gives of it in his Dictionary: and I do not know that any other perfon has ever attempted to explain it. H. How does he account for it? B. He fays," AN is sometimes in old authors a contraction of And if." Of which he gives a very unlucky instance from Shakespeare *; where both AN and IF are used in the fame line. "He cannot flatter, He! "An honeft mind and plain: he must speak Truth: Where, if AN was a contraction of AND IF; AN and IF should rather change places. H. I can no more agree with Dr. S. Johnson than you do. A part of one word only, employed to fhew that another word is compounded with it, would indeed be a curious method of con-traction. Though even this account of it would ferve my purpose. But the truth will ferve it better: * Lear, A&t II. Scene 6. and and therefore I thank you for your difficulty. proof, and a very strong one in my favour. Verb, and may very well supply the place of It is a fresh AN is also a IF; it being nothing else but the Imperative of the Anglo-faxon verb Anan, which likewife means to Give, or to Grant. It seems indeed to be fo. B. But, if fo, how can it ever be made to fignify AS IF? For which also, as well as for And if, Johnson fays AN is a con-traction *. H. It never fignifies As if: nor is ever a contraction of them. B. Johnson however advances Addison's authority for it. "My next pretty correfpondent, like Shakespeare's "Lion in Pyramus and Thisbe, roars AN it were any "nightingale." H. If Addison had fo written, I should answer roundly, that he had written false English. But he never did so write. This arbitrary method of contraction is very useful to an idle or ignorant expofitor. It will fuit any thing. S. Johnfon alfo fays"AN'T, a contraction for And it; or rather And if it; as-An't please you—that is, And if it please you." It is merely-AN it please you. . He only quoted it in mirth and ridicule, as the author wrote it. And Johnson, an Editor of Shakespeare, ought to have known and observed it. And then, instead of Addison's or even Shakespeare's authority, from whom the expreffion is borrowed; he fhould have quoted Bottom's, the Weaver: whofe Language correfponds with the character Shakespeare has given him,— "The fhallow'ft thickfcull of that barren fort, viz. "That work for Bread upon Athenian Stalls *." "I will aggravate my voice fo (fays Bottom) that I will "roar you as gently as any fucking Dove: I will roar you "AN 'twere any nightingale +.” If Johnson is fatisfied with fuch authority as this, for the different fignification and propriety of English words, he will find enough of it amongst the clowns in all our comedies; and Mafter Bottom in particular in this very fentence will furnish him with many new meanings. I believe, Johnson will not find AN used for As if, either seriously or clownifhly, in any other part of Addison or Shakespeare; except in this fpeech of Bottom, and in * Midfummer Night's Dream, A&t III. Scene 2. But, another another of Hostess Quickly-" He made a finer end, and "went away AN it had been any Christom child *.” B. In English then, it feems, these two words which have been called conditional Conjunctions (and whofe force and manner of fignification, as well as of all the others, we are directed by Mr. Locke to search after in "the feveral "views, postures, ftands, turns, limitations, and excep“tions, and feveral other thoughts of the mind, for which "we have either none or very deficient names") are, according to you, merely the original Imperatives of the verbs to Give or to Grant. Now let me understand you. I do not mean to divert you into an etymological explanation of each particular word of other languages, or even of the English, and so to change our converfation from a philofophical inquiry concerning the nature of Language in general, into the particular bufinefs of a polyglot Lexicon. But, as you have faid that your principles will apply univerfally, I defire to know whether you mean that the conditional conjunctions of all other languages are likewise to be found, like IF and * Henry V. A& II. Scene 3. AN, AN, in the original Imperatives of fome of their own or derived verbs, meaning to Give? H. No. If that was my opinion I know you are ready instantly to confute it by the Conditionals of the Greek and Latin and Irish, the French, Italian, Spanish, Portugueze and many other Languages. But I mean, that those words which are called conditional conjunctions, are to be accounted for in ALL languages in the fame manner as I have accounted for IF and AN. Not indeed that they must all mean precisely as these two do,-Give and Grant; but fome word equivalent: Such as,-Be it, Suppofe, Allow, Permit, Put, Suffer, &c. Which meaning is to be fought for from the particular etymology of each refpective language, not from fome un-named and un-known "Turns, Stands, Pof"tures, &c. of the mind." In short, to put this matter out of doubt, I mean to discard all fuppofed mystery, not only about thefe Conditionals, but about all those words alfo which Mr. Harris and others diftinguish from Prepofitions, and call Conjunctions of Sentences. I deny them to be a separate sort of words or Part of Speech by themselves. For they have not a feparate manner of fignification: although they are not devoid of fignification. And the particular fignification of each must be fought for from amongst the |