will be proper, nevertheless, to premise a few remarks upon those other methods of connexion; because from the first of them we learn the cause why prepositions are connected with

its own proper force and significancy. I prefer to subjoin here some examples taken from Cattier himself, in order the more clearly to illustrate my meaning; since in the text I have discussed the subject only in general terms.

The Scholiast Antigon. v. 376, The author of

4uqi, according to Cattier, denotes in composition, circum, as in ἀμφιβάλλω, and also dubitation, as in ἀμφισβητέω. But in both these instances augi has its own proper signification; it denotes strictly, utrimque, on both sides, on either hand, as does also the adverb άupis. Hence auquẞnev is to go or tend towards one side and the other; as ἀμφιβάλλειν is to cast on either side; whence ἀμφίβολος, wounded or attacked on both sides, (Thucyd. 4. 32.) metaph. fluctuating, dubious, uncertain; and so also aμçißáhhev, to fluctuate, be in doubt. The reason why auqιoßηtav signifies to be in doubt, lies not in the preposition, but in the verb; for every one who is in doubt, inclines or tends first to one side and then the other, so long as he has not decided what to do.-We might affirm, with the same right, that άuqi signifies defence, as in ἀμφιβαίνειν, e. g. ὃς χρύσην ἀμφιβέβηκας, and other examples; but this no one would tolerate. The proper signification of auqi then is utrimque; and when this preposition is joined in composition with verbs, it superadds this sense to the idea expressed by the verb. Thus votiv is to think, and άupivosiv is so to think that the mind wavers on one side and the other, i. e. to doubt. on Sophocles therefore is incorrect, when he says ad ἀμφινοῶ· περισσὴ ἡ ἀμφί, “the ἀμφί is redundant. the Etymologicum is therefore also wrong, when he says that άupi and лi are synonymous; for лɛi is properly circa or circum, about, around. It therefore not only superadds a far different sense from that of augi, to verbs with which it is connected; but it also not unfrequently simply augments or gives intensity or comprehensiveness to the meaning of the simple verb; because the simple action expressed by the verb is made, by the addition of лɛi, to comprehend as it were the whole of the object, as being affected on every side and in all its parts. Thus, as ἀμφινοεῖν is to think waveringly, so περινοεῖν is to think carefully, to consider on all sides, to excogitate; and лeçivolα, solertia, ingenuity. Hence also both these prepositions are united with one verb, as aμpiregiτházɛodai, to wander about hither and thither, Orph. Lith. 80; and άuqinεqirqwquv, Iliad VIII. 348, comp. Eustath. 716, 49; auriider, Hom. Hymn. Ven. 271. In like manner they are also sometimes used together as separate prepositions; e. g. Iliad. II. 305. XVII. 760. comp. Eusth. p. 1126, extr. Aró in composition, Cattier says, signifies negation, as aлónu; VOL. III. No. 9.

7

verbs at all; while from the third we may most clearly perceive how inconsiderately, in phrases of this sort, the lexicographers have so often recurred to pleonasm.

despondency, as aлuniv; acquittal, as άroyn¶iser; completion, as aлegyálεσa. Abresch adds other significations; but that which he first subjoins, (in ἀπεῖναι, ἀποκοιμᾶσθαι, ἀποκρύπτειν, etc.) he ought to have marked as being properly the primary and common sense of nó in composition. In aлónu it is not the preposition that denotes negation, but the whole verb; he who denies or refuses a thing, declares that thing to be remote from his mind or will (άnovɛɛ). On the other hand, xatάonu is to affirm, to assent, (xatavɛɛiv,) to annex or superadd, as it were, one's own views or feelings to a thing. So also añoчngilar is to set any one free by vote; not because aлó denotes acquittal, but because yngilar and unpilɛodaι signify to give one's suffrage concerning any thing (ɛgi twos); and therefore, as xataynφίζειν τινά is to condemn by one's sufrage, (ψηφίζειν κατά τινος,) 50 añoчngisav tvá is to acquit by suffrage; because he who is thus acquitted, is conceived of as freed, taken away, from the sentence. Hence also άлoчngiger is construed with the accusative, although the preposition governs only the genitive ; as also ἀπομάχεσθαι, ἀποδικάζειν, ἀπολογεῖσθαι, and others.

