as the most consonant to nature, in consequence of which notion we brand every departure from it as a transgression of the natural order. This way of thinking ariseth from some very specious causes, but is far from being just. "Custom," it hath been said, " becomes a second nature." Nay, we often find it strong enough to suppress the first. Accordingly, what is in this respect accounted natural in one language, is unnatural in another. In Latin, for example, the negative particle is commonly put before the verb, in English it is put after it; in French one negative is put before, and another after. If in any of these languages you follow the practice of any other, the order of the words will appear unnatural. We in Britain think it most suitable to nature to place the adjective before the substantive; the French and most other Europeans think the contrary. We range the ob lique cases of the personal pronouns, as we do the nouns whose place they occupy, after the verb; they range them invariably before, notwithstanding that when the regimen is a substantive, they make it come after the verb, as we do. They and we have both the same reason, custom, which is different in different countries.

But it may be said, that more than this can be urged in support of the ordinary arrangement of a simple sentence above explained. The nominative, to talk in the logicians' style, is the subject; the adjective, or participle, is the predicate; and the substantive verb, the copula. Now, is it not most natural, that the subject be mentioned before the thing predicated of it? and what place so proper for the copula which unites them, as the middle? This is plausible, and, were the mind a pure intellect, without fancy, taste, or passion, perhaps it would be just. But as the case is different with human nature, I suspect there will be found little uniformity in this particular in different tongues, unless where, in respect either of matter or of form, they have been in a great measure derived from some common source.

The Hebrew is a very simple language, and hath not that variety either of moods or of conjunctions that is requisite for forming a complicated style. Here, there

fore, if any where, one would expect to find an arrangement purely natural. Yet in this language, the most usual, and what would with them therefore be termed the grammatical disposition of the words, is not the disposition above mentioned. In the historic style, or when past events are related, they commonly place the verb first, then the nominative, afterwards the regimen, predicate, or attendant circumstances*. The freedom which

Thus the very first words of Genesis, a book even among the books of Scripture remarkable for simplicity of style, are an evidence of this in the active verb:

The order is preserved exactly in the השמים ואת האדע בראשות בכא אלהים את

ווהו ערב ווהו בקך יום אחד

ne.

Vulgat: "In principio creavit Deus coelum et terram." That the same order is observed in disposing the substantive verb, appears from the fifth verse, The arrangement here is perfectly exhibited in the Latin version of Junius and Tremellius, which is generally very literal: "Sic fuit "vespera et fuit mane diei primi." Yet in English we should be apt to call the order in both passages, especially the last, rather unnatural." In the beginning "created God the heavens and the earth." "And was evening and was morn"ing day first." The same thing might be illustrated in the passive verbs, in the neuter, and in the reciprocal, if necessary. Nothing therefore can be more evident, than that it is custom only which makes us Britons prefer one order of words, and others another, as the natural order. I am surprised that a critic of so much taste and discernment as Bouhours (see his Entretiens d'Ariste et d'Euge 2. la langue Francoise) should represent this as one of the excellencies of the French tongue, that it follows the natural order of the words. It is manifest, from what has been said, that its common arrangement has no more title to be denominated natural, than that of any other language. Nay, we may raise an argument for confuting this silly pretence, from the very laws that obtain in this language. Thus, if the natural order require that the regimen should follow the active verb, their way of arranging the oblique cases of the pronouns is unnatural, as they always place them before the verb; if, on the contrary, the natural order require that the regimen should precede the governing verb, their way of arranging nouns governed by verbs is unnatural, since they always place them after the verb; so that, whichever be the natural way, they depart from it in the disposition of one or other of these parts of speech. The like may be urged in regard to the nominative, which, though for the most part, it go before the active verb, in certain cases follows it. This happens frequently when the verb is preceded by the oblique case of the relative, as in this sentence: "Le retardement, que "souffre le lecteur, le rend plus attentif." And even in placing their adjectives, wherever use hath made exceptions from the general rule, it has carried the notion of what is natural along with it. They would call it as unnatural to say homme jeune as to say gardien ange. All therefore that can be affirmed with truth is, that the French adhere more inviolably than other nations to the ordinary arrangement established in the language. But this, as I hope to evince in the sequel, is one of the greatest imperfections of that tongue. The ease with which the Italian admits either order in the personal pronouns, especially in poetry, adds often to the harmony and the elegance, as well as to the vivacity of the expression, as in these lines of Metastasio's Artaserse;

Sallo amor, lo sanno i numi;

Il mio core, il tuo lo sa.

Bouhours, in the dialogue above mentioned, has dropt the character of critic and

Greek and Latin allow on this article, renders it improper to denominate one order grammatical exclusively of others. I imagine, therefore, that perhaps the only principle in which on this subject we can safely rest, as being founded in nature, is, that whatever most strongly fixes the attention, or operates on the passion of the speaker, will first seek utterance by the lips. This is agreeable to a common proverb, which perhaps, to speak in Shakespear's phrase, is something musty, but significant enough," Nearest the heart, nearest the mouth." In #these transpositions, therefore, I maintain, that the order will be found on examination, to be more strictly natural, than when the more general practice in the tongue is followed.

