20. Gender is a distinction of substan tives as denoting males or females, or neither. The names of males are said to be of the masculine gender; the names of females of the feminine gender ; and all other names are said to be of the neuter, that is, of neither gender. The purposes even of accurate communication do not in all cases require any denotement of gen der, and accordingly we find many words which are common to both sexes. The English and the pure Persian appear to be the only languages which observe the natural distinction in the division of nouns. We denote difference of sex, either by a change of appellation, or by a change on the word itself, or by a significant adjunct. In addition to its greater philosophical accuracy, the procedure of our language enables us to mark with greater perspi cuity and force the personification of in animate substances or abstract qualities. In the earliest languages there is no dis tinction of gender further than into mas culine and feminine, and the reason is obvious; for the principle of animation ap pears to the uncultivated mind to pervade all nature. In the more cultivated lan guages, in which a third class isadmitted, the arrangement seems to have been the work of art. The foundation was laid in the natural distinction of sex; by degrees those terminations which mostfrequently occurred in the respective divisions were made the characteristics of those divi sions, and nouns of similar termina tions were arranged under them, with out respect to the original ground of distinction. We must not be surpris ed to find that langtiages, derived from those in which the distinctions of na ttire had given way to the divisions of art, should leave nature altogether : and we accordingly find, that in those mo dern European languages which are de rived from the Latin, gender is little more than a mere grammatical distinc tion of nouns into two classes, called masculine and feminine.
II. Of the ..ddnoun.
21. We apply the term adnoun to these single words which are added to nouns, to vary their comprehension, or to vary or determine their extension. Those which affect the former object are call ed adjectives; those which affect the latter we call restrictives. It is not, per haps, in all cases, easy to say, to which of these classes an adnoun should be referred, because the two objects are not always distinguishable ; but in ge neral, those which denote qualities are adjectives, and those which denote situ anon, possession or number, are restric rives.
22. The adjective is exactly equiva lent to a noun connected with another noun by means of juxtaposition, or of a preposition, or of corresponding flexion. E. g golden cup is the same with a gold cup, or a cup of gold ; a prudent man is the same as a man of prudence, or vir prudenthe. It has been already observed, that the Greek and Latin ge nitive, our preposition of, and juxtapo sition, are all equivalent procedures, though custom has produced a variety in the mode of their application : we now add, that the adjective is another equivalent ; and further, that the con nection denoted by the adjective is equal ly indefinite with the others. E. g. A healthy colour, is a colour caused by health ; a healthy exercise, is exercise causinghealth. And the use of all these procedures is the same, to particularize the general term, by connecting with the qualities which are included under it some quality which the general term does not include. In many instances, to denote that the name of a quality is used thus in connection with some other name, that is, in fact, that it is used as an adjective, certain terminations are em ployed, significant of such connection ; and Mr. H. Tooke informs us, that those
by which the simple adjectives are form ed, viz. en, ed, and ig (our modern y) con vey, all three, the designation that the names to which they are annexed are to be joined to some other names ; and this by their own intrinsic meaning, for they signify give, add, join. " So the adjectives wooden and woollen," he con tinues, " convey precisely the same ideas, are the names of the same things, denote the same substances, as the substantives wood and wool : and the termination en only puts them in a condition to be join ed to some other substances, or rather gives us notice to expect some other sub stances to which they are to be joined." 23. Most languages which admit of inflection carry it through their adjec tives as well as nouns. In some the adjective is varied, to express difference in the gender, number, and case of the connected noun. Where great liberty of inversion is desirable, these variations are convenient, because they point out with what noun the adjective is connec ed : where juxtaposition ascertains this, they are unnecessary, since they make no change in the signification of the ad jective. The signification of the adjec tive wise, e. g. is unchanged, whether it be applied to one man or woman, or to twenty men or women : whether its sub • stantive be stated singly, or conjoined with others, as the names of the parents, place of abode, &c. of those to whom it is applied. The French always place the adjective close to its noun, yet they make changes on it to denote the gender of the connected noun. This is always unneces sary ; but sometimes it contributes to elegance, by preventing an awkward cir cumlocution.
24. The qualities denoted by adjectives may, in general, in degree : some, as dimensions and weight, may be mea sured with accuracy ; and the compara tive degree of some qualities, at least of heat and cold, can be ascertained with precision. Many, however, are incapable of exact measurement ; and the cases in which the exact degree of the quality cannot be ascertained are few, in compa rison with those in which it is unneces sary. When we use terms to express a greater or less degree of a quality, we may either make a direct and particu lar reference to the degree in which it is possessed by other objects, or use them without such reference. In the former case, we are said to compare the quali ties ; and variations of the adjective, to express this comparison, are called de grees of comparison. The difference be tween the comparative and superlative, in our language, consists in the manner or construction merely, and not in the de gree of the quality : thus, Solomon was wiser than any other king of Israel, is the same as, " Solomon was the wisest of the ,rings of The comparative is used, when we speak of an object as distinct from those with which we compare it ; the superlative, when it is spoken of as one of those with which we compare it. Man is the noblest of animals, but not the noblest of the brute creation, otherwise he must be one of the brute creation: he is nobler than the brutes, but not than all animals, or he must be nobler than himself. The cus tom of our language makes one distinc tion between the comparative and super lative, which does not coincide with this grand distinction. We use the compara tive with the force of the superlative when we speak of ta o; us, he is the wiser of the two, and the -wisest of any great number. This is not an unjustifiable usage ; but it has no particular foundation in the force of the comparative and superlative.