صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

offended, if they in turn be occafionally and respectfully inspected themfelves, in momentous cafes.

Hanc veniam petimufque damufque viciffim.

The grand and leading cause of erroneous opinion, on this most abftrufe fubject, is, I apprehend, the long" received hypothefis*," that in Hebrew, and its kindred Dialects, Verbs are the roots or themes of all other words; and that these are, in general, triliteral, fuppofed to confift of three confonants, or elementary letters; and, according to this fcheme, have all our Oriental Lexicons been conftructed hitherto.

I fhall therefore bring this hypothefis itself to the rigid text of, 1, Logic, or Univerfal Grammar. 2. Hiftory, facred and profane, recording the actual rife and progrefs of language. s. The Analogy of Languages, difcoverable in the nearer and remoter Dialects of the Eaft and Weft. 4. The conceffions of the ableft advocates of the received fyftem: and, 5. The difcordances and contradictions of Etymologists and Hypercritics.

1. Every logical propofition confifts of a fubject and predicate, correfponding refpectively to the nominative cafe and verb, in a grammatical Jentence. But furely the fubject of difcourfe muft, in the natural order of conception and learning of language, precede its predicate or attribute, as fubftances are the foundation of their qualities or accidents. And hence Nouns, or the names of things, muft neceffarily be prior to Verbs, denoting their active, paffive, and reflex operations. And fuch is the natural and judicious arrangement of Grammarians in every language, who, however they may differ from each other, in affigning the number and order of the parts of Speech, all agree in beginning with Nouns.

,4b אב

,Am אם

Ah אה

בי

2.,The Bible, that most ancient and authentic record of the origin of things, ftates, Gen. 2, 19—20. that when the first Man was created, the Divine Author of speech brought before him all the various tribes of animals, "to see what he would call them : and whatever Adam called any living creature, that became its name" in the primeval language. In this most ancient and venerable Nomenclature, therefore, Nouns were the first words. And daily obfervation confirms, that the moft familiar objects of fenfation, first attract the attention of infants, and that their names are the firit learned; and that these are neceffarily monofyllables, as being the founds that are shortest and fimpleft of utterance, or eafieft of articulation; fuch as are framed by the first organs of speech, the throat and lips, like "Father." "Mother." "Brother." Ben, “Son;" ↑ Jad, "Hand;" Peh, " Mouth, &c. which are not confined to the Hebrew language, but run through most of the kindred oriental dialects, demonftrating their common defcent from fome parent ftock: whereas, the Verbs in all thefe, are moftly triliteral or diffyllables; and confequently, as being more difficult of pronunciation, as well as more abftrufe in their fignifications, denoting ideas of reflection, could not be the roots of nouns, or the names of fenfible objects earlier known, and eafier to be understood and expreffed: See Locke's Efay, B. II. ch. 1. Of the Original of our Ideas; and B. III. ch. 1. § 5. Of Words of Reflection. 3. If we attend to the analogy of languages, that accomplished scholar, and admirable linguift, Sir William Jones, afferts, that "it is the genius of the Sanferit language, that the roots of verbs are almost universally biliteral."-Afiatic Researches, Vol. II. p. 4. But the Sanferit, or facred lan

* See Locke's Effay, Book IV. Chap. 20. On the Causes of Ener.

guage

guage of Hindoftan, is a twin fifter of the primitive Syriac dialect; confequently these roots could not be verbs themselves, (as Sir William J. fuppofes) but rather Nouns; according to the analogy of the Hebrew and Syriac tongue. Sir George Staunton also, in his account of the late Embaffy to China, ftates, that in the Chinese language, the words of every kind, are moftly monofyllables, differing, by nice and delicate inflexions of the voice, in the fame combinations of elementary letters; fo as to be scarcely diftinguishable by European ears, and utterly incapable of being pronounced by European tongues; but the Chinese language, like the Sanfcrit, is of the remoteft antiquity, both having fprung from the fame parent ftock and the fame original ftructure of roots, we may fafely conclude, is common to the nearer dialects of the Eaft, and the remoter of the Weft, their defcendants.

