the preter tenfe.

To our language may be with great juftnefs applied the obfervation of Quintilian, that fpeech was not formed by an analogy fent from heaven. It did not defcend to us in a ftate of uniformity and perfection, but was produced by neceffity, and enlarged by accident, and is therefore compofed of diffimilar parts, thrown together by negligence, by affectation, by learning, or by ignorance.

Our

Our inflections therefore are by no means conftant, but admit of numberless irregularities, which in this Dictionary will be diligently noted. Thus fox makes in the plural foxes, but ox makes oxen. Sheep is the fame in both numbers. Adjectives are fometimes compared by changing the laft fyllable, as proud, prouder, proudeft; and fometimes by particles prefixed, as, ambitious, more ambitious, met ambitious. The forms of our verbs are fubject to great variety; fome end their preter tenfe in ed, as I love, I loved, I have loved; which may be called the regular form, and is followed by moft of our verbs of fouthern original. But many depart from this rule, without agreeing in any other; as I shake, I shook, I have fhaken, or hook, as it is fometimes written in poetry; I make, I made, I have made; I bring, I brought; I wring, I wrung; and many others, which, as they cannot be reduced to rules, muft be learned from the dictionary rather than the grammar.

The verbs are likewife to be diftinguished according to their qualities, as actives from neuters; the neglect of which has already introduced fome barbarities in our converfation, which if not obviated by just animadverfions, may in time creep into our writings.

Thus, my Lord will our language be laid down, diftinct in its minuteft fubdivifions, and refolved into its elemental principles. And who upon this furvey can forbear to with, that thefe fundamental atoms of our fpeech might obtain the firmnefs and immutability of the primogenial and conftituent particles of matter, that they might retain their fubVOL. II. ftance

C

ftance while they alter their appearance, and be varied and compounded, yet not deftroyed.

But this is a privilege which words are fcarcely to expect: for, like their author, when they are not gaining ftrength, they are generally lofing it. Though art may fometimes prolong their duration, it will rarely give them perpetuity; and their changes will be almost always informing us, that language is the work of man, of a being from whom permanence and ftability cannot be derived.

Words having been hitherto confidered as feparate and unconnected, are now to be likewise examined as they are ranged in their various relations to others by the rules of fyntax or conftruction, to which I do not know that any regard has been yet shewn in English dictionaries, and in which the grammarians can give little affiftance. The fyntax of this language is too inconftant to be reduced to rules, and can be only learned by the diftinct confideration of particular words as they are ufed by the best authors. Thus, we fay, according to the prefent modes of fpeech, The foldier died of his wounds, and the failor perifhed with hunger and every man acquainted with our language would be offended by a change of thefe particles, which yet feem originally affigned by chance, there being no reafon to be drawn from grammar why a man may not, with equal propriety, be faid to die with a wound, or perish of hunger.

Our fyntax therefore is not to be taught by general rules, but by special precedents; and in examining whether Addison has been with juftice, accused of a folecifin in this paffage,

The

The poor inhabitant

Starves in the midst of nature's bounty curft,

And in the loaden vineyard dies for thirst,

it is not in our power to have recourfe to any eftablished laws of fpeech; but we must remark how the writers of former ages have ufed the fame word, and confider whether he can be acquitted of impropriety, upon the teftimony of Davies, given in his favour by a fimilar paffage.

She loaths the wat'ry glass wherein fhe gaz'd,

And shuns it ftill, although for thift she dye.

When the conftruction of a word is explained, it is neceffary to purfue it through its train of phrafeology, through thofe forms where it is ufed in a man- ' ner peculiar to our language, or in fenfes not to be comprised in the general explanations; as from the verb make arife thefe phrafes, to make love, to make an end, to make way; as, he made way for his followers, the hip made way before the wind; to make a bed, to make merry, to make a mock, to make prefents, to make a doubt, to make out an affertion, to make good “a” breach, to make good a cause, to make nothing of an attempt, to make lamentation, to make, a merit, and many others which will occur in reading with that view, and which only their frequency hinders from being generally remarked.

The great labour is yet to come, the labour of interpreting these words and phrafes with brevity, fulness, and perfpicuity; a task of which the extent and intricacy is fufficiently fhewn by the mifcarriage of those who have generally attempted it. This difficulty

C 2