As an irrefragable argument in support of this doctrine, it may be pleaded, that though the most usual, which is properly the artificial order, be different in different languages, the manner of arranging, or (if you like the term better) transposing, above specified, which is always an effect of vivacity in the speaker, and a cause of producing a livelier conception in the hearer, is the same in all languages. It is for this reason amongst others, that I have chosen to take most of my examples on this topic, not from any original performance in English, but from the common translation of the Bible, and shall here observe once for all, that both in the quotations already made, and those hereafter to be made, our translators have exactly followed the order of the original. And indeed, all translators of any taste, unless when cramped by the genius of the tongue in which they wrote, have in such cases done the samet. It may be proper also to

philosopher, for that of encomiast. He talks like a lover about his mistress. He sees neither blemish nor defect. All is beauty and excellence. For my part, if I were to prove the inferiority of French to Italian and Spanish, the two languages with which he compares it, I should not desire other or better topics for evincing the point, than the greater part of those which he has employed, in my judgment very unsuccessfully, for the contrary purpose.

• Hamlet.

+ Gr. Meyaan Agreμis Episiov. Lat. Vulg. Erasm. "Magna Diana Ephesiorum." Castal. Beza," Magna est Diana Ephesiorum." Ital. Diodate, "Grande • e la Diana degli Efesii." "How weak in comparison is the French version of

remark, that there are some modern tongues which in this respect are much more inflexible than ours.

The next example I shall produce is very similar to the former, as in it the substantive verb is preceded by the participle passive, and followed by the nominative. In the acclamations of the people on our Saviour's public entry into Jerusalem, the historian informs us, that they cried out," Blessed is he that cometh in the name of "the Lord*." Instead of this, say, " He that cometh in "the name of the Lord is blessed;" aud by this alteration in the order of the words, apparently trifling, you convert a fervid exclamation into a cold aphorism.

The third example shall be of an active verb, preceded by the accusative, and followed by the nominative. It may be proper to observe by the way, that unless one of these is a pronoun, such an arrangement is scarcely admissible in our language. These cases in our nouus, not being distinguished by inflection, as they are in our pronouns, are solely ascertained by place. But to come to the proposed example, we are informed by the sacred historian, that when Peter and John ordered the cripple who sat begging at the beautiful gate of the temple, to look on them, he looked at them very earnestly, expecting to receive something from them. Then Peter said, "Silver and gold have I none, but such as I have, give "I thee; in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, arise "and walk t." Here the wishful look and expectation

Le Clerc ? "La Diane des Ephesiens est une grande deesse." How deficient that of Beausobre?" La grande Diane des Ephesiens." How ridiculous that of Saci?" Vive la grande Diane des Ephesiens."

Matt. xxi. 9. Gr. Euλoynuevos o sexopesvos y oropari Kugy. Lat. Vulg. Eras Bez. "Benedictus qui venit in nomine Domini." Cast. "Benne sit ei que "venit," &c. Ital. Diod. Benedetto colui che viene nel nome del Signiore." Fr. Le Clerc, Beaus. Saci, "Beni soit celui qui vient au nom du Seigneur." + Acts iii. 6. Gr. Αργυριον και χρυσιον εχ υπαρχει και ο δε εχω, σατο σοι δίδωμι Εν ovoμalı Inov Xgis8 78 Nalwçais ṛysıgai naı rıgızarıı. Lat. Vul. Eras. Bez. “Argen"tum et aurum non est mihi; quod autem habeo, hoc tibi do. In nomine Jesu Christi Nazareni, surge et ambula." Castaglio hath not adhered so closely to the order of the words in the original, but hath in this and some other places, for the sake of latinity, weakened the expression: "Nec argentum mihi nec aurum "est; sed quod habeo, hoc tibi do. In nomine," &c. It would seem that neither the Italian language nor the French can admit so great a latitude in arranging the words; for in these the vivacity resulting from the order is not only

of the beggar, naturally leads to a vivid conception of that which was the object of his thoughts, and this conception as naturally displays itself in the very form of the declaration made by the apostle. But as every thing is best judged by comparison, let us contrast with this the same sentence arranged according to the rigid rules of grammar, which render it almost a literal translation 13 of the Italian and French versions quoted in the margin, I "I have no gold and silver; but I give thee that which "I have: In the name of-" The import is the same, but the expression is rendered quite exanimate. Yet the sentences differ chiefly in arrangement, the other difference in composition is inconsiderable.

There is another happy transposition in the English version of the passage under review, which, though peculiar to our version, deserves our notice, as it contributes not a little to the energy of the whole. I mean not only the separation of the adjective none from its substantives silver and gold, but the placing of it in the end of the clause, which, as it were, rests upon it. "Silver and gold have I none." For here, as in several other instances, the next place to the first, in respect of emphasis, is the last. We shall be more sensible of this by making a very small alteration on the composition and structure of the sentence, and saying, "Silver and gold are not in my possession;" which is manifestly

66

weaker.

My fourth example should be one wherein the verb occupies the first place in the sentence, which often happens in the ancient languages with great advantage in point of vivacity. But this cannot frequently obtain in English, without occasioning an ambiguity; the first place when given to the verb, being, by the rules of our

weakened but destroyed. Diod. "Io non ho ne argento ne oro; ma quel che ho, "io t'el dono: nel nome di Jesu Christo il Nazareo, levati e camina." Le Clerc, Beausobre," Je n'ai ni or ni argent; mais ce que j'ai, je vous le donne: au nom de Jesus Christ de Nazareth, levez-vous et marchez." Saci's is the same, except in the last member, where by transposing the words, “au nom de Jesus Christ de Nazareth," and putting them after "levez-vous,” he hath altered the sense, and made that a circumstance attending the action of the lame man, which was intended to express the authority whereby the apostle gave the order.