:

66

And that verbs are not indeed the elementary or effential parts of speech, we may collect from their frequent omiffion, in grammatical fentences, in all the ancient languages; especially in poetical compofitions, the earliest of all:-Thus the firft fentence of the book of Pfalms, in the Hebrew, and all the ancient verfions, Bleffed the man, &c." wants the verb fubftantive " is"; and the ufual falutation in China, Hou poo hou"Well, not well?" intimates: [Are you] well [or] not well?" 4. The nouns, 7, “ Hand"; Mouth"; pw, "Sack" or "bag", with many others of the biliteral clafs, are allowed by Kimchi, Buxtorf, Caftell, and all the lexicographers, to be radicals. And the learned Michaelis, in his Supplementa ad Lexica Hebraica, under the head of ↳ Manus, p. 1055, acknowledges : "Primitivum effe videtur, ut et alia membrorum corporis humani vocabula."

[ocr errors]

,אלהים,אלוה And again, under

Deus, p. 87, Difficilis eft de etymologia nominum quorundam primorum et antiquiffimorum difputatio, quod VERBA forte ex NOMINIBUS orta et denominata funt.”—This is a notable conceffion from this celebrated advocate of the received hypothefis, though qualified with a forte, " perhaps"; and before him, Schultens, that great Orientalift, candidly confeffes, in his judicious Inftitutiones Lingue Hebrææ, p. 158. "Docent paffim Grammatici, (fubmonuitque Cl. Alting) NOMINA interdum radicis rationem habere, et VERBO originem dare: ut s Auris, propagavit 8, in Pih. et n in Hiph.-Aures præbuit. Talia bene multa extant."And the teftimony of the accurate Alting, to which he alludes, is most exprefs, in his ufeful Synopfis Inftitutionum Hebræarum, Chaldæarum, et Syrarum, &c. Vol. I. p. 89. edit. 8vo. 1730.

“HEBREI, Verbum primo loco collocant, tum quod radicem fere exhibeat unde partium aliarum vocabula derivantur; tum ob amplitudinem tractations: Sed Nos Verbo primum locum in tractatione negamus, tum quia natura fuá, nomine pofterius eft (quòd fubftantiam fæpe notat, et verbum, accidens) tum imprimis, quia participia, (pars verbi) fequuntur flexionem nominum; quam proinde cognitam effe oportet, aut alieno loco jam per tractanda eft. Tertium porro locum Verbo affignamus, quia ob crebram cllipfin verbi fubftantivi, Sententia integra ex folis Nominibus et Particulis formari poteft, nullo prorfus Verbo interveniente. Vide Pf. 3, 9. et 8. 10. et 18, 31-32."

5. Several of the triliteral verbs, fet down as roots or themes, by lexicographers, according to the received hypothefis, are imaginary: and thefe are diftinguished from the real roots, by being unpointed, in Buxtorf, Caftell, &c.-And their amount is confiderable: fuch as ps, the fup

pofed

pofed root of os, Mother; ans, of ns, Brother; op', of D', Sea; &c. although the biliteral nouns themselves, are as well intitled to the rank of roots, as the foregoing, which are admitted to be fuch.

6. Several of the real verbs, fupposed to be roots, may more naturally be derived from their offspring, thus, nas to regard or refpect, naturally flows from as, Father; 2, to build, from 12, Son; and accordingly, the verb is ufed in the fenfe of begetting children. Deut. 25, 9. So thall it be done unto the man, that will not build up his brother's houfe." The verb s, To fwear, curfe, or devote to deftruction, naturally flows from 8 GOD, who was appealed to in these solemın acts, as fupreme arbiter. And this, even Michaelis himfelf, who adopts the received hypothefis, inconfiftently admits : "Potius hoc ipfum 8 juravit, denominativum putam effe ab : quafi dicas, per Deum aliquid affirmavit." In like manner, the B. C. in queftion, although he derives the divine name., from a triliteral verb, ns', "to be lovely, fair or admirable," following Cocceius and Vitringa, yet admits that "it may be taken as a root by itself." p. 154.

