Ethic Politic Oeconomic so Poesie and all other Arts whatsoever are honored beautified nobilitated and highly advanced by the Christian faith more than ever before in the heathenish Philosophers times who did imbrace them more for curiosity then Religion sake but we Christians esteeme them because they willingly give all their assistance and offer up their service to the Bible and Divinity But further if we would speak of these artes in reference unto othermen viz. the greatest part of those in Asia and Affrica I avow that a more worthy work cannot be undertaken by a Generous Nation as England I have experience of to bee than that the Learned men thereof should not only sit still at home referring all things only to themselves and studies but also joyne with Heathens Christians and Jewes to learne from them teach them love them and to be beloved of them to meet them invite and doe them good not only with temporall but also which they would accept of with more thankfull humble devout earnest minds with Spirituall refreshments Are you the worse for having your Sermons frequented by thousands more then formerly or the Exchange with thousands of Merchants more then your selves every one of them encreasing the common-wealth and riches of the City or for having store of spirituall intellectuall and corporeall goods wherewith to refresh all Asia and Affrica by your writings and instructions in their owne tongue but I must leave this to me at least pleasant music and come to the fifth point to shew that these six languages viz. Ebrew Calde Syriac Samaritic Ethiopic and Arabic are BUT ONE Truly I would never have touched that point either in this my English Essay or in any of my latine books and writings because I know it is displeasing to some who would not willingly heare the truth or the nature and secrecy of this tongue discovered or cannot believe it to be so or if they doe will not confesse it but would keep the people still in ignorance admiration of unspeakable high matters whereunto no body is able to attaine but themselves nay they thinke that I undervalue the Holy tongue feigning as if I spake of it in a contemptible way because of this unity as if God were therefore to be contemned because BUT ONE and that I loose my owne reputation of Learning by writing and speaking of it in that way of commendation Some others are apt to thinke and say that this sort of commendation doth only arise out of some philosophicall notions about unity and diverfity which are also very usefull and necessary following therein Plato's wayes of discoursing of things rather in high and witty fancies than in plaine and samiliar way tending to and advancing the easines and utility of the matter under hand but only that the truth must bee said and written much profit arising from a true notion of things whole Kingdomes being willing to engage in a worke according to their notions be they good or bad wherefore I thought it reasonable to say something in behalfe of this holy primitive tongue when so many hundred wits lye and sleep out of a false conceit that it is impossible to overcome these Orientall tongues because there is no end of studying them and never almost any seene to get out with credit and honour Many thousand wits otherwise imployed that might easily be brought to any tongue if they were well informed of the subject Many thousand study not at all that would be glad to have some good subject presented them In respect of all these in love towards the rongue I tender to all the English wits of whatsoever profession honour title degree and state this sort of learning only with this condition that they truly love God whom they see not feare and tremble at his power and greatnesse yet withall faithfully embrace his mercy kindnesse and goodnesse and rejoyce in the flourishing condition of their own Kingdome for if they cannot doe this I have done with them and desire not to engage farther with them Upon this point viz. that all those hitherto though falsly esteemed divers tongues are but ONE I did partly before build the usefullnesse and shall hereafter also set downe the easinesse of them when I have fully demonstrated that unity which I now speake of Vnity then is a flower of essence never of accidents for they cannot have that prerogative to become one whereas let essence be presented with all the various accoutrements that the wit of man can invent it cannot be changed but will alwayes remain one and the same Now therefore when we speake of the unity of these tongues viz. that these six tongues in my opinion are only one and not divers it must be understood of their essence not accidents Ignorant people may thinke that languages have neither essence nor accidents but the learned and such I speake unto at this time though in some measure to others also know that not only created matters but also tongues may be considered both in their essence and accidents And as essence is one so hath it essentiall proprieties viz. Vnity Truth and Goodnesse besides divers others all which are so united with essence or the essentiall being of things metaphysically considered that if they are one and the same it followes necessarily that whatsoever is good and true in one continues still to be the same under whatsoever climate name shape or plantation it be found Then if Ebrew be good holy and primitive and Caldaic Syriac Samaritic Ethiopic and Arabic call them by as many names as you please be the same primitive tongue then if you deny whether with or without reason any one of them the name of primitive you may as well deny it to Ebrew it selfe the denying of one being the denying of the other Now then I will lay downe the foundation of this unity Ebrew Calde Syriac Samaritic Arabic and Ethiopic is one tongue because it hath but one matter and forme whereof it consists and whereby it differs from all other tongues whatsoever none of them having the said properties The matter of these viz. Ebrew Calde c. is 22. sundry letters reduceable unto 20. used generally by these people in all ages from David the King and Prophets dayes untill us Nay further seeing that David used the very same words which Moses the holy penman of the five Bookes of the Law and story of the patriarchs before the law both before and after the deluge retayning the same nature that was observed by Ezra the Scribe I thinke we have a good ground from reason to say that Adam himselfe did use the same tongue But because the antiquity of the Ebrew Alphabet even from Adams dayes is already sufficiently demonstrated against any cavills I shall goe on to shew my unity T is true that there is some diversity in the Arabic Syriac and Ethiopic Alphabet though not arising from the tongue it selfe but only that the Ethiopians and
hath penned and sent into your bosome you are not worthy to look on any book else although I would have shewed you onely in England about two thousand None is honoured by learning them True because none did truely understand them No people studied them Yet all nations do The Vniversities drive more the Arts than these Tongues Because they were taught to be many and learned men would rather dispute than become schollars againe and againe Yet all this spoken in an opposite way is easily done and said but not easily believed because the old principles are so deeply rooted in mens hearts therefore is it fit to go on a litle more plainely in the declaration of their nature then in railing and wrangling about them Wherefore I will choose to speake first of their Antiquitie secondly of their rare vertues thirdly of their largenesse fourthly of their use fiftly of their unity sixthly and lastly of their easines And all this without much premeditation but onely as few dayes labour of using the pen will afford their being many reasons in the way why I could not spend great labour or much time about this businesse at this instant And first the Antiquity of them is granted by all to be before any of the European Tongues whatsoever But the Greeke Tongue which spread so sarre in Europe that out of Greece it took root in Spaine France Italie and in Affrica in all the mediterranean Seashore and almost into Persia it selfe by Alexander the Great not that it was the onely tongue spoken in Asia Africa and Europe all other Tongues being lost but that it came in for its smoothnesse by the victoriousnesse of that people and the activity of their Kings and great traffick of their most renouned Merchants and sea-men this Greeke Tongue onely might challenge a great Antiquity and be competitor with Calde Syriac Samaritan and Arabic if not with Ethiopic whereof we are like to know almost nothing with Ebrew no man dare bring it into competition for antiquity but if diversity of names make no distinct matter and if the essence be not divers because it has many accidents and if the substance of any thing be remaining the same in number although you add never so many outward pictures and titles glosses and inscriptions and if the thing it selfe be not changed in changing the outside onely and if a man remaine the very same although he should be so foolish as to change his habit every day and never weare the same cloaths two dayes together than let us not despaire if we can make it appeare that Ebrew Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and Etiopic are but one and the same language as we shall in the fifth part but that the argument used for the antiquity of Ebrew will shew the very same antiquity to be in all the said Tongues because they being all one began at one instant together with Adam given unto him by God Almighty to talke with his Creator and afterward with his bedfellow not with the Divel as she did Besides wee know there was a great distance between the Caldean Empire the Syrian Gods the Arabian Rovery and the Grecian setlement and well grounded assurance or full large extent either of the tongue or government we know further that the whole Greeke Tongue no dialect excepted as big as it now is comes by good naturall pedegree from the Ebrew Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and I dare say as much out of Ethiopic I say not only from Ebrew and though a great quantity of Greek be already derived by divers Authors only from the Ebrew Bible words so that if I am not mistaken there are above sixe thousand Greeke words clearely derived by divers learned Authors from thence as a son descending from his parents yet if the very same root and stock be in the Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabie and Ethiopic Tongue who can deny or will not easily grant that all these six thousand Greeke words already derived out of Ebrew are at the same instant derived out of Calde c. And than besides if many thousand words extant in Greek can either by me or many hundred men be further derived from these Ebrew words extant in the Bible wil not all this declare more and more a great antiquity not onely of Ebrew I say but also of Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and Ethiopic before the Greeke Tongue it being a most reasonable principle that if the parents beget never so many children in divers Countryes let these children have never so many and various names yet they wil never be elder than their parents Further as it would be a sinple assertion that whatsoever word is not extant in the English Bible is not English even so and no lesse ridiculous doe almost all the learned men hetherto speake when they say that whatsoever word they finde not in the Ebrew Bibel is not any more Ebrew and therefore then it must be called Calde if they finde it in the Calde Jewish translation upon the old Testament or Syriac if in a Syrian Authour or Arabic by an Arabian and Ethiopic by an Ethiopian or Samaritic in the Samaritan character of the Ebrew five Bookes of Meses in some passages differing from the Ebrew Bibles extant or in their Paraphrase upon the text This as it is unsound and a sport of dark mindes led out of the way by neglects of their owne learning so shall it be declared in the fifth point And therefore as we grant that there are some words sound in Calde Syriac and Arabic books which are not in the Ebrew Bible and besides as we know that even of them also a great quantity of Greek words are derived by some and yet many hundred more will heareafter be derived all this doth shew that the Greeke tongue can not come into competition for antiquity either with Ebrew Calde Syriac Arabic or Ethiopic Neither is that dreame as if the Greeke tongue had bin hatched at the same instant with Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and Ethiopic conceaved to be so many divers Tongues at the confusion of Babel that dreame I say is not with any reason but onely a blinde talke upon suppositions First Of a confusion of Tongues in the plurall where the Scripture clearly speaks onely of one tongue of one pronuntiation which tongue was confounded I grant it but as the Scripture saith not unto many tongues for so it saith not but many pronunciations of the very selfe same tongue and so much it sayes and that is true Which was enough to dispersethese builders when they could not understand one the others pronunciation although they spake the same language As forinstance notwithstanding English Scotish Danish Swedish Norwagish Greenlandish Low Dutch and the High German tongue is but one tongue all in all with many yet small accidentall differences these said nations cannot understand one another at an instant and new unexpected meeting I say not of the nearest but most remoted nations
