This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1846 edition. Excerpt: ...other examples, "can be adduced." 259. In reviewing the old theories of the verb, it was proved to you that the imperative and subjunctive moods are only visionary. Now turn to the conjugation of the potential mood of the verb to lave in any ordinary grammar. 200. Look at might, could, should, mould, in the past tense of that conjugation, and then look at could in No. 258, in what the same grammarians call the present tense, and likewise at their present anil past potential signs, may and might, in the future tense. Such things cannot but be held up to the ridicule of discerning minds. The authors of the potential mood, might reasonably be denominated manufacturers, because their conjugation has more the appearance of being constructed by machinery, than by any effort of human understanding. 261. This will insuperably second the assertion, that the conditional verbs are not definite in point of time. They are present in one sentence, and, many of them, past in another. In the term present, the author, of course, includes his predecessors' future time, but which, he repeats, is not future, but a present finite and a present infinitive verb united, and of this he offers, in the following paragraph, another proof. 262. If you refer to the General Conjugation, (No. 24 3,) you will observe that the verb to be in the first person of the finite, varies from the present infinitive, and that, on calling into requisition any of the auxiliaries, it rejects this difference, and assumes its infinitive form. This is an ennobling feature in the author's new theory, for it places it upon something more than a capricious footing. We say, "I am," and "I shall be." Can any reason be given why am here becomes be, other than that be is...