Greek Kagdia and Kadın, &c. And the Greeks might as well have imagined these to be two different words, as our etymologists have fuppofed BOARD and BROAD to be; though there is not the finalleft difference between them, except this metathefis of the letter R the meaning of BOARD and BROAD being the fame, though their modern application is different. F. Well. Be it fo. I think your account of BRAWN has an advantage over Junius and Skinner*. for your journey is much. * Junius fays" BRAWN, callum; inde Brawn of a boar eft "callum aprugnum. Videntur autem BRAWN iftud Angli defumpfiffe ex accufativo, Gr. wwgos, callus; ut ex wwpov, per quandam contrac"tionem et literæ R tranfpofitioncm, primò fuerit #gwv, atque inde cc. BRAWN." Skinner fays" BRAWN, pro Apro, ingeniofe deflectit amicus "quidam doctiffimus a Lat. Aprugna, fupple Caro; rejecto initiali a, P in B, mutato, & elifo, et A finali u premiffo. 66 πωρωμα, 2. BRAWN autem pro callo declinari poffet a Gr. wpwa, idem fignante; in ẞ mutato, w priori propter contracionem elifo, w pof"teriori in AU, et м in N, facillimo deflexu tranfeunte. 66 "3. Mallem tamen BRAWN, pro Apro, a Teut. Braufen, fremere; "vel a Brummen, murmurare. Sed neutrum placet. "4. BRAWN etiam fenfu vulgatiffimo callum aprugnum fignat. Vir rev. "deducit: a Belg. Beer, aper, et. Rauw, Rouw, in obliquis Rauwen, "Rouwen, crudus. Quia exteri omnes hujus cibi infueti (eft enim Angliæ noftræ peculiaris) carnem hane pro crudo habent; ideoque " modò coquunt, modò affunt, modò frigunt, modò pinfunt. Sed obftat, quod nullo modo verifimile eft, nos cibi nobis peculiaris,. Belgis aliifque gentibus ferè ignoti.nomen ab infuetis fumfiffe. much shorter and lefs embarraffed. But I beg it may be understood, that I do not intirely and finally accede to every thing which I may at prefent forbear to conteft. 5. Poffit et deduci (licet nec hoc plane fatisfaciat) ab A. s. Baɲ, aper, et Run, contr. pro Runnen vel Le-ɲunnen, concretus, q. d. "Barrun (i. c.) pars Apri maxime concreta, pars duriffima." ΕΠΕΛ ΕΠΕΑ ΠΤΕΡΟΕΝΤΑ, &or CHAP. IV. THE SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED. F. SEE the etymological ufe you would make of the finals D, T, and N. But you faid, early in our converfation, that WRONG was a past participle, as well as RIGHT; yet WRONG does not fall within any of those three claffes. H. True. It belongs to a much more numerous and lefs obvious clafs of participles; which I fhould have been forry to enter upon, till you had been a little feasoned by the foregoing. WRONG is the past participle of the verb To Wring, Fungan, torquere. The word answering to it in Italian is Torte, the past participle of the verb Torquere; whence the French alfo have Tort. It means merely Wrung, or Wrefted from the RIGHT or Ordered-line of conduct. F. If it means merely Wrung, the past participle of To Wring, why is it not fo written and pronounced? Doctor Lowth, in his account of the English verbs H. Ọ, my dear Sir, the bishop is by no means for our present purpose. His Introduction is a very elegant little treatise, well compiled and abridged for the object which alone he had in view; and highly useful to Ladies and Gentlemen for their converfation and correfpondence; but affording no affistance whatever to reafon or the human understanding: nor did he profefs it. In the fame manner an intelligent tafty milliner, at the court end of the town, may best inform a lady, what the fashion is, and how they wear the things at prefent; but she can give her little or no account perhaps of the materials and manufacture of the ftuffs in which fhe deals;-nor does the lady with to know. The bishop's account of the verbs (which he formed as well as he could from B. Jonfon and Wallis) is the most trifling and moft erroneous part of his performance. He was not himself fatisfied with it; but fays-" This diftribution and account, " if it be just.” He laid down in the beginning a falfe rule: and the confequent irregularities, with which he charges the ve.bs, are therefore of his own making. Our Our ancestors did not deal fo copioufly in Adjectives and Participles, as we their defcendants now do. The only method which they had to make a past participle, was by adding ED or EN to the verb: and they added either the one or the other indifferently, as they pleased (the one being as regular as the other) to any verb which they employed: and they added them either to the Indicative mood of the verb, or to the past tenfe. Shak-ed or Shak-en, Smytt-ed or Smytt-en, Grow-ed or Grow-en, Hold-ed or Hold-en, Stung-ed or Stung-en, Buyld-ed or Buyld-en, Stand-ed or Stand-en, Mow-ed or Mow-en, Know-ed or Know-en, Throw-ed or Throw-en, Sow-ed or Sow-en, Com-ed or Comen, &c. were used by them indifferently. But their most ufual method of fpeech was to employ the past tense itself, without participializing it, or making a participle of it by the addition of ED or EN. So likewife they commonly used their Subftantives without adjectiving them, or employing those adjectives which (in, imitation of fome other languages and by adoption from them) we now employ. Take as one inftance (you fhall have more hereafter) the verb To Heave, Deapan. By adding ED to the Indicative, they had the participle Heaved Heaft Hove Hoved Hoven And all these they ufed indifferently. The fhip (or any thing elfe) was N 2 Heaved |