the mind, and to be reconciled if the student of either grammar or logic is not to be thrown into mental confusion.

But while the study of logical relationship and grammatical form must proceed side by side, each illustrating and aiding the other, great care should be taken never to confound the two points of view. In the treatment of Case, for instance, a grammatical writer must never permit a confusion to arise in his own thought or in that of his readers, as to whether the inflectional form or the logical relationship of the substantive is the point on which the mind is to be centered. So closely are the relations of thought and of its expression intermingled that it is a matter of no small difficulty, sometimes, to avoid confounding the one with the other. That they have often been confounded is the cause of many of the disputes that have arisen among grammarians. But although the logician and the grammarian have different ends in view, there are many facts which they must deal with in common, and so far as the structure of language is concerned they must not antagonize each other.

More than a hundred years ago the celebrated Horne Tooke made the first serious and avowed effort "to introduce logic into grammar." He was an able and ingenious writer, but linguistic thought has made large advance since his period, and there is little of value for the present age in the curious Diversions of Purley, which he wrote. Other writers have attempted (though in different literary form) to

straighten out the relations of logic and grammar, which still remain somewhat perplexing and difficult to handle consistently.

The best result of the study of grammar, however, is a logical habit of mind. The effort to analyze a a difficult passage leads to a fuller appreciation of its meaning, and this in turn cultivates accuracy both in one's own thought and in its final expression. Nor does the advantage end here. Through the keen perception of clearness of construction thus gained, the student not only gains a mastery over his native language, but he finds in it also a firm basis for the right understanding and rapid acquirement of foreign tongues.

V

UNIVERSAL AND PARTICULAR GRAMMAR

English grammar is but a branch of the general science of philology, a new variety or species sprung up from the old stock long ago transplanted from the soil of Greece and Rome.-GOOLD BROWN.

Philology in its larger sense includes all that is or can be meant by Grammar.-EARLE.

Whatever harmony is possible between English grammar and the grammar of other languages should be sought if the value of grammatical study is believed to lie in any degree in making easier for the student the approach to other languages.-DAVENPORT AND EMERSON.

The grammar of a given language may in theory be divided into two parts, one treating of general grammar, or the universal principles that belong to the grammars of all languages, the other dealing only with the particular grammar of the individual language. But while the idea is a suggestive one, the plan has never yet been carried out in a manner that seems entirely satisfactory for class use.

The original idea of grammar was that of a universal science in which different languages shared in varying degrees. We have seen that the earliest grammars issued in England were books of general grammar, written however in Latin and applied directly to that language as being the one that best exemplified the

principles of grammar. It was felt that English had little of real grammar and that all that it contains could easily be learned by the study of general grammar through the medium of Latin. Something of the same idea is still prevalent in schools and colleges to-day.

And there is some justification for this thought. Every one must agree that a knowledge of Latin grammar throws great illumination upon the structural study of English. Yet there are not many modern educators who would admit, either that a knowledge of general grammar is sufficient for one's understanding of English, or that an adequate knowledge of English grammar can be gained through the medium of Latin. It is only by the study of English itself that a true knowledge of English can be acquired.

A certain amount of distinction between the universal and the particular, however, is advisable in a course in grammar. The idea of case, for instance, belongs to general grammar. A student gains this idea most fully if it can be illustrated by examples taken from several different languages. But to know the specific cases belonging to a given language, to be familiar with all the words having case properties, to understand all the sentence relations which these cases can hold, and to form the habit of using them correctly in all these relations, constitutes a much larger bulk of grammatical acquirement than the mere knowledge of the primary case idea. So many are the details of specific grammar that cluster around each universal idea, that even in English, which of all modern lan

guages is most free from grammatical fetters, it is still true that "universal grammar constitutes but a very small part of the particular grammar of a language."

A knowledge of English grammar, then, implies some knowledge of the principles of universal grammar, the recognition of the ways in which these principles are applied in making the forms of English, and also a recognition of all the departures from general grammar that have gained an authorized place in either spoken or written English. This knowledge is to be acquired chiefly by the student's own examination of the current language and literature of the period in which he lives. Yet historical and comparative methods of grammar study are also needed to secure that knowledge of general grammar which is implied in a true knowledge of English grammar.