Part 45 (1/2)
I A _co quality or situation; as, _Good, bad, peaceful, warlike--eastern, western, outer, inner_
II A _proper adjective_ is an adjective forlish, Platonic, Genoese_
III A _numeral adjective_ is an adjective that expresses a definite number; as, _One, two, three, four, five, six_, &c
IV A _pronominal adjective_ is a definitive hich may either accompany its noun, or represent it understood; as, ”_All_ join to guard what _each_ desires to gain”--_Pope_ That is, ”_All ain”
V A _participial adjective_ is one that has the for the idea of ti_ divination”
VI A _compound adjective_ is one that consists of two or ether, either by the hyphen or solidly: as, _Nut-brown, laughter-loving, four-footed; threefold, lordlike, lovesick_
OBSERVATIONS
OBS 1--This distribution of the adjectives is no less easy to be applied, than necessary to a proper explanation in parsing How e, it is difficult to say; none of our dictionaries profess to exhibit all that are e classes Of the Common Adjectives, there are probably not fewer than six thousand, exclusive of the common nouns which we refer to this class when they are used adjectively Walker's Rhyreater part of which s Of those which end in _ous_, as _generous_, there are about 850 Of those in _y_ or _ly_, as _shaggy, homely_, there are about 550 Of those in _ive_, as _deceptive_, there are about 400 Of those in _al_, as _autumnal_, there are about 550 Of those in _ical_, as _mechanical_, there are about 350 Of those in _able_, as _valuable_, there are about 600 Of those in _ible_, as _credible_, there are about 200 Of those in _ent_, as _different_, there are about 300 Of those in _ant_, as _abundant_, there are about 170 Of those in _less_, as _ceaseless_, there are about 220 Of those in _ful_, as _useful_, there are about 130 Of those in _ory_, as _explanatory_, there are about 200 Of those in _ish_, as _childish_, there are about 100 Of those in _ine_, as _masculine_, there are about 70 Of those in _en_, as _wooden_, there are about 50 Of those in _some_, as _quarrelsoether, make 4770
OBS 2--The Proper Adjectives are, inconverted into declinable nouns: as, _European, a European, the Europeans; Greek, a Greek, the Greeks; Asiatic, an Asiatic, the Asiatics_ But with the words _English, French, Dutch, Scotch, Welsh, Irish_, and in general all such as would acquire an additional syllable in their declension, the case is otherwise The gentile noun has frequently fewer syllables than the adjective, but seldom more, unless derived from some different root
Examples: _Arabic, an Arab, the Arabs; Gallic, a Gaul, the Gauls; Danish, a Dane, the Danes; Moorish, a Moor, the Moors; Polish, a Pole_, or _Polander, the Poles; Swedish, a Swede, the Swedes; Turkish, a Turk, the Turks_ When we say, _the English, the French, the Dutch, the Scotch, the Welsh, the Irish_,--ralish, French_, &c, are _indeclinable nouns_
But into the noun _men_ or _people_ understood For if these words are nouns, so are a thousand others, after which there is the sareat, the wise, the learned_[168] The principle would involve the inconvenience of ular for, indefinitely If they are nouns, they are, in this sense, plural only; and, in an other, they are singular only For we can no lishman, an Irishman_, or _a Frenchman_; than we can say, _an old, a selfish_, or _a rich_, for _an old uishi+ng the _languages_, we call the the words, certainly, in no plural sense; and preferring always the line of adjectives, where the gentile noun is different: as, _Arabic_, and not _Arab_; _Danish_, and not _Dane_; _Swedish_, and not _Swede_ In this sense, as well as in the forraphers, call the words _nouns_; and the reader will perceive, that the objections offered before do not apply here But Johnson, in his two quarto volulish_ and _Latin_; and both of these he calls _adjectives_: ”ENGLISH, _adj_ Belonging to England; hence English[169] is the language of England” The word _Latin_, however, he makes a noun, when it e he quotes, the following inaccurate example from Ascha of _Latins_”
OBS 3--Dr Webster gives us explanations like these: ”CHINESE, _n sing_ and _plu_ A native of China; also the language of China”--”japANESE, _n_ A native of japan; or the language of the inhabitants”--”GENOESE, _n pl_ the people of Genoa in Italy _Addison_”--”DANISH, _n_ The language of the Danes”--”IRISH, _n_ 1 A native of Ireland 2 The language of the Irish; the Hiberno-Celtic” According to him, then, it is proper to say, _a Chinese, a japanese_, or _an Irish_; but not, _a Genoese_, because he will have this word to be plural only! Again, if with him we call a native of Ireland _an Irish_, will not more than one be _Irishes?_[170] If a native of japan be _a japanese_, will not more than one be _japaneses?_ In short, is it not plain, that the words, _Chinese, japanese, Portuguese, Maltese, Genoese, Milanese_, and all others of like formation, should follow one and the same rule? And if so, what is that rule? Is it not this;--that, like _English, French_, &c, they are always _adjectives_; except, perhaps, when they denote _languages_? Therea native of China _a Chinese_,--of japan _a japanese_,--&c; as there is also for the regular plurals, _Chineses, japaneses_, &c; but is it, in either case, good and sufficient authority?
