The Grammar of English Grammars Part 47

REGULAR COMPARISON.

Adjectives are regularly compared, when the comparative degree is expressed by adding _er_, and the superlative, by adding _est_ to them: as, Pos., _great_, Comp., _greater_, Superl., _greatest_; Pos., _mild_, Comp., _milder_, Superl., _mildest_.

In the variation of adjectives, final consonants are doubled, final _e_ is omitted, and final _y_ is changed to _i_, agreeably to the rules for spelling: as, _hot, hotter, hottest; wide, wider, widest; happy, happier, happiest_.

The regular method of comparison belongs almost exclusively to monosyllables, with dissyllables ending in _w_ or _y_, and such others as receive it and still have but one syllable after the accent: as, _fierce, fiercer, fiercest; narrow, narrower, narrowest; gloomy, gloomier, gloomiest; serene, serener, serenest; n.o.ble, n.o.bler, n.o.blest; gentle, gentler, gentlest_.

COMPARISON BY ADVERBS.

The two degrees of superiority may also be expressed with precisely the same import as above, by prefixing to the adjective the adverbs _more_ and _most_: as, _wise, more wise, most wise; famous, more famous, most famous; amiable, more amiable, most amiable_.

The degrees of inferiority are expressed, in like manner, by the adverbs _less_ and _least_: as, _wise, less wise, least wise; famous, less famous, least famous; amiable, less amiable, least amiable_. The regular method of comparison has, properly speaking, no degrees of this kind.

Nearly all adjectives that admit of different degrees, may be compared by means of the adverbs; but, for short words, the regular method is generally preferable: as, _quick, quicker, quickest_; rather than, _quick, more quick, most quick_.

OBSERVATIONS.

OBS. 1.--The genius of our language is particularly averse to the lengthening of long words by additional syllables; and, in the comparison of adjectives, _er_ and _est_ always add a syllable to the word, except it end in _le_ after a mute. Thus, _free, freer, freest_, increases syllabically; but _ample, ampler, amplest_, does not. Whether any particular adjective admits of comparison or not, is a matter of reasoning from the sense of the term; by which method it shall be compared, is in some degree a matter of taste; though custom has decided that long words shall not be inflected, and for the shorter, there is generally an obvious bias in favour of one form rather than the other. Dr. Johnson says, "The comparison of adjectives is very uncertain; and being much regulated by commodiousness of utterance, or agreeableness of sound, is not easily reduced to rules. Monosyllables are commonly compared. Polysyllables, or words of more than two syllables, are seldom compared otherwise than by _more_ and _most_. Dissyllables are seldom compared if they terminate in _full, less, ing, ous, ed, id, at, ent, ain, or ive_."--_Gram. of the English Tongue_, p. 6. "When the positive contains but one syllable, the degrees are usually formed by adding _er_ or _est_. When the positive contains two syllables, it is matter of taste which method you shall use in forming the degrees. The ear is, in this case, the best guide. But, when the positive contains more than two syllables, the degrees must be formed by the use of _more_ and _most_. We may say, _tenderer_ and _tenderest, pleasanter_ and _pleasantest, prettier_ and _prettiest_; but who could endure _delicater_ and _delicatest_?"--_Cobbett's E. Gram._, p. 81. _Quiet, bitter, clever, sober_, and perhaps some others like them, are still regularly compared; but such words as _secretest, famousest, virtuousest, powerfullest_, which were used by Milton, have gone out of fashion. The following, though not very commonly used, are perhaps allowable. "Yet these are the two _commonest_ occupations of mankind."--_Philological Museum_, i, 431. "Their _pleasantest_ walks throughout life must be guarded by armed men."--_Ib._, i, 437. "Franklin possessed the rare talent of drawing useful lessons from the _commonest_ occurrences."--_Murray's Sequel_, p. 323.

"Unbidden guests are often _welcomest_ when they are gone."--SHAK.: _in Joh. Dict._

"There was a lad, th' _unluckiest_ of his crew, Was still contriving something bad, but new."--KING: _ib._

OBS. 2.--I make a distinction between the regular comparison by _er_ and _est_, and the comparison by adverbs; because, in a grammatical point of view, these two methods are totally different: the meaning, though the same, being expressed in the one case, by an inflection of the adjective; and in the other, by a phrase consisting of two different parts of speech.

