(19) Let the learner remember that, in writing proper names and words derived from them, we always begin the word with a large letter, or, as it is commonly called, a capital letter. (20) Thus, England is spelled with a large E, and English, though not a noun, because it is derived from, and has reference to, a proper name, is spelled with a capital E. The same may be said of America and American. (21) In the beginning of the last century it was customary, in our printed books, to distinguish every noun, whether proper or common, by a capital letter. This custom is still retained by the Germans. In their language every noun, and every word employed as a noun, is distinguished by a capital.

Let the learner tell to which class proper nouns or common nouns, each word in the following exercise, belongs, giving, in each case, the reason for so classing it. In this exercise we have not employed capitals in spelling the proper nouns, lest we should distinguish them from the common nouns. After repeating the exercise, as an oral lesson, the learner may be required to write it, distinguishing the proper nouns by an initial large letter.

EXERCISE.-Plant, town, country, india, franklin, man, england, president, america, king, soldier, hero, st. paul's, trinity church, general, mountain, the rocky mountains, philadelphia, liverpool, country, kingdom, state, bristol, stranger, horse, day, thursday, april, stephen, boston, city, &c.

MODEL OF EXAMINATION.—What kind of word is plant? Ans. A noun, or substantive. Why do you call it a noun? Ans. Because it belongs to that class of words which serve as subjects of propositions. What kind of noun? Ans. A concrete common noun. Why call it a concrete noun? Ans. Because it is the name of a substance, or of that which possesses independent existence. Why a common noun? Ans. Because it is a name common to a class of things, and not appropriated to a single individual thing.

The young learner may now be required to give twenty (or more, according to circumstances) examples of concrete nouns as a written exercise, distinguishing each proper noun in the usual manner, by beginning it with a large letter. After this exercise has been ex

(19) How are proper nouns and nouns derived from proper names written? (20) Illus trate this by examples. (21) What was the practice in former times in writing nouns ?

amined, let the pupil be questioned according to the above model, on each example. These exercises must be repeated till the learner can promptly distinguish proper and common nouns from one another, and from all other classes of words.

§ 32. (1) In employing common nouns-that is, words which designate classes of things-we may have occasion either to speak, 1st, of the whole class; 2d, of an individual of the class; or, 3d, of a number of individuals of the class without comprising the whole class. (2) The noun, in its simplest form, without any modification of any kind, is sometimes employed in English to indicate the whole class of objects to which the name is applicable. (3) Thus, the word man is employed to signify the whole race of men, or all mankind, as when we say Man is frail, Man is mortal, The proper study of mankind is MAN. By man, in all these cases, we mean the whole human race, or humanity in general. (4) When we wish to indicate, by a common noun, a single individual, we must, in our language, have recourse to the use of one of a class of words which we shall call DETERMINATIVES; as, a man, one man, any man, some man, &c. (5) The term man cannot with propriety be used alone in our language to indicate a single individual man. And the same holds of other common nouns.

(6) When we wish to indicate more than one individual of a class or species, without indicating the whole species, we must use what is called the plural form of the noun, and a determinative or descriptive word besides, to restrict or limit the noun. (7) As examples we may take the phrases, some men, many men, good men, wise men, &c. Here we use men, the plural form of man, and add the limiting words, some, many, good, wise. (8) The plural form of the word man, as well as the singular form, is used without any modifying word to express the whole race; as, Men are frail, Men are mortal, &c. [(9) Indeed it is generally the plural form of com

§ 32. (1) Mention the purposes for which we may have occasion to employ common nouns. (2) For what purpose is the common noun in its simplest form sometimes employed in English? (3) Give illustrations of this fact. (4) To what contrivance must we have recourse in English in order to indicate a single individual by a common noun? (5) What is Laid of the term man?

(6) How do we indicate more than one of a class without indicating the whole class? (7) Give examples. (8) For what purpose is the plural form without any modifying word employed? [(9) What form of a common noun is generally employed to express the

mon nouns which is employed to express the whole class collectively. (10) It is only in the case of certain words that we can with propriety employ the singular form to express the whole class; and when we do use it, it does not so much indicate the class, or individuals taken collectively which form the class or species, as the combined qualities or attributes which constitute or distinguish the class. (11) Thus, man means, when used alone or unmodified, the combined qualities, properties, distinguishing attributes which constitute man, or nearly the same which is sometimes indicated by the term humanity; as in the example already given, The proper study of mankind is MAN-that is, the properties, attributes, &c., which belong to or constitute man. (12) We cannot use such words as tree or animal to express the whole class of trees or animals s; nor such words as oak or ash. These last, when used without a determinative, signify a very different thing from the species which they indicate collectively considered. Thus used, they serve to indicate the kind of wood which they afford, considered as a material for human uses, not the collective species of trees.]

