THE

PRE FA

E FAC E.

THE

IE English Language hath been much cultivated during the last two hundred years. It hath been confiderably polished and refined; its bounds have been greatly enlarged; its energy, variety, richness, and elegance, have been abundantly proved, by numberless trials, in verfe and in profe, upon all subjects, and in every kind of Ayle: but, whatever other improvements it may have received, it hath made no advances in Grammatical Accuracy. Hooker is one of the earlieft writers, of confiderable note, within the period abovementioned: let his writings be compared with the beft of thofe of modern date; and, I believe, it will be found, that, in correctness, propriety, and purity of English ftyle, he hath hardly been furpaffed, or even equaled, by any of his fucceffors..

It is now about fifty years, fince Doctor Swift made a public remonftrance, addreffed to the Earl of Oxford, then Lord Treasurer, concerning the imperfect

A.2

State

State of our Language; alleging in particular, "that "in many inftances it offended against every part of "Grammar." Swift must be allowed to have been a good judge of this matter; to which he was himself very attentive, both in his own writings, and in his remarks upon those of his friends: he is one of the most correct, and perhaps the best, of our prose writers. Indeed the juftness of this complaint, as far as I can find, bath never been questioned; and yet no effectual method hath hitherto been taken to redress the grievance, which was the object of it.

But let us confider, how, and in what extent, we are to understand this charge brought against the English Language: for the Author seems not to have explained himself with fufficient clearness and precifion on this head. Does it mean, that the English Language, as it is fpoken by the politeft part of the nation, and as it ftands in the writings of our most approved authors, often offends against every part of Grammar? Thus far, I am afraid, the charge is true. Or does it further imply, that our Language is in its nature irregular and capricious; not hitherto fubject, nor eafily reducible, to a Syftem of rules? In this refpect, I am perfuaded, the charge is wholly without foundation. The English Language is perhaps of all the prefent European Languages by much the most fimple in its

form

form and conftruction. Of all the antient Languages extant That is the maft fimple, which is undoubtedly the most antient; but even that Language itself does not equal the English in fimplicity.

The words of the English Language are perhaps fubject to fewer variations from their original form, than thofe of any other. Its Subfiantives have but one variation of Cafe; nor have they any distinction of Gender, befide that which nature hath made. Its Adjec tives admit of no change at all, except that which expreffes the degrees of comparison. All the possible variations of the original form of the Verb are not above fix or feven; whereas in many Languages they amount to fome hundreds and almost the whole business of Modes, Times, and Voices, is managed with great eafe by the affiftance of eight or nine commodious little Verbs, called from their ufe Auxiliaries. The Conftruction of this Language is fo eafy and obvious, that our Grammarians have thought it hardly worth while to give us any thing like a regular and fyftematical Syntax. The English Grammar, which hath been laft prefented to the public, and by the Perfon best qualified to have given us a perfect one, comprises the whole Syntax in ten lines: for this reafon; " because our Language has "fo little inflexion, that its conftruction neither "requires nor admits many rules." In truth, the eafter any fubject is in its own nature, the harder

A 3

is it to make it more eafy by explanation; and nothing is more unnecessary, and at the fame time commonly more difficult, than to give a demonstration in form of a propofition almoft felf-evident.

It doth not then proceed from any peculiar irregularity or difficulty of our Language, that the general prac tice both of Speaking and writing it is chargeable with inaccuracy. It is not the Language, but the practice, that is in fault. The truth is, Grammar is very much neglected among us: and it is not the difficulty of the Language, but on the contrary the fimplicity and facility of it, that occafions this neglect. Were the Language lefs eafy and fimple, we should find ourselves under a neceffity of Studying it with more care and attention. But as it is, we take it for granted, that we have a competent knowledge and skill, and are able to acquit ourfelves properly, in our own native tongue: a faculty, folely acquired by ufe, conducted by habit, and tried by the ear, carries us on without reflexion; we meet with no rubs or difficulties in our way, or we do not perceive them; we find ourselves able to go on without rules, and we do not so much as fufpect, that we ftand in need of them.

A Grammatical Study of our own Language makes no part of the ordinary method of inflruction, which we pafs through in our childhood; and it is very feldom that we apply ourselves to it afterwards. Yet the want

of

of it will not be effectually supplied by any other advantages whatsoever. Much practice in the polite world, and a general acquaintance with the best authors, are good helps; but alone will hardly be fufficient: we have writers, who have enjoyed these advantages in their full extent, and yet cannot be recommended as models of an accurate ftyle. Much less then will what is commonly called Learning ferve the purpofe; that is, a critical knowledge of antient Languages, and much reading of antient authors; the greatest Critic and moft able Grammarian of the last age, when he came to apply his Learning and his Criticifm to an English Author, was frequently at a loss in matters of ordinary use and common conftruction in his own Vernacular Idiom.

But perhaps the Notes fubjoined to the following pages will furnifh a more convincing argument, than any thing that can be faid here, both of the truth of the charge of Inaccuracy brought against our Language, as it fubfifts in Practice; and of the necessity of inveftigating the Principles of it, and studying it Grammatically, if we would attain to a due degree of skill in it. It is with reafon expected of every perfon of a liberal education, and it is indifpenfably required of every one who undertakes to inform or entertain the public, that be fhould be able to express himself with propriety and