and propriety in works of imagination, they are frequently found most useful to the authors of philofophical treatises: and have often helped them out at many a dead lift, by giving them an appearance of faying fomething, when indeed they had nothing to say: For Similies are in truth the bladders upon which they float; and the Grammarian finks at once if he attempts to fwim without them. As a proof of which, let us only examine the present instance; and, difmiffing the Zoophytes, fee what intelligence we can draw from Mr. Harris concerning the nature of Conjunctions. First he defines a Word to be a "found fignificant *.” Then he defines Conjunctions to be words (i. e. founds fignificant)" devoid of fignification."-Afterwards he allows that they have" a kind of fignification.” But this kind of fignification is—“ obscure,” (i. e. a fignification unknown): fomething I fuppofe (as Chillingworth couples them) like a fecret Tradition, or a filent Thunder: for it amounts to the fame thing as a fignification which does not fignify: an obfcure or unknown fignification And (page 329) he defines a word to be "a voice articulate, figni"ficant by compat." being no fignification at all. But, not contented with thefe inconfiftencies, which to a lefs learned man would feem fufficient of all confcience, Mr. Harris goes farther, and adds, that they are a-" kind of middle beings"-(he must mean between fignification and no fignification)"Sharing the Attributes of both"—(i. e. of signification and no fignification) and-" conduce to link them both" (i. e. fignification and no fignification) "together." It would have helped us a little, if Mr. Harris had here told us what that middle flate is, between fignification and no fignification *! What are the attributes of no fignification! And how fignification and no fignification can be linked together! If common reafon alone was not fufficient to keep Mr. Harris and Lord Monboddo from this middle ftate between the ro ov and the ro un ov, and between fignification and no fignification; they should at least have liftened to what they are better acquainted with, Authority. « Όσα δε των εναντίων τοιαύτα εςιν, ώςε εν οις πέφυκε γίνεσθαι, η ων κατηγορείται, αναγκαίον αυτών θατερον υπαρχειν τούτων εδεν εσιν ανα μεσον.” Ariftot. Categ. "Inter affirmationem & negationem nullum medium exiftit." J. C. SCALIGER, Lib. 5. C. cxiv. Now Now all this may, for aught I know, be " read and "admired as long as there is any taste for fine writing in "Britain." But with fuch unlearned and vulgar philofophers "The truly philofophical language of my worthy and learned friend "Mr. Harris, the author of Hermes, a work that will be read and admired as long as there is any taste for philofophy and fine writing in Britain.” Orig. and Prog. of Language, Vol. i. p. 8. "But I can hardly have the fame indulgence for the philofopher, efpecially "one who pretended, like Mr. Locke, to be fo attentive an obferver of "what paffed in his own mind, and has written a whole book upon the fubject.-If Mr. Locke would have taken the trouble to study what had "been discovered in this matter by the antients, and had not refolved to "have the merit of inventing himself a whole fyftem of philofophy, he "would have known that every material object is compofed of matter and form." Orig. and Prog. of Lang.. Vol. i. p. 38. "Mr. Locke wrote at a time when the old philosophy, I mean the "fcholaftic philosophy, was generally run down and despised, but no other "come in its place. In that fituation, being naturally an acute man, and not a bad writer, it was no wonder that his Effay met with great applause, "and was thought to contain wonderful discoveries. And I must allow "that I think it was difficult for any man, without the affiftance of books, "or of the converfation of men more learned than himself, to go further in the philofophy of mind than he has done. But now that Mr. Harris has opened to us the treasures of Greek philofophy, to confider Mr. "Locke still as a standard book of philofophy, would be, to use an ancient comparison, continuing to feed on acorns after corn was difcovered." Page 53. fophers as Mr. Locke and his difciples, who feek not Tafe and elegance, but truth and common sense in philofophical fubjects, I believe it will never pass as a "perfect Example "of Analyfis;" nor bear away the palm for "acuteness of "investigation and perfpicuity of explication." For, feparated from the Fine Writing, (which however I can no where find in the book) thus is the Conjunction explained by Mr. Harris. A found fignificant devoid of fignification, Having at the fame time a kind of obscure signification; And yet having neither fignification nor no fignification; But a middle fomething between fignification and no fignification, Sharing the attributes both of fignification and no fignification; And linking fignification and no fignification together. "It was the misfortune of us in the western parts of Europe, that after "we had learned Greek, and got fome tafte of the Greek philofophy, we immediately set up as mafters ourselves, and would needs be inventors in philofophy, instead of humble fcholars of the ancient mafters. In this way Defcartes philofophized in France, Mr. Hobbes and Mr. Locke in "England, and many fince their time of lefs note. I would fain hope, if the indolence and diffipation that prevail fo generally in this age would "allow me to think fo well of it, that Mr. Harris would put a stop to this method of philofophifing without the affiftance of the ancients, and re"vive the genuine Greek philofophy among us." Id. Id. p. 54 If If others, of a more elegant Taste for Fine Writing, are able to receive either pleasure or instruction from such truly philofophical language *, I fhall neither dispute with them nor envy them: But can only deplore the dullness of my own apprehenfion, who, notwithstanding the great authors quoted in Mr. Harris's treatife, and the great authors who recommend it, cannot help confidering this "perfect "example of analyfis," as-An improved compilation of almost all the errors which Grammarians have been accumulating from the time of Ariftotle down to our present days, of technical and learned affectation t. *Clarus ob obfcuram linguam magis inter inanes Quamde graveis inter Grajos, qui vera requirunt. LUCRETIUS, Lib. 1. 640. + I must however do Mr. Harris and Dr. Lowth the juftice to acknowledge, that the Hermes of the former has been received with univerfal approbation both at home and abroad; and has been quoted as undeniable authority on the fubject by the learned of all countries. For which however I can easily account; not by fuppofing that its doctrine gave any more fatisfaction to their minds who quoted it than to mine; but because, as Judges fhelter their knavery by precedents, fo do fcholars their ignorance by authority: and when they cannot reafon, it is fafer and lefs difgraceful to repeat that nonfenfe at fecond hand, which they would be ashamed to give originally as their own, : |