§ 33. We are now brought to consider an important modification of the subject noun, effected (at least partly) by a change of the form of the word. (1) We use the unaltered form of the noun (accompanied generally, in the case of names of substances, by a determinative word) to indicate a single individual of the class to which the noun serves as a common name, and we employ a modified form, when we intend to indicate more than one individual of the class. (2) These two forms may be called the singular form and the plural form-the singular indicating a single thing, the plural a plurality of things, or more than one. [(3) For the sake of brevity, we may henceforth call the original, unmodified, uninflected form of nouns and verbs the root of the noun or verb.] (4) The

gram

whole class collectively? (10) What is said of the employment of the singular form to express a whole class? (11) Illustrate by an example. (12) Can such words as tree, or animal, &c., be used to express the class of trees, &c.; and what do such words as oak and ash used alone signify ?]

33. (1) What form of the noun is used when we speak of a single object of a class, and what when we speak of more than one? (2) What may these forms be called? [(3) What is meant by the root of a noun or verb?] (4) What have grammarians called this modifi. cation of nouns?

marians generally call this modification of nouns NUMBER, and say that nouns have two numbers, the singular and the plural.

As this manner of expression has been so long employed, we shall feel obliged (through a regard to convenience, and to avoid the appearance of making unnecessary innovations), to adopt it on some occasions, though it is liable to serious objection, because it implies that unity is a number, whereas number consists of the aggregation or sum of two or more units. The difficulties which have occurred to some of the grammarians, and the less scientific writers on arithmetic, in attempting to define number, and the glaring absurdities which have been sometimes produced as definitions, are all to be traced to the improper extension (an extension unwarranted by the common usage of language, and reprobated by philosophers as early as the times of Aristotle) of the word number, so as to embrace under it the conception of unity as well as of plurality. It is not to be expected that any serviceable definition can be given embracing in the same terms conceptions so diverse-so opposed as unity and plurality. In other words, while a unit is considered one of the numbers, there can be no rational or logical definition of number. We may, indeed, have such jargon as "number is the consideration of an object as one or more;" or, "number is that property of a noun, by which it expresses one, or more than one," &c. When number is considered as made up of the aggregation or sum of units, the proper definition obviously presents itself. But then to talk of the singular number is absurd-a contradiction of terms. This use of the term number by most grammarians, and by a host of writers on arithmetic, is also altogether inconsistent with the current usage of language in speaking of every thing except grammar and arithmetic. When we use the word number in common discourse we always intend to indicate a plurality, and to exclude unity (except in such colloquial expressions as "number one”). A number of men, a number of things, always implies plurality, and is equivalent to several men, several things.

When we have occasion hereafter to speak of the singular form of nouns, we shall call it simply the singular form, and not the singular number; but as there is no other name in our language to express that modification or accident of nouns which we are considering, we are obliged to employ the term number, or numbers of nouns, for this purpose, whilst we admit its want of strict appropriateness, except as applied exclusively to the plural form. At the same time, we shall endeavor to guard our readers and ourselves against any misconcep tion to which the use of this term might possibly lead.

34. In coming to treat of the formation of the plural of nouns, a class of the contrivances of articulate language distinct from what we have yet had under consideration, and a class which will employ much of our attention in the remainder of this treatise, is presented to our notice. (1) Hitherto we have contemplated nouns and verbs as performing their respective functions in propositions without any species of modification, whether effected by a change of their form, or by the assistance of other words. (2) Very few of the purposes which language now serves can be accomplished without advancing a step beyond this. With unmodified nouns, and unmodified verbs, we could form but a very small number of propositions, and express a very limited portion of our thoughts. (3) The learner will, no doubt, have discovered this fact already in attempting to form rational propositions consisting of two words-a simple unmodified noun, and an unmodified verb. (4) For example, of the subject expressed by the noun man without any modification, we can by the use of bare verbs make only a very limited number of assertions consistent with truth, and deserving the attention of rational beings. Man lives, man thinks, man speaks, talks, sings, walks, runs, &c., &c. Such propositions, though all true, contain truths so well known by mankind generally, that we seldom find occasion to employ them in this naked form in conversation or in writing, and even when we do, in order to give our assertion more appearance of weight, we usually employ some more dignified mode of expression, as man is endowed with thought, with speech, &c.

(5) Even, if we are allowed to modify at pleasure the verbs we employ, we can make only a limited number of true and rational assertions about the subject expressed by the naked term MAN. (6) But, when we are allowed to modify this term by the assistance of additional words, and, at the same time, to modify the verb, we

34. (1) What is said of the manner in which we have been contemplating nouns and verbs hitherto? (2) Can the purposes of language be effected by unmodified nouns and verbs? (3) What will the learner have already discovered in regard to this matter? (4) Give example, and go through the illustration.

(5) When allowed to modify the verbs we employ, can we make a large number of assertions in regard to the subject expressed by the bare word man? (6) How is it, when we are allowed to modify the subject noun and the verb? (7) Illustrate by examples.