| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: A short introduction to English grammar: with critical notes
Author: Anonymous
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "A short introduction to English grammar: with critical notes" ***
A SHORT
INTRODUCTION
TO
ENGLISH GRAMMAR:
WITH CRITICAL NOTES.
Nam ipsum _Latine_ loqui est illud quidem in magna laude ponendum:
sed non tam sua sponte, quam quod est a plerisque neglectum. Non enim
tam præclarum est scire _Latine_, quam turpe nescire; neque tam id
mihi oratoris boni, quam civis _Romani_ proprium videtur.
CICERO.
[Illustration]
LONDON: Printed by J. HUGHS;
For A. MILLAR in the Strand;
And R. and J. DODSLEY in Pall-mall. 1762.
PREFACE.
_The English Language hath been much cultivated during the last two
hundred years. It hath been considerably polished and refined; it hath
been greatly enlarged in extent and compass; its force and energy, its
variety, richness, and elegance, have been tried with good success,
in verse and in prose, upon all subjects, and in every kind of stile:
but whatever other improvements it may have received, it hath made no
advances in Grammatical accuracy._
_It is now about fifty years since Doctor ~Swift~ made a public
remonstrance, addressed to the Earl of ~Oxford~, then Lord Treasurer,
of the imperfect State of our Language; alledging in particular, “that
in many instances it offended against every part of Grammar.” ~Swift~
must be allowed to have been a good judge of this matter. He was himself
very attentive to this part, both in his own writings, and in his remarks
upon those of his friends: he is one of our most correct, and perhaps our
very best prose writer. Indeed the justness of this complaint, as far as
I can find, hath never been questioned; and yet no effectual method hath
hitherto been taken to redress the grievance of which he complains._
_But let us consider, how, and in what extent, we are to understand this
charge brought against the ~English~ Language. Does it mean, that the
~English~ Language as it is spoken by the politest part of the nation,
and as it stands in the writings of our most approved authors, oftentimes
offends against every part of Grammar? Thus far, I am afraid, the charge
is true. Or does it further imply, that our Language is in its nature
irregular and capricious; not subject, or not easily reduceable, to a
System of rules? In this respect, I am persuaded, the charge is wholly
without foundation._
_The ~English~ Language is perhaps of all the present European Languages
by much the most simple in its form and construction. Of all the ancient
Languages extant that is the most simple, which is undoubtedly the most
ancient: but even that Language itself does not equal the ~English~ in
simplicity._
_The Words of the ~English~ Language are subject to fewer variations from
their original Form, than those perhaps of any other Language whatsoever.
Its Substantives have but one variation of Case: nor have they any beside
the natural distinction of Gender. Its Adjectives admit of no change
at all, except that which expresses the degrees of Comparison. All the
possible variations of the original form of the Verb are not above six
or seven; whereas in many Languages they amount to one or two hundred:
and almost the whole business of Modes, Times, and Voices is managed with
great ease by the assistance of eight or nine commodious little Verbs;
called from their use Auxiliaries. The Construction of this Language is
so easy and obvious, that our Grammarians have thought it hardly worth
while to give us any thing like a regular and systematical Syntax. The
last ~English~ Grammar that hath been presented to the public, and by
the Person best qualified to have given us a perfect one, comprises the
whole Syntax in ten lines. The reason, which he assigns for being so very
concise in this part, is, “because our Language has so little inflection,
that its Construction neither requires nor admits many rules.” In truth,
the easier any subject is in its own nature, the harder is it to make it
more easy by explanation; and nothing is commonly more unnecessary, and
at the same time more difficult, than to give a Demonstration in form of
a proposition almost self-evident._
_It is not owing then to any peculiar irregularity or difficulty of our
Language, that the general practice both of speaking and writing it is
chargeable with inaccuracy. It is not the Language, but the practice,
that is in fault. The truth is, Grammar is very much neglected among us:
and it is not the difficulty of the Language, but on the contrary the
simplicity and facility of it, that occasions this neglect. Were the
Language less easy and simple, we should find ourselves under a necessity
of studying it with more care and attention. But as it is, we take it
for granted, that we have a competent knowledge and skill, and are able
to acquit ourselves properly, in our own native tongue: a faculty solely
acquired by use, conducted by habit, and tried by the ear, carries us on
without reflection; we meet with no rubs or difficulties in our way, or
we do not perceive them; we find ourselves able to go on without rules,
and we do not so much as suspect that we stand in need of them._
_A Grammatical Study of our own Language makes no part of the ordinary
method of instruction which we pass thro’ in our childhood; and it is
very seldom that we apply ourselves to it afterward. And yet the want of
it will not be effectually supplied by any other advantages whatsoever.
