because that which _begins_ and
_ends_, and is constantly _changing_, is never _one_ nor the
_same_, nor in the same state. The deity on whose temple this word
was inscribed was called =Apollo=, Apollon, from _a_ negative and
_pollus_, _many_, because God is =one=, his nature simple, and
_uncompounded_."--_Vide, Clark's Com._

[17] The same fact may be observed in other languages, for all people
form language alike, in a way to correspond with their ideas. The
following hasty examples will illustrate this point.

_Agent._ _Verb._ _Object._
_English_ Singers Sing Songs
_French_ Les chanteurs Chantent Les chansons
_Spanish_ Los cantores Cantan Las cantinelas
_Italian_ I cantori Cantano I canti
_Latin_ Cantores Canunt Cantus

_English_ Givers Give Gifts
_French_ Les donneurs Donnent Les dons
_Spanish_ Los donadores Dan o donan Los dones
_Italian_ I danatori Dano o danano I doni
_Latin_ Datores Donant Dona

_English_ Fishers Fish Fishes
_French_ Les pecheurs Pechent Les poissons
_Spanish_ Los pescadores Pescan Los peces
_Italian_ I pescatori Pescan I pesci
_Latin_ Piscatores Piscantur Pisces

_English_ Students Study Studies
_French_ Les etudiens Etudient Les etudes
_Spanish_ Los estudiantes Estudian Los estudios
_Italian_ I studienti Studiano I studii
_Latin_ Studiosi Student Studia

[18] Mr. Murray says, "These compounds," _have_, _shall_, _will_,
_may_, _can_, _must_, _had_, _might_, _could_, _would_, and
_should_, which he uses as auxiliaries to _help_ conjugate _other_
verbs, "are, however, to be considered as _different forms_ of the
_same_ verb." I should like to know, if these words have any thing
to do with the _principal_ verbs; if they only alter the _form_ of
the verb which follows them. I _may_, _can_, _must_, _shall_,
_will_, or _do love_. Are these only different forms of _love_? or
rather, are they not distinct, important, and original verbs, pure
and perfect _in_ and _of_ themselves? Ask for their etymons and