here but also in place of vowells which all the occidentall European tongues confirme Rule 4. The Pricks for distinction joynture and other designes are diverse but uselesse In Ebrue and Calde 1. Maffiq which is onely a point within 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it is the last letter in steede of being below it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being such a superfluous thing that 1. Though the Dictionary writers themselves have it yet they uniustly confound it with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent as deriving 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 God from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 forswearing 2. In many places of the Bible this point is lost in that letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when it is the affix of the three person signifying he his him 3. In Syriac Arabic and Etiopic it is never found 4. It is not pronounced in the orient as a syllable a part and yet the Grammar would have it so 5. It is superfluous because when the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath a fatah gnuba it is sounded ha what neede then of hi too either ha must be left out or hi. 6. Because it falls away as the Grammarians say when the letter receaves a hireq but observe that even this maffiq is that hireq and that hireq is that maffiq 7. It is a non necessary thing upon a non-necessary ground raised by those unhappy builders the Jewes who invented these pricks because they conceived a necessity of a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent whereas if there had beene none but moveable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Ebrew as it is in Syriac Arabic Etiopic and Samaritic there had beene no neede of that invention of maffiq It is never in Jod for that point which is in it is dages which is now to be spoken of 2. Dages a point with in any letter whatsoever except 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and doth double the letter if there go immediatly à vowell before but if a sua either expressed or understood under the last letter of a word go before than is its power of dubling superfluous Whereby you may see the superfluity of this poynt 1. In all places of the Bible without doubling wheresoever it is in any of these letters as bgd kft 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the first in the word the last letter of the word forgoing not being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. In the same letters in the middle of a word an expresse sua going before All the euphonics are superfluous as not being now observed either by the Iewes or Christians in their pronunciation the true nature condition and use of them being unknown to both parties alike 4. The Characteristicall are superfluous as being left out in many places 5. The compensative are superfluous as being omitted in as many 6. In Syriac Samaritic and Etiopic it is generally omitted 7. The distinction of forte and lene is unknowne to the Sirians and Arabians 8. It is many times easily mistaken in Ebrue for Sureq In Siriac they have two names qusoy and rukok yet the Grammarians nay those naturall ones which doe yet live Sionita Ecchellensis and Emira as I take it do deny that the Syrians ever had a dages forte But if not what is than that qusoy and rukok both cannot be lene both cannot be forte nay it is denyed that there is any forte at all this point doth almost never appear but if it be of a great use why doth it not appeare if of none why is there in the Ebrew such a stirre about it If it doubles why is it not forte if not why is there qusoy and rukok both If superfluous what need have wee than to trouble us with it Farther the Syrians do many times use a poynt above or beneath the letters as in the forgoing to denote a e i o u above distinguish betwixt certaine words of a divers signification Below the letter d. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ido a hand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hu he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hi she 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sento sleepe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 khadto new in Masc 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 abdo a servant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ulo a babe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 biso base belg boos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 henûn they m. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 henen they f. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 min of or from the same with the poynt above are pronounced otherwise and do signifie aido what Women hau that Man hoi that Woman santo year the letter r. Khadto new in f abodo service avolo vvicked without it aulo wickednesse boiso miserable honun they Men honên they Women Men who But alas is any man so bereaved of reason that hee thinkes he shall not bee able to discerne these words without a poynt Take from mee these three observations 1. The Masculine and Feminine genders are adiaforas and let them not trouble you 2. Abstract and concrete notions will easily be discerned by the Text. 3. The farther the signification of one is from the signification of the other word so much the easier will it bee discerned in the Text without a poynt The same is to bee observed in the poynt which is in the Verbs 1. Below it denotes the whole pretertense except the first singular and the third sem sing hath it sometimes above at the left hand of t. 2. It stands frequently with the singular and imperative 3. All the persons in future tense except the first person in both numbers 2. above 1. The first of the pretertense 2. the noune agent otherwise called participle bnoni denoting together o or a. Yet in the fourth order it is below the second radicall being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3. The first singular and plurall in the future 4. Two do denote the plurall as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ktobe Books the boto goods in Plurall or in the Verbs of the Feminine gender onely fqadei they did visite fqadôn do you visite nefqdôn they shall visite refqdên yee shall visite If an r be in the word then is one point unto that of r added sufficient to make up two Where three do occurre besides these two of the plurall number the third denotes the vowell or qusoy or the tense In the verbs of a radicail r one point is for the letter and one for the first person of the future tense as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qriyt I have cried and cald not qrayt thou didst cry and call Yet all these points are added out of a childish feare that the people will not let reason have the soveraignity rather then for necessity sake nor is it to be esteemed that they are of such necessity or of the essence of the tongue In the Arabic the poynts difference some letters one above as Kh ds z dh th gh f and by the Turcks and Persians at k pronounced as gh one below as b and by the African Arabians about
Ledebuhr his disciple both Germans out of Pommeren in a booke of 36 sheets printed in Octavo at Leyden by Le Mair 1647. cald salselet hammiqra as hee out of a high conceit thinkes it to be a chaine of the Scripture catena Scripturae written in Latine as if without the accents the Scripture would fall asunder If that were so how was it possible that the Lxx Hierome and all our interpreters for 200 yeares and upwards could so neerly interpret the Bible that all these new raised great Masters of Israel are not able to shew a sensible foule and faulty translation arising from the ignorance of the Accents whereas wee know they had no knowledge of these high misteries which these three late Authors would have the World to believe they have found before all the rest and brag of it in their books almost intollerably Therefore let no Englishman think that hee hath not learned the Ebrue tongue if hee know not these Accents and the infinity of worke in them and rather with mee pitty the paines of those painfull Germans and Scotchman upon such rotten principles and learne hereafter of them to labour upon a sure ground or to thinke that God hath laid a curse upon his labour fisyphi saxum a stone that will give him an endlesse and unprofitable worke and I wish this painfull man and Buxtorf and all those that are so busy about the pricks and will not believe that excellently and exceedingly learned Authour Mr. Capell a Frenchman professor at Saumur whose learned booke in Latine Arcanum punctorum revelatum that judicious and illustrious Author Erpenius caused to bee Printed at its owne charge in his owne most excellent orientall Printing house at Leyden Anno 1625. that they may bestow their paines upon better worke than about these triffles of the poynt and the Samaritic Characters if they or those wherewith now the Bible is commonly printed be the true old Ebrue Characters whereas both are of the same essence and one no more true than the other as I have shewed before Yet all that can bee said for these stroaks and pricks of the accents and for those that will care for them as very necessary is onely this 1. That one accent may do the businesse 2. That it stands at the syllable which is to be lifted up in the pronunciation 3. That it stands at a certaine letter also 4. That that letter must have a vowell because it cannot otherwise be elevated 5. By consequence never at a letter with sva 6. That their forme is either simple opposite or compound 7. That in Ebrue they do give in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vâl that is after along vowell when the following letter hath no vowel but sva the nature of a short vowell that anothe letter may follow this long vowell in the same syllable whereas otherwise it should go the following sillable or word the long vowell naturally desiring to end the syllable And again in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vālē the nature of a long to a short vowell when the following letter goeth away to the following syllable having its owne vowell long or short when the short vowell had need of it to rely upon as being of a short pronunciation 8. That it is the nature of every accent to change upon such conditions the nature of the short and long vowels 9. Those conditions failing it doth not change that nature of the vowells 10. And yet as that nature of the vowels doth not hold constantly so neither are these stroacks constantly of that nature 11. There are no euphonic accents for meteg who is onely cald so I shewed to bee onely a stroack keeping two letters asunder 12. To call accents tonics is a tautology both words descending from one root and signifying one thing 13. That meteg with silluq is improvidently made of the same figure 14. That rbia and holem also are improvidently almost confounded whereby arises a necessity of new and many Rules 15. The Accents are unreasonably and without sence cald Grammaticall and Retoricall for Retoric hath never any accents nor doth speake of them 16. It is without profit to give in the Grammer a title and terme for a word which hath the accents in the last syllable or the last but one Notwithstanding the Grecians did the same perispomenos barytonos and oxytonos in the last properispomenos and paroxytonos in the last syllable but one 17. It matters not if yee call the words milra below the last syllable milel above in the last but one Calde or Ebrue words 18. To shew the union or disjunction of words by Accents is the invention of men also 19. As the union of words belong to Syntax so the signe thereof by the Accents 20. For that purpose those are invented which yee have in the table with the Names THE END OF ORTHOGRAFY FIRST RVLE THE SECOND PART OF GRAMMAR is cald Etymology and Analogy ETymology is a part of the second part of the Grammer whereunto all the rules mediatly or immediately have their respects and reference For whatsoever word occurres in the Bible or any orientall Author whatsoever the question about it is I confesse as in the Greec and Latine tongue what signifies it and to know that whence is it derived The first part is again either of the simple and abstract signification viz. Etymology that is the Lexicâs and Dictionaries which handles the first more properly where if possible 1. The reason why this roote signifies this and not that should be shewed but hath bin hitherto neglected by them all 2. That signification should according to Retoric Logic Fisic and Metafisic be distinguished unto all its branches 3. The division with the reason thereof should be clearly set downe 4. The Authority as not superfluous should be added that we might see it to bee truly humane good sound and satisfactory reason which all Authours hetherto want Or of the signes of the signification whereof as also of their reasonable and analogicall reducement unto this or that root the other part of the second part of Grammer doth speake to wit analogy From the principall office thereof Authors call it Etymology yet from the nearest part in respect to us as all concrets are more sutable to our apprehensions and the nearest to our senses then abstracts the old Romans did rather call it Analogy as Vossius shewes in his Latine Grammer or great and good booke about the Latine Grammer The first part considers the root without any the least consideeration of the parts of a speech unto how many parts of a speech every root is dividable The second layes downe certaine rules into how many parts all the words of this or that or any tongue may be divided and than applies every word or layes downe certaine rules to which they may be applied The first is mightily abstract as a new Metafisic the second is meerly concret as a new Fisic Yet the first part hath the greatest
any person and tense although wee have it not in the Ebrue Bible And that is demonstrable à priori by this first rule and à posteriori by the practise of the Jewes who have made many Nounes and Verbs not extant in the Bible which they never could have done if it were not lawfull And thus all the tongues become more full and copious Secondly it is practised by the Iewes in the Calde translation in the Talmud in all Rabbinicall books so that it is a meere fancy to call those formed Nounes and Verbs wee finde with the rabbines and not in the Ebrue Bible rabbinicall words and rabbinismes or Talmudicall words and Talmudisines Thirdly the same is done by the Syrians Arabians and Etiopians who have many Nounes and Verbs which are not in the Ebrue Bible Rule 2. This the simplest tongue hath onely a Noune and Verbe and no more parts of speech As God is the singlenesse and uncompoundednesse it selfe so it is no wonder that his tongue which hee by reason gave unto Adam is the most simple and least compounded tongue Neither can any tongue be brought to a greater singlenesse than this which hath the greatest to wit onely two parts of speech according to nature it selfe which goes almost constantly upon a division of two in an opposite way One part cannoe make up a whole story discourse descripâ—ion or opem but Noune and Verbe taken in thâ—â— sense as here may For here in Analogy we consider them for the most part only with relation to their terminations not significations Therefore notwithstanding the Greecks and Latines have made 8 or 9 parts and some Grammarians in this tongue have unreasonably followed them yet the Arabians and Jewes in their Grammars have the nearest way that they could finde and that is a Noune a Verbe and a participle I confesse a threefould distinction is frequently used in nature by the third to jovne or separate the better the opposites as Comenius goes much upon that ground And so in Logic in every proposition wee have a Noune and Verbe and the Copulative so that considering the nature of speeches they go upon a Noune Verbe and Participles as Copulations Yet because here wee consider them not logically nor rhetorically neither Syntactically or pöetically therefore when all the Nounes and Participles may bee coucht as one part as they are one by termination onely and that both Nounes and Participles are unvariable and thereby a more compendious way may bee found for Syntax I thinke not that I have done amisse in leaving away the third part being in outward shew all one the Nounes in all tongues becomming adverbs and here because undeclinable also prepositions conjunctions and interiections to shew that singlenesse whereunto the Arabians and Jewes came very neere to bee yet more fingle and that without any hurt to them remembring that saying of the Jewes before all things let a Master teach his Disciples the neerest way And as the Syntax by many excellent men is already brought to a more compendious way by this trinity of the parts of speech in analogy whereas Buxtorf hath 22 Chapters in Syntax because built upon those 8 parts a Noun Verbe Pronoun Participle Adverb Preposition Conjunction and Interjection and Hottinger hath 12 Chapters with an Appendix of three seciall anamalies in the Ebrue Syntax printed 1647 at Zurich in 80 and many others of that stuffe so is it certaine that it may bee brought into a neerer way by cutting away the third part and making it all one with the first which is generally for Ebrew Samaritic Calde Syriac Arabic and Etiopic whereof I have given the yeare past viz. 1647. The proofe in that little English Grammer and shall shew it in the following Syntax A Noun is defined by all the Logicians and that very exactly to bee a word of no tense or time yet with capacity of any tense as present preter or future Those Nounes that are substantive Nounes as 〈◊〉 Bench Stoole House Mouse Man Wife Woman Table or Cloath are all without a notion of Tense The adiectives also have yet a capacity of an Adverbe as well good ill base right just c. But the Nounes of action as drinking sleeping walking c. drinke sleepe walke c. Have the capacity of any tense of a Verbe whence they are sirnamed participles as participating of the signification of a Verbe by any of those three tenses But about a Noune and all the differences of Nounes as their significations c. must be spoken in a generall Grammar which things you may take out of other Authors and are in the meane while here presupposed A Verb cannot be without the signification of a time present preter or future And thereby it is distinguished from a Noune and the Noune from a Vorbe So that as in nature there is onely the Masculine and Feminine sex each having its difference and regimen being a mishape in nature so here these two sexes a Noun and Verbe Rule 3. Both have two Genders Masc and Feminine This rule is generall for all tongues in the apprication though not in the termination For innalice hee writes shee writes the first is Masculine the other Feminine and yet there is no difference in termination Even so in this Orientall tongue to speake the truth there is no more difference betwixt Masculine and Feminine in Verbs then there is with us In the Pretertense of Ebrue and Calde the third person both Maseuline and Feminine are the same for wheresoever you finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 written with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 paragogick it is Masculine and when it is with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 formative it is Feminine Now who is able at the first aspect to see into the heart of that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whither it bee paragogic and superfluous or formative and necessary The second person Masculine and Feminine have both but one letter as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The first hath but one termination viz. