any language which may not, by a skillful herald, be traced home to its own family and origin." AND, a principal copulative, has the force of add. I rode AND Peter walked I rode ADD Peter walked. Its origin is not well known. EKE is another copulative, Anglo-Saxon eac, also, and eacan, to add to. It seems to be related to the Latin ac. In Danish the conjunction is og, and the verb ager. In Swedish the conjunction is och, and the verb oka. In Dutch the conjunction is ook, and the verb auchan. In Maso-Gothic the conjunction is auk, and the verb aukan. In English the conjunction is eke, from Anglo-Saxon eacan. But, on the other hand, the Latin ac differs from augeo; and the Greek av wants the characteristic of avşɛiv; and the Icelandic og differs from the verb auka. ALSO, Anglo-Saxon eal, all, and swa, so, is a copulative with a still more specific meaning, inasmuch as it implies something of similitude with what went before. Ir, a suppositive or conditional conjunction, is in signification equivalent to grant, being an imperative form from the Anglo-Saxon gifan, to give. It was anciently sometimes spelled gif and yif. AN is also a conditional conjunction, from annan, to grant: “An you had any eye behind you, you might see more detraction at your heels than fortune before you."-SHAKSPEARE. noun. As, a causal conjunction (compare German als), is a contraction of also. This will account for its being sometimes used as a proSo is a relative to the antecedent as, or as is an antecedent to the relative that, which is also a pronoun, used as a conjunction. BECAUSE, a causal conjunction, was originally a combination of words, by and cause. Some of the older writers say by cause that. SINCE, also a causal, is from Anglo-Saxon sith or sithen=since. THEREFORE, a collective or illative conjunction, is a compound word, pronominal in one of its elements, and equivalent to the Latin Quam ob rem. It has two applications: first, when we state effect as a matter of fact; and, secondly, when we state it as a matter of reasoning; as, 1. "He is guilty, therefore he blushes;" 2. "He blushes, therefore he is guilty." In the first we state a fact, in the second a conclusion. It is a circumstance which often occasions error and perplexity, that both these classes of conjunctions (the causal and the illative) denote not only cause and effect, but premiss and conclusion; e.g., If I say this ground is rich because the trees on it are flourishing, or, the trees are flourishing, and therefore the soil must be rich, I employ these conjunctions to denote premiss and conclusion; for it is plain that the luxuriance of the trees is not the cause of the soil's fertility, but only the cause of my knowing it. If, again, I say the trees flourish because the ground is rich, or, the ground is rich, and therefore the trees flourish, I am using the very same conjunctions to denote the connection of cause and effect; for, in this case, the luxuriance of the trees being evident to the eye would hardly need to be proved, but might need to be accounted for. WHEREFORE is analogous to therefore in origin and force. THEN, an illative conjunction, is of pronominal origin. See § 308. It is also used as an adverb. EITHER, NEITHER, OR, NOR, are simple disjunctives. They might be called alternatives, either and or being taken affirmatively, and neither and nor negatively. Either is in origin a pronoun. See § 314. Or is a contraction of other, which is also a pronoun. Neither and nor are simply either or or with a negative particle prefixed. Or is frequently followed by else, as nor is by yet. ELSE, a simple conjunction, related to Anglo-Saxon elles, and the Latin alius. THAN, pronominal in its origin, is reckoned by HARRIS among adversatives of comparison. UNLESS, from Anglo-Saxon onlesan, to loose, called by HARRIS an adversative adequate, with reference to the prevention of an event, is called by CROMBIE an exceptive. EXCEPT appears to have the force of unless in sentences like the following: "This realme is like to lacke bothe stuffe of artillery and of artificers of the same, except a provision of due remedy in this behalf be the more spedily founde." THOUGH has already been mentioned as, according to the scheme of HARRIS, an inadequate adversative: it is sometimes called a concessive. It is the Anglo-Saxon peah. It is an antecedent to the relative conjunctions YET and STILL; e.g.: "Though Birnam Wood be come to Dunsinane, "Though I do condemn report myself SENTENCES ARE CON THE TWO WAYS IN WHICH NECTED. § 380. Conjunctions show the relation of sentences one to another. Two sentences are connected either by way of subordination or by way of co-ordination. They are connected in the way of subordination when one of them can be considered as standing in the place of a substantive, adjective, or adverb; as, "He reported that the king died" (=death of the king); "the foreigner who travels" (=traveling foreigner); "he was at work before the sun rose" (=early). Conjunctions, when used to connect subordinate sentences, may be called subordinative conjunctions. as, Two sentences are, on the other hand, connected in the way of co-ordination when they are not thus dependent one upon another; “He is ill, and he has called a physician;" "he goes to France, but he can not speak French." Conjunctions which express a connection of this description may be called co-ordinative conjunctions. See § 537. QUESTIONS UNDER CHAPTER IX. 1. Give the two definitions of a conjunction, and the derivation of the term. 2. What is the distinguishing characteristic of conjunctions? 