NEATH by the nether, that is, lower part. By, Anglo-Saxon be or big, Gothic bi, Swedish be, Danish by. The word, in composition, is often written be; as, Because, besiege.

BEFORE, BEHIND, are of the same nature, in this respect, that fore and hind are to the nouns, in composition with be. They are still used in an adjectival sense in foreman, hind wheel, &c. tofore were formerly used instead of before, and they are the expressions aforesaid, heretofore.

Afore and still used in

FOR and FORE appear to have been originally the same word. Our common words "wherefore" and "therefore" are equivalent to "for which" and "for this ;" and the latter is often written forthy in ancient authors, as the former is written for why by some of modern date:

"And forthy, if it happe in any wise
That here be any cover in this place."
CHAUCER'S Troilus.

“Solyman had three hundred field-pieces, that a camel might well carry one of them, being taken from the carriage; for why, Solyman, purposing to draw the emperor into battle, had brought no greater pieces of battery with him."-KNOLLE'S History of Turkey. Forsaid was used as foresaid, forlok for forelook. For still has a meaning kindred to fore or before. For is also used as a conjunction; as, "That ye may be the children of your Father who is in heaven; for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good." In such sentences for has the sense of because. It may be said, in general, that for indicates the cause or motive of any action or cir

cumstance.

IN, Latin in, Greek ev, Gothic in, Anglo-Saxon in, French en, Spanish en, Italian in, German ein, Danish ind, Sanscrit antu. This relates to place and time, and can be coupled, in the way of opposition, to out. This last word is in Anglo-Saxon ut. Various compounds are formed from these; as, Within, without, or inwith, outwith, as written by some ancient writers. The words withouten and forouten were also formerly used.

Adown, afore, aneath, astride, despite, outside, per, &c., are sometimes used as prepositions.

THE NATURE AND

OFFICE OF PREPOSITIONS.

§ 374. 1. "The preposition is a word placed before a noun." This is merely an external definition, and does not indicate its internal

nature.

2. Prepositions express neither essences (like substantives) nor

activities (like verbs and adjectives), but only their relations. They express, not the substance, but the form of our ideas. Hence they are ranked by Becker with form-words.

3. Prepositions are indeclinable, as the relations of things are external to the things themselves, and are not affected by the changes which take place in them.

4. Prepositions express relations between verbs whose original nature consists in activity or motion, or some other parts of speech involving the verbal idea, and a noun expressing an essence. Of course, with very few exceptions, they denote local relations, or other relations conceived of as local relations by the mind.

5. The relations expressed by prepositions are either external or internal to the human mind. The external relations are of a physical nature, and obvious to the senses. The internal relations belong to the province of the intellect. As these higher relations are subject to the same analysis as the sensible relations, and the mind supposes a close resemblance between the physical and intellectual worlds, so prepositions denoting the external relations are also employed to express the internal.

6. Physical relations are for the most part local. Activity is motion. Relations of activity are directions of motion. These local relations arrange themselves in antitheses, forming a beautiful system; as, In and out, the only absolute relation of space; Latin cis and trans; before and behind; above and below, relative relations of space; to and from, relations of direction; into and out of, a compound relation, etc. This system is too little regarded in our com

mon grammars.

7. Intellectual relations are conceived of as physical, and are expressed by prepositions denoting physical relations. They are exhibited to others as they strike our own minds. This is shown,

(1.) In cases where the primary or physical meaning of the verb is lost; as, To copy from a picture; to rule over a country.

(2.) In cases where the physical meaning is not lost; as, To rely on another's promise; to tend to a given result; to insult over any one.

(3.) In cases where the force of the preposition had been already expressed in the verb; as, To consult with a person to abstain from a thing; to concur with another; antipathy against another.

8. Prepositions thus exhibit a wonderful correlation between the intellectual and physical worlds; a correlation which shows that both worlds proceeded from the same Author.

9. Prepositions exhibit the wonderful economy of language. The number of relations is almost infinite, yet they are all expressed by

a comparatively small number of prepositions, and this without any confusion or danger of mistake. We are guided in the meaning by the nature of the ideas between which the relation exists; but if one local relation were used for another, confusion would immediately arise.

10. As the object of prepositions is the same with that of cases in nouns, hence, in those languages where there are no cases, there must be more prepositions; and vice versa, in those languages which have numerous cases, fewer prepositions are necessary.