[ocr errors]

II. Having thus fhewn, that the received hypothefis, or Maforetic fcheme of derivation, is untenable in both its branches, from the genius and history of language; and that the elementary terms of all languages, are naturally nouns, or names of the most obvious and ftriking fenfible objects; and neceffarily monofyllables, as being eafieft of pronunciation :we may fafely conclude, from analogy, that the fimpleft of the divine names, ÆL and . IAH. are the most ancient of all; the venerable bx (ÆL) of mibs, (ÆL-ÕH); and its plurals, (ÆLOH-IM) And (IAH), of mm (IAH-OH) formed from their refpective-roots, by additional fyllables, or by compofition; according to the nfual progrefs of language: and, indeed, that they cannot be derivatives, formed either by contraction or elifion, from terms more compounded, I fhall next endeavour to prove, by thewing the infufficiency of all the roots hitherto affigned to them.

parents

-

:

N.B. In adapting the foregoing primitive names of GoD, to English pronunciation, I have departed from the Maforetic punctuation; and alfo from the orthography of the British Critic: 1. Because 8, the first letter of his ÆL and its compounds, is not a vowel but a confonant; the fofteft of the afpirates, Aleph, He, Hheth, (Arabic Hha) and Ain: As in the proper name, Aaron; which is pronounced Haroun, by the Arabs. And 2. I have rejected the Pathah furtivum, of the Maforites, is LOAÌL, which is no vowel point; Schultens, Inftit. p. 72-118. and feems to have crept in," unneceffarily, if not mifchievously, to confound the etymology; and, perhaps, to affimilate it to 3. the Maforetic punctuation of IEHOVAH; which fhould rather be pronounced IAHOH: according to the most ancient Greek pronunciation, IAQ, fortunately prcferved in the fragments of Orpheus, and the Clarian Oracle, and Diodorus Siculus; and approved of, by Origen and Jerom, the most learned of the fathers though long fince loft among the Jews; not daring, out of fuperftition, to pronounce "this glorious and awful name." Deut. 28, 58. as their ancestors evidently did: 1 Kings 18, 39,

"

T :

I. SUP

I. SUPPOSED DERIVATIONS OF, ÆL and ms, ÆLOH.-1. Some Jewish grammarians, Cocceius and the Hutchinfonian fchool, derive both from ns, "to fwear"-which is juftly rejected by Michaelis, (as we have feen) and the B. C. p. 141-152.

2. Michaelis adopts the verb, nhs as the root, in the fenfe of benefacere alicui, or benevolus fuit, from the Arabic noun Ali, fignifying "good": as intimating the goodness or beneficence of the DEITY; which is certainly a more honourable derivation than the former, which reprefents him " as an object of mere terror”—and more confonant to Scripture and the first philofophy: "Why callest thou me good?" faid our bleffed SAVIOUR himfelf" there is none GOOD b ONE, that is GOD"None, in whom goodnefs is an inherent, underived principle of conduct: Matt. 19, 17. And in the facred commentary of the Perfian rites afcribed to Zoroafter, among feveral magnificent titles of THE DEITY, we meet Ayadav Ayadorar "BEST OF THE GOOD."-Newton's Chronology, P. 353. Whence Plato probably derived his deifying principle." τ' Αγαθον, "THE GOOD" fupreme; noticed by the B. C. p. 141-149. And alfo the earliest Latin writers, their—"OPTIMUS MAXIMUS"-his fuperlative goodness taking the lead of his greatness: And from the Greek Ta-, the contraction of Ayad-, might eafily have been derived, the German GOTT, and our Saxon or English term, GOD; and perhaps, all thofe, ultimately, from the Syriac Hhad, the contraction of the Hebrew, Ahhad, fignifying." One"-by an eafy tranfmutation of kindred confonants;-for this ingenious etymological feries, we are indebted to Hallenberg, a Danish critic, cited by the Monthly Review, vol. 34. Append. p. 483. which happily illuftrates the peculiar force and beauty of our Lord's foregoing argument.

Still, however, Michaelis's derivation appears to be inadmiffible, as it is not drawn from the pure fource of the Hebrew language: and efpecially as Michaelis himself, p. 82. admits, that the primitive root, s EL, is wanting, (or obfolete) both in the Arabic and Syriac dialects, although they retain its derivatives, of which Ali, is plainly one : as alfo the verb Alah, in Arabic, to adore or worship. See Cocceius.

3. More exceptionable, is the derivation offered by the B. C. "It appears to come from the roots in its primary sense of "

TT

P. 152.approach

ing or coming close to"-accedere: (whence alfo defcends the præpofition, [El, fignifying Ad, Verfus, Jurta]) according to this etymology, it will more particularly exprefs the omniprefence of GOD, under the notion of a " proximity" or coming close up to every thing." When it takes the fuffix of the first perfon fingular, it expreffes the fuppliant's fenfe of God's conftant proximity to him. In Pfalm 22, 1. [The] MESSIAH prays thus: My EL, My EL-i. e. Thou that art ufually close befide me, wherefore haft thou forfaken me?"

