ambulo.) They understand, that MORFE, (Mopon,) and FORMA— MURMEEKS, (Mupun,) and FORMICA, &c. &c. belong to each other; and Robert Ainsworth has observed the constant union of M with B, P, in a vein of metaphor worthy of an Etymologist. "M," says he, "doth not refuse to usher in its sister labials, B and P, as in Ambulo "and Amplus." I have appealed to these common instances, and quoted these humble authorities, for the purpose of impressing the fact on the mind of my Reader, and to shew, that the connexion between M, B, F, P, is apparent on the most familiar occasions, and acknowledged by our ordinary Philologists.

It is only by observing the actual changes, which take place in a great variety of words, that we can fully understand the precise mode, by which these changes are effected. The Letter M, in the arrangement of the Etymologist, must be confounded with the other Labials; yet on some occasions we may observe a shade of difference, by which M appears to be distinguished from the others. At the end of å word or syllable no difference appears; and they are all in this position confounded with each other. In the beginning of a word, however, the M seems to be separated from the other Labials, under some barrier of distinction, by which it maintains its place to the exclusion of the rest, as in the instance of Mother and its parallels; in the changes of which, as we perceive, the other Labials have not intruded. We may conceive, that something of this sort happens, by observing the operations of Language, with which we are most familiar. We see, that the M perpetually connects itself with the other Labials P and B, &c. at the end of a word or syllable; as thuMP, thuMB, buMPer, &c., though we do not familiarly observe the same union at the beginning of a word; but we generally find, that the M remains alone, and separated from its sister Labials. We find however, that the M is familiarly applied in conjunction with the other labials in the first syllable of a word, or in words of one syllable, when it is preceded by a vowel breathing, as in aMBulo, aMPlus, aMPhi, aMPelos, (Aupi,-Circa, Aμπeλos, Vitis.) In modern Greek, however, the M precedes the B at the beginning of a word, when no symbol for a Vowel breathing appears. The liquid L, as it

is called, is a familiar organical addition to the Labials, though we shall perpetually find, that the ML, PL, in a word, is a significant Radical, as in Ambulo, Amplus, &c. The Etymologists have remarked the union between M and N, which should be extended to the other Labials, where the n may almost always be considered as an organical addition, without any Radical meaning appropriate to itself, or as belonging to MN, BN, &c., as terMa, (Tepua,) terMinus, steFo, steFaNOO, (ZTEQw, Corono, Tepavow, Corono, &c. &c. This union is perpetual. In the In the organs of some nations the sound of s is annexed to P, F; and hence the Greeks have their letter Y, Psi, which represents the union of these sounds. But this union, which seldom appears, opens into no facts important in the Art of Etymology.

Let us now consider the Consonants in the second Class; C, D, G, J, K, Q, S, T, X, Z, which, as I maintain, familiarly pass into each other, to the exclusion of the rest, in the ordinary operations of Language. The Grammarians have observed, that T, D, Th, (T, A,E,) are Cognate with each other, and that K, G, Ch, (K, г, X,) are Cognate with each other; but they ought to have seen, that they are all Cognate or Commutable with each other. In the examples of Mother, Father and Brother, before produced, we have seen only the T and D Changed into each other; but in the example of Daughter we have D, T Changed into each other at the beginning of the word, and GhT, GT, T, ChT, KhT, in the middle or end of the word; where we see the two Classes blended with each other. Among the parallel terms produced by Wachter for MUTER, Mother, we find the Sclavonic words MAC, MACIER, MACZ, MACZER, MASS, MATE, MATKA; where we see, how the C, CZ, S, TK are likewise to be added, as Commutable Consonants with the D, T, Th. The Greek Verbs will fully illustrate the same changes. In TASSO and TATTO, (Taσow, TаTTW,) TS and TT signify 'To Arrange;' and in eTAGON, TAKSO or TAXO, teTACHα, (Eтayov, Tağw, TeTaxa,) the TKS, TX, TCh, have the same meaning; and thus we see, that S, T, KS or X, Ch, are Cognate or Commutable Consonants. Again, FRAZO, To Speak, becomes FRASO, FRAD-On, peFRAKA, (Φραζω, Φρασω, Εφραδον, Πεφρακα,) where we perceive, that Z, S, D, K or C, are Cognate or Commutable

into

into each other. Thus we perceive, how the two Classes T, D, Th, K, G, Ch, are inseparably blended and confounded with each other. We perceive moreover, that other Letters Z, X and S, are introduced, which must be added to the same Series of Commutable Letters.

The S has been considered by the Grammarians as a Letter invested with a power peculiar to itself. " est suæ potestatis litera." The Letter S is not distinguished by any privileges, which are denied to other Letters. In the ordinary distribution of our Alphabets, every Letter may be considered as a Letter of its own power, or as having a power or property, peculiar to itself. Still, however, certain Letters may have a power-property or propensity to pass into each other, without any disturbance of this peculiar property, by which they are distinguished from each other; or any derangement of the particular degrees of Affinity, which these Letters may bear to each other. Different modes of classing Letters may have their use, according to the different purposes, to which their classification is applied. Yet no division can be more faulty and imperfect than that of the Grammarians, which we have just exhibited, respecting the Cognate Letters, when considered under their property of Commutability into each other, in the inflexions of Nouns and Verbs. We see most unequivocally, that in the Inflexions of Verbs, the Letters C or Ch, D, G, K, S, T, X, Z, pass familiarly or are changed into each other, whatever may be their peculiar relation to each other, or the precise process, by which this change is produced. We do not obtain from the Greek verbs any distinct evidence of the peculiar relation or the degrees of Affinity, which these Letters bear to each other, though it does not from hence follow, that such degrees of Affinity may not exist. Thus it may still be, that T, D, Th, which some call Dentals, and K, G, Ch, which some call Palatines, form two sets, in some measure, distinct from each other, as containing Letters more particularly related to each other. I have no objection to this idea, or to this mode of division, for certain purposes, and on certain occasions ; but I still affirm, that it is a division, entirely false, as applied to the definition of the Grammarians, and altogether useless and improper for all the purposes of the Etymologist. We know, that