11. Whether the expression of relations by cases or by prepositions in the Indo-European languages is the more ancient, it is difficult to decide. With respect to the external and lower relations, it is natural to believe that prepositions were used from the first for their expression; but with respect to the internal spiritual relations the matter is not so clear. It would seem as if the language-makers had begun by expressing the internal relations by inflection, and the external by prepositions, and that the contest between these two principles has been the occasion of the endless variety of existing languages.

QUESTIONS UNDER CHAPTER VIII.

1. Give the two definitions of the preposition, with examples.

2. What is the derivation of the term, and does the name describe the nature and office of the preposition?

3. With what part of speech did some of the Greek grammarians class it? 4. What office do prepositions perform in modern languages as compared with ancient languages?

5. What are some of the relations which prepositions express? and what was the original relation which they expressed?

6. Mention some of the simple prepositions, and some of the compound of the several classes.

7. Mention some of the prepositions which were originally participles; and some that were verbs in the imperative mode; and some that were adjectives; and some of the prepositional phrases.

8. Describe the nature and office of prepositions.

9. In expressing relations, which were prior, case-endings or prepositions?

CHAPTER IX.

CONJUNCTIONS.

§ 375. A CONJUNCTION is a word which can connect two propositions without making a part of either; as, "The sun shines. and the sky is clear;" "You admire him because he is brave." See § 240.

Or, a Conjunction is a word which connects two sentences or parts of sentences; as, "John writes and Thomas reads;" "I will visit him if he desires it."

The word conjunction is derived from the Latin con, with, and junctus, joined joined together. The distinguishing characteristic of the conjunction is, that it shows the relation of sentences or propositions; thus, "He sang and danced"-" He sang and he danced." In each side of this equation there are really two propositions; the only difference between them is, that in one of them there is an ellipsis of the word he. A preposition connects words; a conjunction connects propositions. The same word is sometimes a conjunction, and at other times a preposition or an adverb. See § 361. A preposition is a part of speech serving to show the particular mode in which one sentence is connected with another sentence. Conjunctions are relational words or form-words.

1. Simple,

2. Disjunctive,

2. Adversative, 1. Absolute or Comparative. 2. Adequate or Inadequate.

1. According to the above scheme, conjunctions are divided into classes, according as they connect the meanings of sentences or not, as well as the sentences themselves. The first are called CONNECTIVES, because they connect the meanings of sentences. The second class are called DISJUNCTIVES, because they do not connect the

meanings of sentences: "Cæsar was ambitious, AND Rome was enslaved," "Cæsar was ambitious, OR Rome was enslaved." It is evident that the words and and or alike join the two sentences, but it is equally evident that they join them very differently. In the one case it is signified by the conjunction and that the propositions stand on the same basis, and are both meant to be asserted with the same degree of confidence; in the other, it is signified by the conjunction or that the ground on which the one assertion is made excludes the other. Both and and or are conjunctions-both mark that a relation exists between the two sentences—but the particular relations which they mark are different. In the one case there is accumulation; in the other, separation.

2. The CONNECTIVES are subdivided into Copulatives and Continuatives. Copulatives only couple sentences. Continuatives, on the other hand, consolidate sentences into one continuous whole. Thus we might say with propriety, "Franklin was a philosopher AND Henry was an orator." But it would be absurd to say, “Franklin was a philosopher BECAUSE Henry was an orator." And is a copulative; because, a continuative.

3. The CONTINUATIVES are subdivided into Suppositive and Positive. The suppositives are such as if; the positives such as because. The former imply necessary connection, but do not assert existence; the latter imply both the one and the other: "IF we wish others to be good, we should set them an example by doing well ourselves;” “I shall not walk out BECAUSE it rains."

4. The POSITIVES are either Causal or Collective. The causals are such as because, &c., which subjoin causes to effects; as, The sun is in eclipse BECAUSE the moon intervenes. The collectives are such as subjoin effects to causes; as, The moon intervenes, ThereFORE the sun is in eclipse.

5. In like manner, the DISJUNCTIVES are divided into two classes, the Simple and Adversative. A simple disjunctive conjunction disjoins and opposes indefinitely; as, Either it is day or it is night. An adversative disjoins with a positive and definite opposition, asserting the one alternative and denying the other; as, It is not day BUT it is night.

6. The ADVERSATIVES admit of two distinctions: first, as they are either Absolute or Comparative; and, secondly, as they are either Adequate or Inadequate. The absolute adversative is where there is a simple opposition of the same attribute to different subjects, or of different attributes in the same subjects, or of different attributes in different subjects; as, 1. Achilles was brave, BUT Thersites was not;