3. Give HARRIS's classification of conjunctions, with examples of the several kinds. 4. Give the common classification, with instances of copulative, disjunctive, and correlative conjunctions. 5. State HORNE TOOKE's opinion of the office of conjunctions, with examples and illustrations. 6. Give MURRAY's definition of conjunctions. 7. Give Sir JOHN STODDART's opinion of the office of conjunctions, with examples and illustrations. 8. What is said of the origin of conjunctions? 9. In what two ways are sentences connected? 10. Give examples of a sentence connected in the way of subordination, and of a sentence connected in the way of co-ordination. CHAPTER X. INTERJECTIONS. § 381. AN INTERJECTION is a word which can neither form the part of a proposition, nor connect two different propositions, but is thrown in to express some sudden thought or emotion of the mind; as, oh! pshaw! alas! The word Interjection is from the Latin word interjectio, a throwing in, and is not in grammatical construction with a sentence. 1. Of the interjections, some are Primitive or original, others are Derived from other parts of speech. The primitive interjections are a sort of universal language, yet not without some variety in different tongues. The derived interjections vary, of course, in different languages. 2. Primitive interjections, with which we are principally concerned, are all formed by onomatopeia. a. Some of them result from the position into which the vocal and articulating organs have a tendency to be thrown by the muscular action of the face and other parts in those movements which constitute the natural gestures or signs of emotions. This tendency is more or less indefinite. Hence, in the first place, the resulting word for the same emotion may be different in different languages, according to the habits of articulation which accompany the several languages; and, in the second place, the same interjection, like words in Chinese, may subserve different purposes, according to the intonation. Thus pain, accompanied with languor or grief, relaxes all the muscles, and the mouth being consequently open, with the other organs in their usual state, the sound ah is produced with a monotonous and feeble intonation, and degenerating into a mere groan. Sharp and sudden pain, on the contrary, throws the muscles into a state of tension round the lips, and produces oh, with the breath drawn in, and the semitonic intonation described by Dr. Rusн. Surprise raises the brows and opens the mouth suddenly; hence Ah, with an abrupt and upward tone, expresses that emotion. Wonder or astonishment rounds the lips; hence results the interjection Oh! with a downward intonation. Contempt is accompanied with a protrusion of the lips; hence it is expressed by pish, pshaw. b. Other primitive interjections result from the imitation of objective or outward sounds. For instance, shoo, shoo, which is used in driving away poultry, was probably suggested by the rustling of their wings when they ran away suddenly; sheep and lambs are called by the cry of knan, knan, in imitation of the sound which they make in running to be fed; dogs are called to persons by sucking the breath through the lips, in imitation of the cry of puppies. To the onomatopeia may also be referred such interjections as hush, 'st, whist, used to enjoin stillness and silence, as they all consist merely in atonic or whispering sounds. 3. Derived interjections are either (1.) terms descriptive of the emotion, with appropriate intonations; as, Horrid! shocking! joy! (2.) names, common and proper, used in addressisg animals; (3.) verbs in the imperative mode; as, Hark! see! behold! help! halt! or nouns used as imperatives, by means of the intonation; as, Silence! peace! courage! or adverbs, used in like manner for the imperative; as, Softly! away! or (4.) abbreviated forms, used particularly by the vulgar; as, Gramercy (French grand merci, great thanks); I marry (for ay Mary); 's death (for by his death). 4. Interjections have not, in our common grammars, assumed the importance nor obtained the scientific treatment which they deserve. For if we regard language as originating in and related to our intellectual faculties only, then interjections lose their claim to be considered parts of speech. But if we consider language in its broadest sense, as arising from our whole spiritual nature, interjections have a just claim to be considered an integral part of language. The fact that interjections express the multiplied emotions of the human mind, and lend their aid where all other language fails in this respect; that they are the only medium of intercourse between man and the brute creation, or of animals with each other; and that they are a natural universal language, is sufficient to exhibit their importance in a philosophic view. There can be no doubt that interjections, rightly used, contribute much to render language an exact picture of the human mind. 5. Some interjections are the same in languages very remote from each other, as the following examples will show: Greek &, Latin O, Gothic o, English O, Syriac o, to call attention. Greek pɛv, Latin phy, English fie, French fi, Arabic uffu, to express aversion. Greek ovai, Latin vai, Gothic var, English woe, Hebrew oi, |