as every additional stroke conftitutes a new character, and as every diftinct idea, and every mode of relation is expreffed by a diftinct character, we are not to wonder that the Chinese characters fhould be fo extremely numerous. The number of our ideas is almost infinite: what wonder then that the characters of the Chinese fhould amount to 80,000*, many of which stand for entire fentences. Were every word in our own language, when it is used in a different fenfe; when it is compounded with another word; when it ftands connected with a new particle, adjective or verb; when it is ufed in a different cafe, number, gender, or the like; were it, I fay, upon every fuch change in its fituation, to be reckoned a new and diftinct word; especially when all our obfolete words, with their feveral relations and dependencies, are added to the account; the number of our words would not fall much fhort of the Chinese. Eighty thousand is the number of Chinese characters contained in their largest dictionaries; we are told however that the most learned of their doctors feldom find it neceffary to be mafters of above half the number, and that a fourth part of these are sufficient for men to express themselves on the common occafions of lifet. If the difficulty of mastering and retaining fuch a number of arbitrary marks, greatly retards the progrefs of their literature; on the other hand the Chinese have all poffible inducements to cultivate and purfue it. There is no part of the globe

where learning is attended with fuch honours and rewards: the Literati are reverenced as men of another fpecies, they are the only nobility known in China: be their birth never fo mean and low, they become Mandarines of the higheft rank in proportion to the extent of their learning on the other hand be their birth never fo exalted, they quickly fink into poverty and obfcurity, if they neglect those studies which raised their fathers. It is a fond and groundless notion of fome late writers, who ought to have known better, that there is a key to the Chinese characters, hidden from the common people, and referved as a fecret in fome few families of the great. On the contrary, there is no nation in the world where the first honours of the ftate lie fo open to the lowest of the people, and where there is lefs of hereditary and traditional greatnefs. All the ftate employments in China are the rewards of literary merit and they are continually grafped by hands lifted up from among the common people.

But to return, if thefe characters are difficult to the natives, on account of their number and complexity; their oral language is no lefs fo to foreigners on account of the peculiarity of the founds, employed in it. P. Du Halde § tells us, that the very make of the Chinefe mouths is different from that of Europeans: "Their teeth "are placed in a different manner "from ours: the upper row "stands out, and fometimes falls upon the under lip, or at least on the gums of the under row,

+ Mod. Univ.

which lies inward; the two 66 gums scarce ever meet together, "like those of Europeans.

The Chinese, fays a judicious writer of the French Academy †, retain all the vowels employed in the French language, which are twelve in number, viz, a, è, é, e, i, o, ou, u, and ang, ing, ong, ung. The nafal afpiration, which makes the effential difference in these four laft, is much stronger in the Chinese pronunciation than the French.

They have ftill further a kind of vowel or fimple found wholly unknown to us, which the Portuguese express by the letters Ute when they write Chinese words: It is a kind of cry fetched from the hollow of the ftomach; of which it is difficult to give an exact idea in fpeaking only to the eyes. This found deferves fo much the more the name of a cry, as it is never joined with any other whether vowel or confonant, but is always pronounced apart.

one.

The Chinese have only twelve fimple confonants, reckoning the foft afpiration or fpiritus lenis for Many of thefe confonants are fo doubled and afpirated in the pronunciation, that they may be reckoned two and twenty. But excepting only Ts; the Chinese never join two different confonants with one vowel, and there is never more than one confonant in one fyllable. What is ftill farther remarkable in the Chinese language, is that the founds B. D. R. X. Z. are not found in it. Infomuch that a Chinese, who had a mind to pronounce thofe letters, could not do it without altering fomething, and making use of fuch

founds in his own language as come nearest to them: yet both the founds of D. and Z. feem to be found in the word I-tfe, as it is commonly founded I-dze. the Chinese, who can distinctly say, I-dze, cannot pronounce da, de, di, do, du, nor za, ze, zi, zo, zu.

Yet

This fubjects the miffionaries to great inconvenience in fitting European words to Chinese mouths. The difficulty of doing this we fhall readily conceive, if we take along with us, that every word of many fyllables must be made to appear as a ftring of monofyllables, and muft be divefted of all thofe founds which a Chinese mouth cannot pronounce. It is to be fuppofed that the reverend fathers would fhun thefe difficulties where they could, by fubftituting Chinese words expreffive of their own: but they were obliged to retain the latter in the names of places and in the terms of religion. It will be curious to fee what ftrange appearance both thefe make when accommodated to the Chinese pronunciation.

Of the former, Europa becomes Yeu-lo-pa. Afia is Ya-fy-ya. Africa is Ly-vi-ya, [i. e. Lybya,] and America is Yame-li-kya.

As to the terms of religion they are under greater difficulties. Thus for Maria they were forced to Ma-li-ya; for Crux, Cu-lu-fu; for baptizo, pa-pe-ti-fo; for fpiritus, fu-pi-li-tu-fu; for Chriftus, Ki-luJu-tu-fu; and for ++ Bartholomeus, Pe-ulb-to-lo-meu-fu. When a Chinefe prieft (for the miffionaries have conferred holy orders on fome of their converts) fays mafs in Latin, he thus confecrates the

Ibid. | Ibid. P. Du Halde,

Bayeri Lexicon Sin. p. 179. 190.

