be distinguished by the principle of intensity, others again may be to each other as positive and negative, and so forth. By thus applying some general principle of difference to words, the precise limits to the meaning of each will not be so difficult to ascertain, and the habit of testing their signification in this manner will soon produce a marked effect on the style of those who practise the rule.

There is one science intimately connected with the subject of synonymy, upon which it will be naturally expected that some remarks should here be made. I mean Etymology. A knowledge of the derivation of words is unquestionably of great service in enabling us to determine their meaning, and it may be confidently asserted, that they who are wholly ignorant of those languages from which English is derived can never have that clear conception of the primary signification of words which every good etymologist must possess. On the other hand, it should not be forgotten, that as words are continually undergoing some alteration in meaning, and in course of time, acquiring an incrustation, as it were, of signification, we should not place too firm a reliance on a knowledge of their original meaning, in endeavoring to fix the exact limits of their modern acceptation. A love for antiquity and classical associations, however natural and admirable in itself, may, like all other strong passions, prove in some respects pernicious; and it is much to be feared, that undue admiration for the beauty of ancient languages has, in many instances, caused us to underrate the qualities of our mother tongue. But we should remember, that in order to gain any sound knowledge of a subject, it is necessary not only to make ourselves acquainted with its origin, but also to be able to trace it through all the phases of its existence, a rule particularly applicable to language, the materials of which are so fluctuating and changeable. Now, the principles before explained do not belong to any one language in particular, but are applicable to every language on the globe, both ancient and modern; they are universal-they are founded in the very nature of thingsthey existed before any language was spoken, and we may presume that they will last as long as the world continues to

exist. I would not have it supposed, that in making these remarks, I entertain any disrespect for the languages or literature of antiquity; so far from this being the case, I yield to none in my respect and veneration for the ancients; and I am impressed with a firm conviction, that antiquity is the source from which all the poets and philosophers of modern times have most copiously drawn. I would merely caution the young student against allowing his prejudices in favour of the ancients to interfere with the application of universal principles. Indeed, there can be little doubt that the ancients were as well acquainted with these principles as ourselves, for every day brings to light some new proof of how much further advanced they were even in practical science than we are inclined to give them credit for; and we are not justified in inferring, because they have left us no distinct works upon this subject, that they were not aware of these principles, and did not apply them in the same way as the moderns.

It is not a little surprising that the English, who in some questions have displayed such admirable patience of research and sagacity of investigation, should have produced so few works on the subject of synonymy. During the last century, France reckoned a considerable number of writers on this subject; among others, Girard, Voltaire, D'Alembert, Duclos, Dumarsais, Diderot, Beauzée, Roubaud, Lavaux, &c. The German writers on synonymy are Eberhard and Maass. The Italians and Spanish have also directed some attention to this subject: among the former may be mentioned, Grassi, Romani, and Tommaseo; and among the latter, Huerta and March. The only works on synonymy deserving of notice which we possess in English are, those of Dr. Trusler, Mr. W. Taylor, of Norwich, and Mr. Crabb. These are all books of reference, and not one of them adapted to the wants of younger students, or in any way suited to the purposes of practical education. Dr. Trusler's book, published at London in 1766, was a partial abstract of the Abbé Girard's "Synonymes Français." Most of the articles are little more than translations from this work, and these are interspersed with some original definitions of some contiguous terms peculiar to

ourselves But many of his explanations are very vague; several of the terms which he defines are altered in meaning since his time, and others are growing, or have already become, obsolete. These objections are of themselves sufficient to render his work rather a matter of literary curiosity than a source of instruction. Mr. Taylor's work, which appeared in 1813, displays much learning. He has taken etymology as the basis of his definitions, but in so doing, he appears to have frequently lost sight of the modern acceptation of words, and consequently he has sometimes attempted to force ont words a meaning which they do not really possess. Hence many of his definitions and discriminations are purely arbitrary. For these reasons, his work was not so useful as he undoubtedly had the power of making it, and we believe that it never reached a second edition. But the largest work that we possess on the subject of synonymy is that of Mr. Crabb, who, in 1810, published his “English Synonymes arranged in alphabetical order." This is a work of much higher pretensions, and, as a book of reference, is unquestionably of great utility. There is, however, one point connected with its execution which appears to interfere in some measure with its utility. One part of the plan of his work, is to compare four or five, and sometimes as many as six words of the same class of meaning, and explain their differences in one article. In doing this, all the words are so mixed up together, and their explanations so perplexed, that the student, who it may be presumed is searching for the exact meaning of a single word, often finds it utterly impossible to disentangle the one term from the many with which it is mixed up, and thus, in many cases, obtains no satisfactory information. It should be remarked, however, that this practice is not peculiar to Mr. Crabb, but is common to both the others, as well as to all the foreign writers on the subject.*

