‘Seasons return, but _not_ to me returns Day, _or_ the sweet approach of ev’n _or_ morn, _Or_ sight of vernal bloom, _or_ summer’s rose, _Or_ flocks, _or_ herds, _or_ human face divine.’ _Milton, P. L._, B. iii, l. 40.–“_Burn’s Gr._, p. 108.
OBS. 18.–T. O. Churchill, whose Grammar first appeared in London in 1823, treats this matter thus: “As _or_ answers to _either, nor_, a compound of _not or [ne or_] by contraction, answers to _neither_, a similar compound of _not either [ne either_]. The latter however does not constitute that double use of the negative, in which one, agreeably to the principles of philosophical grammar, destroys the other; for a part of the first word, _neither_, cannot be understood before the second, _nor_: and for the same reason a part of it could not be understood before _or_, which is sometimes improperly used in the second clause; while the whole of it, _neither_, would be obviously improper before _or_. On the other hand, when _not_ is used in the first clause, _nor_ is improper in the second; since it would involve the impropriety of understanding _not_ before a compound of _not_ [or _ne_] with _or_. ‘I shall _not_ attempt to convince, _nor_ to persuade you.–What will you _not_ attempt?–To convince, _nor_ to persuade you.’ The impropriety of _nor_ in this answer is clear: but the answer should certainly repeat the words not heard, or not understood.”–_Churchill’s New Gram._, p. 330.
OBS. 19.–“It is probable, that the use of _nor_ after _not_ has been introduced, in consequence of such improprieties as the following: ‘The injustice of inflicting death for crimes, when _not_ of the most heinous nature, _or_ attended with extenuating circumstances.’ Here it is obviously not the intention of the writer, to understand the negative in the last clause: and, if this were good English, it would be not merely allowable to employ _nor_ after _not_, to show the subsequent clause to be negative as well as the preceding, but it would always be necessary. In fact, however, the sentence quoted is faulty, in not repeating the adverb _when_ in the last clause; ‘or _when_ attended:’ which would preclude the negative from being understood in it; for, if an adverb, conjunction, or auxiliary verb, preceding a negative, be understood in the succeeding clause, the negative is understood also; if it be repeated, the negative must be repeated likewise, or the clause becomes affirmative.”–_Ib._, p. 330.
OBS. 20.–This author, proceeding with his remarks, suggests forms of correction for several other common modes of expression, which he conceives to be erroneous. For the information of the student, I shall briefly notice a little further the chief points of his criticism, though he teaches some principles which I have not thought it necessary always to observe in writing. “‘And seemed _not_ to understand ceremony, _or_ to despise it.’ _Goldsmith_. Here _either_ ought to be inserted before _not_. ‘It is _not_ the business of virtue, to extirpate the affections of the mind, but to regulate them.’ _Addison_. The sentence ought to have been: ‘It is the business of virtue, _not_ to extirpate the affections of the mind, but to regulate them.’ ‘I do _not_ think, that he was averse to the office; _nor_ do I believe, that it was unsuited to him.’ How much better to say: ‘I do not think, that he was averse to the office, _or_ that it was unsuited to him!’ For the same reason _nor_ cannot follow _never_, the negative in the first clause affecting all the rest.”–_Ib._ p. 332. “_Nor_ is sometimes used improperly after _no_: [as,] ‘I humbly however trust in God, that I have hazarded _no_ conjecture, _nor_ have given any explanation of obscure points, inconsistent with the general sense of Scripture, which must be our guide in all dubious passages.’ _Gilpin_. It ought to be: ‘_and_ have given _no_ explanation;’ or, ‘I have _neither_ hazarded any conjecture, _nor_ given any explanation.’ The use of _or_ after _neither_ is as common, as that of _nor_ after _no_ or _not_.[429] ‘_Neither_ the pencil _or_ poetry are adequate.’ _Coxe_. Properly, ‘_Neither_ the pencil _nor_ poetry _is_ adequate.’ ‘The vow of poverty _allowed_ the Jesuits individually, to have _no_ idea of wealth.’ _Dornford_. We cannot _allow_ a _nonentity_. It should be: ‘did _not_ allow, to have _any_ idea.'”–_Ib._, p. 333.
OBS. 21.–Thus we see that Churchill wholly and positively condemns _nor_ after _not, no_, or _never_; while Burn totally disapproves of _or_, under the same circumstances. Both of these critics are wrong, because each carries his point too far; and yet it may not be right, to suppose both particles to be often equally good. Undoubtedly, a negation may be repeated in English without impropriety, and that in several different ways: as, “There is _no_ living, _none_, if Bertram be away.”–_Beauties of Shak._, p. 3. “Great men are _not_ always wise, _neither_ do the aged [always] understand judgement.”–_Job_, xxxii, 9. “Will he esteem thy riches? _no, not_ gold, _nor_ all the forces of strength.”–_Job_, xxxiv. 19. Some sentences, too, require _or_, and others _nor_, even when a negative occurs in a preceding clause; as, “There was _none_ of you that convinced Job, _or_ that answered his words.”–_Job_, xxxii, 12. “How much less to him that accepteth _not_ the persons of princes _nor_ regardeth the rich more than the poor.”–_Job_, xxxiv, 19. “This day is holy unto the Lord your God; mourn _not, nor_ weep.”–_Neh._, viii, 9. “Men’s behaviour should be like their apparel, _not_ too straight _or_ point-de-vise, but free for exercise.”–_Ld. Bacon_. Again, the mere repetition of a simple negative is, on some occasions, more agreeable than the insertion of any connective; as, “There is _no_ darkness, _nor_ shadow of death, where the workers of iniquity may hide themselves.”–_Job_, xxxiv, 22. Better: “There is _no_ darkness, _no_ shadow of death, _wherein_ the workers of iniquity may hide themselves.” “_No_ place _nor any_ object appears to him void of beauty.”–_Murray’s Key_, 8vo, p. 255. Better: “_No_ place, _no_ object, appears to him void of beauty.” That passage from Milton which Burn supposes to be faulty, and that expression of Addison’s which Churchill dislikes, are, in my opinion, not incorrect as they stand; though, doubtless, the latter admits of the variation proposed. In the former, too, _or_ may twice be changed to _nor_, where the following nouns are nominatives; but to change it throughout, would not be well, because the other nouns are objectives governed by _of_:
“Seasons return, but _not_ to me returns Day, _nor_ the sweet approach of ev’n _or_ morn, _Nor_ sight of vernal bloom, _or_ summer’s rose, _Or_ flocks, _or_ herds, _or_ human face divine.”
OBS. 22.–_Ever_ and _never_ are directly opposite to each other in sense, and yet they are very frequently confounded and misapplied, and that by highly respectable writers; as, “Seldom, or _never_ can we expect,” &c.–_Blair’s Lectures_, p. 305. “And seldom, or _ever_, did any one rise, &c.”–_Ib._, p. 272. “Seldom, or _never_, is[430] there more than one accented syllable in any English word.”–_Ib._, p. 329. “Which that of the present seldom or _ever_ is understood to be.”–_Dr. Murray’s Hist. of Lang._, Vol. ii, p. 120. Here _never_ is right, and _ever_ is wrong. It is _time_, that is here spoken of; and the affirmative _ever_, meaning _always_, or _at any time_, in stead of being a fit alternative for _seldom_, makes nonsense of the sentence, and violates the rule respecting the order and fitness of time: unless we change _or_ to _if_, and say, “seldom, _if_ ever.” But in sentences like the following, the adverb appears to express, not time, but _degree_; and for the latter sense _ever_ is preferable to _never_, because the degree ought to be possible, rather than impossible: “_Ever so_ little of the spirit of martyrdom is always a more favourable indication to civilization, than _ever so_ much dexterity of party management, or _ever so_ turbulent protestation of immaculate patriotism.”–_Wayland’s Moral Science_, p. 411. “Now let man reflect but _never so_ little on himself.”–_Burlamaqui, on Law_, p. 29. “Which will _not_ hearken to the voice of charmers, charming _never so_ wisely.”–_Ps._, lviii, 5. The phrase _ever so_, (which ought, I think, to be written as _one word_,) is now a very common expression to signify _in whatsoever degree_; as, “_everso_ little,”–“_everso_ much,”–“_everso_ wise,”–“_everso_ wisely.” And it is manifestly this, and not time, that is intended by the false phraseology above;–“a form of speech handed down by the best writers, but lately accused, I think with justice, of solecism. * * * It can only be defended by supplying a very harsh and unprecedented ellipsis.”–_Johnson’s Dict., w. Never_.
OBS. 23.–Dr. Lowth seconds this opinion of Johnson, respecting the phrase, “_never so wisely_,” and says, “It should be, ‘_ever_ so wisely;’ that is, ‘_how_ wisely _soever_.'” To which he adds an other example somewhat different: “‘Besides, a slave would _not_ have been admitted into that society, had he had _never such_ opportunities.’ Bentley.”–_Lowth’s Gram._, p. 109. This should be, “had he had _everso excellent_ opportunities.” But Churchill, mistaking the common explanation of the meaning of _everso_ for the manner of parsing or resolving it, questions the propriety of the term, and thinks it easier to defend the old phrase _never so_; in which he supposes _never_ to be an adverb of time, and not to relate to _so_, which is an adverb of degree; saying, “‘Be it _never_ so true,’ is resolvable into, ‘Be it so true, _as never any thing was_.'[431] ‘I have had _never_ so much trouble on this occasion,’ may be resolved into, ‘I _have never had_ so much trouble, _as_ on this occasion:’ while, ‘I have had _ever_ so much trouble on this occasion, cannot be resolved, without supplying some very harsh and unprecedented ellipsis indeed.”–_New Gram._, p. 337, Why not? I see no occasion at all for supposing any ellipsis. _Ever_ is here an adverb of degree, and relates to _so_; or, if we take _everso_ as one word, this too is an adverb of degree, and relates to _much_: because the meaning is–“_everso much_ trouble.” But the other phraseology, even as it stands in Churchill’s explanations, is a solecism still; nor can any resolution which supposes _never_ to be here an adverb of time, be otherwise. We cannot call that a grammatical resolution, which makes a different sense from that which the writer intended: as, “A slave would not have been admitted into that society, had he _never_ had such opportunities.” This would be Churchill’s interpretation, but it is very unlike what Bentley says above. So, ‘I have _never had so much_ trouble,’ and, ‘I have had _everso much_ trouble,’ are very different assertions.
OBS. 24.–On the word _never_, Dr. Johnson remarks thus: “It seems in some phrases to have the sense of an _adjective_, [meaning,] _not any_; but in reality it is _not ever_: [as,] ‘He answered him to _never_ a word.’ MATTHEW, xxvii, 14.”–_Quarto Dict._ This mode of expression was formerly very common, and a contracted form of it is still frequently heard among the vulgar: as, “Because he’d _ne’er_ an other tub.”–_Hudibras_, p. 102. That is, “Because he had _no_ other tub.” “Letter nor line know I _never_ a one.”–_Scott’s Lay of L. M._, p. 27. This is what the common people pronounce “_ne’er a one_,” and use in stead of _neither_ or _no one_. In like manner they contract _ever a one_ into “_e’er a one_;” by which they mean _either_ or _any one_. These phrases are the same that somebody–(I believe it is _Smith_, in his Inductive Grammar–) has ignorantly written “_ary one_” and “_nary one_” calling them vulgarisms.[432] Under this mode of spelling, the critic had an undoubted right to think the terms unauthorized! In the compounds of _whoever_ or _whoe’er, whichever_ or _whiche’er, whatever_ or _whate’er_, the word _ever_ or _e’er_, which formerly stood separate, appears to be an adjective, rather than an adverb; though, by becoming part of the pronoun, it has now technically ceased to be either.
OBS. 25.–The same may be said of _soever_ or _soe’er_, which is considered as only a part of an other word even when it is written separately; as, “On _which_ side _soever_ I cast my eyes.” In Mark, iii, 28th, _wherewithsoever_ is commonly printed as two words; but Alger, in his Pronouncing Bible, more properly makes it one. Dr. Webster, in his grammars, calls _soever_ a WORD; but, in his dictionaries, he does not _define_ it as such. “The word _soever_ may be interposed between the attribute and the name; ‘how clear soever this idea of infinity,’–‘how remote soever it may seem.’–LOCKE.”–_Webster’s Philosophical Gram._, p. 154; _Improved Gram._, p. 107. “SOEVER, _so_ and _ever_, found in compounds, as in _whosoever, whatsoever, wheresoever_. See these words.”–_Webster’s Dict._, 8vo.
OBS. 26.–The word _only_, (i.e., _onely_, or _onelike_,) when it relates to a noun or a pronoun, is a definitive adjective, meaning _single, alone, exclusive of others_; as, “The _only_ man,”–“The _only_ men,”–“Man _only_,”–“Men _only_,”–“He _only_,”–“They _only_.” When it relates to a verb or a participle, it is an adverb of manner, and means _simply, singly, merely, barely_; as, “We fancy that we hate flattery, when we _only_ hate the manner of it.”–_Art of Thinking_, p. 38. “A disinterested love of one’s country can _only_ subsist in small republics.”–_Ib._, p. 56. When it stands at the head of a clause, it is commonly a connective word, equivalent to _but_, or _except that_; in which sense, it must be called a conjunction, or at least a conjunctive adverb, which is nearly the same thing; as, “_Only_ they would that we should remember the poor.”–_Gal._, ii, 10. “For these signs are prepositions, _only_ they are of more constant use than the rest.”–_Ward’s Gram._, p. 129.
OBS. 27.–Among our grammarians, the word “_only_” often passes for an adverb, when it is in fact an adjective. Such a mistake in this single word, has led Churchill to say of the adverb in general, “_It’s_ place is for the most part before adjectives, _after nouns_, and after verbs;” &c.–_New Gram._, p. 147. But, properly, the placing of adverbs has nothing to do with “nouns,” because adverbs do not relate to nouns. In this author’s example, “His _arm only_ was bare,” there is no adverb; and, where he afterwards speaks of the latitude allowable in the placing of adverbs, alleging, “It is indifferent whether we say, ‘He bared his _arm only_;’ or, ‘He bared _only_ his arm,'” the word _only_ is an adjective, in one instance, if not in both. With this writer, and some others, the syntax of an adverb centres mainly in the suggestion, that, “_It’s_ propriety and force depend on _it’s_ position.”–_Ib._, p. 147. Illustration: “Thus people commonly say; ‘_I only_ spoke three words:’ which properly implies, that _I_, and _no other person_, spoke three words: when the intention of the speaker requires: ‘I spoke _only three_ words; that is, _no more than three_ words.'”–_Ib._, p. 327. One might just as well say, “I spoke three words _only_.” But the interpretation above is hypercritical, and contrary to that which the author himself gives in his note on the other example, thus: “Any other situation of the adverb would make a difference. ‘He _only_ bared his arm;’ would imply, that he did _nothing more than_ bare his arm. ‘_Only_ he bared his arm;’ must refer to a preceding part of the sentence, stating something, to which the act of baring his arm was an exception; as, ‘He did it in the same manner, _only_ he bared his arm.’ If _only_ were placed immediately before _arm_; as, ‘_He_ bared his _only arm_;’ it would be an adjective, and signify, that he had but one arm.”–_Ib._, p. 328. Now are not, “_I only spoke three words_,” and, “_He only bared his arm_,” analogous expressions? Is not the former as good English as the latter? _Only_, in both, is most naturally conceived to belong to the verb; but either may be read in such a manner as to make it an adjective belonging to the pronoun.