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is therefore called common which doth not detract any thing from what I say for the common gender includes both Masculine and Feminine under one termination So likewise is the first and third plurall in Ebrue as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the second plurall in Calde and Syriac as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore the Masculine and Feminine gender in Verbs is to bee understood rather for application then termination yet by the pricks whereof I shall speake in the Appendix there is I confesse more difference made but in common speech there is not halfe so much difference made as is conceaved as for instance when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is written with pricks the Masculine is lathasta the Feminine lathast but in common speech whither it be to man or woman it is pronounced only lathast It being cleare enough to the eye wither it be a man or woman that is spoken to Also in the Nounes it is
The significations of them you may finde there or in any Dixionary I was therefore so large with them because the same holds in Calde Samaritic Syriac Arabic and Etiopic Nay of all these you will finde the most part in Arabic which Dialect of all these six is unto us the best known because the fullest of books first agreeing in the same gender with Ebrue secondly in the same variation of the gender thirdly not onely generally in other words besides these occurrent in Scripture but even in all these reckoned up there being not one of them not to be found in the Arabic tongue as yee call it or Dialect And further if that the other words which are ordinarily Masculine and ending upon the third radicall should be found in Arabic Syriac and Etiopic at a variance from the Masculine towards the Feminine as there are many that you may wonder the lesse at it having in the Ebrew Bible it selfe the same variation Finally that yee learne hence not to stand so highly amazed at the frequency of these and other excepted words nor thinke that you dare or cannot go without stumbling through the Ebrue Bible or whatsoever Calde Samaritic Syriac Arabic and Etiopic books because of this great block but rather learne hence to judge that even this multitude of exceptions demolishes that distinction of Masculine and Feminine and these two great Mountaines of Grizzim not Gerizzim or Garizzim Deut. 11 29.27 12. Ios 8 33 Jid. 9.7 and Ebâl Deut. 11 29.27 4.13 Ios 8 30.33 upon which formerly it seemed the blessing and curse were put by the former Grammarians Rule 11. Feminine hath a t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 after the Root in singular and the Letter of the plurall and sometimes by accident an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent In these the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 t is servile and not radicall and yet this servile is not constantly Feminine neither partly in singular as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 partly in plurall as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and all the infinitives with the third radicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are many times Masculine and yet is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 t servile and they are also otherwise frequently Feminine So also ending on a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent as the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before written with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 item 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because all these end on the third radicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent by accident in place of the third radicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is cleare in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and severall others Now because it is so full of difficulty to distinguish 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 servile from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 radicall and also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 servile from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 radicall and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 paragogic being then for the most part Masculine both in Verbs and Noanes from the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 necessary and formative these distinctions being so full of difficulties that not onely the greatest Grammarians of the Christians but all the greatest Masters of Yishrael among whom the Massoretes are by no meanes of the least ranke did so frequently stumble at that it is a wonder to behold and observed partly by some others of them and partly by the Christians and there are dayly many discoveries more about such mishaps And why should wee chide and trouble young Schollars when they did not know the distinction or that they should know it or else go no further That hath bin the crosses and exceeding great stumbling-blocks which those blockheads the Jewish Masters did lay in the way for themselves and us and yet their authority is so highly cried up The same is true in Syriac and Calde of the words ending in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 naturall or accidentall of a hard taske to be demonstrated and proved to be this and not that And God be praised who raises us out of the dust by opening unto us the eyes of the vanity of this terrible bufinesse and Babel And I hope I shall have hereafter in some Latine books fuller and larger occasion to answer unto severall doubts arising in Scripture elsewhere by not greatly regarding the Masculine and Feminine Gender which I will gladly performe if God will spare mee my life and great learned men will bee pleased in the meane time to set themselves on that labour as to seeke together all the doubts which either are all ready made in the behalfe of the Gender or themselves might bee able to make so that sparing that labour which otherwise I could performe as well as they I finding it ready and done unto my hand may the easier go through the resolutions thereof Rule 12. Any of the Letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are for the most part the note of the plurall number This rule is to be understood to hould 1. In the duall which as we said before appartains to the plurall 2. Both in Masculine and Feminine as well of Nounes as Verbs 3. Both in present future and preter 4. With or without the affixes following 5. That they are frequently cast away in all these Dialects as I said in the 14 Rule of Etymology And than in books without poynts there is no difference betweene singular and plurall whence is to be seen that that distinction is not so constantly observed in this tongue as wee imagine And therefore wee must go higher to wit unto reason led by the signification of the word the Syntax Retoric Logic Fisic and Metafific And if you thinke to shun it here or there yet you must resolve some time or other to step forward thereunto by your own reasonable strength because all these letters will faile you in many particulars And is it not better to do that willingly which otherwise you will be forced unto and to do it quickly when it is so that you must do it not being able to avoid it and when yee have done it will give you a great joy viz. that yee are rid of that infinite toyle of the pricks and poynts whereupon you set your hope as upon that which would lead you through all difficulties and doubts though as yet they never performed any such thing in matters of consequence where your reason could not have led you thorough without them but only in easy things where reason would have done you as good service and that with as much ease too But if it bee so that yee did never and as yet are loath to try your reason nor will grant that those which have done and do use theirs can see as much nay more with reason though without these pricks than you without it though having them I say plainly you are no reasonable Creature Therefore these following Nounes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are ordinarily plurall and
formes are either in Nounes or Verbs both are considered in the outward forme either as they stand a part without reference to the foregoing or following word in the Text or in reference to them this the Grammarians call Syntax supposing the pricks to be of the nature of this tongue as if by them onely the sense were cleare without them impossible to be had hence are all bookes full of such like Observations and Directions all which though in number they cannot amount to lesse then fifthy thousand yet are superfluous the pricks being only brought in by some Jewes the names wherof are uncertaine to them us and they are given by them onely to shew us what they thought to be now and then in a Syntax whereas we may see if we know the significations of the words and phrases the same thing without them and that they many times have mistaken and from their mistakes arise many examples for Anomaly so that the divers formes either in Nounes or Verbs in the Treasure of the Ebrue Grammer writte◠by that excellently leatned and painfull Grammarian Iohn Buxtorf are needlesse also two Chapters of his Syntax to wit the seventh and seventeenth are absolutely superfluous concerning the points or pricks which they call vowels Rule 9. Whatsoever Observations are or may be made upon the Bible Calde Targum Syric Arabic and Etiopic Authors onely in reference to their pricks are of no use The Jewes and Christian Authors have made upon the Bible an infinity of observations whereof that body of the Masoreticall notes is no small part of almost all which are to be rejected as of no use Hence also the very concordances of D. John Buxtorf are of no more authority and use if the eafinesse truth and nature of the tongue be onely the maine scope and drift of him than R Natans concordance who followeth without regard of prics the order of the Ebrue Text without points Rule 10. The Accents not being of the nature of this tongue are in Ftymology and Analogy of no use To Analogy or otherwise cald Etymology belongeth the greatest part of Doctor John Buxtorf his Observations in his Grammaticall Treasure about them by him set downe in Orthografy which fault is also frequent by others The substance of whatsoever can bee said of them concerning Analogy is that their place is to bee considered and that not onely in respect of the syllable either in the last of a word or one before the last but also in words onely of one syllable and there of the concurrence of two Accents Therefore more especially in reference to every Letter at what Letter of two three or foure in one syllable to wit that they do stand onely at a Letter with one of the prick vowels long or short not at the Letter with a single or compound sva And that every Accent may go to the following Letter Or come back to the forgoing Letter Or be wholy cast away Whereof maqqef is the signe nor the cause or understood to be absent in the first of two Nouns joynt together in relation of possession not of appellation or apposition And because the second radicall hath before others the vowel therefore the Accents doe stand more regularly and frequently at the second radicall From whence it doth remove to the first radicall if the first radicall onely have the vowel As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yoma day the first radicll y hath the Accent because the second radical vau is quiescent and hath no vowel nor hath the third radicall m any vowel therefore onely the first having the vowel o yo hath the Accent so also in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Khet Nerd Qost Or if the third radicall be cast away As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Váicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vaizav 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vattqas 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vayyitgal 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vattitcas the accent in these is at the first radicall k z q g and many and many hundred such like Or where the third radicall hath no vowel and the second a short vowel whereby the two last radicals make up a short syllable As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sefer 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 melek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erez or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arez To the third radicall if it doth receive a vowel As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sfarim by r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 malka by k 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 arazot by z. To the serviie Praefix when the third being cast away the first and second doth make a short syllable as for instance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vayyáan by y the Roote being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the service suffix if it doe make a short syllable with the following servile e. g. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fqadtem by t the Roote being fqd. And yet all these foregoing Rules are so many times violated or not observed by the Authors of them that you will finde many sorts of Anomalicall places of them where they are at the right syllable yet not at the right Letter or at the false syllable before or after the right Letter and Syllable whereof I have set downe some Observations in my Notes on P. Martinius Ebru Grammar Englished Printed at Amsterdam twice both Anno 1645. and 1646. Item in my Latine Deline ation of the Ebrue Grammar Printed at Amsterdam in 4º 1646. page 80. Rule 11. The accents are supposed to joyne and disjoyne words for the making up a true and right sense Before I have fully done about these accents there is as yet one use of them remaining to be handled which is assigned unto them by all the Grammarians that have written hitherto to wit that they have the power of a Syntacticall combination of words and disjunctions of them that is to shew which words are to be joyned together to make up a plaine sense such as is intended by the Holy Ghost in every place in every verse of the Bible whereon also for the most part depends distinction of verses which according to the best observation of mine and others upon such a supposall notwithstanding I am not of the mind that it is truely in them So that I doe disclaime here what formerly I have preceptically set down either in my English or Latine Books concerning it yet if some men will stand to it be it right or wrong I will shortly repeale it here is as followeth 1. That they are the accidentall signe of a Conjunction or disjunction of words 2 That they signifie first a greater or fuller point secondly a lesser point thirdly two little points fourthly a little point with a Comma fiftly the stroke Comma sixtly yet they never shew where there is an exclamation or interogation neither which words together belong to a comma comma with a point two little points the lesse and the greater or full point 3. All this in a naturall order where a sence is full either of one word or of two joynd or of three whereof the two first or last be more neerely joyned yet in respect to the third or fourth words where also the two or three former or latter more neerely to be joyned with relation to the body of fewer or of many more with none greater or greater distinction now by reason these five degrees of distinctions which are in all manner of speech in any tongue whatsoever used here in the occident and the North though not in the whole Orient 4 The accents are of five degrees thus call d by the Grammarians 1 One King Silluq 2 Dukes Atnah and compound merca 3 Earles zaqef sgolta and tifha 4 Lords salselet rbia single or compound with a silluq sasta zarqa tbir a double merca ytib five Knights fazr qarnefarah t lisa geres 5 These make up whole senses according to those five degrees of senses 6 The rest are called servants because they onely joyne words two three or foure to bring them to the following Knight Lord Earle Duke or King to make up the full sense 7 Every one of these according to his degree makes a greater or lesser joynr and hath before him first a great distinguisher secondly a lesser but Knights have none of both before them thirdly a joyner each with his servants of a greater or lesser distinguisher before him finally followes the fourth the King 8 Yet whereas in the whole Bible there is almost one and the same order observed three bookes viz. Job the Proverbs and the Psalmes have no Earles and doe differ in some small matter besides as to the following fiame 9 They are generally in the Bible thus 4. Kingssilluc 3 joyner merca 2 the lesser distinguisher tifha 1 the greater distinguisher zaqef 4. Duke Atnah 3 munah 2 tifqa 1 zahef or sgolta 4. Earle either the higher zaqef sgolta or the lower tifqa 3 munah or merca 2 fasta zarca tbir 1 Rbia. 4. Lord either the higher salselet rbia or the lower fastha zarca tbir mercayim ytib 3 munah mahfac merca darga 2 fsic geres 1 tlisa fazr 4. Knight Fazr qarnefara tlisa geres 3 munch yerah qadma tlisa merca 2 and 1 none 10 But in the said three Bookes there is such an order as is in some sort differing 3. King silluc 2 munah merca 1 rbia compound with zaqef or salselet 3. Duke Higher compound merca 2 yrah zarqa 1 rbia 3. Duke Lower atnah 2 munah merca tifha 1 rbia 3 Lord Higher rbia fingle or compound salselet 2 merca mahfac munah 1 none 3 Lord Lower zarca 2 merca munah 1 fazr or the lower tifha 2 munah 1 fazr 3. Knights Fazr 2 Yerah 1 none This is that faigned commonwealth which was set up by the Jewes which for the matter I esteeme to be against the fundamentall lawes of that tongue and for the manner this palpable vast difference is not onely in three bookes by which notwitstanding wee may perceive one and the same spirit did not frame and order all but there are above ten thousand examples where neither in the generall nor in this particular agreement is kept so that I utterly disclaime it from being either naturall morall politicall or juris divini And so I conclude the Etymology or Analogy FINIS
sixt order is omitted through all the persons tenses The Aethiopile manner of forminge verbs hauing but 4 order The other Orders being formed as the first it shall suffice to set downe the first words onely The Noune 〈◊〉 of the first order is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 There are also imperfect verbs yet none but what are likewise declined perfectly according to the Analogy but in regard that some doe occurre sometimes defective in one of their radicall it may be requisite to know for the finding of their rootes that such as double the Second radicall 〈◊〉 it in the Second person Sing foem and second and third person 〈…〉 of the future and no where else Those whose first radical is 〈◊〉 cast it away through the whole future present of the first order and no where else Those whose second or third radical is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cast away throughout the first order and no where else what other speciall anomalyes there are may be learnt by exercise A DISCOURSE Concerning the Easterne Tongues to wit Ebrew Calde Samaritane Syriac Arabic and Ethiopick IF there were not a great dimnesse in our sight and dulnesse in the understanding of our judgements which should ordinarily be led by reason more than by received opinions there is no doubt but all things would goe far better and in a higher way yea whole Nations would be truely honorable glorious magnificent rich mighty powerfull and redoubtable unto their enemies spread more large enjoy far more Kingdomes then now they possesse shires governe them with more facility and lesse trouble then now a handfull of Cities The lack of true noble principles spoyles all great affaires Nothing is easie because we are childish in our actions Let us lay a good foundation and upon a little ground we may erect an excellent high and glorious steeple which will be seen far abroad It is not money that gives splendor to the world but reason The sunne is that which carries the bravest sway in the world discovering all things seeing all things of any colour nature and condition good or bad And in that vastnes of the heaven it occupies but a little space yet gives light and glory unto the whole Hemisphere The reason withus man-kinde is the sunne of our judgement whereby we are able to learne all things quickly and easily because thereby wee can comprehend all things taught us Let there be never so many actions it will easily discerne them all Never so voluminous workes it will leade us through them and make way even in the darkest passages of them and shew us what method it had by the author when he pen'd the booke and that it is the same sun both for his our Hemisphere like as we know that the sunne is the same to them at Jerusalem and al other parts of the world that it is to us in England If then these things that come under our eyes are so certaine why should the eyes of our judgement bee so dimsighted as not to discerne by reason such things as are onely to bee made easie and delightsome unto us therby except we delight more in ignorance then knowledge Yet that can never be said of mankind wheresoever or whatsoever but must still be granted that indeed it doth rather imbrace according to that light of Nature which God hath bestowed upon it REASON than UNREASON LIGHT than DARKENES LOVE then HATRED And thence it comes to passe that yet so many things are done because reason leades us on shewes us the hope to come through the waies wherby to endeavour how to shunne the snares to avoid the enemies to imbrace the friends and to improve all to the best advantage thus to come at our journeys end Only we confesse that this Honorable Councellor within us given by God Almighty is never or very seldome heard by the greatest part of men not out of hatred but slownesse of spirit unwillingnesse of paines unthankefullnes after having received good counsell but rather subdued or oppressed by vices lewdnes corruption or malice to the great hurt and griefe of this our sunne This neglect of reason hath troubled and made all Learnings uneasie because without it wee have them all given to us without life Reason is the life of all actions of all learnings And thence it is that the Mathematicks are the most true and delightfull studies because the fullest of reason And where that layes the ground-worke the fabrick will bee durable Thus all Languages when they are taught or learned by and with reason have an excellent easinesse and that is the cause why people generally beleeve that in Heaven they shall speak some other than their mother tongue and yet attaine to it without the least difficulty because reason will make any tongue easier than a thousand rules The principles of all tongues are laid by reason as well as the principles of Physick Metaphysick Logick or any other Art whatsoever But our opinions and principles not being regulated thereby doe invert all the waies to learne them to a difficulty Whence it comes to passe that even al people cry out Tongues are difficult and lay that downe as a certaine principle If now people build upon such ground can we expect any thing from them but foolish talking and writings Can we finde figs on thornes or grapes on thistles or is it possible for the fruit to bee sweet where the very root of the tree is bitternes it selfe Let us then lay aside and that with your leave all such principles and imbrace this viz. That Tongues are the easiest things in the world to learne and that with great delight To come then neerer to our Tongues the subject of this our present discourse I confesse that still I find among all men nay the learned themselves many strange opinions of them and such principles that if they should be truely scanned they would make the world to laugh at them The nearest way that I am able to shew to speake and judge truely of these Tongues viz. Ebrew Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and Ethiopic is onely that you believe all things on the contrary If they tell you there are many believe them to be but one If hard to be gotten to be easie If without use there are none more usefull If of a hard pronunciation not much harder than English Vngracious the sweetest expressions in English are found in them Not many Bookes in them More than any man is able to read through in all his life time Of no comely Characters as neate as English Of few words And the more wise grave serious majestaticall speeches Contemptible by none but ignorant and malicious men They are lost no more than the German French Italian Spanish Latine or the English No good Authors extant in them The Bible is originally in this tongue And if you can forget or slightly passe by that booke which the spirit of God himselfe
componere parva if we may take an example of that wise King as I think I may in place where all others speake of many tongues I say it is but one and therefore the antiquity of Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and Ethiopic is not the antiquity of many but onely of one and the selfe same Ebrew tougue So than that we may come to the conclusion of the first point I affirme and am able to make it good against all opposers that Ebrew Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic Ethiopic were from the very beginning of Adams creation and do remaine yet with us in the world they were before and after the confusion of Babell and are therefore the Mother tongue of all tongues in the world The second point is the rare vertues of these Orientall Tongues viz. Ebrew Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and Ethiopic whereby they are far more noble then Greeke Latine or any of the esteemed learned tongues And here I confesse I see before me such a vastnesse of an excellent plaine where my horse could runne not only a most gallant course but even out of breath yet not to hazard so much because I must use that my loving creature many times more and with more advantage hereafter than yet I conceive to be at this race I will at this time not so much as permit it to a Gallop but keepe it in a smooth and painles pace being assured of its willingnes upon any other presented occasion That most naturall simplenesse or singlenesse in the comportements of this grave Lady doth keep me still in a wilfull obedience and a silent admiration nay adoration of that divinity You will sinde here a Divinity in pedegree a comelinesse in attire a constancy in their nature and fashions a gravity in few speeches a due observation of sensefull ordrings of words a brevity in their contractions an hatted of confusion of the same a providence in placing them no superfluity in servants a certaine office ordered unto every one of them even accounted superfluous by men ignorant in their affaires have their charge of a good turne Their constant number of roots the easy order to finde them out planted all as in an Orchard by square that wheresoever you send your eyes you behold the same distance of each other Every tree of them of a divers savor and gracious taste with a delightfull smell The branches of these trees ordered yeelding hundreds of fruits to wit words all of the same taste and smell yet with some diversity So that Ebrew Calde Samaritan Syriac Arabic and Ethiopic according to many Authours and Books yet extant have as large an extent as the Greek of Latine Tongue For being a full tongue as well as Latine or Greek it must needs follow that all the Ebrew Language must represent the whole Latine and Greek the Calde or Samaritan all the same Syriac Arabic and Ethiopic the same Neither doth it contradict me and my tenents that the Bible doth not containe the whole Ebrew tongue therefore this tongue doth not comprehend the whole Latine tongue For I never said that this tongue as it is extant onely in the Ebrew Bible doth containe all the Latine tongue even because there is not the whole Ebrew language in the Ebrew Bible but is partly yet in Caldean c. Authours The whole Orientall tongue doth include the whole Occidentall be it Greek Latine German English Spanish French Italien or whatsoever And there is wonder enough in it I dare say that those words which are in the Ebrew Bible do containe most part of the GGreek or Latine tongue that is the greatest part of the Latine or Greek tongue is expressable by such words as are in the Ebrew Bible be they never so few in comparison of that great voluminous vastity of Latine or English it selfe If we do admire the nature of this tongue we may justly exclaime even in behalfe of it as the Apostle in a higher straine concerning the nature of men under unbelief and confusion and the capacity of Gods mercyes upon all O the depth of the riches both of the wisedome and knowledge of God how unsearchable are his judgements and his wayes past finding out For God is as well the cause of this his holy tongue which he was pleased first to bestow upon mankind as He was the Creatour of the first Adam and in him of all mankind Yet as there was another state in Adam even after his fall more livelinesse lesse dulnesse more simplenesse and finglenesse of hearts lesse troubles of the affaires of the world neerer with God because lesse objects from God more cleare sighted even in naturall things because using more his reason diligency and industrie on them and more blessed in his undertakings because with a more single heart so that in many hundreds of things Adam was even after the fall yet so much more perfect than we No lesse it was with this tongue partly before the confusion of Babel as in the state of innocency Few and full words Which fulnesse is wonderous in all mens eyes and yet not searched from whence Therefore If I shall not doe a misse I shall rather give a hint at that well and fountaine to lead you unto it than at this time to bring you many cups full of that wholesome living water flowing nay springing from thence It is undeniable that a thing is but one in essence and yet has divers accidents more or lesse so the word signifying a thing and but one thing also which words we call the roote those words those roots do onely signifie that one tree And every tree though never so many if they are of the same stock will have all the same taste whereby it comes to passe that 20.50.100 words in Ebrew c. descending from the same roote and tree do yeeld naturally alike taste or signification and yet they are individuals and divers in number The taste then is one and the same the radicall signification is but one not 2 3 4 6. or more as hitherto all the Dictionary Writers have falsly asserted even against nature it selfe yeelding unto one and the same roote or tree many and divers tasts Which assertion holds yet because they are all but ill gardiners onely considering the outward shape of the fruits and therefore the taste being a little different they presently conclude against the nature of all trees that one and the same roote or tree can have divers tastes or significations When otherwise if they would but search and conferre the taste of this with the taste of the other fruit they would finde a sweet analogie between them viz. that there is but one taste in every tree and so define that taste or signification But by what meanes doth the same taste seeme to be divers and so dazle the eyes of learned men and withdraw their judgement I answer because they think not 1. That tongues are onely proper to men and not beasts 2. That men