Much practice in the polite world, and a general acquaintance with the
best authors, are good helps, but alone will hardly be sufficient: we
have writers, who have enjoyed these advantages in their full extent,
and yet cannot be recommended as models of an accurate style. Much less
then will what is commonly called Learning serve the purpose; that is,
a critical knowledge of ancient languages, and much reading of ancient
authors: the greatest Critic and most able Grammarian of the last age,
when he came to apply his Learning and his Criticism to an English
Author, was frequently at a loss in matters of ordinary use and common
construction in his own ~Vernacular Idiom~._
_But perhaps the Notes subjoined to the following pages will furnish a
more convincing argument, than any thing that can be said here, both
of the truth of the charge of inaccuracy brought against our Language
as it subsists in practice, and of the necessity of investigating the
Principles of it, and studying it Grammatically, if we would attain to a
due degree of skill in it. It is with reason expected of every person of
a liberal education, and much more is it indispensably required of every
one who undertakes to inform or entertain the public, that he should be
able to express himself with propriety and accuracy. It will evidently
appear from these Notes, that our best Authors for want of some rudiments
of this kind have sometimes fallen into mistakes, and been guilty of
palpable errors in point of Grammar. The examples there given are such as
occurred in reading, without any very curious or methodical examination:
and they might easily have been much increased in number by any one,
who had leisure or phlegm enough to have gone through a regular course
of reading with this particular view. However, I believe, they may be
sufficient to answer the purpose intended; to evince the necessity of the
Study of Grammar in our own Language, and to admonish those, who set up
for Authors among us, that they would do well to consider this part of
Learning as an object not altogether beneath their regard._
_The principal design of a Grammar of any Language is to teach us to
express ourselves with propriety in that Language, and to be able to
judge of every phrase and form of construction, whether it be right or
not. The plain way of doing this, is to lay down rules, and to illustrate
them by examples. But besides shewing what is right, the matter may be
further explained by pointing out what is wrong. I will not take upon me
to say, whether we have any Grammar that sufficiently performs the first
part: but the latter method here called in, as subservient to the former,
may perhaps be found in this case to be of the two the more useful and
effectual manner of instruction._
_Besides this principal design of Grammar in our own Language, there
is a secondary use to which it may be applied, and which, I think,
is not attended to as it deserves. A good foundation in the General
Principles of Grammar is in the first place necessary for all those who
are initiated in a learned education; and for all others likewise, who
shall have occasion to furnish themselves with the knowledge of modern,
languages. Universal Grammar cannot be taught abstractedly: it must be
done with reference to some language already known, in which the terms
are to be explained, and the rules exemplified. The learner is supposed
to be unacquainted with all but his own native tongue; and in what
other, consistently with reason and common sense, would you go about
to explain it to him? When he has a competent knowledge of the main
principles, the common terms, the general rules, the whole subject and
business of Grammar, exemplified in his own Language; he then will apply
himself with great advantage to any foreign language, whether ancient or
modern. To enter at once upon the Science of Grammar, and the Study of
a foreign Language, is to encounter two difficulties together, each of
which would be much lessened by being taken separately and in its proper
order. For these plain reasons a competent Grammatical knowledge of our
own Language is the true foundation upon which all Literature, properly
so called, ought to be raised. If this method were adopted in our
Schools; if children were first taught the common principles of Grammar
by some short and clear System of ~English~ Grammar, which happily by its