OBS. 28.–The term _not but_ is equivalent to two negatives that make an affirmative; as, “_Not but_ that it is a wide place.”–_Walker’s Particles_, p. 89. “_Non_ quo _non_ latus locus sit.”–_Cic. Ac._, iv, 12. It has already been stated, that _cannot but_ is equal to _must_; as, “It is an affection which _cannot but_ be productive of some distress.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 461. It seems questionable, whether _but_ is not here an adverb, rather than a conjunction. However this may be, by the customary (but faulty) omission of the negative before _but_, in some other sentences, that conjunction has acquired the adverbial sense of _only_; and it may, when used with that signification, be called an _adverb_. Thus, the text, “He hath _not_ grieved me _but_ in part.” (_2 Cor._, ii, 5,) might drop the negative _not_, and still convey the same meaning: “He hath grieved me _but_ in part;” i.e., “_only_ in part.” In the following examples, too, _but_ appears to be an adverb, like _only_: “Things _but_ slightly connected should not be crowded into one sentence.”–_Murray’s Octavo Gram., Index_. “The assertion, however, serves _but_ to show their ignorance.”–_Webster’s Essays_, p. 96.
“Reason itself _but_ gives it edge and power.”–_Pope_.
“Born _but_ to die, and reasoning _but_ to err.”–_Id._
OBS. 29.–In some constructions of the word _but_, there is a remarkable ambiguity; as, “There _cannot be but one_ capital musical pause in a line.”–_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 92. “A line _admits but one_ capital pause.”–_Ibid._ Thus does a great critic, in the same paragraph, palpably contradict himself, and not perceive it. Both expressions are equivocal. He ought rather to have said: “A line admits _no more than_ one capital pause.”–“There cannot be _more than_ one capital musical pause in a line.” Some would say–“admits _only_ one”–“there can be _only one_.” But here, too, is some ambiguity; because _only_ may relate either to _one_, or to the preceding verb. The use of _only_ for _but_ or _except that_, is not noticed by our lexicographers; nor is it, in my opinion, a practice much to be commended, though often adopted by men that pretend to write grammatically: as, “Interrogative pronouns are the same as _relative_, ONLY their antecedents cannot be determined till the answer is _given to the question_.”–_Comly’s Gram._, p. 16. “A diphthong is always long; as, _Aurum, Caesar_, &c. ONLY _prae_, in composition before a vowel is commonly short.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 254; _Gould’s_, 246.
OBS. 30.–It is said by some grammarians, that, “The adverb _there_ is often used as an _expletive_, or as a word that adds nothing to the sense; in which case, it precedes the verb and the nominative; as, ‘_There_ is a person at the door.'”–_Murray’s Gram._, p. 197; _Ingersoll’s_, 205; _Greenleaf’s_, 33; _Nixon’s Parser_, p. 53. It is true, that in our language the word _there_ is thus used idiomatically, as an introductory term, when we tell what is taking, or has taken, _place_; but still it is a regular adverb _of place_, and relates to the verb agreeably to the common rule for adverbs. In some instances it is even repeated in the same sentence, because, in its introductory sense, it is always unemphatical; as, “Because _there_ was pasture _there_ for their flocks.”–_1 Chron._, iv, 41. “If _there_ be indistinctness or disorder _there_, we can have no success.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 271. “_There, there_ are schools adapted to every age.”–_Woodbridge, Lit. Conv._, p. 78. The import of the word is more definite, when emphasis is laid upon it; but this is no good reason for saying, with Dr. Webster, that it is “without signification,” when it is without emphasis; or, with Dr. Priestley, that it “seems to have no meaning whatever, except it be thought to give a small degree of emphasis.”–_Rudiments of E. Gram._, p. 135.
OBS. 31.–The noun _place_ itself is just as loose and variable in its meaning as the adverb _there_. For example; “_There_ is never any difference;” i.e., “No difference ever takes _place_.” Shall we say that “_place_,” in this sense, is not a noun of place? To _take place_, is, to occur _somewhere_, or _anywhere_; and the unemphatic word _there_ is but as indefinite in respect to place, as these other adverbs of place, or as the noun itself. S. B. Goodenow accounts it a _great error_, to say that _there_ is an adverb of place, when it is thus indefinite; and he chooses to call it an “_indefinite pronoun_,” as, “‘What is _there_ here?’–‘_There_ is no peace.’–‘What need was _there_ of it?'” See his _Gram._, p. 3 and p. 11. In treating of the various classes of adverbs, I have admitted and shown, that _here, there_, and _where_, have sometimes the nature of pronouns, especially in such compounds as _hereof, thereof, whereof_; but in this instance, I see not what advantage there is in calling _there_ a “pronoun:” we have just as much reason to call _here_ and _where_ pronouns–and that, perhaps, on all occasions. Barnard says, “In the sentence, ‘_There_ is one glory of the sun,’ &c., the adverb _there_ qualifies the verb _is_, and seems to have the force of an affirmation, like _truly_”–_Analytical Gram._, p. 234. But an adverb of the latter kind may be used with the word _there_, and I perceive no particular similarity between them: as, “_Verily there_ is a reward for the righteous.”–_Psal._, lviii, 11. “_Truly there_ is a glory of the sun.”
OBS. 32.–There is a vulgar error of substituting the adverb _most_ for _almost_, as in the phrases, “_most all_,”–“_most anywhere_,”–“_most every day_,”–which we sometimes hear for “_almost all_,”–“_almost anywhere_,”–“_almost every day_.” The fault is gross, and chiefly colloquial, but it is sometimes met with in books; as, “But thinking he had replied _most_ too rashly, he said, ‘I won’t answer your question.'”–_Wagstaff’s History of Friends_, Vol. i, p. 207.
NOTES TO RULE XXI.
NOTE I.–Adverbs must be placed in that position which will render the sentence the most perspicuous and agreeable. Example of error: “We are in no hazard of mistaking the sense of the author, though every word which he uses _be not precise_ and exact.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 95; _Jamieson’s_, 66. Murray says,–“though every word which he uses _is not precise_ and exact.”–_Octavo Gram._, p. 302. Better:–“though _not every word_ which he uses, _is precise_ and exact.”
NOTE II.–Adverbs should not be needlessly used for adjectives; nor should they be employed when quality is to be expressed, and not manner: as, “That the _now_ copies of the original text are entire.”–_S. Fisher_. Say, “the _present_ copies,” or, “the _existing_ copies.” “The arrows of calumny fall _harmlessly_ at the feet of virtue.”–_Murray’s Key_, p. 167; _Merchant’s Gram._, 186; _Ingersoll’s_, 10; _Kirkham’s_, 24. Say, “fall _harmless_;” as in this example: “The impending black cloud, which is regarded with so much dread, may pass by _harmless_.”–_Murray’s Key_, 8vo, p. 262.
NOTE III.–With a verb of motion, most grammarians prefer _hither, thither_, and _whither_, to _here, there_, and _where_, which are in common use, and perhaps allowable, though not so good; as, “Come _hither_, Charles,”–or, “Come _here_.”
NOTE IV.–“To the adverbs _hence, thence_, and _whence_, the preposition _from_ is frequently (though not with strict propriety) prefixed; as, _from hence, from whence_.”–See _W. Allen’s Gram._, p. 174. Some critics, however, think this construction allowable, notwithstanding the former word is implied in the latter. See _Priestley’s Gram._, p. 134; and _L. Murray’s_, p. 198. It is seldom elegant to use any word needlessly.
NOTE V.–The adverb _how_ should not be used before the conjunction _that_, nor in stead of it; as, “He said _how_ he would go.”–“Ye see _how that_ not many wise men are called.” Expunge _how_. This is a vulgar error. Somewhat similar is the use of _how_ for _lest_ or _that not_; as, “Be cautious _how_ you offend him, i.e., _that_ you _do not_ offend him.”–_W. Allen’s Gram._, p. 175.
NOTE VI.–The adverb _when, while_, or _where_, is not fit to follow the verb _is_ in a definition, or to introduce a clause taken substantively; because it expresses identity, not of being, but of time or place: as, “_Concord_, is _when_ one word agrees with another in some accidents.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 151; _Gould’s_, 155. Say, “Concord is _the agreement of_ one word with _an other_ in some _accident or_ accidents.”
NOTE VII.–The adverb _no_ should not be used with reference to a _verb_ or a _participle_. Such expressions as, “Tell me whether you will _go_ or _no_,” are therefore improper: _no_ should be _not_; because the verb _go_ is understood after it. The meaning is, “Tell me whether you will go or _will not go_;” but nobody would think of saying, “Whether you will go or _no go_.”
NOTE VIII.–A negation, in English, admits but one negative word; because two negatives in the same clause, usually contradict each other, and make the meaning affirmative. The following example is therefore ungrammatical: “For my part, I love him not, _nor_ hate him _not_.”–_Beauties of Shakspeare_, p. 16. Expunge the last _not_, or else change _nor_ to _and_.
NOTE IX.–The words _ever_ and _never_ should be carefully distinguished according to their sense, and not confounded with each other in their application. Example: “The Lord reigneth, be the earth _never so_ unquiet.”–_Experience of St. Paul_, p. 195. Here, I suppose, the sense to require _everso_, an adverb of degree: “Be the earth _everso_ unquiet.” That is,–“unquiet _in whatever degree_.”
NOTE X.–Adverbs that end in _ly_, are in general preferable to those forms which, for want of this distinction, may seem like adjectives misapplied. Example: “There would be _scarce_ any such thing in nature as a folio.”–_Addison_. Better:–“_scarcely_.”
IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.
FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XXI.
EXAMPLES UNDER NOTE I.–THE PLACING OF ADVERBS.
“All that is favoured by good use, is not proper to be retained.”–_Murray’s Gram._, ii, p. 296.
[FORMULE.–Not proper, because the adverb _not_ is not put in the most suitable place. But, according to Note 1st under Rule 21st, “Adverbs must be placed in that position which will render the sentence the most perspicuous and agreeable.” The sentence will be improved by placing _not_ before _all_; thus, “_Not all_ that is favoured by good use, is proper to be retained.”]
“Every thing favoured by good use, [is] not on that account worthy to be retained.”–_Ib._, i, 369; _Campbell’s Rhet._, p. 179. “Most men dream, but all do not.”–_Beattie’s Moral Science_, i, 72. “By hasty composition, we shall acquire certainly a very bad style.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 191. “The comparisons are short, touching on one point only of resemblance.”–_Ib._, p. 416. “Having had once some considerable object set before us.”–_Ib._, p. 116. “The positive seems improperly to be called a degree.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 69; _Gould’s_, 68. “In some phrases the genitive is only used.”–_Adam_, 159; _Gould_, 161. “This blunder is said actually to have occurred.”–_Smith’s Inductive Gram._, p. 5. “But every man is not called James, nor every woman Mary.”–_Buchanan’s Gram._, p. 15. “Crotchets are employed for the same purpose nearly as the parenthesis.”–_Churchill’s Gram._, p. 167. “There is still a greater impropriety in a double comparative.”–_Priestley’s Gram._, p. 78. “We have often occasion to speak of time.”–_Lowth’s Gram._, p. 39. “The following sentence cannot be possibly understood.”–_Ib._, p. 104. “The words must be generally separated from the context.”–_Comly’s Gram._, p. 155. “Words ending in _ator_ have the accent generally on the penultimate.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i, 239. “The learned languages, with respect to voices, moods, and tenses, are, in general, differently constructed from the English tongue.”–_Ib._, i, 101. “Adverbs seem originally to have been contrived to express compendiously in one word, what must otherwise have required two or more.”–_Ib._, i, 114. “But it is only so, when the expression can be converted into the regular form of the possessive case.”–_Ib._, i, 174. “Enter, (says he) boldly, for here too there are gods.”–_Harris’s Hermes_, p. 8. “For none work for ever so little a pittance that some cannot be found to work for less.”–_Sedgwick’s Economy_, p. 190. “For sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.”–_Luke_, vi, 34. “They must be viewed exactly in the same light.”–_Murray’s Gram._, ii, 24. “If he does but speak to display his abilities, he is unworthy of attention.”–_Ib., Key_, ii, 207.
UNDER NOTE II.–ADVERBS FOR ADJECTIVES.
“Motion upwards is commonly more agreeable than motion downwards.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 48. “There are but two ways possibly of justification before God.”–_Dr. Cox, on Quakerism_, p. 413. “This construction sounds rather harshly.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i, 194; _Ingersoll’s_, 199. “A clear conception in the mind of the learner, of regularly and well-formed letters.”–_Com. School Journal_, i, 66. “He was a great hearer of * * * Attalus, Sotion, Papirius, Fabianus, of whom he makes often mention.”–_Seneca’s Morals_, p. 11. “It is only the Often doing of a thing that makes it a Custom.”–_Divine Right of Tythes_, p. 72. “Because W. R. takes oft occasion to insinuate his jealousies of persons and things.”–_Barclay’s Works_, i, 570. “Yet often touching will wear gold.”–_Beauties of Shak._, p. 18. “Uneducated persons frequently use an adjective, when they ought to use an adverb: as, ‘The country looks _beautiful_;’ instead of _beautifully_.”–_Bucke’s Gram._, p. 84. “The adjective is put absolutely, or without its substantive.”–_Ash’s Gram._, p. 57. “A noun or pronoun in the second person, may be put absolutely in the nominative case.”–_Harrison’s Gram._, p. 45. “A noun or pronoun, when put absolutely with a participle,” &c.–_Ib._, p. 44; _Jaudon’s Gram._, 108. “A verb in the infinitive mood absolute, stands independently of the remaining part of the sentence.”–_Wilbur and Livingston’s Gram._, p. 24. “At my return lately into England, I met a book intituled: ‘The Iron Age.'”–_Cowley’s Preface_, p. v. “But he can discover no better foundation for any of them, than the practice merely of Homer and Virgil.”–_Kames, El. of Criticism, Introd._, p. xxv.