Church If any meanes may be procured whereby we shall not mock God Almighty any more unto his face praying for them and yet stirring not a hand or foot to helpe them but will worke and become working in good earnest for those Christians in Asia and Africa let him move or beseech the Magistrate or at least under hand worke out by friends or whosoever by the States that they may not be any more unsensible of the unmeasurable want of their brethren The Germans Frenchmen Spaniards Italians Low Duchmen nay all sorts almost of the Europians have helpt England by affording us the Ebrew Bibell and other books in great abundance Let us see now if we can at length be thankfull towards them returning good for good or in doing good with printing thousands of Ebrew Calde Syriac Arabic and Etiopic Bibels thereby to give as plentifully Gods Word to Asia and Africa as by the mercy of God we have it in England Ninteenthly nay let him truly defire the conversion of the Muhammedans who are as neere Christians as many others are which beare the name of Christ viz. Photinians Arrians halfe Arrians Socinians Weigelians c. which I set down under their severall names although their sects are rather one than more when they will not suffer Christ who came into the flesh of Adam and did take upon him the seed of Adam and not of Angels to be God and the Sonne of God wherein the Turkes come nearest unto them Some good way should be laid downe by all meanes for them also who would bring in a great store of Churches and of a most flourishing beauty if once brought to the true acquaintance with the Gospel of Christ The fault lies not in them so much as in us wee can helpe but are lasy and desire it not Twentieth The conversion of the Iewes for whom I hear every weeke so earnestly prayed and yet see nothing lesse endevoured must bee one point of any christian teacher of Gods Word What all to neglect the conversion of those people which in Gods eye are still beloved because under the rod. I pray let us not trample upon them but have mercy on them Fy for shame A christian and a despiser of Gods counsell Are mens wayes so much towards goodnesse that they will and can forgive their enemies and should God not deale so with his creatures Hee whose wayes are higher than our wayes and whose thoughts heigher than our thoughts Even that is a signe to me of Gods grace towards a Iew because God stirres up so many christian Ministers to pray for them I heere it most constantly in Pauls London Or are they all deceived men Are they all praying for a thing which God has never desired or decreed I never heare any of them to pray for the Divell that he may be saved and there is no body hath any thing to plead for him nay not so much as ignorance hee knowes well enough Jesus to be the Christ and Son of God they knew him and therefore did they themselves acknowledge him I beseech you heartily when you pray for the Jewes conversion doe you it only out of fashion or with your very earnest desire If out of fashion O ye wicked Hypocrite If out of an hearty desire why then so slow And if we never had any promise of their conversion in the New Testament whereof yet we have abundantly should they not be as good unto us as the Heathens Had not the Jewes a promise of our which were Heathens conversion They had and God has done it blessed be his name for ever and no doubt will doe it with the Jewes also There is another sort of easinesse of this Orientall tongue for those I spake of even now I confesse are vertues belonging to a professour and such as will facilitate any profession whatsoever not only of tongues lesse only Orientall taken out of the very bowels of it viz. First because it is the eldest or primitive and consequently the most simple tongue as God the first founder and giver of it is the simplenes or singlenesse it selfe and as Adam the first speaker of it in his state of innocence when it was given him was the most true and simple Grammarian Rhetorician Logician and Metapysician that lived in the world and church from whence it begun and continues till our dayes whether its glory did ever increase or decrease I know not sure I am that then it was in its highest sphere Yet as all other tongues doe not increase and decrease saving only in the fancies of men So neither could it be brought to a confusion at the confusion of Babel which Authors improperly expresse viz. It did escape without ruine nor at the captivity of Babel which was of a farre lesse miraculous power of God from heaven having no need of repairing after either of both nor falling far short from former perfection as out of naturall grounds which hereafter will be laid down may appeare This singlenesse is seen in many things First in a constant Trinunity representing the nature of its author in having for a union to a root a trinity of letters for a unity of a conjugation a trinity of tenses for a unity to a tense of things past or to come a trinity of persons for a unity of one letter in the root a trinity of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 auy for a unity of one tongue the trinity of the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in many things else where this same trinunity could be shewed 2ly that it is only divided into two branches naturall unto any essence as Metaphysic teacheth a finite which is present future and preter and has a time nor can be said to be without time and in Grammar is cald a Verb An infinite which is neither present future nor preter and has no time nor can be said to be within time and in Grammar is cald a Noun Thirdly that it takes single letters from a matter of 20 the most frequent and necessary words of it and puts them in stead of that whole word before or after another word to make fewer words wherin some other nay almost all tongues of Europe do imitate it in their common speaking and writing Fourthly that it useth the most simple and single easie naturall common and vulgar expressions that are obvious in any common tongue II. It becomes easie because of its rationality in all things whereof we had already many passages before but here is observable that infinite wisedome and depth of reason in every signification of the root communicated to a great variety of Nounes and Verbs and yet all these as by the outward shape of the Analogy turning about their one and only center the root those three radicall letter so that the signification of them all winde themselves rationally out reflecting unto that radicall signification as a swarm of bees goe out and returne to their stock And thirdly because in nature there
ancient The Arabians as they have the same way of joyning so have they likewise the essentiall writing The names if fully written would appeare to be 1. the same names 2. the same fort of Letters 3. the names to be taken out of the same tongue and 4. that their order should be the same with Ebrew Samaritan Calde and the Syriac Alphabet All the difference may easily bee shewen by degrees going from Samaritan to the old Syriac hence to the new Syriac of Trostius his new Testament or the bookes printed in Germany and Leyden by Erpenius hence to that latter printed at Rome given out by Gabriel Sionita or by that Syriac Old and New Testament lately given out by that same worthy and learned man at Paris Hence to some farre better Syriac Manuscripts extant in England which being compared with the most ancient Arabic writing as I have seene it at Ephesus in a table that hangs there in a Church built by a Turck to the honour of Iesus Christ called Isa Peigamber the characters thereof being like Syriac you will finde them to be almost all one Nay among my own Manuscripts I have some pieces of Arabic witten upon Parchment being the Cufi writing which comes very neer unto the neatest Syriac extant There are here in England above 20000 severall fashions of Arabic writings every Manuscript being different from other and some of them being composed of severall tracts bound up together will afford 10 20 nay 30 severall formes of writing And I my selfe have one Manuscript that containes above an hundred different sorts Wherefore you must not stand either upon this or that print for even as we our selves differ in writing so do they And therefore I desire you to acquaint your selves with the written bookes as much as possible Nay there are some coppy bookes published in sundry countries wherein that they might bee thought to bee skillfull in strange tongues they have made such soul worke about the Syriac Arabic Turkish Persian Malayan Tatar and Mogull Letters that I am ashamed of them Nay among printed bookes onely France and Italy have good Arabic characters those in Germany and the Low countries are not good Nor are Erpenius his characters according to the true and neat Arabic duct in writing Nor are those Arabick pieces cut in copper in the deceased Crinesius his booke called Babel or Joh. Zechendorfius yet living both Germans well performed But I hope wee shall shortly make neater worke in that kinde here in England then hath beene done hitherto in Europe Rule 4 They have all one and the same consonants in power and by way of pronouncing not much different from our English The pronunciations which we have in our English Alfabet of all our letters we see to be almost the same with French High and Low Dutch and other Nations of Europe on the same fashion those of the Orient being as well Men as wee have not much lesse or much divers soundings of letters The primitif thus a b g d h e v u 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 y i k l m n x sh o f p rz q r s t. Our English is a b c d e f g h i k l m n o p q r s t u w x y z. just so pronounces the Ebrue and Samaritic Calde and Syriac Arabic and Etiopic viz. A b c or g as wee English pronounce g before e or i ge gi the reason is because that c in Italy from whence wee fetch our Alfabet before e or i is pronounced as if à t were before je ji thus tje tij and our g is pronounced as if there were à d before je ij thus dje dij So that the difference is betweene the Italian or Roman c and the English Ebrue Arabick Calde aad Syriac g as the proportion of 〈◊〉 D e because the Grecians who did immediatly receive their Alfabet from this primitife Tongue as the son is the immediate heire of his parents almost generally have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 e yet for the most part even that same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they pronounce as if it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 e hence it is no wonder that in the Greec Latin English and all occidentall alfabets is a simple e in place of that easy the easiest breath of all the gutturall letters after a cald by the Grecians the spiritus lenis and he the spiritus asper F is unjustly yet according to many hundert Nations in the World arisen in place of the primitive w or v cōsonant which being too hard pronounced by the Coptites the Romans Italians Spaniards French made filius from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an interpofition of l betweene two i viz. u i thus is f in place of w v. G is come in place of the primitive easy s for the pronunciation of zayin is as the Grecians Germans and Low Coùntry pronounces in the beginning of any word And because that some of the Aeolians and old Latines did pronounce g as the French do je ge hence is it that they mistaking the second degree of s done onely by the tongue and the teeth which is the tongue not comming at the teeth as the teeth closed and the palat made with a cavity make z a g as the French ge and je Then the primitive letter requires a single sibilation and the Greec letter from whence the Latines have it a compound one H this is from the second fort of h in the primitive tongue the second wherof is here the single h in Ebreu it is of a double pronunciation first Kh easy unto all the Europians almost except English and French 2. halfe h and halfe kh almost impossible for all the Europians Yet by the Jewes yee may learne it the best Here followes a letter unknowne unto the Latines from whence the English have their Alfabet to wit th the Greecs as the nearest unto the Orient and these parts that did speake this tongue have it from this primitive tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thét theta And must be pronounced with the bredth of the tongue I is in this primitife tongue the y of the English and French pronunciation The Latines mistaking it to be naturally a vowell when it was a consonant made it a vowell Yet as in this primitive tongue all the letters are consonants and not vowels so is also the whole Alfabet of Greec Latine English and of all Europe only consonants not vowels whereof now and then some become to be vowels yet by a meer accident K l m n. are of the same nature in the primitife that they are in English onely take heed that you never pronounce k as kh but constantly as ca co cu. Ka ke ki ko ku Here comes in another letter knowne by the Greecs Romans and English rightly placed onely in the Greec Alfabet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 x which all the people