If the placing of an adverb before an adjective is to be called a grammatical modification or variation of the latter word, we shall have many other degrees than those which are enumerated above. The words may with much more propriety be pa.r.s.ed separately, the degree being ascribed to the adverb--or, if you please, to both words, for both are varied in sense by the inflection of the former. The degrees in which qualities may exist in nature, are infinitely various; but the only degrees with which the grammarian is concerned, are those which our variation of the adjective or adverb enables us to express--including, as of course we must, the state or sense of the primitive word, as one. The reasoning which would make the positive degree to be no degree, would also make the nominative case, or the _casus rectus_ of the Latins, to be no case.

OBS. 3.--Whenever the adjective itself denotes these degrees, and is duly varied in form to express them, they properly belong to it; as, _worthy, worthier, worthiest_. (Though no apology can be made for the frequent error of confounding the _degree of a quality_, with the _verbal sign_ which expresses it.) If an adverb is employed for this purpose, that also is compared, and the two degrees thus formed or expressed, are properly its own; as, worthy, _more_ worthy, _most_ worthy. But these same degrees may be yet otherwise expressed; as, worthy, _in a higher degree_ worthy, _in the highest degree_ worthy. Here also the adjective _worthy_ is virtually compared, as before; but only the adjective _high_ is grammatically modified. Again, we may form three degrees with several adverbs to each, thus: Pos., _very truly_ worthy; Comp., _much more truly_ worthy; Sup., _much the most truly_ worthy. There are also other adverbs, which, though not varied in themselves like _much, more, most_, may nevertheless have nearly the same effect upon the adjective; as, worthy, _comparatively_ worthy, _superlatively_ worthy. I make these remarks, because many grammarians have erroneously pa.r.s.ed the adverbs _more_ and _most, less_ and _least_, as parts of the adjective.

OBS. 4.--Harris, in his Hermes, or Philosophical Inquiry concerning Universal Grammar, has very unceremoniously p.r.o.nounced the doctrine of three degrees of comparison, to be _absurd_; and the author of the British Grammar, as he emotes the whole pa.s.sage without offering any defence of that doctrine, seems to second the allegation. "Mr. Harris observes, that, 'There cannot well be more than two degrees; one to denote simple excess, and one to denote superlative. Were we indeed to introduce more degrees, we ought perhaps to introduce infinite, which is absurd. For why stop at a limited number, when in all subjects, susceptible of intension, the intermediate excesses are in a manner infinite? There are infinite degrees of _more white_ between the first simple _white_ and the superlative _whitest_; the same may be said of _more great, more strong, more minute_, &c. The doctrine of grammarians about _three_ such degrees, which they call the Positive, the Comparative, and the Superlative, must needs be absurd; both because in their Positive there is no comparison at all, and because their Superlative is a Comparative as much as their Comparative itself.'

_Hermes_, p. 197."--_Brit. Gram._, p. 98. This objection is rashly urged.

No comparison can be imagined without bringing together as many as two terms, and if the positive is one of these, it is a degree of comparison; though neither this nor the superlative is, for that reason, "_a Comparative_." Why we stop at three degrees, I have already shown: we have three _forms_, and only three.

OBS. 5.--"The termination _ish_ may be accounted in some sort a degree of comparison, by which the signification is diminished below the positive, as _black, blackish_, or tending to blackness; _salt, saltish_, or having a little taste of salt:[179] they therefore admit of no comparison. This termination is seldom added but to words expressing sensible qualities, nor often to words of above one syllable, and is scarcely used in the solemn or sublime style."--_Dr. Johnson's Gram._ "The _first_ [degree] denotes a slight degree of the quality, and is expressed by the termination _ish_; as, _reddish, brownish, yellowish_. This may be denominated the _imperfect_ degree of the attribute."--_Dr. Webster's Improved Gram._, p. 47. I doubt the correctness of the view taken above by Johnson, and dissent entirely from Webster, about his "_first degree_ of comparison." Of adjectives in _ish_ we have perhaps a hundred; but nine out of ten of them are derived clearly from _nouns_, as, _boyish, girlish_; and who can prove that _blackish, saltish, reddish, brownish_, and _yellowish_, are not also from the _nouns, black, salt, red, brown_, and _yellow_? or that "a _more reddish_ tinge,"--"a _more saltish_ taste," are not correct phrases? There is, I am persuaded, no good reason for noticing this termination as const.i.tuting a degree of comparison. All "double comparisons" are said to be ungrammatical; but, if _ish_ forms a degree, it is such a degree as may be compared again: as,

"And seem _more learnedish_ than those That at a greater charge compose."--_Butler_.