UNDER NOTE III–HERE FOR HITHER, &c.
“It is reported that the governour will come here to-morrow.”–_Kirkham’s Gram._, p. 196. “It _has been_ reported that the governour will come here to-morrow.”–_Ib., Key_, p. 227. “To catch a prospect of that lovely land where his steps are tending.”–_Maturin’s Sermons_, p. 244. “Plautus makes one of his characters ask another where he is going with that Vulcan shut up in a horn; that is, with a lanthorn in his hand.”–_Adams’s Rhet._ ii, 331. “When we left Cambridge, we intended to return there in a few days.”–_Anonym_. “Duncan comes here to-night.”–_Shak., Macbeth_. “They talked of returning here last week.”–_J. M. Putnam’s Gram._, p. 116.
UNDER NOTE IV.–FROM HENCE, &c.
“From hence he concludes that no inference can be drawn from the meaning of the word, that a _constitution_ has a higher authority than a law or statute.”–_Webster’s Essays_, p. 67. “From whence we may likewise date the period of this event.”–_Murray’s Key_, ii, p. 202. “From hence it becomes evident, that LANGUAGE, taken in the most comprehensive view, implies certain Sounds, having certain Meanings.”–_Harris’s Hermes_, p. 315. “They returned to the city from whence they came out.”–_Alex. Murray’s Gram._, p. 135. “Respecting ellipses, some grammarians differ strangely in their ideas; and from thence has arisen a very whimsical diversity in their systems of grammar.”–_Author_. “What am I and from whence? i.e. what am I, and from whence _am_ I?”–_Jaudon’s Gram._, p. 171.
UNDER NOTE V.–THE ADVERB HOW.
“It is strange how a writer, so accurate as Dean Swift, should have stumbled on so improper an application of this particle.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 112. “Ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us,” &c.–_Acts_, xv, 7. “Let us take care _how_ we sin; i.e. _that_ we _do not_ sin.”–_Priestley’s Gram._, p. 135. “We see by these instances, how prepositions may be necessary to connect those words, which in their signification are not naturally connected.”–_Murray’s Gram._, p. 118. “Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?”–_2 Cor._, xiii, 5. “That thou mayest know how that the earth is the Lord’s.”–_Exod._, ix, 29.
UNDER NOTE VI.–WHEN, WHILE, OR WHERE.
“Ellipsis is when one or more words are wanting, to complete the sense.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 235; _Gould’s_, p. 229; _B. F. Fisk’s Greek Gram._. 184. “Pleonasm is when a word more is added than is absolutely necessary to express the sense.”–_Same works_. “Hyst~eron prot~eron is when that is put in the former part of the sentence, which, according to the sense, should be in the latter.”–_Adam_, p. 237; _Gould_, 230. “Hysteron proteron, _n._ A rhetorical figure when that is said last which was done first.”–_Webster’s Dict._ “A Barbarism is when a foreign or strange word is _made use_ of.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 242; _Gould’s_, 234. “A Solecism is when the rules of Syntax are transgressed.”–_Iidem, ib._ “An Idiotism is when the manner of expression peculiar to one language is used in another.”–_Iid., ib._ “Tautology is when we either uselessly repeat the same words, or repeat the same sense in different words.”–_Adam_, p. 243; _Gould_, 238. “Bombast is when high sounding words are used without meaning, or upon a trifling occasion.”–_Iid., ib._ “Amphibology is when, by the ambiguity of the construction, the meaning may be taken in two different senses.”–_Iid., ib._ “Irony is when one means the contrary of what is said.”–_Adam_, p. 247; _Gould_, 237. “The Periphrasis, or Circumlocution, is when several words are employed to express what might be expressed in fewer.”–_Iid., ib._ “Hyperbole is when a thing is magnified above the truth,”–_Adam_, p. 249; _Gould_, 240. “Personification is when we ascribe life, sentiments, or actions, to inanimate beings, or to abstract qualities.”–_Iid., ib._ “Apostrophe, or Address, is when the speaker breaks off from the series of his discourse, and addresses himself to some person present or absent, living or dead, or to inanimate nature, as if endowed with sense and reason.”–_Iid., ib._ “A Simile or Comparison is when the resemblance between two objects, whether _real_ or _imaginary_, is expressed in form.”–_Kirkham’s Gram._, p. 223. “Simile, or Comparison, is when one thing is illustrated or heightened by comparing it to another.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 250; _Gould’s_, 240. “Antithesis, or Opposition, is when things contrary or different are contrasted, to make them appear in the more striking light.”–_Iid., ib._ “Description, or Imagery, [is] when any thing is painted in a lively manner, as if done before our eyes.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 250. “Emphasis is when a particular stress is laid on some word in a sentence.”–_Ib._ “Epanorthosis, or Correction, is when the speaker either recalls or corrects what he had last said.”–_Ib._ “Paralepsis, or Omission, is when one pretends to omit or pass by, what he at the same time declares.”–_Ib._ “Incrementum, or Climax in sense, is when one member rises above another to the highest.”–_Ib._, p. 251. “A Metonymy is where the cause is put for the effect, or the effect for the cause; the container for the thing contained; or the sign for the thing signified.”–_Kirkham’s Gram._, p. 223. “Agreement is when one word is like another in number, case, gender, or person.”–_Frost’s Gram._, p. 43; _Greenleaf’s_, 32. “Government is when one word causes another to be in some particular number, person, or case.”–_Webster’s Imp. Gram._, p. 89; _Greenleaf’s_, 32; _Frost’s_, 43. “Fusion is while some solid substance is converted into a fluid by heat.”–_B._ “A Proper Diphthong is where both the Vowels are sounded together; as, _oi_ in _Voice, ou_ in _House_.”– _Fisher’s Gram._, p. 10. “An Improper Diphthong is where the Sound of but one of the two Vowels is heard; as _e_ in _People_.”–_Ib._, p. 11.
UNDER NOTE VII.–THE ADVERB NO FOR NOT.
“An adverb is joined to a verb to show how, or whether or no, or when, or where one is, does, or suffers.”–_Buchanan’s Syntax_, p. 62. “We must be immortal, whether we will or no.”–_Maturin’s Sermons_, p. 33. “He cares not whether the world was made for Caesar or no.”–_American Quarterly Review_. “I do not know whether they are out or no.”–_Byron’s Letters_. “Whether it can be proved or no, is not the thing.”–_Butler’s Analogy_, p. 84. “Whether or no he makes use of the means commanded by God.”–_Ib._,, p. 164. “Whether it pleases the world or no, the care is taken.”– _L’Estrange’s Seneca_, p. 5. “How comes this to be never heard of nor in the least questioned, whether the Law was undoubtedly of Moses’s writing or no?”–_Bp. Tomline’s Evidences_, p. 44. “Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not.”–_John_, ix, 25. “Can I make men live, whether they will or no?”–_Shak._
“Can hearts, not free, be try’d whether they serve Willing or no, who will but what they must?”–_Milton, P. L._
UNDER NOTE VIII.–OF DOUBLE NEGATIVES.
“We need not, nor do not, confine the purposes of God.”–_Bentley_. “I cannot by no means allow him that.”–_Idem_. “We must try whether or no we cannot increase the Attention by the Help of the Senses.”–_Brightland’s Gram._, p. 263. “There is nothing more admirable nor more useful.”–_Horne Tooke_, Vol. i, p. 20. “And what in no time to come he can never be said to have done, he can never be supposed to do.”–_Johnson’s Gram. Com._, p. 345. “No skill could obviate, nor no remedy dispel, the terrible infection.”–_Goldsmith’s Greece_, i, 114. “Prudery cannot be an indication neither of sense nor of taste.”–_Spurzheim, on Education_, p. 21. “But that scripture, nor no other, speaks not of imperfect faith.”–_Barclay’s Works_, i, 172. “But this scripture, nor none other, proves not that faith was or is always accompanied with doubting.”–_Ibid._ “The light of Christ is not nor cannot be darkness.”–_Ib._, p. 252. “Doth not the Scripture, which cannot lie, give none of the saints this testimony?”–_Ib._, p. 379. “Which do not continue, nor are not binding.”–_Ib._, Vol. iii. p. 79. “It not being perceived directly no more than the air.”–_Campbell’s Rhet._, p. 331. “Let’s be no Stoics, nor no stocks, I pray.”–_Shak., Shrew_. “Where there is no marked nor peculiar character in the style.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 175. “There can be no rules laid down, nor no manner recommended.”–_Sheridan’s Lect._, p. 163.
“_Bates_. ‘He hath not told his thought to the king?’ _K. Henry_. ‘No; nor it is not meet he should.'”–_Shak_.
UNDER NOTE IX.–EVER AND NEVER.
“The prayer of Christ is more than sufficient both to strengthen us, be we never so weak; and to overthrow all adversary power, be it never so strong.”–_Hooker_. “He is like to have no share in it, or to be ever the better for it.”–_Law and Grace_, p. 23. “In some parts of Chili, it seldom or ever rains.”–_Willetts’s Geog_. “If Pompey shall but never so little seem to like it.”–_Walker’s Particles_, p. 346. “Latin: ‘Si Pompeius _paulum_ modo ostenderit sibi placere.’ _Cic_. i, 5.”–_Ib._ “Though never such a power of dogs and hunters pursue him.”–_Walker, ib._ “Latin: ‘_Quamlibet_ magna canum et venantium urgente vi.’ _Plin_. l. 18, c. 16.”–_Ib._ “Though you be never so excellent.”–_Walker, ib._ “Latin: ‘_Quantumvis_ licet excellas.’ _Cic. de Amic_.”–_Ib._ “If you do amiss never so little.”–_Walker, ib._ “Latin: ‘Si _tantillum_ peccassis.’ _Plaut. Rud._ 4, 4”–_Ib._ “If we cast our eyes never so little down.”–_Walker, ib._ “Latin: ‘Si _tantulum_ oculos dejecerimus.’ _Cic. 7. Ver_.”–_Ib._ “A wise man scorneth nothing, be it never so small or homely.”–_Book of Thoughts_, p. 37. “Because they have seldom or ever an opportunity of learning them at all.”–_Clarkson’s Prize-Essay_, p. 170. “We seldom or ever see those forsaken who trust in God.”–_Atterbury_.
“Where, playing with him at bo-peep, He solved all problems, ne’er so deep.”–_Hudibras_.
UNDER NOTE X.–OF THE FORM OF ADVERBS.
“One can scarce think that Pope was capable of epic or tragic poetry; but within a certain limited region, he has been outdone by no poet.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 403. “I, who now read, have near finished this chapter.”–_Harris’s Hermes_, p. 82. “And yet, to refine our taste with respect to beauties of art or of nature, is scarce endeavoured in any seminary of learning.”–_Kames, El. of Crit._, Vol. i, p. viii. “By the Numbers being confounded, and the Possessives wrong applied, the Passage is neither English nor Grammar.”–_Buchanan’s Syntax_, p. 123. “The letter G is wrong named _jee_.”–_Creighton’s Dict._, p. viii. “Last; Remember that in science, as in morals, authority cannot make right, what, in itself, is wrong.”–_O. B. Peirce’s Gram._, p. 194. “They regulate our taste even where we are scarce sensible of them.”–_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 96. “Slow action, for example, is imitated by words pronounced slow.”–_Ib._, ii, 257. “Sure, if it be to profit withal, it must be in order to save.”–_Barclay’s Works_, i, 366. “Which is scarce possible at best.”–_Sheridan’s Elocution_, p. 67. “Our wealth being near finished.”–HARRIS: _Priestley’s Gram._, p. 80.
CHAPTER IX.–CONJUNCTIONS.
The syntax of Conjunctions consists, not (as L. Murray and others erroneously teach) in “their power of determining the mood of verbs,” or the “cases of nouns and pronouns,” but in the simple fact, that they link together such and such terms, and thus “mark the connexions of human thought.”–_Beattie_.
RULE XXII.–CONJUNCTIONS.
Conjunctions connect words, sentences, or parts of sentences: as, “Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me _and_ thee, _and_ between my herdmen _and_ thy herdmen; _for_ we are brethren.”–_Gen._, xiii, 8.
“Ah! _if_ she lend not arms _as well as_ rules. What can she more _than_ tell us we are fools?”–_Pope._
EXCEPTION FIRST.
The conjunction _that_ sometimes serves merely to introduce a sentence which is made the subject or the object of a finite verb;[433] as, “_That_ mind is not matter, is certain.”
“_That_ you have wronged me, doth appear in this.”–_Shak._
“_That_ time is mine, O Mead! to thee, I owe.”–_Young_.
EXCEPTION SECOND.
When two corresponding conjunctions occur, in their usual order, the former should generally be parsed as referring to the latter, which is more properly the connecting word; as, “_Neither_ sun _nor_ stars in many days appeared.”–_Acts_, xxvii, 20. “_Whether_ that evidence has been afforded [_or_ not,] is a matter of investigation.”–_Keith’s Evidences_, p. 18.
EXCEPTION THIRD. _Either_, corresponding to _or_, and _neither_, corresponding to _nor_ or _not_, are sometimes transposed, so as to repeat the disjunction or negation at the end of the sentence; as, “Where then was their capacity of standing, _or_ his _either_?”–_Barclay’s Works_, iii, 359. “It is _not_ dangerous _neither_.”–_Bolingbroke, on Hist._, p. 135. “He is very tall, but _not_ too tall _neither._”–_Spect._, No. 475.
OBSERVATIONS ON RULE XXII.
OBS. 1.–Conjunctions that connect particular _words_, generally join similar parts of speech in a common dependence on some other term. Hence, if the words connected be such as have _cases_, they will of course be in the same case; as, “For _me_ and _thee_”–_Matt._, xvii, 27. “Honour thy _father_ and thy _mother_.”–_Ib._, xviii, 19. Here the latter noun or pronoun is connected by _and_ to the former, and governed by the same preposition or verb. Conjunctions themselves have no government, unless the questionable phrase “_than whom_” may be reckoned an exception. See Obs. 17th below, and others that follow it.
OBS. 2.–Those conjunctions which connect _sentences_ or _clauses_, commonly unite one sentence or clause to an other, either as an additional assertion, or as a condition, a cause, or an end, of what is asserted. The conjunction is placed _between_ the terms which it connects, except there is a transposition, and then it stands before the dependent term, and consequently at the beginning of the whole sentence: as, “He taketh away the first, _that_ he may establish the second.”–_Heb._, x, 9. “_That_ he may establish the second, he taketh away the first.”