The like fored, are, on soe, we do not find these words inflected, as they were formerly Examples: ”The _Chinese_ are by no means a cleanly people, either in person or dress”--_Balbi's Geog_, p 415 ”The _japanese_ excel in working in copper, iron, and steel”--_Ib_, p 419
”The _Portuguese_ are of the sain with the Spaniards”--_Ib_, p
272 ”By whom the undaunted _Tyrolese_ are led”--_Wordsworth's Poeueses_, 'tis so st their Children, to _learn_ to _Read_, and Write, that they cannot hinder them from it”--_Locke, on Education_, p 271 ”The _Malteses_ do so, who harden the Bodies of their Children, and reconcile theo stark Naked”--_Idem, Edition of_ 1669, p 5 ”CHINESE, _n s_ Used elliptically for the language and people of China: plural, _Chineses Sir T Herbert_”--_Abridgement of Todd's Johnson_ This is certainly absurd For if _Chinese_ is used _elliptically_ for the people of China, it is an _adjective_, and does not fore concerning the whole class These plural forht not to be i, ”No, I will never descend with him beneath even _a japanese_: and I remember what Voltaire remarks of _that country_”--_Diversions of Purley_, i, 187 In this case, he ought, unquestionably, to have said--”beneath even _a native of japan_;” because, whether _japanese_ be a noun or not, it is absurd to call _a japanese_, ”_that country_” Butler, in his Hudibras, somewhere uses the word _Chineses_; and it was, perhaps, in his day, coy, and therefore wrong Milton, too, has it:
”But in his way lights on the barren plains Of Sericana, where Chineses[171] drive With sails and wind their cany _waggons_ light”
--_Paradise Lost_, B iii, l 437
OBS 4--The Numeral Adjectives are of three kinds, namely, _cardinal, ordinal_, and _ on in a series indefinitely Thus:--
1 _Cardinal_; One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty, twenty-one, twenty-two, &c
2 _Ordinal_; First, second, third, fourth, fifth, sixth, seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, eleventh, twelfth, thirteenth, fourteenth, fifteenth, sixteenth, seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth, twentieth, twenty-first, twenty-second, &c
3 _Multiplicative_; Single or alone, double or twofold, triple or threefold, quadruple or fourfold, quintuple or fivefold, sextuple or sixfold, septuple or sevenfold, octuple or eightfold, &c But high terms of this series are seldom used All that occur above decuple or tenfold, are written with a hyphen, and are usually of round numbers only; as, thirty-fold, sixty-fold, hundred-fold
OBS 5--A cardinal nu ordinal denotes only the last one of that nu of a series, the first of several or many Thus: ”_One_ denotes siard to more; but _first_ has respect to reater number; and _two_ means the number _two_ completely; but _second_, the last one of _two_: and so of all the rest”--_Burn's Gram_, p 54 A cardinal number answers to the question, ”_How many_?” An ordinal number answers to the question, ”_Which one_?” or, ”_What one_?” All the ordinal numbers, except _first, second, third_, and the compounds of these, as _twenty-first, twenty-second, twenty-third_, are formed directly from the cardinal numbers by means of the termination _th_ And as the primitives, in this case, areof several words, it is to be observed, that the addition is made to the last term only That is, of every compound ordinal number, the last term only is ordinal in form Thus we say, _forty-ninth_, and not _fortieth-ninth_; nor could theof the phrase, _four hundred and fiftieth_, be expressed by saying, _fourth hundredth and fiftieth_; for this, if it , speaks of three different numbers