OBS. 6.--Among the degrees of comparison, some have enumerated that of _equality_; as when we say, "It is _as sweet as_ honey." Here is indeed a comparison, but it is altogether in the _positive_ degree, and needs no other name. This again refutes Harris; who says, that in the positive there is no comparison at all. But further: it is plain, that in this degree there may be comparisons of _inequality_ also; as, "Mola.s.ses is _not so sweet_ as honey."--"Civility is _not so slight_ a matter as it is commonly thought."--_Art of Thinking_, p. 92. Nay, such comparisons may equal any superlative. Thus it is said, I think, in the Life of Robert Hall: "Probably no human being ever before suffered _so much_ bodily pain." What a preeminence is here! and yet the form of the adjective is only that of the positive degree. "Nothing _so uncertain_ as general reputation."--_Art of Thinking_, p. 50. "Nothing _so nauseous_ as undistinguishing civility."--_Ib._, p. 88. These, likewise, would be strong expressions, if they were correct English. But, to my apprehension, every such comparison of equality involves a solecism, when, as it here happens, the former term includes the latter. The word _nothing_ is a general negative, and _reputation_ is a particular affirmative. The comparison of equality between them, is therefore certainly improper: because _nothing_ cannot be equal to _something_; and, reputation being something, and of course equal to itself, the proposition is evidently untrue. It ought to be, "Nothing _is more uncertain than_ general reputation." This is the same as to say, "General reputation is _as uncertain as any thing_ that can be named." Or else the former term should exempt the latter; as. "_Nothing else_"--or, "No _other_ thing, is _so uncertain_ as" _this popular honour, public esteem_, or "_general reputation_." And so of all similar examples.

OBS. 7.--In all comparisons, care must be taken to adapt the terms to the degree which is expressed by the adjective or adverb. The superlative degree requires that the object to which it relates, be one of those with which it is compared; as, "_Eve_ was _the fairest_ of women." The comparative degree, on the contrary, requires that the object spoken of be not included among those with which it is compared; as, "_Eve_ was _fairer_ than any of _her daughters_." To take the inclusive term here, and say, "_Eve_ was _fairer_ than any _woman_," would be no less absurd, than Milton's a.s.sertion, that "Eve was _the fairest_ of _her daughters_:" the former supposes that she was _not a woman_; the latter, that she was _one of her own daughters_. But Milton's solecism is double; he makes Adam _one of his own sons_:--

"Adam the goodliest man of men since born His sons, the fairest of her daughters Eve."--_P. Lost_, B. iv, l. 324.

OBS. 8.--"Such adjectives," says Churchill, "as have in themselves a superlative signification, or express qualities not susceptible of degrees, do not properly admit either the comparative or [the] superlative form.

Under this rule may be included _all adjectives with a negative prefix_."--_New Gram._, p. 80. Again: "As _immediate_ signifies instant, present with regard to time, Prior should not have written '_more_ immediate.' _Dr. Johnson_."--_Ib._, p. 233. "Hooker has _unaptest_; Locke, _more uncorrupted_; Holder, _more undeceivable_: for these the proper expressions would have been the opposite signs without the negation: _least apt, less corrupted, less deceivable_. Watts speaks of 'a _most unpa.s.sable_ barrier.' If he had simply said 'an unpa.s.sable barrier,' we should have understood it at once in the strongest sense, as a barrier impossible to be surmounted: but, by attempting to express something more, he gives an idea of something less; we perceive, that his _unpa.s.sable_ means _difficult to pa.s.s_. This is the mischief of the propensity to exaggeration; which, striving after strength, sinks into weakness."--_Ib._, p. 234.

OBS. 9.--The foregoing remarks from Churchill appear _in general_ to have been dictated by good sense; but, if his own practice is right, there must be some exceptions to his rule respecting the comparison of adjectives with a negative prefix; for, in the phrase "_less imprudent_," which, according to a pa.s.sage quoted before, he will have to be different from "_more prudent_," he himself furnishes an example of such comparison. In fact, very many words of that cla.s.s are compared by good writers: as, "Nothing is _more unnecessary_."--_Lowth's Gram., Pref._, p. v. "What is yet _more unaccountable_."--ROGERS: _in Joh. Dict._ "It is hard to determine which is _most uneligible_."--_Id., ib._ "Where it appears the _most unbecoming_ and _unnatural_."--ADDISON: _ib._ "Men of the best sense and of the _most unblemished_ lives."--_Id., ib._ "March and September are the _most unsettled_ and _unequable_ of seasons."--BENTLEY: _ib._ "Barcelona was taken by a _most unexpected_ accident."--SWIFT: _ib._ "The _most barren_ and _unpleasant_."--WOODWARD: _ib._ "O good, but _most unwise_ patricians!"--SHAK.: _ib._ "_More unconstant_ than the wind."--_Id., ib._ "We may say _more_ or _less imperfect_."--_Murray's Gram._, p. 168. "Some of those [pa.s.sions] which act with the _most irresistible_ energy upon the hearts of mankind, are altogether omitted in the catalogue of Aristotle."--_Adams's Rhet._, i, 380. "The wrong of him who presumes to talk of owning me, is _too unmeasured_ to be softened by kindness."--_Channing, on Emanc.i.p.ation_, p. 52. "Which, we are sensible, are _more inconclusive_ than the rest."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 319.