* Besides the works above mentioned, there was published at Brunswick, in 1841, a work entitled "Synonymisches Handwörterbuch der Englischen Sprache für die Deutschen." The author of this work is Dr. Melford, professor of modern languages in the University of Göttingen. This book, which is merely a translation of some of the principal articles in Crabb, with additional examples, contributes nothing whatever towards an improved knowledge of synonymy.

In the present work, the author has purposely avoided comparing more than two terms in one explanation. This plan, with one or two exceptions, has been uniformly followed throughout the book. It has been adopted for two reasons: 1st, because, in writing, it is almost always between two words that any difficulty of choice exists; and, 2dly, because the writer has been thus better enabled to give the inquirer a distinct conception of their real difference and respective limits, which could not have been so easily done, had he followed the practice of the beforementioned writers. Besides, as the object of this book is not so much to explain, us to lay down principles of explanation, this arrangement was unnecessary. The manner in which the book is intended to be used is as follows:-The explanations under each pair of words having been carefully and attentively read by the pupil, he should be questioned upon them by the teacher, and should be required to determine under which class they may be ranged; then, the exercises under each pair should be written out, the pupil introducing the word in the blank space; and lastly, other sentences of his own composition should be written, in which each of the words is to be employed in its proper signification. This practice will not only insure an accurate knowledge of the difference between the terms, but also, a proper application of the terms themselves; and it will impress that difference, as well as the principle upon which it depends, so strongly on the learner's mind, that he will not be soon likely to forget them.

It would be superfluous to enlarge on the usefulness of such exercises as those here presented to the learner, were it not that this is the first occasion, as far as the author is aware that a practical work on English synonymes has been offered to the public. An admission that something of the sort is a desideratum, does not, however, amount to a conviction that it is necessary, on the same principle that it is much easier to allow that we are in the wrong, than to set about doing right. It may be therefore proper to make some remarks on the effect which a systematic study of synonymy is likely to have, not only on the language and style of the student, but also as

regards the general improvement of his mind and his habits of thinking.

Coleridge, in whose writings we may perhaps gather a greater number of valuable hints on education than from any other modern author, says, in the Preface to his "Aids to Reflection," that a leading object of this work was "to direct the reader's attention to the value of the science of words, their use and abuse, and the incalculable advantage of using them appropriately, and with a distinct knowledge of their primary, derivative, and metaphorical senses; and in furtherance of this object, I have neglected no occasion of enforcing the maxim, that to expose a sophism, and to detect the equivocal or double meaning of a word, is, in the great majority of cases, one and the same thing." And, further, addressing the reader, he says: "Reflect on your own thoughts, actions, circumstances, and—which will be of especial aid to you in forming a habit of reflection—accustom yourself to reflect on the words you use, hear, or read; their birth, derivation, history, &c. For if words are not things, they are living powers by which the things of most importance to mankind are actuated, combined, and humanized."

When we reflect on the circumstances in which all children are of necessity placed, and the bad example they continually have before them, in respect of language, from servants and others, it is not surprising that they begin at an early age to use words loosely and incorrectly. Though, in this particular, some have much greater advantages than others, all are to some degree affected by this example, and parents cannot well begin too soon to take measures to counteract its effects. If all the English we hear spoken around us during our infancy and childhood were correct, there would be, of course, no-necessity for this injunction; but the contrary is so notoriously the fact, that there are very few in whom this pernicious example does not produce an inveterate habit, and whom it does not affect, in some degree, through the whole course of their lives. There is one principle in education which should never be lost sight of, and which, notwithstanding its importance, does not appear sufficiently obvious to the minds, even of those