heart, and those who had no principle as men of honour ; that their licentiousness was either disgustingly gross, or covered only with a specious and dangerous veil; that their language was impious; and that when they pretended to excite feelings of benevolence, it was only for ideal objects, and terminated in mere speculation. This objection, however, like all the rest, was founded on occasional abuse, and was by no means applicable to the generality of the works in question. It was certainly to be regretted, that some writers of undoubted genius had maintained principles of an objectionable nature, and that others had presented indelicate and inflammatory scenes.: But this was far from being the case to any great extent. For the most part, their tendency was to promote the cause of morality. It was true, that the passion of love often made a conspicuous figure, but it was in connection with others which were no less prominent; and all the passions of the human heart thus became, by turns, the subjects of illustration. If contempt was ever excited for age, it was only when disgraced by vice or folly; and, though clandestine marriages were sometimes represented as taking place, they were generally coupled with such circumstances of inconvenience, embarrassment, or distress, as were calculated to discourage imitation. If goodness of heart was sometimes connected with dissolute conduct, or honourable character with want of principle, the state of society, and the prevalent sentiments of the fashionable world, often compelled the writer, who desired to give a correct picture of life and manners, to describe mankind as he found them, though it might be his object to make them better. Licentious descriptions or profane expressions certainly could be neither justified nor pal liated; but their occurrence in novels and romances was by no means so frequent as to stamp the character of such productions: they were only partial blemishes, not distinguishing features; and were chiefly confined to those works which were written when the public morals were less pure, or when, at least, the manners of society were less refined. That Sterne and Rousseau were not themselves benevolent, was no proof at all that their writings were not calculated to excite benevolence in others; they were neither the first nor the last who had preached what they did not practise. In short, whatever might be urged against novels and romances by those who formed their judgment of the whole merely from the worst specimens, their general effects were excellent. Of those that were really worth perusal, some were adapted to one purpose, some to another. Each answered its desired end. Taken altogether, there was no power of the mind which they did not contribute to exer cise and strengthen,no virtue which they did not inculcate, no passion of the heart which they did not tend to regulate and refine. At the same time that they furnished a most elegant and delightful recreation, they stored the mind with valuable sentiments; they improved the taste; they inspired a love of letters, and caused the breast to glow with every generous and noble feeling. Like every thing of human origin, they had their faults and imperfections; but their merits were, on the whole, so infinitely superior, as entirely to counterbalance whatever could be urged against them. ON THE ETYMOLOGY OF ENGLISH NOUNS. PART THE FIRST. PREVIOUSLY to entering upon the immediate subject of inquiry, it may not be improper to make a few introductory remarks. Etymology treats of the derivation and inflections of words. In order to do this with more ease and intelligibility, it classifies the various words of which language is composed, appropriating to each class a distinguishing term, descriptive of its nature or circumstances. The "There were," says Harris, "various opinions in ancient days as to the number of these parts or elements of speech." Words were first divided into two general kinds, denominated nouns and verbs. As language became more refined, and its nature better understood, words were farther divided into substantives, attributes, definitives, and connectives, more technically called nouns, articles, and conjunctions. Stoics made five parts of speech, "by dividing the noun into the appellative and proper. Others increased the number, by detaching the pronoun from the noun, the participle and adverb from the verb, and the preposition from the conjunction. The Latin grammarians proceeded farther, and detached the interjection from the adverb, within which, by the Greeks, it was always included as a species.*" Subsequent philologists becoming more particular, have gone still farther, and separated the elements of language into ten or twelve classes. Hermes, chap. iii. book 1. It is customary in treating of the etymology of the English language, to enumerate nine parts of speech : the article, noun, adjective, pronoun, verb, adverb, preposition, conjunction, and interjection; and it is our intention to indulge in some etymological inquiries concerning each, not following this arrangement, which, although usual, appears neither indicative of their progressive formation, actual importance, nor usual situation in the construction of sentences. . The two principal classes of words in every language must be nouns and verbs, and, of these, the former doubtless had the precedence. The earliest intimation we have of the employment of nouns, occurs in the second section of the first book of the Mosaic history, when, after the creation of beasts and birds, the Almighty condescended to honour our great progenitor by allowing and enabling him to name them; and such, at that happy period, was his mental ability, that he acquitted himself so much to the satisfaction of his Divine employer, that "whatsoever Adam called every living creature, that was the name thereof. * " Names being thus assigned to animals by divine aid and authority, their utility must have been immediately felt; and other objects of sense, as it became needful or interesting to refer to them, would progressively be similarly characterized. Thus, the first language would be gradually amplified, until the occurrence of that memorable judgment, the confusion of tongues at Babel. Hitherto there is reason to believe, names had been given with some philosophical propriety; but now the