OBS. 3.–The term that follows a conjunction, is in some instances a _phrase_ of several words, yet not therefore a whole clause or member, unless we suppose it elliptical, and supply what will make it such: as, “And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, AS _to the Lord_, AND _not unto men_”–_Col._, iii, 23. If we say, this means, “as _doing it_ to the Lord, and not _as doing it_ unto men,” the terms are still mere phrases; but if we say, the sense is, “as _if ye did it_ to the Lord, and not _as if ye did it_ unto men,” they are clauses, or sentences. Churchill says, “The office of the conjunction is, to connect one _word_ with an other, or one _phrase_ with an other.”–_New Gram._, p. 152. But he uses the term _phrase_ in a more extended sense than I suppose it will strictly bear: he means by it, a _clause_, or _member_; that is, a sentence which forms a part of a greater sentence.
OBS. 4.–What is the office of this part of speech, according to Lennie, Bullions, Brace, Hart, Hiley, Smith, M’Culloch, Webster, Wells, and others, who say that it “joins _words_ and _sentences_ together,” (see Errors on p. 434 of this work,) it is scarcely possible to conceive. If they imagine it to connect “_words_” on the one side, to “_sentences_” on the other; this is plainly absurd, and contrary to facts. If they suppose it to join sentence to sentence, by merely connecting word to word, in a joint relation; this also is absurd, and self-contradictory. Again, if they mean, that the conjunction sometimes connects word with word, and sometimes, sentence with sentence; _this sense they have not expressed_, but have severally puzzled their readers by an ungrammatical use of the word “_and_.” One of the best among them says, “In _the sentence_, ‘He _and_ I must go,’ the word _and_ unites _two sentences_, and thus _avoids_ an unnecessary repetition; thus instead of saying, ‘He must go,’ ‘I must go,’ we connect _the words He, I_, as the same thing is affirmed of _both_, namely, _must go_.”–_Hiley’s Gram._, p. 53. Here is the incongruous suggestion, that _by connecting words only_, the conjunction in fact _connects sentences_; and the stranger blunder concerning _those words_, that “the same thing is affirmed of _both_, namely, [_that they_] _must go_.” Whereas it is plain, that nothing is affirmed of either: for “_He and I must go_,” only affirms of _him_ and _me_, that “_we must go_.” And again it is plain, that _and_ here connects nothing but the two pronouns; for no one will say, that, “_He and I must go together_” is a compound sentence, capable of being resolved into two simple sentences; and if, “_He and I must go_,” is compound because it is equivalent to, “He must go, and I must go;” so is, “_We must go_,” for the same reason, though it has but one nominative and one verb. “_He and I_ were present,” is rightly given by Hiley as an example of _two pronouns_ connected together by _and_. (See _his Gram._, p. 105.) But, of _verbs_ connected to each other, he absurdly supposes the following to be examples: “He spake, _and_ it was done.”–“I know it, _and_ I can prove it.”–“Do you say so, _and_ can you prove it?”–_Ib._ Here _and_ connects _sentences_, and not particular _words_.
OBS. 5.–Two or three conjunctions sometimes come together; as, “What rests, _but that_ the mortal sentence pass?”–_Milton_. “_Nor yet that_ he should offer himself often.”–_Heb._, ix, 25. These may be severally parsed as “connecting what precedes and what follows,” and the observant reader will not fail to notice, that such combinations of connecting particles are sometimes required by the sense; but, since nothing that is needless, is really proper, conjunctions should not be unnecessarily accumulated: as, “_But_ AND _if_ that evil servant say in his heart,” &c.–_Matt._, xxiv, 48. Greek, “[Greek: Ean de eipae o kakos donlos ekeinos,]” &c. Here is no _and_. “_But_ AND _if_ she depart.”–_1 Cor._, vii, 11. This is almost a literal rendering of the Greek, “[Greek: Ean de kai choristhae.]”–yet either _but_ or _and_ is certainly useless. “In several cases,” says Priestley, “we content ourselves, now, with fewer conjunctive particles than our ancestors _did_ [say _used_]. Example: ‘_So_ AS _that_ his doctrines were embraced by great numbers.’ _Universal Hist._, Vol. 29, p. 501. _So that_ would have been much easier, and better.”–_Priestley’s Gram._, p. 139. Some of the poets have often used the word _that_ as an expletive, to fill the measure of their verse; as,
“When _that_ the poor have cried, Caesar hath wept.”–_Shakspeare_.
“If _that_ he be a dog, beware his fangs.”–_Id._
“That made him pine away and moulder, As though _that_ he had been no soldier.”–_Butler’s Poems_, p. 164.
OBS. 6.–W. Allen remarks, that, “_And_ is sometimes introduced to engage our attention to a following word or phrase; as, ‘Part pays, _and_ justly, the deserving steer.’ [_Pope._] ‘I see thee fall, _and_ by Achilles’ hand.’ [_Id._]”–_Allen’s E. Gram._, p. 184. The like idiom, he says, occurs in these passages of Latin: “‘Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit.’ _Virg_. ‘Mors _et_ fugacem persequitur virum.’ _Hor_.”–_Allen’s Gram._, p. 184. But it seems to me, that _and_ and _et_ are here regular connectives. The former implies a repetition of the preceding verb: as, “Part pays, _and justly pays_, the deserving steer.”–“I see thee fall, _and fall by Achilles’ hand_.” The latter refers back to what was said before: thus, “Perhaps it will _also_ hereafter delight you to recount these evils.”–“_And_ death pursues the man that flees.” In the following text, the conjunction is more like an expletive; but even here it suggests an extension of the discourse then in progress: “Lord, _and_ what shall this man do?”–_John_, xxi, 21. “[Greek: Kurie, outos de ti;]”–“Domine, hic _autem_ quid?”–_Beza_.
OBS. 7.–The conjunction _as_ often unites words that are in _apposition_, or in _the same case_; as, “He offered _himself_ AS a _journeyman_.”–“I assume _it_ AS a _fact_.”–_Webster’s Essays_, p. 94. “In an other example of the same kind, the _earth_, AS a common _mother_, is animated to give refuge against a father’s unkindness.”–_Kames, El. of Crit._, Vol ii, p. 168. “And then to offer _himself_ up AS a _sacrifice_ and _propitiation_ for them.”–_Scougal_, p. 99. So, likewise, when an intransitive verb takes the same case after as before it, by Rule 6th; as, “_Johnson_ soon after engaged AS _usher_ in a school.”–_L. Murray_. “_He_ was employed AS _usher_.” In all these examples, the case that follows _as_, is determined by that which precedes. If after the verb “_engaged_” we supply _himself, usher_ becomes objective, and is in apposition with the pronoun, and not in agreement with _Johnson_: “He engaged _himself_ as _usher_.” One late writer, ignorant or regardless of the analogy of General Grammar, imagines this case to be an “objective governed by the conjunction _as_,” according to the following rule: “The conjunction _as_, when it takes the meaning of _for_, or _in the character of_, governs the objective case; as, Addison, _as_ a _writer_ of prose, is highly distinguished.”–_J. M. Putnam’s Gram._, p. 113. S. W. Clark, in his grammar published in 1848, sets _as_ in his list of _prepositions_, with this example: “‘That England can spare from her service such men _as_ HIM.’–_Lord Brougham_.”–_Clark’s Practical Gram._, p. 92. And again: “When the second term of a _Comparison of equality_ is a Noun, or Pronoun, the _Preposition_ AS is commonly used. Example–‘He hath died to redeem such a rebel _as_ ME.’–_Wesley_.” Undoubtedly, Wesley and Brougham here erroneously supposed the _as_ to connect _words only_, and consequently to require them to be in the same case, agreeably to OBS. 1st, above; but a moment’s reflection on the sense, should convince any one, that the construction requires the nominative forms _he_ and _I_, with the verbs _is_ and _am_ understood.
OBS. 8.–The conjunction _as_ may also be used between an adjective or a participle and the noun to which the adjective or participle relates; as, “It does not appear that brutes have the least reflex sense of _actions_ AS _distinguished_ from events; or that will and design, which constitute the very nature of _actions_ AS _such_, are at all an object of their perception.”–_Butler’s Analogy_, p. 277.
OBS. 9.–_As_ frequently has the force of a _relative pronoun_, and when it evidently sustains the relation of a case, it ought to be called, and generally _is_ called, a pronoun, rather than a conjunction; as, “Avoid such _as are_ vicious,”–_Anon_. “But as many _as received_ him,” &c.–_John_, i, 12. “We have reduced the terms into as small a number _as was_ consistent with perspicuity and distinction.”–_Brightland’s Gram._, p. ix. Here _as_ represents a noun, and while it serves to connect the two parts of the sentence, it is also the subject of a verb. These being the true characteristics of a relative pronoun, it is proper to refer the word to that class. But when a clause or a sentence is the antecedent, it is better to consider the _as_ a conjunction, and to supply the pronoun _it_, if the writer has not used it; as, “He is angry, _as [it] appears_ by this letter.” Horne Tooke says, “The truth is, that AS is _also an article_; and (however and whenever used in English) means the same as _It_, or _That_, or _Which_.”–_Diversions of Purley_, Vol. i, p. 223. But what definition he would give to _”an article_,” does not appear.
OBS. 10.–In some examples, it seems questionable whether _as_ ought to be reckoned a pronoun, or ought rather to be parsed as a conjunction after which a nominative is understood; as, “He then read the conditions _as follow_.”–“The conditions are _as follow_.”–_Nutting’s Gram._, p. 106. “The principal evidences on which this assertion is grounded, are _as follow_.”–_Gurney’s Essays_, p. 166. “The Quiescent verbs are _as follow_.”–_Pike’s Heb. Lex._, p. 184. “The other numbers are duplications of these, and proceed _as follow_”–_Dr. Murray’s Hist. of Lang._, Vol. ii, p. 35. “The most eminent of the kennel are bloodhounds, which lead the van, and are _as follow_.”–_Steele, Tattler_, No. 62. “His words are _as follow_.”–_Spect._, No. 62. “The words are _as follow_.”–_Addison, Spect._, No. 513. “The objections that are raised against it as a tragedy, are _as follow_.”–_Gay, Pref. to What d’ ye call it_. “The particulars are _as follow_.”–_Bucke’s Gram._, p. 93. “The principal interjections in English are _as follow_.”–_Ward’s Gram._, p. 81. In all these instances, one may suppose the final clause to mean, “as _they here_ follow;”–or, supposing _as_ to be a pronoun, one may conceive it to mean, “_such_ as follow.” But some critical writers, it appears, prefer the singular verb, “_as follows_” Hear Campbell: “When a verb is used _impersonally_, it ought undoubtedly to be in the singular number, whether the neuter pronoun be expressed or understood: and when no nominative in the sentence can regularly be construed with the verb, it ought to be considered as impersonal. For this reason, analogy as well as usage _favour_ [say _favours_] this mode of expression, ‘The conditions of the agreement were _as follows_;’ and not ‘_as follow_.’ A few late writers have inconsiderately adopted this last form through a mistake of the construction. For the same reason we ought to say, ‘I shall consider his censures so far only as _concerns_ my friend’s conduct;’ and not ‘so far as _concern_.'”–_Philosophy of Rhet._, p. 229. It is too much to say, at least of one of these sentences, that there is no nominative with which the plural verb can be regularly construed. In the former, the word _as_ may be said to be a plural nominative; or, if we will have this to be a conjunction, the pronoun _they_, representing _conditions_, may be regularly supplied, as above. In the latter, indeed, _as_ is not a pronoun; because it refers to “_so far_,” which is not a noun. But the sentence is _bad English_; because the verb _concern_ or _concerns_ is improperly left without a nominative. Say therefore, ‘I shall consider his censures so far only as _they concern_ my friend’s conduct;’–or, ‘so far only as _my friend’s conduct is concerned_.’ The following is an other example which I conceive to be wrong; because, with an adverb for its antecedent, _as_ is made a nominative: “They ought therefore to be uttered _as quickly as is_ consistent with distinct articulation.”–_Sheridan’s Elocution_, p. 76. Say rather, “They ought therefore to be uttered _with as much rapidity_ as is consistent with distinct articulation.”
OBS. 11.–Lindley Murray was so much puzzled with Tooke’s notion of _as_, and Campbell’s doctrine of the _impersonal verb_, that he has expressly left his pupils to hesitate and doubt, like himself, whether one ought to say “_as follows_” or “_as follow_,” when the preceding noun is plural; or–to furnish an alternative, (if they choose it,) he shows them at last how they may _dodge the question_, by adopting some other phraseology. He begins thus: “_Grammarians_ differ in opinion, respecting the propriety of the following modes of expression: ‘The arguments advanced were nearly _as follows_;’ ‘the positions were, _as appears_, incontrovertible.'”– _Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 146. Then follows a detail of suggestions from Campbell and others, all the quotations being anonymous, or at least without definite references. Omitting these, I would here say of the two examples given, that they are not parallel instances. For, “_as follows_,” refers to what the arguments were,–to the things themselves, considered plurally, and immediately to be exhibited; wherefore the expression ought rather to have been, “_as follow_,” or, “_as they here follow_.” But, “_as appears_” means “_as it appears_,” or “_as the case now appears_;” and one of these plain modes of expression would have been much preferable, because the _as_ is here evidently nothing but a conjunction.
OBS. 12.–“The diversity of sentiment on this subject,” says L. Murray, “and the respectability of the different opponents, will naturally induce _the readers_ to pause and reflect, before they decide.”–_Octavo Gram._, p. 147. The equivalent expressions by means of which he proposes to evade at last the dilemma, are the following: “The arguments advanced were nearly such as follow;”–“The arguments advanced were nearly of the following nature;”–“The following are nearly the arguments which were advanced;”– “The arguments advanced were nearly those which follow:”–“These, or nearly these, were the arguments advanced;”–“The positions were such as appear incontrovertible;”–“It appears that the positions were incontrovertible;” –“That the positions were incontrovertible, is apparent;”–“The positions were apparently incontrovertible;”–“In appearance, the positions were incontrovertible.”–_Ibid._ If to shun the expression will serve our turn, surely here are ways enough! But to those who “pause and reflect” with the intention _to decide_, I would commend the following example: “Reconciliation was offered, on conditions as moderate as _were_ consistent with a permanent union.”–_Murray’s Key_, under Rule 1. Here Murray supposes “_was_” to be wrong, and accordingly changes it to “_were_,” by the Rule, “A verb must agree with its nominative case in number and person.” But the amendment is a pointed rejection of Campbell’s “impersonal verb,” or verb which “has no nominative;” and if the singular is not right here, the rhetorician’s respectable authority vouches only for a catalogue of errors. Again, if this verb must be _were_ in order to agree with its nominative, it is still not clear that _as_, is, or ought to be, the nominative; because the meaning may perhaps be better expressed thus:–“on conditions as moderate _as any that were_ consistent with a permanent union.”