"Ere yet the salt of _most unrighteous_ tears Had left the flushing in her galled eyes."--_Shak._

OBS. 10.--Comparison must not be considered a general property of adjectives. It belongs chiefly to the cla.s.s which I call common adjectives, and is by no means applicable to all of these. _Common adjectives_, or epithets denoting quality, are perhaps more numerous than all the other cla.s.ses put together. Many of these, and a few that are p.r.o.nominal, may be varied by comparison; and some _participial_ adjectives may be compared by means of the adverbs. But adjectives formed from _proper names_, all the numerals, and most of the compounds, are in no way susceptible of comparison. All nouns used adjectively, as an _iron_ bar, an _evening_ school, a _mahogany_ chair, a _South-Sea_ dream, are also incapable of comparison. In the t.i.tle of "His _Most Christian_ Majesty," the superlative adverb is applied to a _proper adjective_; but who will pretend that we ought to understand by it "_the highest degree_" of Christian attainment?

It might seem uncourtly to suggest that this is "an abuse of the king's English," I shall therefore say no such thing. Pope compares the word Christian, in the following couplet:--

"Go, purified by flames ascend the sky, My better and _more Christian_ progeny."--_Dunciad_, B. i, l. 227.

IRREGULAR COMPARISON.

The following adjectives are compared irregularly: _good, better, best; bad, evil_, or _ill, worse, worst; little, less, least; much, more, most; many, more, most_.

OBSERVATIONS.

OBS. 1.--In _English_, and also in _Latin_, most adjectives that denote _place_ or _situation_, not only form the superlative irregularly, but are also either defective or redundant in comparison. Thus:

I. The following nine have more than one superlative: _far, farther, farthest, farmost_, or _farthermost; near, nearer, nearest_ or _next; fore, former, foremost_ or _first; hind, hinder, hindmost_ or _hindermost; in, inner, inmost_ or _innermost; out, outer_, or _utter, outmost_ or _utmost, outermost_ or _uttermost; up, upper, upmost_ or _uppermost; low, lower, lowest_ or _lowermost; late, later_ or _latter, latest_ or _last_.

II. The following five want the positive: [_aft_, adv.,] _after, aftmost_ or _aftermost_; [_forth_, adv., formerly _furth_,[180]] _further, furthest_ or _furthermost; hither, hithermost; nether, nethermost; under, undermost_.

III. The following want the comparative: _front, frontmost; rear, rearmost; head, headmost; end, endmost; top, topmost; bottom, bottommost; mid_ or _middle, midst,[181] midmost_ or _middlemost; north, northmost; south, southmost; east, eastmost; west, westmost; northern, northernmost; southern, southernmost; eastern, easternmost; western, westernmost_.

OBS. 2.--Many of these irregular words are not always used as adjectives, but oftener as nouns, adverbs, or prepositions. The sense in which they are employed, will show to what cla.s.s they belong. The terms _fore_ and _hind, front_ and _rear, right_ and _left, in_ and _out, high_ and _low, top_ and _bottom, up_ and _down, upper_ and _under, mid_ and _after_, all but the last pair, are in direct contrast with each other. Many of them are often joined in composition with other words; and some, when used as adjectives of place, are rarely separated from their nouns: as, _in_land, _out_house, _mid_-sea, _after_-ages. Practice is here so capricious, I find it difficult to determine whether the compounding of these terms is proper or not. It is a case about which he that inquires most, may perhaps be most in doubt. If the joining of the words prevents the possibility of mistaking the adjective for a preposition, it prevents also the separate cla.s.sification of the adjective and the noun, and thus in some sense destroys the former by making the whole a noun. Dr. Webster writes thus: "FRONTROOM, _n._ A room or apartment in the _forepart_ of a house.

