But _how_ does it become a definite object in the mind
of the _hearer_? Certainly, not by the phrase, "_a_ temple," which
indicates _any_ temple, leaving it altogether _undetermined_ which; but
supposing the person addressed was totally unacquainted with the fact
asserted, and it becomes to him, _in one respect only_, a definite and
particular temple, by means of the associated words, "Solomon built;"
that is, by the use of these words in connexion with the others, the
hearer gets the idea of a temple distinguished as _the one erected by
Solomon_. If the speaker were addressing one whom he supposed to be
unacquainted with the fact related, he might make the temple referred to
a still more definite object in the mind of the hearer by a farther
explanation of it; thus, "Solomon built _a_ temple _on mount Zion_; and
that was _the_ temple _to which the Jews resorted to worship_."
"_The_ lunatic, _the_ poet, and _the_ lover,
Are of imagination all compact."
"_The_ horse is a noble animal;" "_The_ dog is a faithful creature;"
"_The_ wind blows;" "_The_ wolves were howling in _the_ woods." In these
examples, we do not refer to any particular lunatics, poets, lovers,
horses, dogs, winds, wolves, and woods, but we refer to these
_particular classes_ of things, in contradistinction to other objects or
classes.
Pages:
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167