OBS. 13.–A late writer expresses his decision of the foregoing question thus: “Of all the different opinions on a grammatical subject, which have arisen in the literary world, there scarcely appears one more indefensible than that of supposing _as follows_ to be an impersonal verb, and to be correctly used in such sentences as this. ‘The conditions were _as follows_.’ Nay, we are told that, “A few late writers have adopted this form, ‘The conditions were as follow,’ _inconsiderately_;” and, to prove this charge of inconsiderateness, the following sentence is brought forward: ‘I shall consider his censure [_censures_ is the word used by Campbell and by Murray] so far only _as concern_ my friend’s conduct.’ which should be, it is added, ‘_as concerns_, and not _as concern_.’ If analogy, simplicity, or syntactical authority, is of any value in our resolution of the sentence, ‘The conditions were as follows,’ the word _as_ is as evident a relative as language can afford. It is undoubtedly equivalent to _that_ or _which_, and relates to its antecedent _those_ or _such_ understood, and should have been the nominative to the verb _follow_; the sentence, in its present form, being inaccurate. The second sentence is by no means a parallel one. The word _as_ is a conjunction; and though it has, as a relative, a reference to its antecedent _so_, yet in its capacity of a mere conjunction, it cannot possibly be the nominative case to any verb. It should be, ‘_it concerns_.’ Whenever _as_ relates to an _adverbial_ antecedent; as in the sentence, ‘_So_ far _as_ it concerns me,’ it is merely a conjunction; but when it refers to an _adjective_ antecedent; as in the sentence, ‘The business is _such as_ concerns me;’ it must be a relative, and susceptible of case, whether its antecedent is expressed or understood; being, in fact, the nominative to the verb _concerns_.”–_Nixon’s Parser_, p. 145. It will be perceived by the preceding remarks, that I do not cite what is here said, as believing it to be in all respects well said, though it is mainly so. In regard to the point at issue, I shall add but one critical authority more: “‘The circumstances were as _follows_.’ Several grammarians and critics have approved this phraseology: I am inclined, however, to concur with those who prefer ‘_as follow_.'”–_Crombie, on Etym. and Synt._, p. 388.
OBS. 14.–The conjunction _that_ is frequently understood; as, “It is seldom [_that_] their counsels are listened to.”–_Robertson’s Amer._, i, 316. “The truth is, [_that_] grammar is very much neglected among us.”–_Lowth’s Gram., Pref._, p. vi. “The Sportsman believes [_that_] there is Good in his Chace [chase.]”–_Harris’s Hermes_, p. 296.
“Thou warnst me [_that_] I have done amiss; I should have earlier looked to this.”–_Scott_.
OBS. 15.–After _than_ or _as_, connecting the terms of a comparison, there is usually an ellipsis of some word or words. The construction of the words employed may be seen, when the ellipsis is supplied; as, “They are stronger _than we_” [are.]–_Numb._, xiii. 31. “Wisdom is better _than weapons_ of war” [are.]–_Eccl._, ix, 18. “He does nothing who endeavours to do more _than_ [what] _is allowed_ to humanity.”–_Dr. Johnson_. “My punishment is greater _than_ [what] _I can bear_.”–_Gen._, iv, 13. “Ralph gave him more _than I_” [gave him.]–_Churchill’s Gram._, p. 351. “Ralph gave him more _than_ [he gave] _me_.”_–Ibid._ “Revelation, surely, was never intended for such _as he_” [is.]–_Campbell’s Four Gospels_, p. iv. “Let such as _him_ sneer if they will.”–_Liberator_, Vol. ix, p. 182. Here _him_ ought to be _he_, according to Rule 2d, because the text speaks of such as _he is_ or _was_. “‘You were as innocent of it _as me_:’ ‘He did it _as well as me_.’ In both places it ought to be _I_: that is, _as I was, as I did_.”–_Churchill’s Gram._, p. 352.
“Rather let such poor souls _as you_ and _I_ Say that the holidays are drawing nigh.”–_Swift_.
OBS. 16.–The doctrine above stated, of ellipses after _than_ and _as_, proceeds on the supposition that these words _are conjunctions_, and that they connect, not particular words merely, but sentences, or clauses. It is the common doctrine of nearly all our grammarians, and is doubtless liable to fewer objections than any other theory that ever has been, or ever can be, devised in lieu of it. Yet _as_ is not always a conjunction; nor, when it is a conjunction, does it always connect sentences; nor, when it connects sentences, is there always an ellipsis; nor, when there is an ellipsis, is it always quite certain what that ellipsis is. All these facts have been made plain, by observations that have already been bestowed on the word: and, according to some grammarians, the same things may severally be affirmed of the word _than_. But most authors consider _than_ to be always a conjunction, and generally, if not always, to connect _sentences_. Johnson and Webster, in their dictionaries, mark it for an _adverb_; and the latter says of it, “This word signifies also _then_, both in English and Dutch.”–_Webster’s Amer. Dict._, 8vo, _w. Than_. But what he means by “_also_,” I know not; and surely, in no English of this age, is _than_ equivalent to _then_, or _then_ to _than_. The ancient practice of putting _then_ for _than_, is now entirely obsolete;[434] and, as we have no other term of the same import, most of our expositors merely explain _than_ as “a particle used in comparison.”–_Johnson, Worcester, Maunder_. Some absurdly define it thus: “THAN, _adv_. Placed in comparison.”–_Walker_, (Rhym. Dict.,) _Jones, Scott_. According to this definition, _than_ would be a _participle_! But, since an express comparison necessarily implies a connexion between different terms, it cannot well be denied that _than_ is a connective word; wherefore, not to detain the reader with any profitless controversy, I shall take it for granted that this word is always a conjunction. That it always connects sentences, I do not affirm; because there are instances in which it is difficult to suppose it to connect anything more than particular words: as, “Less judgement _than_ wit is more sail _than_ ballast.”–_Penn’s Maxims_. “With no less eloquence _than_ freedom. ‘Pari eloquentia _ac_ libertate.’ _Tacitus_.”–_Walker’s Particles_, p. 200. “Any comparison between these two classes of writers, cannot be other _than_ vague and loose.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 347. “This _far more than_ compensates all those little negligences.”–_Ib._, p. 200.
“Remember Handel? Who that was not born Deaf as the dead to harmony, forgets,
Or can, _the more than Homer_ of his age?”–_Cowper_.
OBS. 17.–When any two declinable words are connected by _than_ or _as_, they are almost always, according to the true idiom of our language, to be put in the _same case_, whether we suppose an ellipsis in the construction of the latter, or not; as, “My _Father_ is greater than _I_.”–_Bible_. “What do _ye_ more than _others_?”–_Matt._, v, 47. “More _men_ than _women_ were there.”–_Murray’s Gram._, p. 114. “Entreat _him_ as a _father_, and the younger _men_ as _brethren_.”–_1 Tim._, v, 1. “I would that all _men_ were even as _I_ myself.”–_1 Cor._, vii, 7. “Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?”–_John_, xxi, 15. This last text is manifestly _ambiguous_; so that some readers will doubt whether it means–“more than _thou lovest these_,” or–“more than _these love me_.” Is not this because there is an _ellipsis_ in the sentence, and such a one as may be variously conceived and supplied? The original too is ambiguous, but not for the same reason: “[Greek: Simon Iona, agapas me pleion touton];”–And so is the Latin of the Vulgate and of Montanus: “Simon Jona, diligis me _plus his_?” Wherefore Beza expressed it differently: “Simon _fili Jonae_, diligis me plus _quam hi_?” The French Bible has it: “Simon, fils de Jona, m’aimes-tu plus que _ne font_ ceux-ci?” And the expression in English should rather have been, “Lovest thou me more than _do_ these?”
OBS. 18.–The comparative degree, in Greek, is said to govern the genitive case; in Latin, the ablative: that is, the genitive or the ablative is sometimes put after this degree without any connecting particle corresponding to _than_, and without producing a compound sentence. We have examples in the phrases, “[Greek: pleion touton]” and “_plus his_,” above. Of such a construction our language admits no real example; that is, no exact parallel. But we have an imitation of it in the phrase _than whom_, as in this hackneyed example from Milton:
“Which, when Beelzebub perceived, _than whom_, Satan except, none higher sat,” &c.–_Paradise Lost_, B. ii, l. 300.
The objective, _whom_, is here preferred to the nominative, _who_, because the Latin ablative is commonly rendered by the former case, rather than by the latter: but this phrase is no more explicable according to the usual principles of English grammar, than the error of putting the objective case for a version of the ablative absolute. If the imitation is to be judged allowable, it is to us _a figure of syntax_–an obvious example of _Enallage_, and of that form of Enallage, which is commonly called _Antiptosis_, or the putting of one case for an other.
OBS. 19.–This use of _whom_ after _than_ has greatly puzzled and misled our grammarians; many of whom have thence concluded that _than_ must needs be, at least in this instance, a _preposition_,[435] and some have extended the principle beyond this, so as to include _than which, than whose_ with its following noun, and other nominatives which they will have to be objectives; as, “I should seem guilty of ingratitude, _than which_ nothing is more shameful.” See _Russell’s Gram._, p. 104. “Washington, _than whose fame_ naught earthly can be purer.”–_Peirce’s Gram._, p. 204. “You have given him more than _I_. You have sent her as much as _he_.”–_Buchanan’s Eng. Syntax_, p. 116. These last two sentences are erroneously called by their author, “_false syntax_;” not indeed with a notion that _than_ and _as_ are prepositions, but on the false supposition that the preposition _to_ must necessarily be understood between them and the pronouns, as it is between the preceding verbs and the pronouns _him_ and _her_. But, in fact, “You have given him more than _I_,” is perfectly good English; the last clause of which plainly means–“more than I _have given him_.” And, “You have sent her as much as _he_,” will of course be understood to mean–“as much as he _has sent her_;” but here, because the auxiliary implied is different from the one expressed, it might have been as well to have inserted it: thus, “_You have_ sent her as much as _he has_.” “She reviles you as much as _he_,” is also good English, though found, with the foregoing, among Buchanan’s examples of “false syntax.”
OBS. 20.–Murray’s twentieth Rule of syntax avers, that, “When the qualities of different things are compared, the latter noun or pronoun is _not governed_ by the conjunction _than_ or _as_, but agrees with the verb,” &c.–_Octavo Gram._, p. 214; _Russell’s Gram._, 103; _Bacon’s_, 51; _Alger’s_, 71; _Smith’s_, 179; _Fisk’s_, 138. To this rule, the great Compiler and most of his followers say, that _than whom_ “is an exception.” or “_seems to form_ an exception;” to which they add, that, “the phrase is, however, avoided by the best modern writers.”–_Murray_, i, 215. This latter assertion Russell conceives to be untrue: the former he adopts; and, calling _than whom_ “an exception to the general rule,” says of it, (with no great consistency,) “Here the conjunction _than_ has certainly the force of a preposition, and supplies its place by governing the relative.”–_Russell’s Abridgement of Murray’s Gram._, p. 104. But this is hardly an instance to which one would apply the maxim elsewhere adopted by Murray: “_Exceptio probat regulam_.”–_Octavo Gram._, p. 205. To ascribe to a conjunction the governing power of a preposition, is a very wide step, and quite too much like straddling the line which separates these parts of speech one from the other.
OBS. 21.–Churchill says, “If there be no ellipsis to supply, as sometimes happens when a pronoun relative occurs after _than_; the relative is to be put in the _objective case absolute_: as, ‘Alfred, _than whom_ a greater king never reigned, deserves to be held up as a model to all future sovereigns.'”–_New Gram._, p. 153. Among his Notes, he has one with reference to this “_objective case absolute_,” as follows: “It is not governed by the conjunction, for on no other occasion does a conjunction govern any case; or by any word understood, for we can insert no word, or words, that will reconcile the phrase with any other rule of grammar: and if we employ a pronoun personal instead of the relative, as _he_, which will admit of being resolved elliptically, it must be put in the nominative case.”–_Ib._, p. 352. Against this gentleman’s doctrine, one may very well argue, as he himself does against that of Murray, Russell, and others; that on no other occasion do we speak of putting “the objective case absolute;” and if, agreeably to the analogy of our own tongue, our distinguished authors would condescend to say _than who_,[436] surely nobody would think of calling this an instance of the nominative case absolute,–except perhaps one swaggering _new theorist_, that most pedantic of all scoffers, Oliver B. Peirce.
OBS. 22.–The sum of the matter is this: the phrase, _than who_, is a more regular and more analogical expression than _than whom_; but both are of questionable propriety, and the former is seldom if ever found, except in some few grammars; while the latter, which is in some sort a Latinism, may be quoted from many of our most distinguished writers. And, since that which is irregular cannot be parsed by rule, if out of respect to authority we judge it allowable, it must be set down among the _figures_ of grammar; which are, all of them, intentional deviations from the ordinary use of words. One late author treats the point pretty well, in this short hint: “After the conjunction _than_, contrary to analogy, _whom_ is used in stead of _who_.”–_Nutting’s Gram._, p. 106. An other gives his opinion in the following note: “When _who_ immediately follows _than_, it is used _improperly_ in the objective case; as, ‘Alfred, _than whom_ a greater king never reigned;’–_than whom_ is not grammatical. It ought to be, _than who_; because _who_ is the nominative to _was_ understood.–_Than whom_ is as bad a phrase as ‘he is taller _than him_.’ It is true that some of our best writers have used _than whom_; but it is also true, that they have used _other_ phrases which we have rejected as ungrammatical; then why not reject this too?”–_Lennie’s Grammar_, Edition of 1830, p. 105.
OBS. 23.–On this point. Bullions and Brace, two American copyists and plagiarists of Lennie, adopt opposite notions. The latter copies the foregoing note, without the last sentence; that is, without admitting that “_than whom_” has ever been used by good writers. See _Brace’s Gram._, p. 90. The former says, “The relative _usually_ follows _than_ in the objective case, _even when the nominative goes before_; as, ‘Alfred, than whom a greater king never reigned.’ This anomaly it is difficult to explain. Most probably, _than_, at first had the force of a preposition, which it now retains only when followed by the relative.”–_Bullions, E. Gram._, of 1843, p. 112. Again: “_A relative_ after _than_ is put in the objective case; as, ‘Satan, than _whom_ none higher sat.’ This anomaly has not been satisfactorily explained. In this case, some regard _than_ as a preposition. _It_ is probably only a case of simple _enallage_”–_Bullions, Analyt. and Pract. Gram._, of 1849, p. 191. Prof. Fowler, in his great publication, of 1850, says of this example, “The expression should be, Satan, than _who_ None higher sat.”–_Fowler’s E. Gram._, Sec.482, Note 2. Thus, by one single form of _antiptosis_, have our grammarians been as much divided and perplexed, as were the Latin grammarians by a vast number of such changes; and, since there were some among the latter, who insisted on a total rejection of the figure, there is no great presumption in discarding, if we please, the very little that remains of it in English.