OBS 6--Some of the nuularly declined: as, _Ones, twoes, threes, fours, fives_, &c So, _Fifths, sixths, sevenths, eighths, ninths, tenths_, &c ”The _seventy's_ translation”--_Wilson's Hebrew Gram_, p 32 ”I will not do it for _forty's_ sake”--_Gen_, xviii, 29 ”I will not destroy it for _twenty's_ sake”--_Ib_, ver 31 ”For _ten's_ sake”--_Ib_, ver 32 ”They sat down in ranks, by _hundreds_, and by _fifties_”--_Mark_, vi, 40 ”There are _millions_ of truths that a man is not concerned to know”--_Locke_ With the compound numerals, such a construction is less common; yet the denominator of a fraction may be a number of this sort: as, seven _twenty-fifths_ And here it y, as in 1 Chron, xxiv, 17th, ”The _one and twentieth_ to Jachin, the _two and twentieth_ to Gamul, the _three and twentieth_ to Delaiah, the _four and twentieth_ to Maaziah,”generally say, _the twenty-first, the twenty-second_, &c; using the hyphen in all compounds till we arrive at _one hundred_, or _one hundredth_, and then first introducing the word _and_; as, _one hundred and one_, or _one hundred and first_, &c
OBS 7--The pronominal Adjectives are coreat i words are perhaps all that properly belong to this class, and several of these areelse: _All, any, both, certain, divers, each, either, else, enough, every, feer, fewest, former, first, latter, last, little, less, least, many, more, most, much, neither, no_ or _none, one, other, own, only, same, several, some, such, sundry, that, this, these, those, what, whatever, whatsoever, which, whichever, whichsoever_[172] Of these forty-six words, seven are always singular, if the word _one_ is not an exception; namely, _each, either, every, neither, one, that, this_: and nine or ten others are always plural, if the word _many_ is not an exception; namely, _both, divers, feer, fewest, many, several, sundry, these, those_ All the rest, like our common adjectives, are applicable to nouns of either number _Else, every, only, no_, and _none_, are definitive words, which I have thought proper to call pronoh only the last can noith propriety be made to represent its noun understood ”Nor has Vossius, or _any else_ that I know of, observed it”--_Johnson's Gram Com_, p 279 Say, ”or any _one_ else” Dr Webster explains this word _else_ thus: ”ELSE, _a_ or _pron_ [Sax _elles_] Other; one or so?”--_Octavo Dict_ ”Each and _every_ of them,” is an old phrase in which _every_ is used pronominally, or with ellipsis of the word to which it refers; but, in common discourse,say, _every one, every est its noun _Only_ is perhaps most commonly an adverb; but it is still in frequent use as an adjective; and in old books we sos; as, ”Neither are they the _only_ [verbs] in which it is read”--_Johnson's Grammatical Commentaries_, p 373 ”But I think he is the _only_ [one] of these Authors”--_Ib_, p 193 _No_ and _none_ seem to be only different for used before a noun expressed, and the latter when the noun is understood, or not placed after the adjective; as, ”For _none_ of us liveth to himself, and _no_ man dieth to himself”--_Romans_, xiv, 7 _None_ was anciently used for _no_ before all words beginning with a vowel sound; as, ”They are sottish children; and they have _none_ understanding”--_Jeremiah_, iv, 22 This practice is now obsolete _None_ is still used, when its noun precedes it; as,
”Fools! who from hence into the notion fall, That _vice_ or _virtue_ there is _none_ at all”--_Pope_
OBS 8--Of the words given in the foregoing list as pronominal adjectives, about one third are so: _All_, when it_otherwise; enough_, signifying _sufficiently; first_, for _in the first place; last_, for _in the last place; little_, for _in a sree; least_, for _in the sree; reatest degree; no_, or _none_, for _in no degree; only_, for _singly, reat a degree_[173] To these may perhaps be added the word _other_, when used as an alternative to _somehow_; as, ”_Soy_, p 89 Here _other_ seems to be put for _otherwise_; and yet the latter ould not be agreeable in such a sentence ”_Somewhere or other_,” is a kindred phrase equally coular and puzzling Would it not be better, always to avoid both, by saying, in their stead, ”_In some way or other_,”--”_In so examples, however, _other_ seems to be used for _otherwise_, without such a connection: ”How is THAT used, _other_ than as a Conjunction?”--_Ainsworth's Gram_, p 88
”Will it not be receiv'd that they have done 't?
--Who dares receive it _other?_”--SHAK: _Joh Dict, w Other_