To give a satisfactory definition of the verb, or such a one as
shall be found scientifically correct and unexceptionable, has
hitherto baffled the skill, and transcended the learning, of our
philosophical writers. If its essential quality, as is generally
supposed, is made to consist in _expressing affirmation_, it remains
still to be defined _when_ a verb _expresses_ affirmation. In
English, and in other languages, words appropriated to express
affirmation, are often used without any such force; our idea of
affirmation, in such instances, being the mere _inference of
custom_.
In the sentence,--"_Think, love_, and _hate_, denote moral actions,"
the words _think, love_, and _hate_, are nouns, because they are
mere _names_ of actions. So, when I say, "John, _write_--is an
irregular verb," the word _write_ is a noun; but when I say, "John,
_write_--your copy," _write_ is called a verb.
Why is this word considered a noun in one construction, and a verb
in the other, when both constructions, until you pass beyond the
word write, are exactly alike? If write does not _express_ action in
the former sentence, neither does it in the latter, for, in both, it
is introduced in the same manner.
Pages:
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154