OBS. 24.–Peirce’s _new theory_ of grammar rests mainly on the assumption, that no correct sentence ever is, or can be, in any wise, _elliptical_. This is one of the “Two GRAND PRINCIPLES” on which the author says his “work is based.”–_The Grammar_, p. 10. The other is, that grammar cannot possibly be taught without a thorough reformation of its nomenclature, a reformation involving a change of most of the names and technical terms heretofore used for its elucidation. I do not give precisely his own words, for one half of this author’s system is expressed in such language as needs to be translated _into English_ in order to be generally understood; but this is precisely his meaning, and in words more intelligible. In what estimation he holds these two positions, may be judged from the following assertion: “_Without these grand points_, no work, whatever may be its pretensions, can be A GRAMMAR of the LANGUAGE.”–_Ib._ It follows that no man who does not despise every other book that is called a grammar, can entertain any favourable opinion of Peirce’s. The author however is tolerably consistent. He not only scorns to appeal, for the confirmation of his own assertions and rules, to the judgement or practice of any other writer, but counsels the learner to “spurn the idea of quoting, either as proof or for defence, the authority of any man.” See p. 13. The notable results of these important premises are too numerous for detail even in this general pandect. But it is to be mentioned here, that, according to this theory, a nominative coming after _than_ or _as_, is in general to be accounted a _nominative absolute_; that is, a nominative which is independent of any verb; or, (as the ingenious author himself expresses it,) “A word in the subjective case following another subjective, and immediately preceded by _than, as_, or _not_, may be used _without an_ ASSERTER immediately depending on it for sense.”–_Peirce’s Gram._, p. 195. See also his “_Grammatical Chart_, Rule I, Part 2.”
OBS. 25.–“Lowth, Priestley, Murray, and most grammarians say, that hypothetical, conditional, concessive, or exceptive conjunctions; as, _if, lest, though, unless, except_; _require_, or _govern_ the subjunctive mood. But in this they are certainly wrong: for, as Dr. Crombie rightly observes, the verb is put in the subjunctive mood, because the mood expresses contingency, _not because it follows the conjunction_: for these writers themselves allow, that the same conjunctions are to be followed by the indicative mood, when the verb is not intended to express a contingency. In the following sentence: ‘_Though_ he _be_ displeased at it, I will bolt my door; and _let_ him break it open _if_ he _dare_:’ may we not as well affirm, that _and_ governs the imperative mood, as that _though_ and _if_ govern the subjunctive?”–_Churchill’s Gram._, p. 321.
OBS. 26.–In the list of _correspondents_ contained in Note 7th below, there are some words which ought not to be called _conjunctions_, by the parser; for the relation of a word as the proper correspondent to an other word, does not necessarily determine its part of speech. Thus, _such_ is to be parsed as an adjective; _as_, sometimes as a pronoun; _so_, as a conjunctive adverb. And _only, merely, also_, and _even_, are sometimes conjunctive adverbs; as, “_Nor_ is this _only_ a matter of convenience to the poet, it is _also_ a source of gratification to the reader.”– _Campbell’s Rhet._, p. 166. _Murray’s, Gram._, i, 362. Professor Bullions will have it, that these adverbs may relate to _nouns_–a doctrine which I disapprove. He says “_Only, solely, chiefly, merely, too, also_, and perhaps _a few others_, are sometimes _joined to substantives_; as, ‘Not _only_ the men, but the women _also_ were present.'”–_English Gram._, p. 116. _Only_ and _also_ are here, I think, conjunctive adverbs; but it is not the office of adverbs to qualify nouns; and, that these words are adjuncts to the nouns _men_ and _women_, rather than the verb _were_, which is once expressed and once understood, I see no sufficient reason to suppose. Some teachers imagine, that an adverb of this kind qualifies the _whole clause_ in which it stands. But it would seem, that the relation of such words to verbs, participles, or adjectives, according to the common rule for adverbs, is in general sufficiently obvious: as, “The perfect tense not _only refers_ to what is past, but _also conveys_ an allusion to the present time.”–_Murray’s Gram._, p. 70. Is there any question about the true mode of parsing “_only_” and “_also_” here? and have they not in the other sentence, a relation similar to what is seen here?
NOTES TO RULE XXII.
NOTE I.–When two terms connected are each to be extended and completed in sense by a third, they must both be such as will make sense with it. Thus, in stead of saying, “He has made alterations and additions to the work,” say, “He has made alterations _in_ the work, and additions _to it_;” because the relation between _alterations_ and _work_ is not well expressed by _to_.
NOTE II.–In general, any two terms which we connect by a conjunction, should be the same in kind or quality, rather than different or heterogeneous. Example: “The assistance was welcome, and seasonably afforded.”–_Murray’s Key_, 8vo, p. 249. Better: “The assistance was welcome, and _it was_ seasonably afforded.” Or: “The assistance was _both seasonable and welcome_.”
NOTE III.–The conjunctions, copulative or disjunctive, affirmative or negative, must be used with a due regard to their own import, and to the true idiom of the language. Thus, say, “The general bent _or_ turn of the language _is_ towards the other form;” and not, with Lowth and Churchill, “The general bent _and_ turn of the language _is_ towards the other form.”–_Short Introd._, p. 60; _New Gram._, p. 113. So, say, “I cannot deny _that_ there are perverse jades;” and not, with Addison, “I cannot deny _but_ there are perverse jades.”–_Spect._, No. 457. Again, say, “I feared _that_ I should be deserted;” not, “_lest_ I should be deserted.”
NOTE IV.–After _else, other,[437] otherwise, rather_, and all English _comparatives_, the latter term of an exclusive comparison should be introduced by the conjunction _than_–a word which is appropriated to this use solely: as, “Style is nothing _else than_ that sort of expression which our thoughts most readily assume.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 92. “What we call fables or parables are no _other than_ allegories.”–_Ib._, p. 151; _Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 243. “We judge _otherwise_ of them _than_ of ourselves.”–_R. Ainsworth_. “The premeditation should be of things _rather than_ of words.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 262. “Is not the life _more than_ meat?”–_Com. Bible_. “Is not life a _greater_ gift _than_ food?”–_Campbell’s Gospels_.
NOTE V.–Relative pronouns, being themselves a species of connective words, necessarily exclude conjunctions; except there be two or more relative clauses to be connected together; that is, one to the other. Example of error: “The principal and distinguishing excellence of Virgil, _and which_, in my opinion, he possesses beyond _all poets_, is tenderness.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 439. Better: “The principal and distinguishing excellence of Virgil, _an excellence_ which, in my opinion, he possesses beyond all _other_ poets, is tenderness.”
NOTE VI.–The word _that_, (as was shown in the fifth chapter of Etymology,) is often made a pronoun in respect to what precedes it, and a conjunction in respect to what follows it–a construction which, for its anomaly, ought to be rejected. For example: “_In the mean time_ THAT the Muscovites were complaining to St. Nicholas, Charles returned thanks to God, and prepared for new victories.”–_Life of Charles XII_. Better thus: “_While_ the Muscovites were _thus_ complaining to St. Nicholas, Charles returned thanks to God, and prepared for new victories.”
NOTE VII.–The words in each of the following pairs, are the proper _correspondents_ to each other; and care should be taken, to give them their right place in the sentence:
1. To _though_, corresponds _yet_; as, “_Though_ he were dead, _yet_ shall he live.”–_John_, xi, 25. 2. To _whether_, corresponds _or_; as, “_Whether_ it be greater _or_ less.”–_Butler’s Analogy_, p. 77.
3. To _either_, corresponds _or_; as, “The constant indulgence of a declamatory manner, is not favourable _either_ to good composition, _or_ [to] good delivery.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 334.
4. To _neither_, corresponds _nor_; as, “John the Baptist came _neither_ eating bread _nor_ drinking wine.”–_Luke_, vii, 33. “Thou shalt _neither_ vex a stranger _nor_ oppress him.”–_Exod._, xxii, 21.
5. To _both_, corresponds _and_; as, “I am debtor _both_ to the Greeks _and_ to the Barbarians, _both_ to the wise _and_ to the unwise.”–_Rom._, i, 14.
6. To _such_, corresponds _as_; (the former being a pronominal adjective, and the latter a relative pronoun;) as, “An assembly _such as_ earth saw never.”–_Cowper_.
7. To _such_, corresponds _that_; with, a finite verb following, to express a consequence: as, “The difference is _such that_ all will perceive it.”
8. To _as_, corresponds _as_; with an adjective or an adverb, to express equality of degree: as, “And he went out from his presence a leper _as_ white _as_ snow.”–_2 Kings_. v. 27.
9. To _as_, corresponds _so_; with two verbs, to express proportion or sameness: as, “_As_ two are to four, _so_ are six to twelve.”–“_As_ the tree falls, _so_ it must lie.”
10. _So_ is used before _as_; with an adjective or an adverb, to limit the degree by comparison: as, “How can you descend to a thing _so_ base _as_ falsehood?”
11. _So_ is used before _as_; with a negative preceding, to deny equality of degree: as, “No lamb was e’er _so_ mild _as_ he.”–_Langhorne_. “Relatives are not _so_ useful in language _as_ conjunctions.”–BEATTIE: _Murray’s Gram._, p. 126.
12. To _so_, corresponds _as_; with an infinitive following, to express a consequence: as, “We ought, certainly, to read blank verse _so as_ to make every line sensible to the ear”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 332.
13. To _so_, corresponds _that_; with a finite verb following, to express a consequence: as, “No man was _so_ poor _that_ he could not make restitution.”–_Milman’s Jews_, i, 113. “_So_ run _that_ ye may obtain.”–_1 Cor._, ix, 24.
14. To _not only_, or _not merely_, corresponds _but, but also_, or _but even_; as, “In heroic times, smuggling and piracy were deemed _not only_ not infamous, _but_ [even] absolutely honourable.”–_Maunder’s Gram._, p. 15. “These are questions, _not_ of prudence _merely, but_ of morals _also_.”–_Dymond’s Essay_, p. 82.
NOTE VIII.–“When correspondent conjunctions are used, the verb, or phrase, that precedes the first, applies [also] to the second; but no word following the former, can [by virtue of this correspondence,] be understood after the latter.”–_Churchill’s Gram._, p. 353. Such ellipses as the following ought therefore in general to be avoided: “Tones are different both from emphasis and [_from_] pauses.”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, i, 250. “Though both the intention and [_the_] purchase are now past.”–_Ib._, ii, 24.
IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.
FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XXII.
EXAMPLES UNDER NOTE I.–TWO TERMS WITH ONE.
“The first proposal was essentially different and inferior to the second.”–_Inst._, p. 171.
[FORMULE,–Not proper, because the preposition _to_ is used with joint reference to the two adjectives _different_ and _inferior_, which require different prepositions. But, according to Note 1st under Rule 22d, “When two terms connected are each to be extended and completed in sense by a third, they must both be such as will make sense with it.” The sentence may be corrected thus: “The first proposal was essentially different from the second, and inferior _to it_.”]
“A neuter verb implies the state a subject is in, without acting upon, or being acted upon, by another.”–_Alex. Murray’s Gram._, p. 30. “I answer, you may and ought to use stories and anecdotes.”–_Student’s Manual_, p. 220. “ORACLE, n. Any person or place where certain decisions are obtained.”–_Webster’s Dict._ “Forms of government may, and must be occasionally, changed.”–_Ld. Lyttelton_. “I have, and pretend to be a tolerable judge.”–_Spect._, No. 555. “Are we not lazy in our duties, or make a Christ of them?”–_Baxter’s Saints’ Rest_. “They may not express that idea which the author intends, but some other which only resembles, or is a-kin to it.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 94. “We may, we ought therefore to read them with a distinguishing eye.”–_Ib._, p. 352. “Compare their poverty, with what they might, and ought to possess.”–_Sedgwick’s Econ._, p. 95. “He is a much better grammarian than they are.”–_Murray’s Key_, 8vo, p. 211. “He was more beloved, but not so much admired as Cinthio.”–ADDISON, ON MEDALS: _in Priestly’s Gram._, p. 200. “Will it be urged, that the four gospels are as old, or even older than tradition?”–_Bolingb. Phil. Es._, iv, Sec.19. “The court of Chancery frequently mitigates, and breaks the teeth of the common law.”–_Spectator_, No. 564; _Ware’s Gram._, p. 16. “Antony, coming along side of her ship, entered it without seeing or being seen by her.”–_Goldsmith’s Rome_, p. 160. “In candid minds, truth finds an entrance, and a welcome too.”–_Murray’s Key_, ii, 168. “In many designs, we may succeed and be miserable.”–_lb._, p. 169. “In many pursuits, we embark with pleasure, and land sorrowfully.”–_Ib._, p. 170. “They are much greater gainers than I am by this unexpected event.”–_lb._, p. 211.
UNDER NOTE II.–HETEROGENEOUS TERMS.
“Athens saw them entering her gates and fill her academies.”–_Chazotte’s Essay_, p. 30. “We have neither forgot his past, nor despair of his future success.”–_Duncan’s Cicero_, p. 121. “Her monuments and temples had long been shattered or crumbled into dust.”–_Lit. Conv._, p. 15. “Competition is excellent, and the vital principle in all these things.”–DR. LIEBER: _ib._, p. 64. “Whether provision should or not be made to meet this exigency.”–_Ib._, p. 128. “That our Saviour was divinely inspired, and endued with supernatural powers, are positions that are here taken for granted.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i. 206. “It would be much more eligible, to contract or enlarge their extent, by explanatory notes and observations, than by sweeping away our ancient landmarks, and setting up others.”–_Ib._, i. p. 30. “It is certainly much better, to supply the defects and abridge superfluities, by occasional notes and observations, than by disorganizing, or altering a system which has been so long established.”–_Ib._, i, 59. “To have only one tune, or measure, is not much better than having none at all”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 126. “Facts too well known and obvious to be insisted on.”–_Ib._, p. 233. “In proportion as all these circumstances are happily chosen, and of a sublime kind.”–_Ib._, p. 41. “If the description be too general, and divested of circumstances.”–_Ibid._ “He gained nothing further than to be commended.”–_Murray’s Key_, ii, 210. “I cannot but think its application somewhat strained, and out of place.”–VETHAKE: _Lit. Conv._, p. 29. “Two negatives in the same clause, or referring to the same thing, destroy each other, and leave the sense affirmative.”–_Maunders Gram._, p. 15. “Slates are stone and used to cover roofs of houses.”–_Webster’s El. Spelling-Book_, p. 47. “Every man of taste, and possessing an elevated mind, ought to feel almost the necessity of apologizing for the power he possesses.”–_Influence of Literature_. Vol. ii, p, 122. “They very seldom trouble themselves with Enquiries, or making useful observations of their own.”–_Locke, on Ed._, p. 376.