simplicity and facility is perhaps of all others the fittest for such a
purpose, they would have some notion of what they were going about, when
they should enter into the ~Latin~ Grammar; and would hardly be engaged
so many years, as they now are, in that most irksome and difficult part
of literature, with so much labour of the memory, and with so little
assistance of the understanding._
_A design somewhat of this kind gave occasion to the following little
System, intended merely for a private and domestic use. The chief end
of it was to explain the general principles of Grammar as clearly and
intelligibly as possible. In the Definitions therefore easiness and
perspicuity have been sometimes prefered to logical exactness. The
common Divisions have been complied with, as far as truth and reason
would permit. The known and received Terms have been retained, except
in one or two instances, where others offered themselves, which seemed
much more significant. All disquisitions, which appeared to have
more of subtilty than of usefulness in them, have been avoided. In a
word, it was calculated for the use of the Learner even of the lowest
class. Those, who would enter more deeply into this Subject, will
find it fully and accurately handled, with the greatest acuteness of
investigation, perspicuity of explication, and elegance of method, in a
Treatise intitled HERMES, by JAMES HARRIS Esq; the most beautiful and
perfect example of Analysis that has been exhibited since the days of
~Aristotle~._
_The following short System is proposed only as an Essay, upon a Subject,
tho’ of little esteem, yet of no small importance; and in which the
want of something better adapted to real use and practice, than what we
have at present, seems to be generally acknowledged. If those, who are
qualified to judge of such matters, and do not look upon them as beneath
their notice, shall so far approve of it, as to think it worth a revisal,
and capable of being improved into something really useful; their remarks
and assistance, communicated through the hands of the Bookseller, shall
be received with all proper deference and acknowledgement._
A SHORT INTRODUCTION TO ENGLISH GRAMMAR.
GRAMMAR.
Grammar is the Art of rightly expressing our thoughts by Words.
Grammar in general, or Universal Grammar, explains the Principles which
are common to all languages.
The Grammar of any particular Language, as the English Grammar, applies
those common principles to that particular language, according to the
established usage and custom of it.
Grammar treats of Sentences, and the several parts of which they are
compounded.
Sentences consist of Words; Words, of one or more Syllables; Syllables,
of one or more Letters.
So that Letters, Syllables, Words, and Sentences, make up the whole
subject of Grammar.
LETTERS.
A Letter is the first Principle, or least part of a Word.
An Articulate Sound is the sound of the human voice, formed by the organs
of speech.
A Vowel is a simple articulate sound, formed by the impulse of the voice,
and by the opening only of the mouth in a particular manner.
A Consonant cannot be perfectly sounded by itself; but joined with
a vowel forms a compound articulate sound, by a particular motion or
contact of the parts of the mouth.
A Diphthong, or Double Vowel, is the union of two or more vowels
pronounced by a single impulse of the voice.
In English there are twenty-six Letters:
A, a; B, b; C, c; D, d; E, e; F, f; G, g; H, h; I, i; J, j; K, k; L, l;
M, m; N, n; O, o; P, p; Q, q; R, r; S, s; T, t; U, u; V, v; W, w; X, x;
Y, y; Z, z.
_J j_, and _V v_, are consonants; the former having the sound of the
soft _g_, and the latter that of a coarser _f_: they are therefore
intirely different from the vowels _i_ and _u_, and distinct letters of
themselves; they ought also to be distinguished by a peculiar Name; the
former may be called _ja_, and the latter _vee_.
Six of the letters are vowels, and may be sounded by themselves; _a_,
_e_, _i_, _o_, _u_, _y_.
_Y_ is in sound wholly the same with i; and is written instead of it at
the end of words; or before another _i_, as _flying_, _denying_: it is
retained likewise in some words derived from the Greek; and it is always
a vowel.
_W_ is either a vowel, or a diphthong: its proper sound is the same as
the Italian _u_, the French _ou_, or the English _oo_: after _o_, it is
sometimes not sounded at all, sometimes like a single _u_.
