CHAPTER V.

THE USES OF SINGLE WORDS AND PHRASES.

We have seen already how to avoid certain gross blunders which result from the ambiguity or misinterpretation of words and statements; but if we are to acquire any fine discrimination in the interpretation and use of language our study of words and sentences must not end here. Hence several chapters more must be devoted to them.

To understand the exact meaning of a word in any particular sentence it is not enough to know its definition; for however unambiguous the meaning of a word may be as given in a dictionary it may be used for any one of several different purposes, and if we do not understand the differences between these purposes we cannot be sure of interpreting the word aright.

With reference to each one of these different purposes words are divided into different classes-usually two; but since the same word can be classified with reference to different purposes it can belong to as many different classes as there are purposes with reference to which it can be classified. We shall see, however, that not every word can be classified with reference to all these different purposes.

Terms.

The first division of words which we shall consider is into those that are Terms', and those that are not. A term is a word or group of words used to indicate or identify the objects about which a person speaks, or the states, qualities, actions or other relations whose possession by

an object is under consideration. It is, in brief, a name in the broadest sense of the word. In the sentence 'The present Emperor of Germany is remarkably energetic' the first five words are regarded as a single term because they are used together to point out the individual under discussion; and because the last two words of the sentence are used together to indicate a single quality, they also are regarded as a single term. In other connections, of course, the words Emperor, Germany, energetic, would be regarded as separate terms, e.g., The Emperor is energetic; Germany is a beautiful country. Even in the case of the sentence given, if we should be asked to define our terms' it would be proper enough to take up the words separately, as they might appear elsewhere, and explain that by remarkably' was meant, not excessively', but noticeably'; by energetic', not meddlesome' but vigorous'. But if we wished to be absolutely accurate, though tedious, we should add to our explanation of the meaning of the separate words an explanation of the phrase or term as a whole.

6

Though every term is a word or combination of words, the structure of language is such that some words can never be used as complete terms. The object of thought is indicated y the subject of a sentence; its relations under discussion, by the predicate. Such words as prepositions, conjunctions and adverbs cannot be either subjects or predicates and therefore they cannot be terms, though they can be parts of terms. We cannot say, for example: Of is energetic; nevertheless is very; etc. We can say 'of' is a preposition; but then the word is used as a noun and is not taken in its ordinary sense. Unless a relation is discussed-affirmed, denied, or questioned-the word that indicates it is not a term. The word of' in the phrase 'The Emperor of Germany' indicates a relation, but it is not a term, because nothing is said about the relation it indicates. It merely forms a part of the description of the object some other of whose relations is discussed. Prepositions joining nouns to

be terms.

each other, and possessive cases are always devoted to the expression of relations which are involved in the conception of an object but not discussed. For that reason they can never On the same principle, adjectives are true terms when they follow the verb 'to be' or its equivalents as predicates, e.g., in the sentence The horse is white', but not when they are in their usual position, as in the sentence The white horse kicks'.

Words which can be used as complete terms are called Categorematic (Greek, kaτny opέw, to assert); those which can not, and which therefore can not be used except when they are combined into a term with others, are called Syncategorematic (Greek, ovv, together with, and kaτny opέw). κατηγορέω).

The distinctions which we have to discuss in the rest of this chapter all have reference to terms. We shall therefore have nothing more to say at present about syncategorematic words.

The first distinction to be made with reference to terms is between those which are used demonstratively and those which are used descriptively. By a Demonstrative term is meant one that points out an ob

Demonstrative and

descriptive. ject; by a Descriptive term, one that tells something about it. When we say 'John is angry' or 'That is very beautiful', the words 'John' and 'that' are used demonstratively and the remainder of the sentences are intended to describe the objects that they point out. The word John' is of course a proper name and the word 'that'

a

' demonstrative' pronoun. These parts of speech are devoted so exclusively to pointing objects out, and adjectival phrases like 'angry' and 'very beautiful' are devoted so exclusively to their description that if the order of the sentences were reversed and we said 'Angry is John' or 'Very beautiful is that, it would still be plain which words were used to point out the objects under discussion, and which were used to describe them.

In the examples just given the subject of each sentence

was demonstrative and the predicate descriptive, and by straining matters a little we can say that this is always so. We can say, for example, that in the propositions A is larger than B', 'A is bullying B', everything but the subject 'A' is part of a predicate whose function is merely to describe or tell something about A. This, I suppose, would be the grammarian's interpretation of the sentences, and it is the interpretation that we assumed when we defined the subject of a sentence as the name of the object about which we are speaking. But it is not quite fair, for in each of these sentences we tell quite as much about B as about A. The fairer way is to regard the sentence as made up, not of two parts, a subject and a predicate, but of three: two demonstrative terms, and a third term that describes some relation between the things which they point out. In view of this interpretation of propositions like these we cannot say that a predicate is always descriptive (or even that it always consists of a single term). But there is nothing in what we have said to prevent us from saying that the subject is always demonstrative. If we do say so, however, we must make it plain that we are speaking of real subjects and not such nominal subjects as 'it' and 'there' in propositions like these: 'It is a long distance from A to B'; 'It is a long road that knows no turning'; 'There is a lion in the way'. Sometimes, moreover, it is hard to tell what is the real subject. In this last proposition, for example, are we telling about the lion, as the form of the sentence seems to imply, or are we telling about the way and why we cannot travel in it?

Nouns (ie., nouns substantive) are usually used demonstratively; but they can also be used descriptively. When we say 'A man came to the house', the term 'a man' is demonstrative, for it points out, rather indefinitely to be sure, who it was that came; but when we say 'John is a man', the term is used descriptively, for it is intended to summarize a great many of John's attributes, to indicate his general resemblance to the other creatures we call men, and perhaps

to convey an idea of his biological relations to them and to other animals.

Connotative and nonconnotative.

Since it is possible to identify an object more or less definitely by describing it, a term whose primary function in a given sentence is to do the one often serves at the same time incidentally to do the other. When we say that a man came to the house we not only tell the hearer that one or other of a certain large group of things came to the house, but we incidentally describe that thing, implying that it has all the qualities and other relations of a man; and when we say that John is a man we not only describe him but incidentally we tell that he is one of a certain group. Terms which perform this double function are called Connotative; those which do not, Non-connotative.*

What words really are connotative and what non-connotative, and even the definition of these terms themselves, is a matter about which logicians are not all agreed; but the distinction will be illustrated well enough for our purposes if we say that the ordinary Common Nouns of grammar are connotative (e.g., 'man', 'horse', 'pig'), and that Proper Names and Abstract Nouns are probably not.

Whether a proper name is to some extent descriptive as well as demonstrative depends altogether upon whether there exists any convention in virtue of which any particular name is applied only to certain classes of objects. In Englishspeaking countries nowadays, for example, surnames usually indicate family connections. Elsewhere and at other times they have indicated something else. A Christian name may be given merely because a parent thinks it pretty; and yet it is usually chosen with some reference to sex. Nevertheless

* A connotative' term, as defined in logic, must not be confused with the somewhat similar terms which have connotation' as defined in books of rhetoric. They both do something incidentally; but this incidental function as described in rhetoric is generally some kind of appeal to feeling.