Perhaps such speculations as these will prove to be more curious
than profitable. If it be made clearly to appear, that, on
scientific principles, whenever the verbal name is unaccompanied by
a verbalizing adjunct, it is in the _noun-state_, and does not
express affirmation, still this theory would be very inconvenient in
practice.
I shall resume this subject in Lecture XI.
* * * * *
QUESTIONS ON THE PHILOSOPHICAL NOTES.
What has usually been the object of philosophical investigations of
language? (page 32.)--Do the syntactical dependances and connexions of
words depend on their _original_ import?--Is the power of association
and custom efficient in changing the radical meaning of some
words?--Have words intrinsically a signification of their own; or is
their meaning _inferential_; i.e. such as _custom_ has assigned to them?
(page 38.)--On what _fact_ is based the true, philosophical principle of
classification?--Define philosophical grammar.--Which is supposed to be
the original part of speech?--How were the others formed from that?--How
many parts of speech may be recognised in a scientific development and
arrangement of the principles of our language?--Name them.
Pages:
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158