and having a Conjunction before it, it is called the Subjunctive; as, "if I love; if thou love:" when it is barely expreffed without any limitation of perfon or number, it is called the Infinitive; as, "to love:" and when it is expreffed in a form in which it may be joined to a Noun as its quality or accident, partaking thereby of the nature of an Adjective, it is called the Participle; as, " loving [6].",

[6] A Mode is a particular form of the Verb, denoting the manner in which a thing is, does, or fuffers; or expreffing an intention of mind concerning fuch being, doing, or fuffering. As far as Grammar is concerned, there are no more Modes in any language, than there are forms of the Verb appropriated to the denoting of fuch different manners of representation. For inftance; the Greeks have a peculiar form of the Verb by which they exprefs the fubject, or matter, of a Wish; which properly conftitutes an Optative Mode: but the Latins have no fuch form; the subject of a Wish in their language is fubjoined to the Wish itself either expreffed or implied, as fubfequent to it and depending on it; they have therefore no Optative Mode, but what is expressed in that Mode in Greek, falls properly under the Subjunctive Mode in Latin. For the

But to express the Time of the Verb the English ufes alfo the affiftance of other

fame reason, in English the several expreffions of Conditional Will, Poffibility, Liberty, Obligation, &c. come all under the Subjunctive Mode: The mere expreffions of Will, Poffibility, Liberty, Obligation, &c. belong to the Indicative Mode: it is their Conditionality, their being fubfequent, and depending upon fomething preceding, that determines them to the Subjunctive Mode. And in this Grammatical Modal Form, however they may differ in other refpects, Logically or Metaphyfically, they all agree. That Will, Poffibility, Liberty, Obligation, &c. though expressed by the fame Verbs that are occafionally used as Subjunctive Auxiliaries, may belong to the Indicative Mode, will be apparent from a few examples:

"Here we may reign fecure."

Which paffion could not shake? whose solid virtue

The flot of accident, or dart of chance,

Could neither raze, nor pierce ?"—

Id. Othello.

Thefe fentences are all either declarative, or fimply in

Verbs, called therefore Auxiliaries, or Helpers; do, be, have, shall, will: as, “I do love, I did love; I am loved, I was loved'; I have loved, I have been loved I fhall, or will, love, or be loved."

The two principal Auxiliaries, to have, and to be, are thus varied according to Perfon, Number, Time, and Mode.

terrogative; and however expreffive of Will, Liberty, Poffibility, or Obligation, yet the Verbs are all of the Indicative Mode.

It feems therefore, that whatever other Metaphyfical Modes there may be in the theory of Univerfal Grammar, there are in English no other Grammatical Modes than those above described.

: for

That the Participle is a mere Mode of the Verb, is manifeft, if our Definition of a Verb be admitted it fignifies being, doing, or fuffering, with the at fignation of Time fuperadded. But if the effence of the Verb be made to consist in Affirmation, not only the Participle will be excluded from its place in the Verb, but the Infinitive itself alfo, which certain ancient Grammarians of great authority held to be alone the genuine Verb, denying that title to all the other Modes. See HERMES, p. 164.

Perfon.

Time is Present, Paft, or Future.

To HAVE.

Indicative Mode.

Sing.

1. I have,

2.

Prefent Time.

Plur.

We

Thou haft [7], *: Ye

3. He hath, or has [8]; They

Shave.

[7] Thou, in the Polite, and even in the Familiar Style, is difufed, and the Plural You is employed instead of it: we fay You have, not Thou haft. Though in this cafe we apply You to a fingle Perfon, yet the Verb too must agree with it in the Plural Number: it must neceffarily be You have, not You haff. You was, the Second Perfon Plural of the Pronoun placed in agreement with the First or Third Perfon Singular of the Verb, is an enormous Solecism: and yet Authors of the first rank have inadvertently fallen into it." Knowing that you <was my old mafter's good friend." Addifon, Spect. "Would to God you was within her reach." Lord Bolingbroke to Swift, Letter 46. If you was here." Ditto, Letter 47. "I am just now as well, as when you was here." Pope to Swift, P. S. to Letter 56. On the contrary the Solemn Style admits not of You for a Single Perfon. This hath led Mr. Pope into a great impropriety in the beginning of his Meffiah:

N° 517.

"O Thou my voice infpire Who touch'd Isaiah's hallow'd lips with fire!"

D. 2

Paft

The Solemnity of the Style would not admit of You for Thou in the Pronoun; nor the measure of the Verfe touchedft, or didft touch, in the Verb; as it indifpenfably ought to be, in the one, or the other of these two forms: You who touched; or Thou who touchedft, or didft touch. Again:

"Juft of thy word, in every thought fincere,

Who knew no wish but what the world might hear."

Pope, Epitaph. It ought to be your in the firft line, or kneweft in the fecond.

In order to avoid this Grammatical inconvenience, the two diftinct forms of Thox and You are often used promiscuously by our modern Poets, in the fame Poem, in the fame Paragraph, and even in the fame Sentence; very inelegantly and improperly:

"Now, now I feize, I clafp thy charms;

And now you burst, ah cruel! from my arms." Pope. [8] Hath properly belongs to the serious and folemn ftyle; has, to the familiar. The fame may be obferved of doth and does.

"But, confounded with thy art, Inquires her name, that has his heart."

Waller.

Future