to this tongue then would they be constantly the same in Ebrew Samaritic Calde and Syriac Arabic and Etiopic I beseech the Reader to consider 1. that it is as old a fashion to have Bibles without pricks as with prics and in my apprehension older to yet here I do speake onely of a time of 1300 yeares or thereabout If we confesse Hierome to make mention now and then of points yet we see also that there is a great quantity of places otherwise rendred by him or at least the proper names otherwise read than now the prics will suffer And though Zoar that very old Rabbinicall book makes mention of the Names of the Vowells who will not confesse that those names might be very easily written by some other in some copy of Zoar which either by transcription or impression is now in the Text. Have we not thousands of such incroachings upon the Text in hunderts of Authors But if that were not so and that some of them were named doth it therefore follow that they have bin all at that time If the Grecians could be content with a e o for vowells as Plato sayes and the Arabians had nor have any more but these three from Platês time till this very day and if the Sirians could be content without vowells till they becomming Christians and translating many books out of Greec in their tongue did in proper names first afterwards also in other Nounes Verbs assume the Greec a e i o u and if the Persians Turcs Tatars great and little all Mogull and Malaye could be content from their very beginning till this day to bee without prics instead of Vowels what thinke you was there then a curse of God upon the Jewes and all the Prophets that they could nor would understand the writing of one another without so many superfluities Is a e i o u y enough for us in all occident to read by and is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enough to do the same when these do as well represent Consonants and Vowells as those do And what a malediction will you cast upon Gods Word that when many hundreds can understand and that without any hesitation at all thousands of other books without these prics they should not be able to understand Gods Booke without such a doe If that Word of God were written with all that infinity of pricking and stroaking every line and letter were it not the greatest injury that could be done to it to have it once printed without them How thinke yee would the Iewes once dare to offer such an unexpressable sacriledge Or by what meanes are the Jewes wiser then God himselfe who could not finde out an easy way for his Word to be read and fully understood till the Jewes found it out Why must onely the Jewes have 15 Vowells and 20 or 30 Accents but no characteristicall points betweene a Verbe and a Noun the second and the third person active and passive as the Syrians are said to have What a strange thing is it that the Sirians have never a sva never a dages forte as Emira and Ludoyic de Dien do rightly affirme that there should never be found any dages lene in Arabic but all dages forte and contrary no forte but all lene in Syriac In Etiopic and Samaritic nothing in Ebrew Bibles without poynts nor dages forte nor lene Nay in the Samaritic the whole Law without Vowells and any pricks or stroaks of Accents No Accents in Etiopic Arabic and Syriac no Accents in any other Ebrue booke nor in my Calde Manuscript being Questions and Answers upon the Law No Accents nor Vowells in the Arabic and Syriac old Testament given out in the King of France his Bible untill added by Gabriel Siouite as he publickly confesses And whence that infinity of anomalies in Vowells in Accents and what an absurdity is in all the Accents not one onely except What has atnakh the Duke to make a determination of 25 Verses otherwise to be done by Silluq the King when He stands in hundert of places as a boy and servant which nor the Text nor reason regardes What a boyes trick and childish punctation of atnakh is in the third word of the bible In the beginning created God Is it sense or nonsense And yet there must be the Duke Arnakh Truely I pitty all those great Man that are become boyes and children playing thus for the Vowels Accents and diacriticall Notes that they write whole books about fancies and childish stuffe given over unto reprobate minds and labour without the blessing of God Rule 2. The Pricks added unto Consonant Vowells instead of Vowells are various according to the fancy of the inventours in various Countries of the Orient In Ebrue Samaritic Calde Arabic and Eticpic are there naturally none because superfluous the same letters by them being the true Vowels a e t o u which are used by us in English look only to the table and observe their order Yet with all according to the traditions of Grammarians of several dialects here will we speak distinctly of every one of them separatly First in the Ebrue 1. The sounds a e i o u are naturally in every language and therefore in this primitive tongue by all meanes 2. Because the sound will bee heard more long when it stands at the end of a syllable as va ve vi vo vu sva sve svi svo svu and shorter when after that sound followes a Consonant vas ves vis vos vus therefore did some Jewes Masters of children or Grammarians for their Disciples sake invent a double sort of pricks for that double syllable which I call long and short as the Vowells are of late cald long and short otherwise cald great and little viz. for the long syllable qumez zeri hireq holem sureq For the short syllable fatah segol hireq qomez qubbutz 3. Those that have but one name as qametz or qomets and hireq have also but one shape which breeding a confusion doth shew us the sillinesse of these Grammarians God being able to make better worke in his primitise tongue that they were not able to invent two pricks more thereby to prevent all confusion which hetherto lies as a plague upon those who will learne this Ebrue with these pricks and not otherwise and being almost impossible to overcome casts them of from Gods tongue 4. The difference betweene the long and short hireq is not greatly needfull because both is an i. 1. If their follow immediatly the same or any other of these pricks which I named then is it qamez Why because the syllable is long Why long because the following Consonants having its proper prick WHICH WE FOR FASHION SAKE RATHER THAN WITH REASON CAL VOWELS or Vowell concludes a syllable if none of those but some others which are cald svâs then is it qomez Yet because there is great trouble with the accent which changes all this work
no sound for thereby it is distinguished from the vowels who have a sound these Jewish Masters would give it one by joyning thereunto the shorter vowels fatah segol hireq qomez qubbuz Which Doctrine destroyes that position of sua mobile for if it be movable and to be pronounced like an e what need is there to joyne it with segol to make up e and if it were an e before hath it not the sound of two e now and is it not with fatah ea or ae with hireq ei or ie with qomez eo or oe With qubbuz eu or ue And yet they set it onely a simple a e o And if it may be joyned with a e o why not with i and u What have these two short vowels sinned onely the wit failed these Grammarians Or if they did it to avoid confusion because sva joyned with hireq would make up the form of segol for three poynts sake and sva qubbus would get five poynts and so make up the same forme with sva segol it is cleare againe that they had not wit enough to make such formes of hireq and qubbuz that sva hireq and sva qubbuz might not make a confusion either with sva segol or segol And yet where is that compound sva in Syriac Arabic and Etiopic for in the Samaritic the whole Talmud and divers Rabbines and thousands of Arabic books you finde neither it nor any vowell And if you say that the Caldeans have all these vowels and these svâs I say either they had them from the Jewes before the Babilonian captivity or during the time of it now if any man can produce any one line in any Author warrantable or not I care not shewing us so much as one line onely of the true Calde writings with vowels and suâs and then I will yeald If you say in Daniel and Esra we see it plainly I answer do yee not remember that they were Jewes nor did they write and point their books with the Calde letters and poynts but with their own For every one of those dialects have a peculiar manner of vowelling differing from the other Samaritic hath none Syriac hath assumed the Greec 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or v and afterwards some who did nor like to take the vowels of the Grecians to their bookes and to spoyle their own writing therewith invented an other sort of poynts And as true as it is that these Greec vowels are the proper vowels of the Syrians so true is it that these Ebrew Jewish vowels were once the Heathenish Caldean vowels also Arabic hath divers vowels from Syriac Etiopic has divers from Arabic and Syriac and Ebrue so that wee finde every dialect of this tongue to be different from the other in the matter of this accidentall worke of pricks for vowels from whence it clearly appeares that neither these are proper to the Caldean or not proper to the Ebrew Either of them must fall And we see that the nature of the Jewes constantly is first to change the Consonants secondly the vowels of any tongue whatsoever We have example of it in the Persian Turc Arabic Greec Spanish Italien French German and Polonian tongues when there is none of these vowels of theirs no svâs at all and yet for all that they have printed them so and printed not with our letters but with theirs Will you now go and say that Latine hath the Ebrue consonants and those 15 vowels And that the Caldeans had the same poynts with the Ebrew It is to be pittied that that excellently learned Man and My worthily honored Friend Dr. John Buxtorf at Basil Professour of Divinity of this tongue hath thus farre deviated from all reason as to play for the primitivenes of these points and to write a great book in quarto in defence of it being condemned to such a vaste and yet superfluous labour that stone of Sisifus The whole tongue reclaimes their antiquity Those that looke a little farther then the Ebrue Bible may easily see that whereas there is an agreement amongst the Consonants in these dialects there is none in the vowels I pray let not authority make here slaves of us and keepe us still in a feare and give us an infinite toyle of anomalies in the Ebrue Bible whereby we shall never be able to get the Siriac Arabic and Etiopic tongue One onely of these compound suâs viz. sva fatah read after its Consonant as it doth stand under it looses under 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 finall the sua because that sua is not admitted under the last letter as is said here before which fatah makes no syllable being neither a long vowell nor a short one but onely a part of sua It might have beene left away together with the sua onely they thought it requisite that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might bee pronounced with an a being gutturall letters and not easily to be pronounced without it And because taken away from sua it was called gnuba or taken which the latter Jewes and our Christian Gammarians not rightly understanding thought it fignified that it must bee pronounced before its consonant A false assertion and of such grosse an errour that it overthrowes the nature of this tongue wherein every syllable beginnes with a consonant and yet is here neither reason nor a powerfull cause why this fatah gnuba should begin a syllables when it cannot so much as make a syllable This gnuba is superfluous when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is its letter because that sounds hi that point within being hireq as that excellent learned Schindler it hath in his Grammer and is frequently underwritten comming from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This gnuba fals away if a letter follow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 elohim God c. and is onely after a long ē i ō ū never a long a. You may leave out the gnuba in your reading These compound suâs are frequently in the Ebrue Bibell not under the throate letters for the use whereof they are said to be invented but under the non-gutturals b. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 31.39 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Num. 10.36 z. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 2.12 q. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 very freqently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nehe. 10.34 And contrary there are above 200 of examples where a single sua is under a throat or gutturall letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I well desist Job 16.6 Iud. 15.7 Out of which confusion multitudes of exceptions and exceptions upon exceptions and that in the Ebrue Bible also not onely in the Calde part of it and that all printed and written copies of the Ebrue Bible never do agree herein wee may clearly see that this Monster and mishape of creating and destroying this inconstancy and fury of building up leveling to the ground will descry unto any wise eye the madnesse of the
Fes Marocco and Algir sometime the f that which is above denoting by them the q. two above t at the end sometimes shaped as an h only by the contraction of writing q. which the Africane Arabians frequently and almost at all times do write above with onely one poynt two below y. Three above is descending from s one poynt comming unto those two naturalls of the t for difference sake sh and by the Turks and Persians the k pronounced as ng kitabung of the book 3. below by the Turks and Persians the b then pronounced as p g. then pronounced as tie and s for a difference from sh Yet are these three points frequently to be seene above s in Arabic books written at Jerusalem and elsewhere by the Christians in their Bibles and Service-books the reason whereof I have given above yet many hundred Manuscripts are to be seene even without these diacriticall and superfluous poynts for them that know perfectly this their mother or learned tongue STROACS 1. In Ebrew and Calde Meteg Fsiq and Maqqêf the two first are put downwards the third in the breadth meteg betweene any vowell and a following sua to keepe them asunder from being reade in one syllable A thing clearly superfluous partly in all our Eastern now yet living tongues where the boyes are able enough to learne the separation of syllables without such troubles partly in the Bible it selfe there being such a variety of it in all Prints that it is past beliefe it was invented so short insteed of a longer which should have begun above the letters and passed betweene them and the vowels underneath them because the inventors thought it more gentile as it is now whereas the other would have shewed more plainly their intention Fsiq such as meteg between two words to shew that you must rest there a little not by the force of sense but onely to observe the thing following the more accuratly Maqqef joynes two or three words together and is placed evidently at random no reason in the World being found why written or 〈◊〉 Therefore are these stroaks also in vaine superfluous and unnecessary 2. By the Syrians yee have but one viz. Maqqef cald Marhothno under neath a letter which they say shall not bee read or heard in the pronunciation as the first 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ana I 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 akhrino another in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 akhroyo the last 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 akhyono a brother in Law Kinsman Cousen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 enoso Men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 erozo a secrecy Yet this line is in many coppies frequently left out 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 d in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 idto a Congregation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 khadto new 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 h in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yhab hee did give 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r humayo a Roman 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thobhu