匾

eucharif,

which is, notwithstanding, the only foundation of all the fine fyftem of polite gallantry.

A paffion, that wishes only to content itself with the lofs of what it thinks the most amiable in the world; a paffion founded on injustice, fupported by deceit, and followed by crimes, remorfe, fhame, and contempt;-can it be delightful to a virtuous heart? Yet this is the amiable equipage of all unlawful engagements; we find ourselves obliged to eradicate from the foul all the fentiments of honour infeparable from a noble education, and to live in an eternal purfuit of that which we condemn; obliged to have our pleafures impoifoned by remorfe, and to be reduced to the unhappy ftate of renouncing virtue, yet not able to content ourselves with vice.

We cannot tafte the fweets of perfect love but in a well-fuited marriage. Nothing fo much diftinguishes a little mind as to ftop at words. What fignifies that custom (for which we fee very good reafons) of making the name of hufband and wife ridiculous? A hufband fignifies, in the general interpretation, a jealous mortal, a quarrelfome tyrant, or a good fort of fool, on whom we may impofe any thing; a wife is a domeftic dæmon, given to this poor man to deceive and torment him. The conduct of the generality of people fufficiently juftifies thefe two characters. But I fay, again, What fignify words? A well-regulated marriage is not like thofe of ambition and intereft: it is two lovers who live together. Let a priest pronounce certain words, let an attorney fign certain papers; I look upon thefe preparations as

a lover does on a ladder of cords, that he fixes to the window of his mistress.

It is impoffible that a perfect and well-founded love fhould be happy but in the peaceable poffeffion of the object beloved, and that peace does not take from the fweetnefs and vivacity of a paffion fuch as I have imagined. If I would amufe myfelf in writing romances, I fhould not place the feat of true happiness in Arcadia, or on the borders of Hymen. I am not fuch a prude as to limit the most delicate tenderness to wifhes; I fhould begin the romance by the marriage of two perfons united by their mind, tafte, and inclination; can any thing be more happy than to unite their intereft and their life? The lover has the pleasure of giving the last mark of his efteem and confidence to his miftrefs; fhe, in. return, gives him the care of her repofe and liberty. Can they give each other more dear or more tender pledges? And is it not natural to wish to give to each other inconteftible proofs of that tendernefs with which the foul is penetrated?

I know there are fome people of falfe delicacy, who maintain that the pleafures of love are only due to difficulties and dangers. They fay, very wittily, the rofe would not be the rofe without thorns, and a thoufand other trifles of that nature, which make fo little impreffion on my mind, that I am perfuaded, was I a lover, the fear of hurting her I loved would make me unhappy, if the poffeffion was accompanied with dangers to her. The life of married lovers is very different, they pass it in a chain of mutual obligations and marks of benevolence,

benevolence, and have the pleasure of forming the entire happiness of the object beloved; in which point I place perfect enjoyment. The moft trifling cares of ceconomy become noble and delicate, when they are heightened by fentiments of tendernefs. To furnish a room is no longer furnishing a room, it is ornamenting the place where I expect my lover; to order a fupper is not fimply giving orders to a cook, it is amufing myfelf in regaling him I love. These neceffary occupations, regarded in this light by a lover, are pleafures infinitely more fenfible and lively than cards and public places, which makes the happinefs of the multitude incapable of true pleasure.A paffion happy and contented, foftens every movement of the foul, and gilds each object that we look

on.

To a happy lover (I mean one married to his mistress) if he has any employment, the fatigues of the camp, the embarraffments of court, every thing becomes agreeable when he can fay to himself, it is to ferve her I love. If fortune is favourable, (for that does not depend on merit) and gives fuccefs to his undertakings, all the advantages he receives are offerings due to her charms, and he finds, in the fuccefs of his ambition, pleasure much more lively and worthy a noble mind, than that of raifing his fortune, or of being applauded by the public. He enjoys his glory, his rank, his riches, but as they regard her he loves; and it is her lover fhe hears praifed, when he gains the approbation of the parliament, the praifes of the army, or the favour of his prince. In misfortune, it is his confolation to

retire to a person who feels his forrow, and to fay to himself in her arms, "My happiness does not depend on the caprice of fortune; here is my affured asylum against all grief; your esteem makes me infenfible to the injuftice of a court, or the ingratitude of a mafter; I feel a fort of pleasure in the lofs of my eftate, as that misfortune gives me new proofs of your virtue and tendernefs. How little defirable is grandeur to perfons already happy? We have no need of flatterers or equipages; I reign in your heart, and I poffefs in your perfon all the delights of nature." In short, there is no fituation of which the melancholy may not be foftened by the company of the perfon we love. Even an illness is not without its pleasures, when we are attended by one we love. I fhould never have done, was I to give you a detail of all the charms of an union in which we find, at once, all that flatters the fenfes in the most delicate and most extended pleasure; but I cannot conclude without mentioning the fatisfaction of feeing each day increase the amiable pledges of our tender friendship, and the occupation of improving them according to their different fexes. We abandon ourfelves to the tender inftin&t of nature refined by love. We admire in the daughter the beauty of the mother, and refpect in the fon the appearances of understanding and natural probity which we efteem in the father.

It is a pleasure of which God himself (according to Mofes) was fenfible, when feeing what he had done, he found it good.

A propos of Mofes, the firft plan of happiness infinitely furpaffed all others; and I cannot

form