language of the people was confounded, and "they did not understand one another's speech." And here imagination involuntarily rushes to the singular and awful scene, and pictures many a distressing occurrence of friends, who in the morning greeted each other in all the tender strains of affection, but, in the evening, left each other amid the agonizing jargon of unintelligible sounds; of intelligent associates reduced to the dire necessity of employing rude gesticulations for the interchange of the most common thoughts; and of busy labourers turning from their proud undertaking, astounded at the confusion occasioned by their new and incomprehensible signs of thought. This confusion of language must have been followed by strange events; and, amidst the rest, by separation, which, it seems, was one consequence, arranged by the wisdom of Him who can always bring good out of evil; for, "from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the Hence followed the origin of nations, and the formation of various languages; for the ingenious among the + Ibid, ch. ii. v. 9. earth. +" * Genesis, ch. ii. v. 19. VOL. II. PART 11. X separated tribes would soon agree on new terms of distinction for objects of sense; and hence would follow the application of hasty, arbitrary, verbal signs, compared with the previous appropriate names which had been gradually formed, but which they had of course forgotten, or their original language could not have been confounded." It was a great part of the judgment inflicted, that the people should not understand each other's language; and, being dispersed, the new verbal signs, although they would bear such affinity to the original words, as indistinct recollection would supply, would vary in harmony according to the diversified taste and ability of the scattered inventors;-an idea, which, if pursued, would account for the progressive formation of existing languages, and all the varieties of beauty and harmony which characterize them. It is, however, of the English noun or substantive we now propose to treat, which has been defined by Murray to be "the name of any thing that exists, or of which we have any notion;" but more correctly by Bosworth, in his excellent" Elements of Saxon Grammar," as "the name of any thing we can see, touch, or conceive to exist;" for, although we cannot call the actions, passions, or states of being, denoted by verbs, things, yet we have a notion of the attributes they express. In the origination of names, they were of course given to things, persons, and places, irrespective of the grammatical distinctions of proper and common; yet is this subsequent distinction of the Stoics both interesting and useful. To avoid tediousness, we propose, in this paper, to treat only of our proper names, reserving the consideration of common substantives to our next. Proper substantives are those which distinguish persons and places. The names of persons have been divided into Christian and surnames. Our subject separates itself into these three inquiries: first, the derivation of Christian names; secondly, of surnames; and, thirdly, of local names. Of their inflections it will not be necessary to treat, for, being subject to the same regimen as common names, these modifications will be noticed in the next paper. Originally, even in this country, men had but one name, as, "Hengist, Alla, Kenric; likewise among all other nations," says Camden, "except the savages of Mount Atlas in Barbary, which were reported to be both namelesse and dreamelesse,*" by Pliny and Marcellinus. *It is affirmed also by Lichtenstein, that no apparent inconvenience arises to the Boujesmans, in South Africa, from their want of names. The appropriation of names in civilized states is not only important, but essential, and was practised, we are well assured, by our first parents; indeed, so important have mankind considered it, that they have often prescribed the time when it should be done, and the festivities which should accompany it. Sacred history distinctly proves that names were not originally thoughtlessly bestowed. They were gratefully commemorative of some remarkable deliverance, or indicative of the hope of some future good, and, in many instances, were given at the divine command. With us, Christian names are frequently given from respect to the father or mother, or from the hope of interesting wealthy relatives in the child's future welfare: thus we have known a child, whose surname was Bear, christened Savage, out of this complaisance, to the no small amusement of his youthful associates. Others frequently give the names to their children of some great personage, king, or conqueror; and it is diverting, in country villages, to hear of names and combinations of names, (for one Christian name is rarely sufficient,) which the fond and poor, although proud, parents are scarcely competent to pronounce. This, although somewhat amusing, is sometimes painful to the named; for the modest and humble girl, who applies for a housemaid's place, is sometimes seen to blush, when her mistress, first inquiring her name, hears of Letitia, Lucilla, Amelia, &c., or of two or three such united. A shrewd observer of human nature is often able to guess at the parent's motive, when, knowing their circumstances and expectations, he witnesses the laborious and pompous signatures of their offspring; although, in Camden's time, he assures us, he knew but of four individuals who had more than one Christian name. * Some, actuated by pious feeling and ardent wishes, name their children after the distinguished characters of sacred history-a pleasing practice, which generally prevails as Christianity is embraced. Names have often proved of more moment than those who gave them ever anticipated. Similarity of name has often led to permanent friendship, to distinguished promotion, and valuable inheritance; and it must be granted, that coincidence both in Christian and surnames possesses a charm calculated to impress and interest a delicate mind. "In this isle," says the learned writer already quoted, "at Silchester * "But two Christian names are rare in England; and I only remember now his Majesty, who was named Charles James, as the prince his sonne Henry Frederic; and, among private men, Thomas Maria Wingfield, and Sir Thomas Posthumus Hobby."-Remaines of a Greater Worke. |