But we may well afk, How is the relative idea of loco-motion, intimated hereby, to be reconciled with God's filling all space, or being abfolutely omniprefent? And how is "conftant proximity" or "perpetual clofenefs to the individual," to be reconciled with the-Comment:-Thou that art ufually clofe befide me?-These are inconfiftencies, which I leave to the B. C. to reconcile. Befides, 2. His interpretation of the verb 8, accedere, is imaginary, (and he grants it is "obfolete" in the Hebrew

language

:

:

language, p. 147.) not to be found in any Hebrew lexicon and 8. was evidently fuggefted by the præpofition, El, ad, juxta; which he rather unfkilfully, deduces from the verb; fince all the lexicons, without exception, agree in representing bs, as a diftinct root itself; as well as the conjunction, 8 Al, fignifying "Ne, Nequaquam:" And furely these are as totally diftinct from each other, and from the noun, bx, (all, differently pointed or pronounced) as the English words, Ball, Bell, Bill, Boll, Bull, confifting of the fame confonants, and differing only in the vowel inferted. But, 4. The B. C. himself has inadvertently approximated more nearly to the leading fignification of the word, in that of its defcendant, ps, p. 150.—“In Exodus, when it is faid of Mofes, that He thould be Elohim to Pharoah, and Aaron his prophet;" the use of the word is evidently figurative; and nothing more is meant, than that Mofes fhould appear to Pharoah as poffeffed of powers more than human: conferring bleffings, and inflicting plagues (both fupernatural) at his own pleasure; and employing Aaron as his inftrument."-4. Approaching nearer to the truth, fome of the ableft lexicographers, Kimchi, Nathan, Buxtorf, Pagninus, Caftell, Calafio, Leigh, Robertfon, Taylor, &c. rank the nouns, under the triliteral noun, 8, AIL, fignifying fortitudo, viris, &c. " might, ftrength," &c. thus tacitly relinquishing one branch of the Maforetic fcheme of etymology: But, as Michaelis, and others, juftly obferve, the latter is more naturally defcended from the former fimpler root, by the insertion of a fervile Iod.

5. Parkhurst, in his Hebrew Lexicon, although he relinquishes the other branch of the Maforetic scheme, exhibiting itself as a root; yet ftrangely and fancifully explains it "the Interpofer, Intervener, or Mediator:" and fays "it expreffes the omniprefence of God, i. e. the univerful extenfion (I will not prefume to say of his fubftance, but) of his knowledge and power."-Although he himself had given a plainer and jufter interpretation, in his Greek Lexicon, under the head EANI.-taken from Aquila's rendering of the first word of Pf. 22, 1.-, N,-Iox ups μs, Icxuçe us, "My strong one, My strong one." But his whole interpretaΙσχυρε tion of that very important citation, appropriated by OUR LORD to Himfelf, in his agony on the crofs, Matt. 27, 46. and Mark 15, 34.; is fo extravagant and revolting, that whatever refpect I may entertain for his piety and erudition, when untinctured with Hutchinfonian myfticifm; (for furely "the man rates when he talks of his fire, light, and Spirit"-as well obferved of another critic of the fame fchool; Brit. Critic, 1800. Feb. p. 208.)-yet, to pass it by, uncenfured, in elementary works of fuch extenfive circulation, would be ill discharging the functions of a SACRED CRITIC. "In this dolorous exclamation of our bleffed REDEEMER, (fays Parkhurft) there feems a propriety and emphafs beyond what has been commonly obferved: for Matthew [fays] ABOUT (TER!) the ninth hour, Jefus cried out with a loud voice,,, MY GOD, MY GOD, why haft thou forsaken me!'-The name by which he then addreffed THE DIVINITY [DEITY] referring to his power:-But Ar the ninth hour, (Ty wpx Tn vatn, [according to] Mark)-when he was in very jaws of death, He again cries out- Eaw, Eawi, ELOI, ELOI, why hast thou forsaken me!'-[i. e.] imbs, nibs,-Thou JEHOVAH, Vol. II. Churchm. Mag. April, 1802,

the

Bb

who

[ocr errors]
« السابقةمتابعة »