p'eet...... Cant. Chi. 8388 (peě), to separate, to put asunder, to distin peet phwat .... pat put-o .... guish. Hok. Chi. to distinguish, to divide, to separate, to set apart. Sansc. fad-an.... A.-Sax. pat ... to share, to portion, to distribute. to set in order, to dispose. 2. To regulate, to rule,-power, ability. Cant. Chi. 8131 (pă), to regulate, &c. 8136 (pă), to rule, or direct, to arrange in order, &c. to have supreme or superhuman power (Wilson), to be powerful, to rule (Westergaard). able. able, powerful, having supremacy over, potens ferarum, frugum, &c. fad-an.... 4.-Sax... to arrange, to set in order, &c. 3. One that has supremacy, a master, a lord or husband, a lady or wife. peet...... Cant. Chi. 8496 (peîh), a designation of royal or imperial personages, an epithet applied to Heaven, a term by which a widow addresses her deceased husband, when sacrificing, &c. pat-i...... Sansc. pat-ni... ... ih s.m. a master, owner, husband. Greek.... s.f. a lady, a mistress, a wife. πότνια patt-i feadh .... a husband. a wife. Irish...... a lord. The idea of concavity appears to have been connected with that of doubling over, or folding. 1. Turning back, doubling in, folding. peet Cant. Chi. 8481 (peih), eight folds of silk in length. 8482 (peih), a roll or piece of silk or cloth. Co.-Chin. to clench a nail, to bend back a twig. ah s.m. a narrowing or contracting of anything, a folding or doubling of anything, so as to form a cup or concavity, &c. ...... turned or bent backwards. to lay in folds or puckers. 2. Concavity, any concave vessel or utensil. pwat...... Hok. Chi. a vessel for containing food. bât Co.-Chin. a dish, a platter. pat-a Sansc. ah s.m. a plate or vessel made of leaves, &c., a cup or concavity made of a leaf folded or doubled, a concavity, a shallow cup or receptacle, as the hollow of the hand, a horse's hoof, &c. rā s.f. a vessel in general, a plate, a cup, a jar, &c. ran s.n. a sacrificial vase, a vessel comprising various forms of cups, plates, spoons, ladles, &c. πατ-άνη .. Greek s.f. a kind of flat dish. fat s.f. a kind of broad drinking vessel used at sacrifices. s.f. a deep dish with broad brims, used at sacrifices, a skillet, a pipkin. Icel....... s.n. a dish, a pan. Varro derived patera from pat-eo, and Pott suggests (as an alternative) the same derivation for war-ávŋ. The identity of the Latin patera and the Sanscrit pātra cannot well be doubted, and as the etymology of patra, if we give any credit to Sanscrit lexicography, is equally beyond the reach of question, we cannot feel much hesitation in giving to warávn, patera and patella the position here assigned to them. Surrounding or encompassing is the root-idea which binds together the following sets of meanings. They may possibly be connected with those immediately preceding. pat 1. Surrounding as a fillet or bandage, as a bond or fetter. Cant. Chi. 8711 (pŭh), a napkin, a cloth to wind round the head, a kind of military cap, &c. 8491 (peĭh), certain bandages rolled round the legs, to strengthen the muscles when walking, a sort of greaves. Hok. Chi. a leathern cap for the knees, a pad for the knees, used when kneeling at sacrifices. Sansc. ... to string, to surround, to encompass. ah s.m. a turban, &c., or cloth for that purpose, a coloured silk turban, a fillet bound round the head, a bandage, a ligature, a cloth bound round a sore, &c. a s.f. a horse's girth. a s.f. chaplet, a garland for the head. πέδ-η Greek.... s.f. a fetter. .... Cant. Chi. 8711 (puh), the lower garments parted off in a par ticular way. 8395 (peě), clothes, garments. Hok. Chi. a kind of short petticoat. to surround, to encompass. ah s.m. an upper or outer garment, &c. ah s.m. a cover, a covering, &c., a cloth worn to cover the privities. to cover. Welsh.... s. pl. aggr. coverings, garments, raiment. A.-Sax... a tunic, Vid. Gloss. to Kemble's Beowulf. 3. Surrounding, as a wall or screen. p'eet...... Cant. Chi. 8499 (peĭh), a wall, a mud wall or other military structure for the purposes of defence, &c. peet pat pat-a...... 8511 (peih), a hedge; a place round which a hedge is drawn, a poor place of abode, &c. to surround or encompass. i s.f. a screen of cloth surrounding a tent, an outer tent, &c. 4. Covering, as a shed or a cottage. .... pwat. Hok. Chi. a straw shed, a thatched cottage. an s.n. a thatch, a roof. Sansc. ..... pat-a ... ah s.m. a sort of cupboard, a granary made of bamboos or canes, a basket or box. an s.n. a house, a hovel. Union or connexion seems to be the root-idea of the following meanings. pat put 1. That which unites, a web, a hem, a selvage. Cant. Chi. 8712 (puh), the toes or claws joined with a web-like substance, web-footed like geese and ducks; joined, connected. Sansc. faith-e... Irish. fit......... Icel. fat .... ...... to fasten, to string, to bind together. the hem of a garment. a selvage; the thread which crosses the woof in weaving; the membrane on the feet of web-footed birds. 2. Interweaving, sewing, embroidering. Cant. Chi. 2588 (fuh), variegated with black and azure colours; Sansc. aḥ s.m. coloured cloth, wove silk, πáτt-w... Gr.(Att.) to intertwine, &c. sewn, stitched*. aḥ s.m. uniting, mixing. cloth in the loom, the warp, a web, clothes (particu- The Chinese word here quoted begins with f. We have, as much as possible, avoided using Chinese words opening with this initial, inasmuch as there is reason to believe that the Chinese ƒ originated in comparatively modern times, and that it is of doubtful parentage, sometimes representing the initial p, and sometimes the initial w. If however we altogether excluded these examples, we should occasionally deprive ourselves of a very important means of illustrating the analogies of language. They have accordingly been sometimes admitted, though not, it must be confessed, without some feelings of hesitation. * We have already noticed another root of a similar form signifying to stitch. Whenever these duplicate forms occur, they should be carefully distinguished. 