Atά retains every where its own signification, through, in composition; but still it gives a variety of modification to the meaning of verbs, according to the different sense which belongs to the verbs themselves. In διακωλύειν, and διατελεῖν, for example, it does not of itself signify continuance, nor in diégzeσdai is it praeter, nor in diaσwsεodai dia tivos is it ex, although it may be so rendered in Latin. Whoever διακωλύει, he κωλύει διά τινος, i. e. hinders through the whole time during which any thing is to be impeded; whoever diégzetα, he Exεtai dia tivos, i. e. comes through something, leaves it wholly behind him, whence διέρχεσθαι εἰς τι, to arrive at ; whoever διασώζεται, he σώζεται διά τινος, i. e. is preserved through the whole time of his being in danger. Hence σaodai às dià пugós 1 Cor. 3: 15, and diaowdyvai di' vdutos 1 Pet. 3: 20, is to be preserved through the midst of the fire and the water by which they were surrounded; which, as to the sense, is indeed equivalent to being saved Ex igne vel aqua. So Xenophon, Anab. V. 5. 7, διὰ πολλῶν καὶ δεινῶν πραγμάτων σεσωμένοι лάQEσTE, 'ye stand here, preserved through many and great evils;' but in III. 2. 7, σoğortai en núvv davov, and Hist. Graec. VII. 1. 16, oi σωθέντες ἐκ τοῦ πράγματος. Thus also in all other verbs, διά fulfils its proper office, and signifies through, per; it denotes that the thing in question exists or takes place in such a way, that it must be conceived of as existing or taking place through something which is opposed or interposed. But since a thing may be regarded in a twofold manner,

It is the nature of verbs, that they necessarily connect the notion of the thing which they express, with the conception of some other thing, which may stand to the former in the relation either

either as the subject on which the idea expressed by the verb depends, or as the object on which the idea expressed by the verb terminates, it follows that diú may require either the genitive (of the subject), or the accusative (of the object); and hence has arisen the twofold signification of dia, as denoting both manner and cause. And since that through which a thing is said to exist or take place, is to be conceived of as a sort of medium, which the whole thing has as it were pervaded or passed through, those verbs therefore which are compounded with diά, often express the notion of difference, perfection, dividing, distributing, dissipating, contending, and the like; in all which, nevertheless, the preposition itself retains its own proper force. Nor do I fear that any one will pronounce all this to be empty speculation; as if it were indifferent, whether we regard the preposition itself as having a different power, or consider the modification which takes place when a preposition is added, as arising out of the verbs themselves. Our lexicographers would surely not have described one and the same preposition as denoting every thing in composition, had they more closely observed the peculiar force and significancy of each.-But to return to the preposition did. It is said to have the signification of excellence in diaqégeiv, diézav. True. But still it is one and the same signification of διά which causes διέρχεσθαι to mean pervenire ; διαβαίνειν, transgredi; and also diagέger, to differ; dieysir, to be prominent. This is clearly established as to dieze by the passages in Homer, Iliad. V. 100. XX. 416.

It is surprising that Abresch, in the place above cited, should follow the custom of so many writers, and attribute to the Greek prepositions almost as many significations as the Latin ones have, by which they are commonly rendered. Thus on p. 74 he writes, that & in composition sometimes denotes in; as ἐκπεσεῖν εἰς χάσμα γῆς in Pausanias ; although the very passage of Lucian which he adduces, Nigrin. c. 36, ἐκ μέσης τῆς ὁδοῦ καταπίπτειν, might have shown him the true solution; for he who while walking along a path, falls into a ditch, falls out of the path, ex via, into the ditch, So the passage of Xenophon, Hist. Gr. V. 4. 17, ὅπλα ἀναρπασθέντα ἐξέπεσον εἰς θάλατταν. But the phrase ἐκ μέσης τῆς ὁδοῦ καταπίπτειν means, to fall out of or at the middle of the way,' i. e. after completing half the way. The preposition agά in composition, he says, signifies not only as, nós, σúv, Agó, but also and άлó. But in all the examples that are adduced, it signifies nothing more than juxta, nigh, near to, neben, in which is also implied the idea of praeter, by, bey, vorbey. But this signification does indeed give a different modification to verbs, according to their