BACKROOM, _n._ A room behind the _front room_, or in the _back part_ of the house."--_Octavo Dict._ So of many phrases by which people tell of turning things, or changing the position of their parts; as, _in_side out, _out_side _in; up_side _down, down_side _up_; _wrong_ end _foremost, but_-end _foremost_; _fore_-part _back, fore_-end _aft_; _hind_ side _before, back_side _before_. Here all these contrasted particles seem to be adjectives of place or situation. What grammarians in general would choose to call them, it is hard to say; probably, many would satisfy themselves with calling the whole "_an adverbial phrase_,"--the common way of disposing of every thing which it is difficult to a.n.a.lyze. These, and the following examples from Scott, are a fair specimen of the uncertainty of present usage:

"The herds without a keeper strayed, The plough was in _mid-furrow_ staid."--_Lady of the Lake_.

"The eager huntsman knew his bound, And in _mid chase_ called off his hound."--_Ibidem_.

OBS. 3.--For the chief points of the compa.s.s, we have so many adjectives, and so many modes of varying or comparing them, that it is difficult to tell their number, or to know which to choose in practice. (1.) _North, south, east_, and _west_, are familiarly used both as nouns and as adjectives. From these it seems not improper to form superlatives, as above, by adding _most_; as, "From Aroar to Nebo, and the wild of _southmost_ Abarim."--_Milton_. "There are no rivulets or springs in the island of Feror, the _westmost_ of the Canaries."--_White's Nat. Hist._ (2.) These primitive terms may also be compared, in all three of the degrees, by the adverbs _farther_ and _farthest_, or _further_ and _furthest_; as, "Which is yet _farther west_."--_Bacon_. (3.) Though we never employ as separate words the comparatives _norther, souther, easter, wester_, we have _northerly, southerly, easterly_, and _westerly_, which seem to have been formed from such comparatives, by adding _ly_; and these four may be compared by the adverbs _more_ and _most_, or _less_ and _least_: as, "These hills give us a view of the _most easterly, southerly_, and _westerly_ parts of England."--GRAUNT: _in Joh. Dict._ (4.) From these supposed comparatives likewise, some authors form the superlatives _northermost, southermost, eastermost_, and _westermost_; as, "From the _westermost_ part of Oyster bay."--_Dr. Webster's Hist. U. S._, p. 126.

"And three miles southward of the _southermost_ part of said bay."--_Trumbull's Hist. of Amer._, Vol. i, p. 88. "Pockanocket was on the _westermost_ line of Plymouth Colony."--_Ib._, p. 44. "As far as the _northermost_ branch of the said bay or river."--_Ib._, p. 127. The propriety of these is at least questionable; and, as they are neither very necessary to the language, nor recognized by any of our lexicographers, I forbear to approve them. (5.) From the four primitives we have also a third series of positives, ending in _ern_; as, _northern, southern, eastern, western_. These, though they have no comparatives of their own, not only form superlatives by a.s.suming the termination _most_, but are sometimes compared, perhaps in both degrees, by a separate use of the adverbs: as, "_Southernmost, a_. Furthest towards the south."--_Webster's Dict._ "Until it shall intersect the _northernmost_ part of the thirty-first degree of north lat.i.tude."--_Articles of Peace_. "To the _north-westernmost_ head of Connecticut river."--_Ib._ "Thence through the said lake to the _most north-western_ point thereof."--_Ib._

OBS. 4.--It may be remarked of the comparatives _former_ and _latter_ or _hinder, upper_ and _under_ or _nether, inner_ and _outer_ or _utter, after_ and _hither_; as well as of the Latin _superior_ and _inferior, anterior_ and _posterior, interior_ and _exterior, prior_ and _ulterior, senior_ and _junior, major_ and _minor_; that they cannot, like other comparatives, be construed with the conjunction _than_. After all genuine English comparatives, this conjunction may occur, because it is the only fit word for introducing the latter term of comparison; but we never say one thing is _former_ or _latter, superior_ or _inferior, than_ an other.

And so of all the rest here named. Again, no real comparative or superlative can ever need an other superadded to it; but _inferior_ and _superior_ convey ideas that do not always preclude the additional conception of _more_ or _less_: as, "With respect to high and low notes, p.r.o.nunciation is still _more inferior_ to singing."--_Kames, Elements of Criticism_, Vol. ii, p. 73. "The mistakes which the _most superior_ understanding is apt to fall into."--_West's Letters to a Young Lady_, p.

