names to CLASSES of these objects, and relinquish the absurd attempt to give a separate name to each individual object. Thus, all plants agreeing in certain characteristics we would call by the general name tree. Another class grain; another grass, &c. These again we might divide into other inferior classes, possessing certain characteristics or marks distinguishing them from the rest of the greater class. Thus, trees might be divided into sub-classes, with distinctive names, as ash, beach, oak, pine, &c., each class so named being distinguished from all other trees by obvious characteristics. By this device, we avoid the endless labor of inventing a new name for every distinct object, as well as the confusion arising from a language so crowded with words as to be wholly unmanageable, or, at least, unsuitable to the purpose of readily communicating our thoughts.

Even where every individual of a class has a proper name, as is the case in regard of our own kind, still a common or general name (a class name) in addition becomes indispensable whenever we wish to make an assertion embracing the whole kind or class. It would be not merely inconvenient, but impossible, to enumerate by their proper names all the individuals of the class, in order to make an assertion embracing them together. Such an assertion as, "Man is mortal,” or, "Men are mortal," could never be made, were we obliged to express the proper names of all the parties included under the assertion. So that, even if we had a proper name for every object, we could not dispense with the use of common names.

[(7) This division of nouns into proper nouns and common nouns has reference chiefly, if not exclusively, to concrete nouns, or names of substances, including collective nouns. (8) All proper nouns are names of substances, and the name common nouns applies chiefly and most appropriately to signs of classes of substances. (9) The collectives are chiefly common nouns, names common to kinds of collections of individuals, as party, assembly, &c., each of these representing a class of those collections, or unions into which individuals are sometimes formed. (10) Sometimes collectives are employed as proper names; as, when we use the word Parliament, to mean the Parliament of Great Britain; or Congress,

grammarians? [(7) To what kinds of nouns does this division into proper and common extend? (8) To which of the classes of nouns already enumerated do proper nouns exclusively belong? and to what nouns does the name common most appropriately apply? (9) What class are chiefly common nouns? (10) Are any of the collectives to be considered as proper nouns? (11) Give examples of prural proper nouns.

to indicate the Legislature of the United States; Parliament met for business- Congress adjourned. (11) Such expressions as the Romans, the Stuarts, the Bourbons, the Cæsars, &c., may be considered as a kind of collective or plural proper nouns.

(12) The grammarians generally designate all nouns which are not proper nouns (that is, names appropriated to individual persons or things, or determinate collections of persons or things), as common nouns. (13) It would perhaps be better to restrict this classification to the names of substances. (14) Many, indeed, of the abstract nouns may, in some sense, and as sometimes employed, be considered, like common nouns, the names of classes. (15) For example, whiteness may, in some sort, be considered as the, name of a class of attributes, for there is one whiteness of snow, another whiteness of milk, another whiteness of paper, &c. Virtue, too, Virtue, too, is the name of a numerous class of moral qualities, and vice in like manner. (16) Yet even these words are not, in their general usage in language, contemplated as names of classes of qualities or attributes, but as names of single attributes, or qualities, found, indeed, in various and large classes of objects, and in various degrees of intensity, but, in the mind's conception of them, possessed of a sort of individuality. When intended to be employed as names of classes, some variation of expression is generally necessary to announce this fact. (17) Some of these nouns are expressive of qualities which admit of no variation, as mortality, perpetuity, equality, &c. The conceptions of which these are the signs have all the individuality of those represented by proper nouns. (18) Upon the whole, as the manner in which all abstract and verbal nouns and the pronouns are employed in language, is more like that in which proper nouns are used, than that in which common nouns are used, we think it best not to class them with common nouns, but to restrict the division of nouns into proper and common to names of substances.]

(12) How do gramınarians generally designate all nouns that are not proper nouns? (13) What restriction of this classification is suggested? (14) May abstract nouns ever be considered as common nouns? (15) Illustrate this point. (16) Are abstract nouns in their general usage contemplated as names of classes of attributes? (17) What is said of the qualities or attributes expressed by some abstract nouns? (18) To what kind of nouns does it seem best to restrict the division into proper and common?]

(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 foruier 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 Eaid 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; 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 ani. mal, &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?