it is good 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Malkauhi his kings 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l in ezelet I went away ezalt shee went away 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yamme the Seas 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 santo a yeare 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 zba to at a time 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mdinto a City 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 zbi to redeemed shfinto or Sfinto a ship Any word which is to be reade with a meditation its point is cald Mhagyono III. above the letters signifying the number This last is of the best use but Marhothno and Mhagyono are not worthy to be observed it being meere fancy that those letters should never be pronounced in that tongue it being certaine and I my selfe have many times heard it at Constantinople where there were many Kershuni for so are those cald that retaine the Syriac bookes in their religious service that they did most constantly pronounce every letter of those but onely when they were posting through then I confes for celerity sake they leave out many letters as even among us and what la France leaves out of letters those are pronounced in the Province and elsewhere therefore I beseech the Reader not to think these precepts to be absolutly true and needfull 3. By the Arabiens yee have medda wesl hamz gezm and Teshdid Medd they use over the letters signifying numbers as in all Astronomicall bookes is to be seene 2. Signifying the circle and lines by the Geometriciens described by letters 3. It stands in stead of the circumflex of the Greecs to pronounce that syllable with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent more long Wesl onely upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent in the beginning of à word joyning its word with the forging as if it were onely one line as Maqqef by the Ebrwes Hamz onely upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shewing them to be radicall and naturally moveable they being sometime and that more frequently quiescent also Yet over or under 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they do write it more frequently whither it be radicall or servile when the word is written with the vowels Yet in old coppies of the Alcoran and in printed bookes the hamza is in the latter case justly and most frequently left away Gezm is a round circle either whole or halfe and stands above that letter which is to bee joyned with the forgoing not so frequent upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as the rest Teshdid is made of two Gesmes and is the dages by the Ebrewes onely one and yet representing all that was falsly esteemed proper unto two lene and forte Rule 5. The stroaks and pricks for the accents are not of the essence of this tongue and therefore onely in the Ebrue Bible and the Calde translation of Aquila or Onqelos on Moses As all the rest of things so truly these stroaks and pricks for accents are set to the Bible without necefity onely I wished that the vowels and suas had got no greater credit than the Accents have which by the most learned of Europe for almost 150 years were still left out as not cared for even by them that tooke upon them the translation of the Ebrue Bible Nor can or will I blame them as if they had mightily mistaken in the translation because of the ignorance of these Accents as if onely by their order the true connexion and disjunction of senses could be had Wherein wee see à more generall and naturall inclination in these that did strive so eagerly for the vowels and yet confesse the Accents to be of the same divine Authority not to care much for an additionall thing in this tongue the most of them never working so much in such an idle thing as Munsterus Claius Neander Buxtorfius but especially of late Mr. Symson a Scotch man Anno 1617. Mr. Bohlius deceased my condisciple under Mr. Trostius An. 1630. and Mr.
vowels it comes to passe that the roots do interchange in like manner the effect being of the same nature with the caâ—fe Rule 17. Some teeth letters easily become tongue letters yet retayning their owne nature different from that of those tong letters The reason is because these two instruments doe frequently and most constantly concurre unto the pronunciation of their ten letters wherof five are more especiall teeth and thother five more especiall tongue letters Zayin is many times changed into d sade into thet sin into t yet they doe retaine their nature so that these d th and t arising from zayin sade and sin must bee distinguished from these letters d th and t when they are naturall and of their one stock Rule 18. Such roots as have the 2 and 3 radicall one and the same do frequently double the first and put it between the 2 and 3. The reason of this transposition as is conceived is for Euphony sake as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and many other the like Rule 18. Some roots take in certaine epenthetick letters whereby they seeme not to bee any more of three radicall Letters onely but of foure five or sixe As for instance 1. The letter R the root is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sebeth a Scepter which is sound with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sarbith whence is the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence is that falsly esteemed persian word parasange or miles c. 2. the letter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the root is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 g m d which we find thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 3. N. the root is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 súr but doth assume n as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bassanvertm in Gen 19.11 2 Reg. 6.18 4. M. the root is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but assumes m as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Cant. 2.13.15.5 The three quiescents are frequently in erted after the second or third radicall as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Arabic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with divers others Rule 20. Some roots seeme to be of more than three letters whereas the fault is in the letters As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen 2.12 Num. 11.7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ier. 44.30 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insteed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen. 41.45 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insteed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gen 2.14 Rule 21. Some roots seeming to have more letters than three are easily by many wayes reduced to that number As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a band n in l by the Latines balteus nine times 〈◊〉 in the Ebrue Bible hath the root 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 insteed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 band by the Arabians a rope cable cord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath the root 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a flame thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Rule 22. Some words are compounded of two or three roots together As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compounded from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 teeth and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Elefant 1 Reg. 10.22 2 Chr. 9.21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dan. 3.5 from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and so in all other dialects An observation for Etymology ALl these rules will be a great deal clearer made out by the insuing dixionary And therefore I beseech the courteous and gentle Reader not to judge upon halfe done worke For the chiefest reason why we cannot see that more perfect unity and identitie which is given us by Metafisick of these dialects and that they are no otherwise divers tongues than Eolic Attic Doric Jonic are divers from the Greec is because neither the Grammar nor the Dictionary were ever made to joyne them except in the Grammar of Lud. de Dieu Anno 1626. Mr. Gerhard the yeare past In the Dictionaries only that excellently learned Schindler in his Pentagloâ—tâ—n given out after his death 1612 made up long before the smatterings in that kinde of Rapheleng in his Arabic Dictionary Anno 1613. and of Calasius in his Ebrue concordance 1621 And I doubt not that when hereafter many excellent wits doe fall upon such generall Grammars and Dixionaris or Lexicâs they will make a great deale bette worke than ever hetherto is dreamed of The said Mr. Gerhard is now about such a Dictionary And I hope that besides him I shall give some further light and perhaps open a doore where no body did expect one beseeching onely in the meane time my Reader to helpe and assist me with whatsoever hee is able assuring him he shall finde me a thankfull man Analogy or the second part of Etymology Rule 1. From each of these 8000 roots may bee derived all sorts of words of whatsoever part of speech BEcause that every speech may bee the better understood and considered the art of Grammar doth divide all speeches into certaine parts in some tongues more in some lesse according to the greater or lesse variety of the terminations in every tongue For the lesse variety of the terminations of words there is in a tongue the fewer parts of speech in that tongue and the greater variety the more That tongue which hath the fewest parts of speech is the most perfect and that which hath the most lesse perfect The parts of speech in this primitive tongue is by all set downe and made too many there being onely two viz. a Noune and Verbe the greatest part of them have also made particles as the third part Other 8 parts some but very unreasonably have made nine and that ninth only for one letter sake as if it were to bee conceaved that one letter could make a ninth part of speech for then there would bee ninteen eight ordinary and eleven extraordinary for those several Letters 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for if the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one letter of these eleven be worthy to make a part of speech all the rest may bee worthy also Yet more specially of that in the second rule Here it is enough to observe that any kinde of word whatsoever none excepted comes from a root seeing that the root it selfe never stands in any booke as the root but the words descending from the roots This first rule of Analogy shewes us likewise by what liberty and yet with a regularity words may be multiplied to wit as wee say in Latine and Greec Analogicè according to analogy the right whereof is to forme words in a decent way For otherwise if there were not such lawfulnesse then wee might never make bold to forme any new word in this orientall primitive tongue where wee had none before As for instance In Ebrue I may make a verbe of
the same as Malkeka thy King to a man and Malkek thy King to a Woman yet both are commonly expressed onely Malkek And this distinction in dead things as Sun Moone Soule Day Night c. is not materiall for it will not alter the sence at all whither yea put them in the Masculine or Feminine And hence it is that there are so many exceptions about it so that in Buxtorfs Thesaurus yee have no lesse then 6 or 8 pages full of rules and exceptions about the gender And in living things onely men and women are of that worth to be accuratly distinguished all the rest deserve not that honour And againe that must bee a silly braine which understanding the sense of the Nounes should not bee able to know whither the Verbe be Masculine or Feminine whereas if it speaks of a woman it cannot but be Feminine and of a man Masculine Yet for the most part every Noune and Verbe that ends upon the third radicall is Masculine A common gender and a neuter are without neid this excludes and that includes both Rule 4. There is neither Active nor Passive extant I confesse it is otherwise laid downe by all the Grammarians that have written of these Dialects except Samaritic whereof wee have no Grammar necessary in all the rest this is laid downe as very necessary Nor do I deny it to bee naturall but that in this tongue there is a certaine termination and changing of Consonants for it that I deny And the reason is because it is so naturally sensible unto every one to feele whither hee gives or receaves blowes whither he smites or is smitten So that if wee onely know the signification of the Verbs and Nounes reason nature the antecedent and consequence will easily shew whither Active or Passive must bee understood although there be no distinction at all for it Yet in the Appendix when wee come to speake of accidentall things in this tongue there wee shall have some more trouble because we cannot be contented with ease and that which is sufficient in our tongues for the very children as those that have not such a great quicknesse of reason and understanding will not bee sufficient for our high learned great Schollers but they must have besides the Sun some petty little candles with them in their hand for feare they might misse the Exchange Church or Tavern at noone day Or as if their legs would not serve them well enough to go abroad but they must have go-carts whereby children learn to walke with them in the street for feare of falling I cannot give a better comparison of the madnesse of all the Grammarians when they forgetting their and our own naturall strength in such triffles make such a great matter to finde out whither the Noun and Verbe bee of an active or passive signification as if nature had not made distinction enough to know whither a man carry or is carried And why should nature have beene so provident by the senses of every man to distinguish betweene active and passive and yet that to bee esteemed nothing except it have a speciall termination or punctation all along Rule 5. There are no moods in this tongue I deny not that there are in tongues an indicative subjunctive optative potentiall imperative and by all superfluously added infinitive yet as the most Latine Grammars extant did reject the old way of the former Latine Grammars who did imitate and follow the steps of the Greec Grammars yet without reason in leaving away the oprative and potentiall mood because of the same termination with the subjunctive as in English I teach the indicative that I teach or might teach the optative when I teach the potentiall the Verbe teach remaining without distinction in respect of these three moods so here in this orientall tongue the subjunctive must be taken away because no speciall termination for it here The imperative as in all other tongues leaves the expressions of i he we they as unnaturall and unreasonable in commands being don only to the second person one or more Which unity is uncapable of distinction and lesse to be an accidentall mannen or mood And is therefore by me cald the commanding present and referred to the tenses The Infinitive is in all tongues a Noun as in English an act to act in this orientall tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mori mors to die a death So then there remaines onely one free mood viz. the indicative yet when there is no more but one you neede not give unto it a title the titles for the most part being given for distinction sake nor call it a mood as wee use not ordinarily the number one two three in things but one in nature as Sun Moone World or Matter a Booke a Pen c. saying one when there are either more or supposed to be more one God one Booke Hereby gaining a shorter way towards our purpose by cutting of that whole long street cald mood wee fall directly into the next street cald tenses Rule 6. Tenses or times are only three present future and preter The present or first position of a time in nature is either commanding some body or declaring Which cannot bee but to the second person onely one or more this is of three persons expressed either by the future or preter or by the Noune agent with the verbe substantive The future hath its temporall distinction by the first or third radicall of the 1. 2. or 3. personall Nounes singular or plurall prefixed before the root The terminations of the present remaining here because it gives the being unto the future The first of both numbers the second masculine singular and the third singular ends upon the third radicall The second Feminine singular here as in the present upon y the 2 and 3 masculine as the second masculine plurall in the present upon u. The second and third feminine plurall as the second feminine plurall upon n. The preter under which is comprised imperfect and plusperfect as nicer distinctions of the time past the perfect expressing both sufficiently because reason will distinguish where the eye reaches not either for want of a distinct object or defect of its power In Syriac most frequent in other dialects now and then the preter with the Verbe substantive makes the plusperfect and the Noune agent with the Verbe substantive the imperfect Yet such a constancy is not here to be expected or that the imperfect may be plusperfect or both to have that verbe substantive onely for fashion as a certaine emphaticall confirmation of the thing past as sufficient or its 1. or 3. radicall by the Arabians before the future a certaine emphaticall confirmation of the thing comming The termination it hath is t in all the singular of all persons and genders except the third Masculine which ends upon the third radicall the second Feminine doth frequently put before the affix personall letter a y paragogic as in Ebrue