the

the sound of Q is similar to that of C, Ch, or of the hardened G, with the vowel u after them; and that J is nothing but one of the sounds annexed to G, as in George, which might have been written Jeorge; and thus we see, that the letters C, D, G, J, K, Q, S, T, X, Z, should be arranged in the same Class as Letters, which are Cognate or Commutable into each other, in the ordinary operations of Language.

Similar facts are exhibited in the Latin Verbs. Thus C is changed into X, CT, as diCo, dixi, diCTum, by a general analogy, and sometimes into S and T, as parCo, parSi, parSum, sarCio, sarSi, sarTum; -D into S, as raDo, rasi, raŝum-G into X and CT by a general rule reGo, reXi, reCTum, and sometimes into S, as merGo, merSi, merSum ;-Q into X and CT, as coQuo, coXi, coCTum ;-SC into T and ST, noSCo, noTum, paSCo, paSTum; -T into S, and CT into X, as miTTo, miSi, miSSum ;-CT into X, fleCTo, fleXi, fleXum. In the Latin and Greek Nouns the same changes are likewise visible. Thus, in Latin, C is changed into CT, as laC, CTis; S into D, T, as pes, peDis, pars, parTis, &c. &c. ;-X into C, G, CT, as paX, paCis, leX, leGis, noX, noCTis. In Greek, S passes into T, Th and D, as gelos, oT-os, kor}us, uTh-os, lamp}aS, aD-os, (Teλws, tos, Kópus, Oos, Aaμñas, dos,) X into K, KT, G, Ch, as kul}iX, iK-os, an}aX, CT-os, tett}iX, iG-os, beX, beeChos, (Kvλığ, kos, Avač, ktos,; Tettiğ, yós, Βηξ, βηχος.)

The various offices, which these Letters perform in modern Languages, would be abundantly sufficient to attest their Affinity. In our own Language, C is used for S and K, as in City and Cap, quasi Sity, Kap; and T has the sound of Sh, as nation, quasi naSHion or naTShion. In the Spanish Language, the C is sounded like Th, before some Vowels, and like the K before others; and when h follows the C, "it is pronounced," says Del Pueyo, "as in the English much, "mucho." In German, C is represented by TSay; and before some Vowels it is sounded like TS. In Italian, C is sounded like TCh, as in Cesare, Cecita, which is pronounced TChesare, TCheTChita,' in so delicate a manner, that you cannot distinguish, says Veneroni, whether a T or D be sounded. "Pour parler avec la delicatesse "Italienne, il faut faire sentir le T de Tchesare, Tchetchita, &c. si "doucement, que l'on ne connoisse pas, si l'on prononce un T ou

"un

"" un D.”

Veneroni represents the sound of the Italian G, and GG, before the Vowels e, i, by DG, as Giro, Oggi, DGiro, oDGi. We may from hence see, how Oggi or oDGi, may belong to hoDie, and how Dgiro or Tgiro, Giro, Guros, (Tupos, Gyrus,) may belong to such terms as Tour, Tour-n-er, (Fr.) Tur-n, &c. &c., with a great race of parallel words to be found through a wide compass of Human Speech.

The Affinity of the Cognate Consonants C, D, G, &c., such as they are detailed in the present arrangement, will enable us to understand, from what source has arisen that cluster of Consonants, which certain writers have so violently and unwisely condemned in some Languages, as in the German, &c. It has arisen from an attempt at extreme accuracy in expressing those different sounds existing in different Cognate Consonants, which the speaker combines together at the same time. These mingled sounds are to be found, in a greater or less degree, in all forms of Speech, which differ chiefly in this respect, than in some Languages more precision is employed in representing that combination of sounds by the power of symbols. One Language adopts the various characters, which are separately used to express the different sounds, of which the combination is formed, while another employs a single and peculiar symbol for that purpose; and a third contents itself with adopting a character, sometimes used for one of those mixed sounds, of which the union consists.

In our own Language this combination of sounds has been strongly felt by other nations; and we accordingly find, that the representation of our words by Foreigners is loaded with Consonants, for the purpose of conveying to the ears of their countrymen the nature of those combined sounds, about which we so little reflect, and which we ourselves are satisfied with expressing by a single symbol. Thus in a German Dictionary, now before me, I find the sounds of our letters C or Ch and J, generally represented by TSCh and DSCh as in Church and Judge, by TSChohrTCh, and DSChoDSCh; The sound of the G in Genius I likewise find to be represented by DSChenius. The Sclavonic Dialects exhibit likewise most fully this union of sounds. In the Russian Language, the sound of two Letters has been represented by TS, TCh; and the enunciation of a third appears to be of