There are, in the various parts of the world, many languages to which the art of grammar has never yet been applied; and to which, therefore, the definition or true idea of grammar, however general, does not properly extend.

And even where it has been applied, and is now honoured as a popular branch of study, there is yet great room for improvement: barbarisms and solecisms have not been rebuked away as they deserve to be.
7.

Melancthon says, "Grammatica est certa loquendi ac scribendi ratio, Latinis Latine." Vossius, "Ars bene loquendi eoque et scribendi, atque id Latinis Latine." Dr.Prat, "_Grammatica est recte loquendi atque scribendi ars._" Ruddiman also, in his Institutes of Latin Grammar, reversed the terms _writing_ and _speaking_, and defined grammar, "_ars rece loquendi scribendique_;" and, either from mere imitation, or from the general observation that speech precedes writing, this arrangement of the words has been followed by most modern grammarians.

Dr.Lowth embraces both terms in a more general one, and says, "Grammar is the art of _rightly expressing_ our thoughts by words." It is, however, the province of grammar, to guide us not merely in the expression of our own thoughts, but also in our apprehension of the thoughts, and our interpretation of the words, of others.

Hence, Perizonius, in commenting upon Sanctius's imperfect definition, "_Grammatica est ars recte loquendi_," not improperly asks, "_et quidni intelligendi et explicandi_ ?" "and why not also of understanding and explaining ?" Hence, too, the art of _reading_ is virtually a part of grammar; for it is but the art of understanding and speaking correctly that which we have before us on paper.