Harrison's, in Dr. Mandeville's reading-books, and in the grammars of Harrison, Staniford, Alden, Coar, John Peirce, E. Devis, C. Adams, D. Adams, Chandler, Comly, Jaudon, Ingersoll, Hull, Fuller, Greenleaf, Kirkham, Ferd.

His grammars are the least judicious, and at present the least popular, of his works.

18. How many different schemes of classification this author invented, I know not; but he might well have saved himself the trouble of inventing any; for, so far as appears, none of his last three grammars ever came to a second edition.

I imagine his several editions must have been different grammars with the same title; for such things are of no uncommon occurrence, and I cannot otherwise account for the assertion that this book was compiled "on the model of Lowth's, and on the same principles as [those on which]

A reviewer proved, that all his pretended novelties are to be found in certain grammars now forgotten, or seldom read.

And the concluding sentence of this work, as well as of his Improved Grammar, published in 1831, extends the censure as follows: "It is not the English language only whose history and principles are yet to be illustrated; but the grammars and dictionaries of all other languages, with which I have any acquaintance, must be revised and corrected, before their elements and true construction can be fully understood."

Of Harris's Hermes, (which, in comparison with our common grammars, is indeed a work of much ingenuity and learning, full of interesting speculations, and written with great elegance both of style and method,) Dr. Lowth says, it is "the most beautiful and perfect example of analysis, that has been exhibited since the days of Aristotle."Preface to Gram.,

7.The three grammars of Ash, Priestley, and Lowth, all appeared, in their first editions, about one time; all, if I mistake not, in the year 1763; and none of these learned doctors, it would seem, used the mode of spelling now in question.

These terms are borrowed from the Latin and Greek grammars, and, except as serving to diversify expression, are of little or no use in English grammar.

Yet so defective and erroneous are the schemes of syntax which are commonly found in our English grammars, that no rules of simple relation, none by which any of the above-named parts of speech can be consistently parsed, are in general to be found in them.

5.Most of our English grammars have more rules of syntax than are needed, and yet are very deficient in such as are needed.

8.It is a very common fault with the compilers of English grammars, to join together in the same rule the syntax of different parts of speech, uniting laws that must ever be applied separately in parsing.

And this latter error, again, has been transferred to most of our English grammars, to the exclusion of any rule for the proper construction of participles, of adverbs, of conjunctions, of prepositions, or of interjections.

13.For the teaching of different languages, it has been thought very desirable to have "a Series of grammars, Greek, Latin, English, &c., all, so far as general principles are concerned, upon the same plan, and as nearly in the same words as the genius of the languages would permit.

This scheme necessarily demands a minute comparison not only of the several languages themselves, but also of the various grammars in which their principles, whether general or particular, are developed.

But, in view of the fact, that the Latin or the Greek grammars now extant, (to say nothing of the French, Spanish, and others,) are almost as various and as faulty as the English, I am apprehensive that this is a desideratum not soon to be realized,a design more plausible in the prospectus, than feasible in the attempt.

At any rate, the grammars of different languages must needs differ as much as do the languages themselves, otherwise some of their principles will of course be false; and we have already seen that the nonobservance of this has been a fruitful source of error in respect to English syntax.

And this work, claiming to have been approved "by the most competent judges," now challenges the praise not only of being "better adapted to the use of academies and schools than any yet published" but of so presenting "the rules and principles of general grammar, as that they may apply to, and be in perfect harmony with, the grammars of the dead languages" Recommendations, p. iv.

Then, for his syntax proper, he copies from Lennie, with some alterations, thirty-four other rules, nine of which are double, and all are jumbled together by both authors, without any regard to the distinction of concord and government, so common in the grammars of the dead languages, and even, so far as I can discover, without any principle of arrangement whatever.

And what becomes of Universal Syntax, when the imperfect systems of the Latin and Greek grammars, in stead of being amended, are modelled to the grossest faults of what is worthless in our own? OBS.

Various divisions and subdivisions of the Latin syntax, with special dispositions of some particular principles of it, may be seen in the elaborate grammars of Despauter, Prat, Ruddiman, Grant, and other writers.

22.The rules of Government in the best Latin grammars are about sixty; and these are usually distributed (though not very properly) under three heads; "1. Of Nouns.

What rules of relation are commonly found in grammars?

Can a uniform series of good grammars, Latin, Greek, English, &c., be produced by a mere revising of one defective book for each language?

Do the Latin grammars teach the same doctrine as the English, concerning nominatives or antecedents connected disjunctively? LESSON XXII.VERBS.