The rest of the letters are consonants; which cannot be sounded alone:
some not at all, and these are called Mutes, _b_, _c_, _d_, _g_, _k_,
_p_, _q_, _t_: others very imperfectly, making a kind of obscure sound,
and these are called Semi-vowels, or Half-vowels, _l_, _m_, _n_, _r_,
_f_, _s_; the first four of which are also distinguished by the name of
Liquids.
The Mutes and the Semi-vowels are distinguished by their names in the
Alphabet, those of the former all beginning with a consonant; _bee_,
_cee_, &c; those of the latter all beginning with a vowel, _ef_, _el_, &c.
_X_ is a double consonant, compounded of _c_, or _k_, and _s_.
_Z_ seems not to be a double consonant in English, as it is commonly
supposed: it has the same relation to _s_, as _v_ has to _f_, being a
thicker and coarser expression of it.
_H_ is only an Aspiration, or Breathing: and sometimes at the beginning
of a word is not sounded at all; as, _an hour_, _an honest_ man.
_C_ is pronounced like _k_, before _a_, _o_, _u_; and soft, like _s_,
before _e_, _i_, _y_: in like manner _g_ is pronounced always hard
before _a_, _o_, _u_; sometimes hard and sometimes soft before _i_, and
_y_; and for the most part soft before _e_.
The English Alphabet, like most others, is both deficient and redundant;
in some cases, the same letters expressing different sounds, and
different letters expressing the same sounds.
SYLLABLES.
A Syllable is a sound either simple or compounded, pronounced by a single
impulse of the voice, and constituting a word, or part of a word.
Spelling is the art of reading by naming the letters singly, and rightly
dividing words into their syllables. Or, in writing, it is the expressing
of a word by its proper letters.
In Spelling, a syllable in the beginning or middle of a word ends in a
vowel, unless the consonant _x_ follow it, or two consonants, whereof the
former is a liquid, or the same as the latter.
But the best and only sure rule for dividing the syllables in spelling,
is to divide them as they are naturally divided in a right pronunciation.
WORDS.
Words are articulate sounds, used by common consent as signs of ideas, or
notions.
There are in English nine Sorts of Words, or, as they are commonly
called, Parts of Speech.
1. The ARTICLE, prefixed to substantives, when they are common names
of things, to point them out, and to shew how far their signification
extends.
2. The SUBSTANTIVE, or NOUN, being the name of any thing conceived to
subsist, or of which we have any notion.
3. The PRONOUN, standing instead of the noun.
4. The ADJECTIVE, added to the noun to express the quality of it.
5. The VERB, or Word by way of eminence, signifying to be, to do, or to
suffer.
6. The ADVERB, added to verbs, and also to adjectives and other adverbs,
to express some circumstance belonging to them.
7. The PREPOSITION, put before nouns and pronouns chiefly, to connect
them with other words, and to shew their relation to them.
8. The CONJUNCTION, connecting sentences together.
9. The INTERJECTION, thrown in to express the affection of the speaker,
though unnecessary with respect to the construction of the sentence.
EXAMPLE.
1 2 7 2 5 1 2 4 7 2 8 5 5
The power of speech is a faculty peculiar to man, and was bestowed
7 3 7 3 4 2 7 1 4 8 6 4
on him by his beneficent Creator for the greatest and most excellent
2 8 9 6 6 5 3 5 3 7 1 4 7 2
uses; but alas! how often do we pervert it to the worst of purposes?
In the foregoing sentence the Words _the_, _a_, are Articles; _power_,
_speech_, _faculty_, _man_, _creator_, _uses_, _purposes_, are
Substantives; _him_, _his_, _we_, _it_, are Pronouns; _peculiar_,
_beneficent_, _greatest_, _excellent_, _worst_, are Adjectives; _is_,
_was_, _bestowed_, _do_, _pervert_, are Verbs; _most_, _how_, _often_,
are Adverbs; _of_, _to_, _on_, _by_, _for_, are Prepositions; _and_,
_but_, are Conjunctions; and _alas_ is an Interjection.