first person do constantly fall away and we see by the taw that the taw is onely the characteristicall letter of this order because constant in all tenses The sixth order is the same with the third onely observing the same things in generall that are to be observed in the fifth order The seventh order hath nun prefixed before the root either alone or with the same hee or alef put before it in the present and pretertense By the Jewes the nun is not expressed in future and present but then the following is for the most part doubled by compensation The Arabians doe constantly write it but onely when the first radicall is a nun also then they write it not but in stead of it they double the radicall nun with a marke called Teshdid Rule 18. Besides these seven there are six other orders which because more rare I put asunder The eigth order but the first of these six is knowne by putting taw after the first radicall but when the first radicall is a taw whither naturall or taken in for sin whereof is spoken in the 17 rule of Etymology or alef vau yod when any of these is the first radicall it is cast away and the servile taw doubled instead thereof The ninth order is the very same with the first only that it hath the third radicall doubled either by setting the letter down twice or else by that marke called Dages or Teshdid The tenth order is knowne by putting 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i st an old Arabic and thence a Turkish word signifying desire before the root the alef is put away in the future Tense excepting onely in the first person singular which will have it even as the fourth Order hath The eleventh order is the same with the ninth only it hath alef vau or yod put before the third radicall doubled The twelfth order is knowne by putting a vaw doubled by Dages or Teshdid after the second radicall The thirteenth order hath the second radicall doubled and a vaw movable put betweene it In the 7.8.9.10.11.12 13. Orders there is an alef superfluous in the present and preter which as is said is cast away in the future but onely in the first person of the future whereof it is formative as well as in the fourth where the alef or he is the Character of the order Observation The signification and speciall respects of each of them in changing the orders belongs properly unto the Dictionary where it must and may bee set downe and not unto the Grammer it being altogether unfit and uselesse therein Rule 19. The termination of the present future and preter Tense of any Number and Gender doth hold through all the 13 Orders This rule doth shew 1. That there are no Moods or manners as indicative optative potentiall and subjunctive as in Greec and Latine 2. That there are not 4 6 or more conjugations in this tongue as there is in Latine and Greec where there are divers terminations not onely in the indicative but also imperative and conjunctive in active and and passive for those foure or more conjugations All which is not here in this tongue where all the Verbs through all the Dialects are formed after one generall fundamentall essentiall manner and the termination of the pretertense is the same for all Verbs through all the 13. Orders the same in the future and present tense Nay the terminatives of the present and future being one there are onely two sorts of terminations through all the 13 orders for all Verbs through all the six Dialects one for the present and future the second for the preter tense In the present 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the third radicall in the preter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the third radicall so that it could not be almost more simple than it is except that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might have onely a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which would have beene enough and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 onely either 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which would suffice Nor must yee looke upon the Vowell which wee doe not here speake of but onely upon the letters neither that the third radicall 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are sometimes cast away or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 changed among themselves or superfluously added Rule 20. The same 13. Orders belong unto the Nouns as well as Verbs That is the greatest task in this Orientall tongue to sinde out the signification of the Nouns according to those thirteene orders whereof wee say the same that Seneca did of the Latine Cases of the Nouns not that every Noun hath them all but that none have any more To finde out the reason a priori what this or that order signifyes in the Verbs is an easie thing and what respect proportion degree or reason one order has to the other is easier to bee found then in the Nounes And yet the same is in the Nouns also Which as I promised wee shall observe as in the Verbs so also in the Nouns in the following Dictionary if the publick wealth and the private aide will sufficiently assist mee in that which no Learned man whosoever that hath any understanding in this tongue and observes the obscurity in the translations of the most excellent places in Scripture and which are framed by the Holy Ghost in a Poeticall way can deny to be the onely way whereby to cure all these diseases wherewith our translation is burthened it being full of non-sense and falsehoods and to advance a more perfect cleare certaine and reasonable knowledge of the whole tongue which is not onely Ebrue and Calde nor yet onely Samaritic and Syriac but also Arabic and Etiopic both in the true Grammar and Dictionary except our Ministers will preach and quote non-sense and falshood and the Right Honorable the Lords and Commons Assembled in the High Court of Parliament the expected Great Reformers of the Church will not have it otherwise For many godly Ministers see and finde it well enough that the translation is as yet very full of non-sense and almost in every Chapter some falshood nay very many pious religious and onely worthy Members of the Church of England do heartily and instantly wish for this worke which is as yet not laid to heart nor so much as once moved to the Parliament God grant wee may become thankfull after such infinite mercies and not lay aside I will not say trample under our feete that exceeding bright shining light of this holy tongue which God has first allighted in our Neighbour Countries where they did and doe labour heartily for it spending not onely much labour but money also in the midst of the War that they might have clearer expositions of the Word of God than heretofore and do print Ebrue Calde Syriac Arabic Samaritic and Eticpic parts of the Bible procure
all forts of books in this tongue entertaine the laborious schollars nay the best Gentlemen Princes Earles Dukes States and Kings have a delight to study or to promote these tongues and God blesses them and prospers their good and Christian duties and works whereas we might reape the fruit of their labour without labour if we will proove living Christians APPENDIX OF ANALOGY For the Pricks and Stroaks Rules 1. Any of the letters being cast away are for the most part compensed or as yet remaining by vertue of Dages and Teshdid IN the Orthography it is told us that there are two conditions that you must rely upon in Ebrue Calde and Arabic to see the Dages or Teshdid expressed 1. That the former syllable end upon a Vowell 2. That the letter which is to have Dages or Teshîd have a vowell or go to the following letter with a Vowell If any of those two conditions faile there is no Dages or Teshdid to be expected and if it be there it wants almost all its vertue and power Yet yee must not expect to finde this Dages constantly in any Manuscripts without pricks and yet you will finde it in some places of those Manuscripts that are written with the least care And therefore it must be denyed to the Samaritic Syriac and Etiopic in some measure because they have not written it except in Syriac now and then and in some measure yee must confesse it to be not onely in Syriac for if it bee but once written in the booke it is enough to demonstrate that it is extant but also in Samaritic and Etiopic to Wheresoever you finde it in Ebrue Calde and Arabic you will either finde it or else must understand it to be in Syriac Samaritic and Etiopic The profit of this Rule is that it takes away all these anomalicall examples in Ebrue Syriac Calde and Arabic where any Radicall or servil letter is compensed for than that letter is yet extant it being onely a compendious way in writing not observed in all places or Dialects As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 at thou in Syriac and Arabic ant 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mibbne n Syriac and Arabic min bne Rule 2. The Dages or Teshdid is either characteristicall eufonic or superfluous This Rule is by all Grammarians given in Orthography where it is not proper For I would onely know of them whither a beginner bee able to reade Ebrue c. without this distinction or whither he must needs know it I am sure hee may read Ebrue Calde Syriac and Arabic without it And why than must it bee put there where nothing is taught but onely that which belongs to reading Tell the beginner that Dages and Teshdid double the letter and thou hast done all that is needfull in Orthography But as for Analogy here these differences if there bee any which expresse the inward nature of it are to be set downe And for that purpose the Grammarians have allowed unto Ebrue and Calde a compensative a characteristic and an Euphonic whereunto R. D. Qimhi in his mielol puts one which hee calls Atemerakhiq a forraigner stranger comming from forraigne unexpected unprovided way of reason The Eufonic is by Erpenius subdistinguished into Deltale Lambdale and Initiale Deltale is the Teshdid upon the letter t after the letter d without a Vowell Lambdale is upon the teeth and tongue letter after the letter l in the personall Noune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ille a ud without a Vowell Initiale or that Teshdid written upon the first letter is onely upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when the letter n is the last without a Vowell in the foregoing word either expresse or in the Vowell an on in And thus much they say I give my judgement thus that I esteeme the title of compensative to bee superfluous it being the nature or intention of all the species of Dages and Teshdid to compense the letter before left out in writing or pronounciating with doubling of that following letter that hath a Vowell The characteristic is onely that which is written in the second Radicall when the first is not cast away and that both in Nounes and Verbs in the second fifth ninth and eleventh order Now this is also compensative for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are onely for a compendious writing contracted into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not for any vertue residing in this Dages or Teshdid Whereby is to be observed 1. That the title of characteristic is not necessary 2. That this doubling of the second and third radicall is a meere accident And therefore in thousands of Ebrue Calde Syriac and Arabic words left away 3. That the doubling of the second or third radicall dependeth upon the pleasure of the Reader 4. That leaving the Dages or Teshdid out of the second or third Radicall the first second and ninth Order hath one and the same externall forme and hence it is that there are so few examples for the ninth order in Ebrue where notwithstanding there are some 5. The same reason may bee given for Syriac where there are none because Dages is almost never written 6. That there is no essentiall alteration in the signification of the word with or without the Dages or Teshdid characteristic 7. Why some word have the same letter doubled as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yisshakar which is now in the Ebrue Bible 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to bee read yisshashkar the name of the fifth son of Jacob by Leah And so in many other words 8. That this doubling of a letter is used in every tongue as well as in this primitive where a man will expressesome emfaticall pronunciation 9. That a man may easily adde such an emfaticall pronunciation unto the Ebrue when hee observes the matter as Jud. 14 6. of Simson when hee with force tore in peeces the Lion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the punctatours considering to expresse that force did write the radicall twice or which is the same did prick it to be pronounced twice And so far of the characteristicall dages or Teshdid The Eufonic is no new species of Dages or Teshdid because every one of them are for eufony in the sweet pronunciation with an emfaticall expression Here is to bee observed that the Grammarians call that Dages or Teshdid in the third radicall eufonicr which I call characteristic Erpenins compensative Compensative and Eufonic are generall names appliable also to the characteristic Therefore is it not to bee esteemed as if I were at variance with them That which Qimhi cals Ate merakhiq is also eufonic not contradistinct unto it and is the same which otherwise the Grammarians call Dages lene in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 b g d k f t when the forgoing word ends on a Vowell with or without an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quiescent intercurring As for instance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hayahbbayyôm which quiescent h doth nothing against that eufonic