The Theory of Moral Sentiments: Or, an Essay Towards an Analysis of the Principles by Which Men Naturally Judge Concerning the Conduct and Character, First of Their Neighbours, and Afterwards of Themselves. to Which Is Added, a Dissertation on the Origin of Languages.Smith, Adam
Philosophy
The Theory of Moral Sentiments: Or, an Essay Towards an Analysis of the Principles by Which Men Naturally Judge Concerning the Conduct and Character, First of Their Neighbours, and Afterwards of Themselves. to Which Is Added, a Dissertation on the Origin of Languages.
Smith, Adam
Ethics -- Early works to 1800; Language and languages -- Early works to 1800
If the original invention of nouns adjective would be attended with so
much difficulty, that of prepositions would be accompanied with yet
more. Every preposition, as I have already observed, denotes some
relation considered in concrete with the co-relative object. The
preposition _above_, for example, denotes the relation of superiority,
not in abstract, as it is expressed by the word _superiority_, but in
concrete with some co-relative object. In this phrase, for example, _the
tree above the cave_, the word _above_, expresses a certain relation
between the _tree_ and the _cave_, and it expresses this relation in
concrete with the co-relative object, the _cave_. A preposition always
requires, in order to complete the sense, some other word to come after
it; as may be observed in this particular instance. Now, I say, the
original invention of such words would require a yet greater effort of
abstraction and generalization, than that of nouns adjective. First of
all, a relation is, in itself, a more metaphysical object than a
quality. Nobody can be at a loss to explain what is meant by a quality;
but few people will find themselves able to express, very distinctly,
what is understood by a relation. Qualities are almost always the
objects of our external senses; relations never are. No wonder,
therefore, that the one set of objects should be so much more
comprehensible than the other. Secondly, though prepositions always
express the relation which they stand for, in concrete with the
co-relative object, they could not have originally been formed without a
considerable effort of abstraction. A preposition denotes a relation,
and nothing but a relation. But before men could institute a word, which
signified a relation, and nothing but a relation, they must have been
able, in some measure, to consider this relation abstractedly from the
related objects; since the idea of those objects does not, in any
respect, enter into the signification of the preposition. The invention
of such a word, therefore, must have required a considerable degree of
abstraction. Thirdly, a preposition is from its nature a general word,
which, from its very first institution, must have been considered as
equally applicable to denote any other similar relation. The man who
first invented the word _above_, must not only have distinguished, in
some measure, the relation of _superiority_ from the objects which were
so related, but he must also have distinguished this relation from other
relations, such as, from the relation of _inferiority_ denoted by the
word _below_, from the relation of _juxtaposition_, expressed by the
word _beside_, and the like. He must have conceived this word,
therefore, as expressive of a particular sort or species of relation
distinct from every other, which could not be done without a
considerable effort of comparison and generalization.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account