“We’ve both the field and honour won; The foe is profligate, and run.”–_Hudibras_, p. 93.
UNDER NOTE III.–IMPORT OF CONJUNCTIONS.
“_The_ is sometimes used before adverbs in the comparative and superlative degree.”–_Lennie’s Gram._, p. 6; _Bullions’s_, 8; _Brace’s_, 9. “The definite article _the_ is frequently applied to adverbs in the comparative and superlative degree.”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 33; _Ingersoll’s_, 33; _Lowth’s_, 14; _Fisk’s_, 53; _Merchant’s_, 24; and others. “Conjunctions usually connect verbs in the same mode or tense.”–_Sanborn’s Gram._, p. 137. “Conjunctions connect verbs in the same style, and usually in the same mode, tense, or form.”–_Ib._ “The ruins of Greece and Rome are but the monuments of her former greatness.”–_Day’s Gram._, p. 88. “In many of these cases, it is not improbable, but that the articles were used originally.”–_Priestley’s Gram._, p. 152. “I cannot doubt but that these objects are really what they appear to be.”–_Kames, El. of Crit._, i, 85. “I question not but my reader will be as much pleased with it.”–_Spect._, No. 535. “It is ten to one but my friend Peter is among them.”–_Ib._, No. 457. “I doubt not but such objections as these will be made.”–_Locke, on Education_, p. 169. “I doubt not but it will appear in the perusal of the following sheets.”–_Buchanan’s Syntax_, p. vi. “It is not improbable, but that, in time, these different constructions may be appropriated to different uses.”–_Priestley’s Gram._, p. 156. “But to forget or to remember at pleasure, are equally beyond the power of man.”–_Idler_, No. 72. “The nominative case follows the verb, in interrogative and imperative sentences.”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, Vol. ii, p. 290. “Can the fig-tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs?”–_James_, iii, 12. “Whose characters are too profligate, that the managing of them should be of any consequence.”–_Swift, Examiner_, No. 24. “You that are a step higher than a philosopher, a divine; yet have too much grace and wit than to be a bishop.”–_Pope, to Swift_, Let. 80. “The terms rich or poor enter not into their language.”–_Robertson’s America_, Vol. i, p. 314. “This pause is but seldom or ever sufficiently dwelt upon.”–_Music of Nature_, p. 181. “There would be no possibility of any such thing as human life and human happiness.”–_Butler’s Anal._, p. 110. “The multitude rebuked them, because they should hold their peace.”–_Matt._, xx, 21.
UNDER NOTE IV.–OF THE CONJUNCTION THAN.
“A metaphor is nothing else but a short comparison.”–_Adam’s Gram._, p. 243; _Gould’s_, 236. “There being no other dictator here but use.”– _Campbell’s Rhet._, p. 167. “This Construction is no otherwise known in English but by supplying the first or second Person Plural.”–_Buchanan’s Syntax_, p. xi. “Cyaxares was no sooner in the throne, but he was engaged in a terrible war.”–_Rollin’s Hist._, ii, 62. “Those classics contain little else but histories of murders.”–_Am. Museum_, v, 526. “Ye shall not worship any other except God.”–_Sale’s Koran_, p. 15. “Their relation, therefore, is not otherwise to be ascertained but by their place.”– _Campbell’s Rhet._, p. 260. “For he no sooner accosted her, but he gained his point.”–_Burder’s Hist._, i, 6. “And all the modern writers on this subject have done little else but translate them.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 336. “One who had no other aim, but to talk copiously and plausibly.”– _Ib._, p. 317. “We can refer it to no other cause but the structure of the eye.”–_Ib._, p. 46. “No more is required but singly an act of vision.”– _Kames, El. of Crit._, i, 171. “We find no more in its composition, but the particulars now mentioned.”–_ Ib._, i, 48. “He pretends not to say, that it hath any other effect but to raise surprise.”–_Ib._, ii, 61. “No sooner was the princess dead, but he freed himself.”–_Johnson’s Sketch of Morin_. “_Ought_ is an imperfect verb, for it has no other modification besides this one.”–_Priestley’s Gram._, p. 113. “The verb is palpably nothing else but the tie.”–_Neef’s Sketch_, p. 66. “Does he mean that theism is capable of nothing else except being opposed to polytheism or atheism?”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 104. “Is it meant that theism is capable of nothing else besides being opposed to polytheism, or atheism?”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 307. “There is no other method of teaching that of which any one is ignorant, but by means of something already known”–DR. JOHNSON: _Murray’s Gram._, i, 163; _Ingersoll’s_, 214. “O fairest flower, no sooner blown but blasted!”– _Milton’s Poems_, p, 132. “Architecture and gardening cannot otherwise entertain the mind, but by raising certain agreeable emotions or feelings.”–_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 318. “Or, rather, they are nothing else but nouns.”–_British Gram._, p. 95.
“As if religion were intended
For nothing else but to be mended.”–_Hudibras_, p. 11.
UNDER NOTE V.–RELATIVES EXCLUDE CONJUNCTIONS.
“To prepare the Jews for the reception of a prophet mightier than him, and whose shoes he was not worthy to bear.”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 214. “Has this word which represents an action an object after it, and on which it terminates?”–_Osborn’s Key_, p. 3. “The stores of literature lie before him, and from which he may collect, for use, many lessons of wisdom.”– _Knapp’s Lectures_, p. 31. “Many and various great advantages of this Grammar, and which are wanting in others, might be enumerated.”– _Greenleaf’s Gram._, p. 6. “About the time of Solon, the Athenian legislator, the custom is said to have been introduced, and which still prevails, of writing in lines from left to right.”–_Jamieson’s Rhet._, p. 19. “The fundamental rule of the construction of sentences, and into which all others might be resolved, undoubtedly is, to communicate, in the clearest and most natural order, the ideas which we mean to transfuse into the minds of others.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 120; _Jamieson’s_, 102. “He left a son of a singular character, and who behaved so ill that he was put in prison.”–_Murray’s Key_, 8vo, p. 221. “He discovered some qualities in the youth, of a disagreeable nature, and which to him were wholly unaccountable.”–_Ib._, p. 213. “An emphatical pause is made, after something has been said of peculiar moment, and on which we want [‘desire’ _M_.] to fix the hearer’s attention.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 331; _Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 248. “But we have duplicates of each, agreeing in movement, though differing in measure, and which make different impressions on the ear.”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 259.
UNDER NOTE VI.–OF THE WORD THAT.
“It will greatly facilitate the labours of the teacher, at the same time that it will relieve the pupil of many difficulties.”–_Frost’s El. of E. Gram._, p. 4. “At the same time that the pupil is engaged in the exercises just mentioned, it will be a proper time to study the whole Grammar in course.”–_Bullions, Prin. of E. Gram._, Revised Ed., p. viii. “On the same ground that a participle and auxiliary are allowed to form a tense.”–BEATTIE: _Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 76. “On the same ground that the voices, moods, and tenses, are admitted into the English tongue.”–_Ib._, p. 101. “The five examples last mentioned, are corrected on the same principle that the preceding examples are corrected.”–_Ib._, p. 186; _Ingersoll’s Gram._, 254. “The brazen age began at the death of Trajan, and lasted till the time that Rome was taken by the Goths.”–_Gould’s Lat. Gram._, p. 277. “The introduction to the Duodecimo Edition, is retained in this volume, for the same reason that the original introduction to the Grammar, is retained in the first volume.”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, Vol. ii, p. iv. “The verb must also be of the same person that the nominative case is.”–_Ingersoll’s Gram._, p. 16. “The adjective pronoun _their_, is plural for the same reason that _who_ is.”–_Ib._, p. 84. “The Sabellians could not justly be called Patripassians, in the same sense that the Noetians were so called.”–_Religious World_, Vol. ii, p. 122. “This is one reason that we pass over such smooth language, without suspecting that it contains little or no meaning.”–_Murray’s Gram._, 8vo, p. 298. “The first place that both armies came in sight of each other was on the opposite banks of the river Apsus.”–_Goldsmith’s Rome_, p. 118. “At the very time that the author gave him the first book for his perusal.”–_Campbell’s Rhetoric, Preface_, p. iv. “Peter will sup at the time that Paul will dine.”–_Fosdick’s De Sacy_, p. 81. “Peter will be supping at the time that Paul will enter.”–_Ibid._ “These, at the same time that they may serve as models to those who may wish to imitate them, will give me an opportunity to cast more light upon the principles of this book.”–_Ib._, p. 115.
“Time was, like thee, they life possest, And time shall be, that thou shalt rest.” –PARNELL; _Mur. Seq._, p. 241.
UNDER NOTE VII.–OF THE CORRESPONDENTS.
“Our manners should neither be gross, nor excessively refined.”–_Merchant’s Gram._, p. 11. “A neuter verb expresses neither action or passion, but being, or a state of being.”–_O. B. Peirce’s Gram._, p. 342. “The old books are neither _English_ grammars, or _grammars_, in any sense of the English Language.”–_Ib._, p. 378. “The author is apprehensive that his work is not yet as accurate and as much simplified as it may be.”–_Kirkham’s Gram._, p. 7. “The writer could not treat some topicks as extensively as was desirable.”–_Ib._, p. 10. “Which would be a matter of such nicety, as no degree of human wisdom could regulate.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i, 26. “No undertaking is so great or difficult which he cannot direct.”–_Duncan’s Cic._, p. 126. “It is a good which neither depends on the will of others, nor on the affluence of external fortune.”–_Harris’s Hermes_, 299; _Murray’s Gram._, i, 289. “Not only his estate, his reputation too has suffered by his misconduct.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i, 150; _Ingersoll’s_, 238. “Neither do they extend as far as might be imagined at first view.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 350. “There is no language so poor, but it hath two or three past tenses.”–_Ib._, p. 82. “As far as this system is founded in truth, language appears to be not altogether arbitrary in its origin.”–_Ib._, p. 56. “I have not that command of these convulsions as is necessary.”–_Spect._, No. 474. “Conversation with such who know no arts which polish life.”–_Ib._, No. 480. “And which can be neither very lively or very forcible.”–_Jamieson’s Rhet._, p. 78. “To that degree as to give proper names to rivers.”–_Dr. Murray’s Hist of Lang._, i, 327. “In the utter overthrow of such who hate to be reformed.”–_Barclay’s Works_, i, 443. “But still so much of it is retained, as greatly injures the uniformity of the whole.”–_Priestley’s Gram., Pref._, p. vii. “Some of them have gone to that height of extravagance, as to assert,” &c.–_Ib._, p. 91. “A teacher is confined–not more than a merchant, and probably not as much.”–_Abbott’s Teacher_, p. 27. “It shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come.”–_Matt._, xii, 32. “Which no body presumes, or is so sanguine to hope.”–_Swift, Drap. Let._ v. “For the torrent of the voice, left neither time or power in the organs, to shape the words properly.”–_Sheridan’s Elocution_, p. 118. “That he may neither unnecessarily waste his voice by throwing out too much, or diminish his power by using too little.”–_Ib._, p. 123. “I have retained only such which appear most agreeable to the measures of Analogy.”–_Littleton’s Dict., Pref._ “He is both a prudent and industrious man.”–_Day’s Gram._, p. 70. “Conjunctions either connect words or sentences.”–_Ib._, pp. 81 and 101.
“Such silly girls who love to chat and play, Deserve no care, their time is thrown away.”–_Tobitt’s Gram._, p. 20.
“Vice is a monster of so frightful mien, As to be hated needs but to be seen.”–POPE: _Mur. Gram._, ii, 17.
“Justice must punish the rebellious deed: Yet punish so, as pity shall exceed.”–DRYDEN: _in Joh. Dict._
UNDER NOTE VIII.–IMPROPER ELLIPSES.
“_That, whose_, and _as_ relate to either persons or things.”–_Sanborn’s Gram._, p. 93. “_Which_ and _what_, as adjectives, relate either to persons or things.”–_Ib._, p. 70. “Whether of a public or private nature.”– _Adam’s Rhet._, i, 43. “Which are included both among the public and private wrongs.”–_Ib._, i, 308. “I might extract both from the old and new testament numberless examples of induction.”–_Ib._, ii, 66. “Many verbs are used both in an active and neuter signification.”–_Lowth’s Gram._, p. 30; _Alger’s_, 26; _Guy’s_, 21; _Murray’s_, 60. “Its influence is likely to be considerable, both on the morals, and taste of a nation.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 373. “The subject afforded a variety of scenes, both of the awful and tender kind.”–_Ib._, p. 439. “Restlessness of mind disqualifies us, both for the enjoyment of peace, and the performance of our duty.”–_Murray’s Key_, ii, 166; _Ingersoll’s Gram._, p. 10. “Adjective Pronouns are of a mixed nature, participating the properties both of pronouns and adjectives.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i, 55; _Merchant’s_, 43; _Flint’s_, 22. “Adjective Pronouns have the nature both of the adjective and the pronoun.”–_Frost’s El. of Gram._, p. 15. “Pronominal adjectives are a kind of compound part of speech, partaking the nature both of pronouns and adjectives.”–_Nutting’s Gram._, p. 36. “Nouns are used either in the singular or plural number.”–_Blair’s Gram._, p. 11. “The question is not, whether the nominative or accusative ought to follow the particles _than_ and _as_; but, whether these particles are, in such particular cases, to be regarded as conjunctions or prepositions.”–_Campbell’s Rhet._, p. 204. “In English many verbs are used both as transitives and intransitives.”–_Churchill’s Gram._, p. 83. “He sendeth rain both on the just and unjust.”–_Guy’s Gram._, p. 56. “A foot consists either of two or three syllables.”–_Blair’s Gram._, p. 118. “Because they participate the nature both of adverbs and conjunctions.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i, 116. “Surely, Romans, what I am now about to say, ought neither to be omitted nor pass without notice.”–_Duncan’s Cicero_, p. 196. “Their language frequently amounts, not only to bad sense, but _non_-sense.”–_Kirkham’s Gram._, p. 14. “Hence arises the necessity of a social state to man both for the unfolding, and exerting of his nobler faculties.”–_Sheridan’s Elocution_, p. 147. “Whether the subject be of the real or feigned kind.”–_Blair’s Rhet._, p. 454. “Not only was liberty entirely extinguished, but arbitrary power felt in its heaviest and most oppressive weight.”–_Ib._, p. 249. “This rule is applicable also both to verbal Critics and Grammarians.”–_Hiley’s Gram._, p. 144. “Both the rules and exceptions of a language must have obtained the sanction of good usage.”–_Ib._, p. 143.