6

of cause or effect. To point out the nature or mode of this relation, it is often necessary to employ prepositions; whose office it is, when thus used with simple verbs, to shew whither the notion of the thing expressed by the verb, is to be referred. Thus when one says, yo T, he indicates that the possession of a certain thing is to be conceived of in connexion with himself; but when it is inquired, what is the mode or ratio of this possession, then there is need of a preposition; whether it be to shew from whom he has the thing, ἔχειν από τινος vel παρά τινος, or to designate where he has it, as ἔχειν ἐν χειρί, or ἔχειν μισθὸν παρὰ To nargi, Matt. 6: 1. Hence it is easy to see, how the entire

various simple meanings. Thus лagazλɛiɛr is indeed to shut out, exclude, not surely because лagú signifies ex, but because when one is shut up not in this place, but in some place beside, (praeter,) he is of course conceived of as excluded from this place. So in Aristophanes, Eccles. 129, nagievai may be rendered by prodire, to come forth, to approach, etc. [as if for 90σivα,] for the connexion is, áoit' is Tò πρόσθεν, and immediately after we find κάθιζε παριών. But still even here лaga is properly juxta, and Taqiέvai is to come near, draw nigh, etc. like лagέza. In the same author we read, Thesmophor. 804, παρακύπτειν ἐκ τῆς θυρίδος, and a little before, ἐγκύπτειν. The former, they say, is here i. q. προκύπτειν, and παρά performs the office of πρό ; while the latter, they say, is for ixxÚTTEIV. But in this sportive passage, лagazулtε is not 'to look out by thrusting the head through the window,' but 'to look out from within the window by inclining the head on one side,' as is done by modest females who do not wish to be seen from without. The notion of лó lies here in the verb xúлTяv itself. The poet therefore immediately subjoins: καν αἰσχυνθεῖσ ̓ ἀναχωρήσῃ, που λὺ μᾶλλον πᾶς ἐπιθυμεῖ αὖθις παρακύψαν ἰδεῖν. Neither is ἐγκύπτειν used for avazúлTEV, as the Scholiast explains it, but it is 'to look out by inclining towards (the window),' and differs from лagɑzúτtεiv, which the sacred writers have used to express the same idea, Luke 24: 12. John 20: 5, 11. The true force of the word is shewn by the examples which Wetstein has given, Nov. Test. T. I. p. 823; and especially by the passage from Aristophanes, Pac. 981 sq.-For these reasons I much doubt whether лagazuya in James 1: 25, means so much as 'to consider diligently, to know thoroughly;' it seems to denote simply to know, to have a knowledge of the law. The apostle says: "He who has a knowledge of the law, if he be not (εvóuevos) a forgetful hearer, but does that which the law prescribes, outos uaxáQios totai, he shall be blessed." The word is also used of knowledge in general, not careful or perfect knowledge, in Lucian, I. Rediviv. p. 598. So also in 1 Pet. 1: 12, it signifies nothing more than simply to behold, to become acquainted with.

difference of signification has arisen in the phrases ἔχειν από τι νος, and ἀπέχειν oι ἀπέχεσθαι. In these latter words, the preposition when thus compounded with the verb, occasions plainly a a new signification, directly opposite to the meaning of the simple verb; the thing to which the preposition points being no longer conceived of as conjoined with the notion of the thing expressed by the verb, but as disjoined from it. The case is different when aneye signifies to have received, (not to receive,) as anéXεiv μiodov, Matt. 6: 2, 5, 16; for there and denotes not disjunction, but an accession made from some other quarter; so that those interpreters are in an error, who here make άnéze μισθόν signify nothing more than the simple ἔχειν. They differ in the same manner, as in English, to have and to have away from, i. e. to have taken away from another to one's self; to have received, as above. It might be more a matter of doubt, whether in the words απέχεσθαι από τινος, the latter preposition is redundant or not; for the phrase expresses the same sense without the preposition ; as Acts 15: 20 απέχεσθαι ἀπὸ τῶν ἀλισγημάτων τῶν εἰδώλων, and verse 29 απέχεσθαι εἰδωλοθύτων. But these forms of expression seem to differ, not in the idea or thing itself, but merely in the mode of conceiving of it; just as they say in German, sich von einer Sache enthalten, and also, sich einer Sache enthalten, (i. e. to abstain from any thing,) where in the former mode of expression the notion of disjunction is referred particularly to the thing, and in the latter to the person.

If now these remarks should seem to any one to be specula-. tive and refined rather than true and well founded, let him remember, that it is the object of all language, not alone to excite. the same thought in the mind of others, but also so to excite the same thought, that it may be conceived, and as it were felt, in the same manner. Hence, wherever language is most highly cultivated, the more does it abound in the use of particles; whose chief province it is to indicate modes and relations, and as it were render them obvious to the senses. Thus it is not surprising, that the Hebrew language should need to employ whole phrases, where in Greek one verb compounded or connected with a preposition, is sufficient.

We may further remark, that when a preposition is subjoined to a verb already compounded with another preposition, it is done in order to designate more accurately the relations of those things, the idea of which is conjoined with the verb, i. e. that the designation of all the adjuncts and circumstances of the verb may