66 On the Nature of the Verb, particularly on the Formation of the Middle or Passive Voice." By T. Hewitt Key, Esq. Any discussion about the nature of the verb in general may seem inopportune and ill-advised, after the series of able papers on the same subject which have appeared in the pages of the Society's Transactions in the course of the last two years. Still more imprudent may such a step be thought, when it is stated that the tendency of the present paper is towards conclusions in several respects decidedly at variance with the results at which the learned and lamented writer of those essays arrived. But the problem is one which lies at the very base of philology, and any defect in the foundation of the theory must needs affect the stability of the whole structure. Hence whether the arguments about to be put forward be deemed valid or not, yet good may follow. If Mr. Garnett's positions be impregnable, the failure of an attack can only tend to a more certain conviction of their strength. On the other hand, if his great and varied learning has been employed in the erection of an unfounded theory, then the very fact that his name must give weight to any doctrines propounded by him, renders it the more incumbent upon those who differ from him, without delay to give their reasons for so differing. But there is another motive which encourages the writer in the course he is now pursuing. He is ready to concur in the correctness of nearly all the statements which the extraordinary extent of Mr. Garnett's linguistic attainments has enabled him to lay down as the basis of his views, and at the same time he feels himself prepared to show that these fundamental facts are perfectly consistent with a theory very different from that which Mr. Garnett seemed to himself to have proved. The reasons which prevented the present writer from following Mr. Garnett from his premises to his conclusions, were stated more than once in the discussions which followed the reading of those papers. But unfortunately the illness which has since robbed the Society of one of its most valued and active members, already precluded him from attending many of the meetings at which his papers were read; and of course any discussion in his absence was in a great measure nugatory. But for the sake of clearness it is best to state that the opinion to which the reasons about to be detailed, together with other considerations, have led the writer is this, that the simple verb is the one fountain of language from which all the other parts of speech as well as secondary verbs have been derived; and by the simple verb is here meant a sound expressive of action. VOL. V. H That any arbitrary sound might be employed as a conventional symbol for any idea is of course conceivable; but the very fact of there being in such case no natural connexion between the significant sound and the thing signified, would render it the more difficult both to acquire and to retain a language so constituted. On the other hand, imitation of natural sounds renders the aid of a monitor for explanation wholly superfluous. Indeed as the representation of the familiar forms of the visible world was the natural medium for pictorial language, so for oral language no means can be conceived so simple or so effectual as the reproduction of the sounds which accompany action. In the hieroglyphical symbols we have living proof that the forms of the material world were in fact put in requisition for the language of the eye. Unfortunately sound is of necessity short-lived; but the analogy of the two cases leads us forcibly to the conclusion, that for a language which was to have the ear for its channel to the mind, man could not but avail himself of the simplest of all means, the imitation of the sounds of nature. That the onomatopoetic principle has constituted some portion of language, is all but universally admitted; and those who are accustomed to trace the varying meaning of words, often passing from the physical to the metaphysical, well know that the principle of association alone will explain how from one single root some hundreds of words may be deduced, and that among these words, such as lie at the extremity of the circle may have acquired a sense apparently wholly unconnected with that central idea from which they have proceeded. On the other hand, the notion of an arbitrary and conventional language, though in a certain sense, as we have already said, conceivable, yet may be safely pronounced unreal, if on no other ground, simply because the very term convention implies a previous agreement, and that again supposes not only an assembly of many people to receive the arbitrary decree, but one in a position to dictate it. Such views may be left to share the fate of other theories, such as Rousseau's Social Contract, which are founded on a similar assumption. But it may be objected that the logical theory of language is at variance with the views we wish to support. Every sentence, say our grammarians, consists of three elements, a subject, what is predicated of the subject, and the copula. That this view of language is all-important for the syllogism, and consequently for argument, is admitted. It is not admitted that the first object in the formation of language was argument. An earlier and a more important purpose was simply to enunciate facts and to give commands. In truth, the process by which a logician forces every sentence into his favourite form, so as to exhibit the so-called substantive verb, is altogether artificial; and not a little harm has been done to grammar by regarding language solely from the logician's point of view. Thus we find De Sacy in his Grammaire Arabe' (tome i. § 246) expressing himself thus : Le seul verbe, qu'on puisse regarder comme absolument nécessaire à l'expression des jugemens de notre esprit, c'est celui qu'on |