CHAPTER X.–PREPOSITIONS.
The syntax of Prepositions consists, not solely or mainly in their power of governing the objective case, (though this alone is the scope which most grammarians have given it,) but in their adaptation to the other terms between which they express certain relations, such as appear by the sense of the words uttered.
RULE XXIII.–PREPOSITIONS.
Prepositions show the relations of words, and of the things or thoughts expressed by them: as; “He came _from_ Rome _to_ Paris, _in_ the company _of_ many eminent men, and passed _with_ them _through_ many cities”–_Analectic Magazine_.
“Ah! who can tell the triumphs _of_ the mind, _By_ truth illumin’d, and _by_ taste refin’d?”–_Rogers_.
EXCEPTION FIRST.
The preposition _to_, before an abstract infinitive, and at the head of a phrase which is made the subject of a verb, has no proper antecedent term of relation; as, “_To_ learn to die, is the great business of life.”–_Dillwyn_. “Nevertheless, _to_ abide in the flesh, is more needful for you.”–ST. PAUL: _Phil._, i, 24. “_To_ be reduced to poverty, is a great affliction.”
“Too much _to_ know, is, to know nought but fame; And every godfather can give a name.”–_Shakspeare_.
EXCEPTION SECOND.
The preposition _for_, when it introduces its object before an infinitive, and the whole phrase is made the subject of a verb, has properly no antecedent term of relation; as, “_For_ us to learn to die, is the great business of life.”–“Nevertheless, _for_ me to abide in the flesh, is more needful for you.”–“_For_ an old man to be reduced to poverty is a very great affliction.”
“_For_ man to tell how human life began, Is hard; for who himself beginning knew?”–_Milton_.
OBSERVATIONS ON RULE XXIII.
OBS. 1.–In parsing any ordinary preposition, the learner should name the _two terms_ of the relation, and apply the foregoing rule, after the manner prescribed in Praxis 12th of this work. The principle is simple and etymological, being implied in the very definition of a preposition, yet not the less necessary to be given as a rule of syntax. Among tolerable writers, the prepositions exhibit more errors than any other equal number of words. This is probably owing to the careless manner in which they are usually slurred over in parsing. But the parsers, in general, have at least this excuse, that their text-books have taught them no better; they therefore call the preposition _a preposition_, and leave its use and meaning unexplained.
OBS. 2.–If the learner be at any loss to discover the true terms of relation, let him ask and answer _two questions_: first, with the interrogative _what_ before the preposition, to find the antecedent; and then, with the same pronoun after the preposition, to find the subsequent term. These questions answered according to the sense, will always give the true terms. For example: “They dashed that rapid torrent through.”–_Scott_. Ques. _What_ through? Ans. “_Dashed through_.” Ques. Through _what?_ Ans. “_Through that torrent_.” For the meaning is–“They dashed through that rapid torrent.” If one term is perfectly obvious, (as it almost always is,) find the other in this way; as, “Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night showeth knowledge.”–_Psal._, xix, 2. Ques. _What_ unto day? Ans. “_Uttereth unto day_.” Ques. _What_ unto night? Ans. “_Showeth unto night_” For the meaning is–“Day uttereth speech unto day, and night showeth knowledge unto night.” To parse rightly, is, to understand rightly; and what is well expressed, it is a shame to misunderstand or misinterpret. But sometimes the position of the two nouns is such, that it may require some reflection to find either; as,
“Or that choice plant, so grateful to the nose, Which _in_ I know not what far country grows.”–_Churchill_, p. 18.
OBS. 3.–When a preposition _begins_ or _ends_ a sentence or clause, the terms of relation, if both are given, are transposed; as, “To a studious _man_, action is a relief.”–_Burgh_. That is, “Action is a relief _to_ a studious man.” “_Science_ they [the ladies] do not _pretend_ TO.”–_Id._ That is, “They do not pretend _to_ science.” “Until I have done that _which_ I _have spoken_ to thee OF.”–_Gen._, xxviii, 15. The word governed by the preposition is always the subsequent term of the relation, however it may be placed; and if this be a relative pronoun, the transposition is permanent. The preposition, however, may be put before any relative, except _that_ and _as_; and this is commonly thought to be its most appropriate place: as, “Until I have done that _of which_ I have spoken to thee,” Of the placing of it last, Lowth says, “This is an idiom _which_ our language is strongly inclined _to_;” Murray and others, “This is an idiom _to which_ our language is strongly inclined:” while they all add, “it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing; but the placing of the preposition before the relative, is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous, and agrees much better with the solemn and elevated style.”–_Lowth’s Gram._, p. 95; _Murray’s_, 8vo, p. 200; _Fisk’s_, 141; _R. C. Smiths_, 167; _Ingersoll’s_, 227; _Churchill’s_. 150.
OBS. 4.–The terms of relation between which a preposition may be used, are very various. The _former_ or _antecedent_ term may be a noun, an adjective, a pronoun, a verb, a participle, or an adverb: and, in some instances, we find not only one preposition put before an other, but even a conjunction or an interjection used on this side; as, “_Because_ OF offences.”–“_Alas_ FOR him!”–The _latter_ or _subsequent_ term, which is the word governed by the preposition, may be a noun, a pronoun, a pronominal adjective, an infinitive verb, or an imperfect or preperfect participle: and, in some instances, prepositions appear to govern adverbs, or even whole phrases. See the observations in the tenth chapter of Etymology.
OBS. 5.–Both terms of the relation are usually expressed; though either of them may, in some instances, be left out, the other being given: as, (1.) THE FORMER–“All shall know me, [_reckoning_] FROM the least to the greatest.”–_Heb._, viii, 11. [_I say_] “IN a word, it would entirely defeat the purpose.”–_Blair_. “When I speak of reputation, I mean not only [_reputation_] IN regard to knowledge, but [_reputation_] IN regard to the talent of communicating knowledge.”–_Campbell’s Rhet._, p. 163; _Murray’s Gram._, i, 360. (2.) THE LATTER–“Opinions and ceremonies [_which_] they would die FOR.”–_Locke_. “IN [_those_] who obtain defence, or [_in those_] who defend.”–_Pope_. “Others are more modest than [_what_] this comes TO.”–_Collier’s Antoninus_, p. 66.
OBS. 6.–The only proper exceptions to the foregoing rule, are those which are inserted above, unless the abstract infinitive used as a predicate is also to be excepted; as, “In both, to reason right, is _to_ submit.”–_Pope_. But here most if not all grammarians would say, the verb “_is_” is the antecedent term, or what their syntax takes to govern the infinitive. The relation, however, is not such as when we say, “He _is to submit_;” that is, “He _must submit_, or _ought to submit_;” but, perhaps, to insist on a different mode of parsing the more separable infinitive or its preposition, would be a needless refinement. Yet some regard ought to be paid to the different relations which the infinitive may bear to this finite verb. For want of a due estimate of this difference, the following sentence is, I think, very faulty: “The great business of this life _is to prepare_, and _qualify us_, for the enjoyment of a better.”–_Murray’s Gram._, Vol. i, p. 373. If the author meant to tell what our great business in this life is, he should rather have said: “The great business of this life is, to prepare and qualify _ourselves_ for the enjoyment of a better.”
OBS. 7.–In relation to the infinitive, Dr. Adam remarks, that, “_To_ in English is often taken _absolutely_; as, _To_ confess the truth; _To_ proceed; _To_ conclude.”–_Latin and Eng. Gram._, p. 182. But the assertion is not entirely true; nor are his examples appropriate; for what he and many other grammarians call the _infinitive absolute_, evidently depends on something _understood_; and the preposition is, surely, in no instance independent of what follows it, and is therefore never entirely absolute. Prepositions are not to be supposed to have no antecedent term, merely because they stand at the head of a phrase or sentence which is made the subject of a verb; for the phrase or sentence itself often contains that term, as in the following example: “_In_ what way mind acts upon matter, is unknown.” Here _in_ shows the relation between _acts_ and _way_; because the expression suggests, that mind _acts_ IN _some way_ upon matter.
OBS. 8.–The second exception above, wherever it is found applicable, cancels the first; because it introduces an antecedent term before the preposition _to_, as may be seen by the examples given. It is questionable too, whether both of them may not also be cancelled in an other way; that is, by transposition and the introduction of the pronoun _it_ for the nominative: as, “_It_ is a great _affliction_, TO _be reduced_ to poverty.”–“_It_ is _hard_ FOR _man_ to tell how human life began.”–“Nevertheless _it_ is more needful for you, THAT _I should abide_ in the flesh.” We cannot so well say, “It is more needful _for you_, FOR _me to abide_ in the flesh;” but we may say, “It is, _on your account_, more needful FOR _me to abide_ in the flesh.” If these, and other similar examples, are not to be accounted additional instances in which _to_ and _for_, and also the conjunction that, are without any proper antecedent terms, we must suppose these particles to show the relation between what precedes and what follows them.
OBS. 9.–The preposition (as its name implies) _precedes_ the word which it governs. Yet there are some exceptions. In the familiar style, a preposition governing a relative or an interrogative pronoun, is often separated from its object, and connected with the other term of relation; as, “_Whom_ did he speak _to_?” But it is more dignified, and in general more graceful, to place the preposition before the pronoun; as, “_To whom_ did he speak?” The relatives _that_ and _as_, if governed by a preposition, must always precede it. In some instances, the pronoun must be supplied in parsing; as, “To set off the banquet [_that_ or _which_] he gives notice _of_.”–_Philological Museum_, i, 454. Sometimes the objective word is put first because it is emphatical; as, “_This_ the great understand, _this_ they pique themselves _upon_.”–_Art of Thinking_, p. 66. Prepositions of more than one syllable, are sometimes put immediately after their objects, especially in poetry; as, “Known all the _world over_.”–_Walker’s Particles_ p. 291. “The thing is known all _Lesbos over_.”–_Ibid._
“Wild Carron’s lonely _woods among_.”–_Langhorne_.
“Thy deep _ravines_ and _dells along_.”–_Sir W. Scott_.
OBS. 10.–Two prepositions sometimes come together; as, “Lambeth is _over against_ Westminster abbey.”–_Murray’s Gram._, i, 118. “And _from before_ the lustre of her face, White break the clouds away.”–_Thomson_. “And the meagre fiend Blows mildew _from between_ his shrivell’d lips.”–_Cowper_. These, in most instances, though they are not usually written as compounds, appear naturally to coalesce in their syntax, as was observed in the tenth chapter of Etymology, and to express a sort of compound relation between the other terms with which they are connected. When such is their character, they ought to be taken together in parsing; for, if we parse them separately, we must either call the first an adverb, or suppose some very awkward ellipsis. Some instances however occur, in which an object may easily be supplied to the former word, and perhaps ought to be; as, “He is at liberty to sell it _at_ [a price] _above_ a fair remuneration.”– _Wayland’s Moral Science_, p. 258. “And I wish they had been at the bottom of the ditch I pulled you out of, _instead of_ [being] _upon_ my back.”–_Sandford and Merton_, p. 29. In such examples as the following, the first preposition, _of_, appears to me to govern the plural noun which ends the sentence; and the intermediate ones, _from_ and _to_, to have both terms of their relation _understood_: “Iambic verse consists _of from_ two _to_ six feet; that is, _of from_ four _to_ twelve syllables.”–_Blair’s Gram._, p. 119. “Trochaic verse consists _of from_ one to three feet.”–_Ibid._ The meaning is–“Iambic verse consists _of feet_ varying in number from two to six; or (it consists) _of syllables_ varying from four to twelve.”–“Trochaic verse consists _of feet_ varying from one _foot_ to three _feet_.”
OBS. 11.–One antecedent term may have several prepositions depending on it, with one object after each, or more than one after any, or only one after both or all; as, “A declaration _for_ virtue and _against_ vice.”–_Butler’s Anal._, p. 157. “A positive law _against_ all fraud, falsehood, _and_ violence, and _for_, or _in_ favour _of_, all justice _and_ truth.” “For _of_ him, and _through_ him, and _to_ him, are all things.”–_Bible_. In fact, not only may the relation be simple in regard to all or any of the words, but it may also be complex in regard to all or any of them. Hence several different prepositions, whether they have different antecedent terms or only one and the same, may refer either jointly or severally to one object or to more. This follows, because not only may either antecedents or objects be connected by conjunctions, but prepositions also admit of this construction, with or without a connecting of their antecedents. Examples: “They are capable _of_, and placed _in_, different stations in the society of mankind.”–_Butler’s Anal._, p. 115. “Our perception _of_ vice _and_ ill desert arises _from_, and is the result _of_, a comparison _of_ actions _with_ the nature _and_ capacities _of_ the agent.”–_Ib._, p. 279. “And the design _of_ this chapter is, _to_ inquire how far this is the case; how far, _over and above_ the moral nature which God has given us, _and_ our natural notion _of_ him, as righteous governor _of_ those his creatures _to_ whom he has given this nature; I say, how far, _besides_ this, the principles _and_ beginnings _of_ a moral government _over_ the world may be discerned, _notwithstanding and amidst_ all the confusion _and_ disorder _of_ it.”–_Ib._, p. 85.
OBS. 12.–The preposition _into_, expresses a relation produced by motion or change; and _in_, the same relation, without reference to motion as having produced it: hence, “to walk _into_ the garden,” and, “to walk _in_ the garden,” are very different in meaning. “It is disagreeable to find a word split _into_ two by a pause.”–_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 83. This appears to be right in sense, but because brevity is desirable in unemphatic particles, I suppose most persons would say, “split _in_ two.” In the Bible we have the phrases, “rent _in_ twain,”–“cut _in_ pieces,”–“brake _in_ pieces the rocks,”–“brake all their bones _in pieces_,”–“brake them _to_ pieces,”–“broken _to_ pieces,”–“pulled _in_ pieces.” In all these, except the first, _to_ may perhaps be considered preferable to _in_; and _into_ would be objectionable only because it is longer and less simple. “Half of them dare not shake the snow from off their cassocks, lest they shake themselves _to_ pieces.”–SHAK.: _Kames_, ii, 246.
OBS. 13.–_Between_, or _betwixt_, is used in reference to two things or parties; _among_, or _amongst, amid_, or _amidst_, in reference to a greater number, or to something by which an other may be surrounded: as, “Thou pendulum _betwixt_ a smile and tear.”–_Byron_. “The host _between the_ mountain and the shore.”–_Id._ “To meditate _amongst_ decay, and