CHAPTER XVIII.

ON THE PARTICIPLES.

s. 567. The present participle, or the participle in _-ing_, must be considered in respect to its relations with the substantive in _-ing_. _Dying-day_ is, probably, no more a participle than _morning-walk_. In respect to the syntax of such expressions as the forthcoming, I consider that they are _either_ participles or substantives.

1. When substantives, they are in regimen, and govern a genitive case--_What is the meaning of the lady's holding up her train?_ Here the word _holding_=_the act of holding_.--_Quid est significatio elevationis pallae de parte foeminae._

2. When participles, they are in apposition or concord, and would, if inflected, appear in the same case with the substantive, or pronoun, preceding them--_What is the meaning of the lady holding up her train?_ Here the word _holding_=_in the act of holding_, and answers to the Latin _foeminae elevantis_.--_Quid est significatio foeminae elevantis pallam?_

For the extent to which the view differs from that of Priestley, and still more with that of Mr. Guest, see _Phil. Trans._, 25.

s. 568. The past participle corresponds not with the Greek form [Greek: tuptomenos], but with the form [Greek: tetummenos]. _I am beaten_ is essentially a combination, expressive not of present but of past time, just like the Latin _sum verberatus_. Its Greek equivalent is not [Greek: eimi tuptomenos]=_I am a man in the act of being beaten_, but [Greek: eimi tetummenos]=_I am a man who has been beaten_. It is past in respect to the action, though present in respect to the state brought about by the action. This essentially past element in the so-called present expression, _I am beaten_, will be again referred to.

* * * * *

{452}