used which perform the office of grammatical terminations in other languages, are defined with so much care and accuracy in their various dicti

onaries.

OF ADJECTIVES.

Relative to the nature of Chinese adjectives, little requires to be said. Three kinds may perhaps be distinguished: original adjectives, or those originally intended to describe a quality as existing in some subject: those which being originally substantives, are used occasionally to describe certain qualities inherent in substantives; and those which may be termed compound-adjectives. Of these three kinds it may not be improper to take a slight view.

1. Those which are Original Adjectives, form a very considerable num

ber: Such are tà, great; syaó, small; kao, high; Thyà, low; Ttchoòng, heavy; khing, light; foò, rich ; 富 T'p'hin, poor, &c. It has however been already shewn, that many characters, originally adjectives, are occasionally used as substantives: thus foò, rich, is often used to denote riches; and tà, great, is occasionally used to signify greatness.

A second kind of adjectives are those, which, originally expressing ideas in their nature substantives, are often used to express the quality they originally denote, as existing in another substantive. Thus shyén, virtue, is often used as an adjective to signify virtuous; and the character yin,

which expresses virtue in the highest degree, is also an adjective when added toyin, a man. Of words thus used both as substantives and adjectives, the English language is not altogether destitute; the words light, calm, cold, salt, &c. are used as adjectives as well as substantives. But, as in English words of this kind, it is not easy always to ascertain whether they were originally adjectives or substantives; so, respecting many of these Chinese characters, it is difficult to say with precision whether they were originally substantives, or whether they have been used from the beginning to denote some quality as existing in other substantives. Were we indeed. to advert to characters originally verbs, and which become adjectives as often as they are used as participles, we might include a great multitude of the Chinese characters. But this would include little peculiar to the Chinese language; 'the conciliating look ;' 'the hated task;' 'the neglected friend; the despised, yet feared enemy,' are expressions by no means unfrequent in the English language.

3. Relative to Compound-adjectives, or those in which two or more characters are united to describe a quality in a substantive, or to form an adjunct thereto, perhaps no language abounds in these to a greater extent than the Chinese. Of this description are certain adjectives formed by adding

th, the genitive particle, to an adjective and sometimes to a verb. The following are sentences of this kind:

These compounds however are not simply adjectives: in both the above instances a verbal is formed by the genitive or possessive particle tih being affixed to a verb, in much the same way as a genitive is often affixed to a Greek infinitive. In the first instance the sentence really is, "this word is of the proper-to-be-spoken (kind) ;" and in the other the sentence might be rendered, "this man is of the highly-useful (kind)." The construction is nearly the same when this genitive particle is prefixed to a simple adjective; in that case the genitive particle tih communicates to the adjective the force of a substantive in the genitive case, by causing "kind" or "sort" to be understood. Thus, this thing is good,' ('haó-tih;') means in reality, 'of the good kind;' and, that thing is bad,' (' ngõh-tik') means, of the bad kind.' But this mode of construction is confined almost wholly to conversation; it scarcely ever occurs in grave compositions.

Another kind of compound adjectives and which are found in their best

writings, are those wherein even seven or eight characters are occasionally united to describe a quality or circumstance connected with a substantive. Such often resemble the adjunct in the sentence given page 200, were it translated 'The coarse-clothing-and-mean-food-abhorring man.' consideration of all compounds of this kind, however, belongs not so much to this part of the grammar, as to that which treats of Compound words; to which we refer them, and proceed without delay to consider what in other languages is termed,

THE COMPARISON OF ADJECTIVES.

The

The comparison of one person or thing with another so as to ascertain the relative degrees of strength, virtue, wisdom, goodness, &c. possessed by each, must necessarily exist in every language cultivated to any extent. Hence such of the alphabetic languages as are most cultivated, have a regular series of terminations, which being affixed to an adjective, express with ease the various degrees of a quality; such are and τατος in Greek;

τερος

and in Sungskrit; or and simus in Latin, and er, and est in English. But as the Chinese language rejects terminations of every kind, it of course has none to mark the degrees of comparison. In expressing these, it makes a nearer approach to the simplicity of the Hebrew, than to the more refined modes of the languages already mentioned.

The most general mode of forming the comparative degree in use among the Chinese, is, that of describing a person or thing as possessing some quality more than or beyond others. This method employs characters in two different ways; it requires certain characters to be prefixed to the sub

stantive with which the comparison is made, as well as certain others to be united to the adjective for the sake of forming the comparison. The former it may be proper to consider first.

The two characters generally prefixed to the substantive with which the comparison is made, are. kwo, to pass beyond, and the prepositive character Ayu, already mentioned. Of these two, kwo is most common

ly used in conversation; and one instance occurs in Confucius of its being used in nearly this sense. In the first volume of Lun-yu, the philosopher, speaking on a certain occasion of his headstrong disciple Tse-loo, has the following remark ;

"Yeu indeed esteems strength more than 1." Lun-yu, book iii.

In this sentence kwo, the fifth character from the right, has the force of 'more than;' but it would still admit of being rendered 'beyond,' without any violence; thus, Yeu truly values courage beyond me.' If rendered indeed in its own proper meaning as a verb, the sense would be nearly the same; ' Yeu, in esteeming strength, goes beyond me.'

To the substantive with which the comparison is made, however, the prepositive character Ayu is much more frequently prefixed by Confucius and the best Chinese writers, than kwò. Thus used, it has nearly the mean