OF

HUMAN UNDERSTANDING.

BOOK III. CHAP. VII.

Of Particles.

§. 1. BESIDES words which are names of

ideas in the mind, there are a great many connect Particles others that are made use of, to signify the parts, or connexion that the mind gives to ideas, or whole senpropositions, one with another. The mind, tences toge in communicating its thoughts to others, does not only need signs of the ideas it has then before it, but others also, to show or intimate some particular action of its own, at that time, relating to those ideas. This it does several ways; as is, and is not, are the general marks of the mind, affirming or denying. But besides affirmation or negation, without which there is in words no truth or falsehood, the mind does, in declaring its sentiments to others, connect not only the parts of propositions, but whole sentences one to another, with their several relations and dependencies, to make a coherent discourse.

6. 2. The words whereby it signifies In them conwhat connexion it gives to the several affirm- sists the art ations and negations, that it unites in one of wellcontinued reasoning or narration, are gene- speaking. rally called particles; and it is in the right use of these, that more particularly consists the clearness and beauty of a good style. To think well, it is not enough that a

man has ideas clear and distinct in his thoughts, nor that he observes the agreement or disagreement of some of them; but he must think in train, and observe the dependence of his thoughts and reasonings upon one another. And to express well such methodical and rational thoughts, he must have words to show what connexion, restriction, distinction, opposition, emphasis, &c. he gives to each respective part of his discourse. To mistake in any of these, is to puzzle, instead of informing his hearer; and therefore it is that those words which are not truly by themselves the names of any ideas, are of such constant and indispensable use in language, and do much contribute to men's well expressing themselves.

They show what relation the

mind gives to its own thoughts.

§. 3. This part of grammar has been perhaps as much neglected, as some others over-diligently cultivated. It is easy for men to write, one after another, of cases and genders, moods and tenses, gerunds and supines: in these, and the like, there has been great diligence used; and particles themselves, in some languages, have been, with great show of exactness, ranked into their several orders. But though prepositions and conjunctions, &c. are names well known in grammar, and the particles contained under them carefully ranked into their distinct subdivisions; yet he who would show the right use of particles, and what significancy and force they have, must take a little more pains, enter into his own thoughts, and observe nicely the several postures of his mind in discoursing.

§ 4. Neither is it enough, for the explaining of these words, to render them, as is usual in dictionaries, by words of another tongue which come nearest to their signification; for what is meant by them is commonly as hard to be understood in one, as another language. They are all marks of some action, or intimation of the mind; and therefore to understand them rightly, the several views, postures, stands, turns, limitations, and exceptions, and several other thoughts of the mind, for which we have either none, or very deficient names, are diligently to be studied. Of these there is a great va

riety, much exceeding the number of particles that most languages have to express them by; and therefore it is not to be wondered that most of these particles have divers, and sometimes almost opposite significations. In the Hebrew tongue there is a particle consisting of but one single letter, of which there are reckoned up, as I remember, seventy, I am sure above fifty several significations.

§. 5. But is a particle, none more fa- Instance in miliar in our language; and he that says it But. is a discretive conjunction, and that it answers sed in Latin, or mais in French, thinks he has sufficiently explained it. But it seems to me to intimate several relations the mind gives to the several propositions or parts of them, which it joins by this monosyllable.

First, "but to say no more:" here it intimates a stop of the mind in the course it was going, before it came quite to the end of it.

Secondly, "I saw but two plants: here it shows, that the mind limits the sense to what is expressed, with a negation of all other.

Thirdly, "you pray; but it is not that God would bring you to the true religion."

Fourthly, "but that he would confirm you in your own." The first of these Buts intimates a supposition in the mind of something otherwise than it should be; the latter shows, that the mind makes a direct opposi→ tion between that, and what goes before it.

Fifthly, "all animals have sense; but a dog is an animal" here it signifies little more, but that the latter proposition is joined to the former, as the minor of a syllogism.

here.

$. 6. To these, I doubt not, might be This matter added a great many other significations of but lightly this particle, if it were my business to exa- touched mine it in its full latitude, and consider it in all the places it is to be found: which if one should do, I doubt, whether in all those manners it is made. use of, it would deserve the title of discretive, which grammarians, give to it. But I intend not here a full