117.

OBS. 5.--Double comparatives and double superlatives, being in general awkward and unfashionable, as well as tautological, ought to be avoided.

Examples: "The Duke of Milan, and his _more braver_ daughter, could control thee."--_Shak., Tempest_. Say, "his _more gallant_ daughter." "What in me was purchased, falls upon thee in a _more fairer_ sort."--_Id., Henry IV_.

Say, "_fairer_," or, "_more honest_;" for "_purchased_" here means _stolen_. "Changed to a _worser_ shape thou canst not be."--_Id., Hen. VI_.

Say, "a _worse_ shape"--or, "an _uglier_ shape." "After the _most straitest_ sect of our religion, I lived a Pharisee."--_Acts_, xxvi, 5.

Say, "the _strictest_ sect." "Some say he's mad; others, that _lesser_ hate him, do call it valiant fury."--_Shak_. Say, "others, that hate him _less_." In this last example, _lesser_ is used adverbially; in which construction it is certainly incorrect. But against _lesser_ as an adjective, some grammarians have spoken with more severity, than comports with a proper respect for authority. Dr. Johnson says, "LESSER, _adj_. A barbarous corruption of _less_, formed by the vulgar from the habit of terminating comparatives in _er; afterward adopted by poets, and then by writers of prose, till it has all the authority which a mode originally erroneous can derive from custom_."--_Quarto Dict._ With no great fairness, Churchill quotes this pa.s.sage as far as the semicolon, and there stops. The position thus taken, he further endeavours to strengthen, by saying, "_Worser_, though _not more barbarous_, offends the ear in a much greater degree, because it has not been so frequently used."--_New Gram._, p. 232.

Example: "And G.o.d made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the _lesser_ light to rule the night."--_Gen._, i, 16. Kirkham, after making an _imitation_ of this pa.s.sage, remarks upon it: "_Lesser_ is _as incorrect_ as _badder, gooder, worser_."--_Gram._, p. 77. The judgement of any critic who is ignorant enough to say this, is worthy only of contempt.

_Lesser_ is still frequently used by the most tasteful authors, both in verse and prose: as, "It is the glowing style of a man who is negligent of _lesser_ graces."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 189.

"Athos, Olympus, aetna, Atlas, made These hills seem things of _lesser_ dignity."--_Byron_.

OBS. 6.--The adjective _little_ is used in different senses; for it contrasts sometimes with _great_, and sometimes with _much_. _Lesser_ appears to refer only to size. Hence _less_ and _lesser_ are not always equivalent terms. _Lesser_ means _smaller_, and contrasts only with _greater_. _Less_ contrasts sometimes with _greater_, but oftener with _more_, the comparative of _much_; for, though it may mean _not so large_, its most common meaning is _not so much_. It ought to be observed, likewise, that _less_ is not an adjective of _number_,[182] though not unfrequently used as such. It does not mean _fewer_, and is therefore not properly employed in sentences like the following: "In all verbs, there are no _less_ than three things implied at once."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 81.

"_Smaller_ things than three," is nonsense; and so, in reality, is what the Doctor here says. _Less_ is not the proper opposite to _more_, when _more_ is the comparative of _many: few, fewer, fewest_, are the only words which contrast regularly with _many, more, most_. In the following text, these comparatives are rightly employed: "And to the _more_ ye shall give the _more_ inheritance, and to the _fewer_ ye shall give the _less_ inheritance."--_Numbers_, x.x.xiii, 54. But if writers will continue to use _less_ for _fewer_, so that "_less cattle_," for instance, may mean "_fewer cattle_;" we shall be under a sort of _necessity_ to retain _lesser_, in order to speak intelligibly: as, "It shall be for the sending-forth of oxen, and for the treading of _lesser_ cattle."--_Isaiah_, vii, 25. I have no partiality for the word _lesser_, neither will I make myself ridiculous by flouting at its rudeness. "This word," says Webster, "is a corruption, but [it is] too well established to be discarded. Authors always write the _Lesser_ Asia."--_Octavo Dict._ "By the same reason, may a man punish the _lesser_ breaches of that law."--_Locke_. "When we speak of the _lesser_ differences among the tastes of men."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 20. "In greater or _lesser_ degrees of complexity."--_Burke, on Sublime_, p. 94. "The greater ought not to succ.u.mb to the _lesser_."--_Dillwyn's Reflections_, p.

128. "To such productions, _lesser_ composers must resort for ideas."--_Gardiner's Music of Nature_, p. 413.