The Substantives _power_, _speech_, _faculty_, and the rest, are General,
or Common, Names of things; whereof there are many sorts belonging to
the same kind, or many individuals belonging to the same sort: as there
are many sorts of power, many sorts of speech, many sorts of faculty,
many individuals of that sort of animal called man; and so on. These
general or common names are here applied in a more or less extensive
signification, according as they are used without either, or with the
one, or with the other, of the two Articles _a_ and _the_. The words
_speech_, _man_, being accompanied with no article, are taken in their
largest extent, and signify all of the kind or sort, all sorts of speech,
and all men. The word _faculty_, with the article _a_ before it, is
used in a more confined signification, for some one out of many of that
kind; for it is here implied, that there are other faculties peculiar
to man beside speech. The words _power_, _creator_, _uses_, _purposes_,
with the article _the_ before them, (for _his_ Creator is the same as
_the_ Creator _of him_) are used in the most confined signification for
the things here mentioned and ascertained: _the power_ is not any one
indeterminate power out of many sorts, but that particular sort of power
here specified, namely, the power of speech; _the creator_ is the One
great Creator of man and of all things; _the uses_, and _the purposes_,
are particular uses and purposes; the former are explained to be those
in particular, that are the greatest and most excellent; such for
instance, as the glory of God, and the common benefit of mankind; the
latter, to be the worst, as lying, slandering, blaspheming, and the like.
The Pronouns _him_, _his_, _we_, _it_, stand instead of some of the
nouns, or substantives, going before them; as _him_ supplies the place
of _man_; _his_ of _man’s_; _we_ of _men_ (implied in the general name
_man_, including all men, of which number is the speaker;) _it_ of _the
power_, before mentioned. If instead of these pronouns the nouns for
which they stand had been used, the sense would have been the same, but
the frequent repetition of the same words would have been disagreeable
and tedious: as, The power of speech peculiar to _man_, bestowed on
_man_, by _man’s_ Creator, &c.
The Adjectives _peculiar_, _beneficent_, _greatest_, _excellent_,
_worst_, are added to their several substantives to denote the character
and quality of each.
The Verbs _is_, _was bestowed_, _do pervert_, signify severally, being,
suffering, and doing. By the first it is implied, that there is such a
thing as the power of speech, and it is affirmed to be of such a kind;
namely, a faculty peculiar to man: by the second it is said to have been
acted upon, or to have suffered, or to have had something done to it;
namely, to have been bestowed on man: by the last, we are said to act
upon it, or to do something to it; namely, to pervert it.
The Adverbs _most_, _often_, are added to the adjective _excellent_,
and to the verb _pervert_, to shew the circumstance belonging to them;
namely, that of the highest degree to the former, and that of frequency
to the latter: concerning the degree of which frequency also a question
is made by the adverb _how_, added to the adverb _often_.
The Prepositions _of_, _to_, _on_, _by_, _for_, placed before the
substantives and pronouns _speech_, _man_, _him_, &_c._ connect them with
other words, substantives, adjectives, and verbs, as _power_, _peculiar_,
_bestowed_, &_c._ and shew the relation which they have to those words;
as the relation of subject, object, agent, end; _for_ denoting the end,
_by_ the agent, _on_, the object; _to_ and _of_ denote possession, or the
belonging of one thing to another.
The Conjunctions _and_, and _but_, connect the three parts of the
sentence together; the first more closely both with regard to the
sentence and the sense; the second connecting the parts of the sentence,
tho’ less strictly, and at the same time expressing an opposition in the
sense.
The Interjection _alas!_ expresses the concern and regret of the speaker;
and though thrown in with propriety, yet might have been omitted without
injuring the construction of the sentence, or destroying the sense.
ARTICLE.
The Article is a word prefixed to substantives, to point them out, and to
shew how far their signification extends.
In English there are but two articles, _a_, and _the_: _a_ becomes _an_
before a vowel or a silent _h_.
_A_ is used in a vague sense to point out one single thing of the kind,
in other respects indeterminate: _the_ determines what particular thing
is meant.
A substantive without any article to limit it is taken in its widest
sense: thus _man_ means all mankind; as,
“The proper study of mankind is man:”
POPE.
where _mankind_ and _man_ may change places without making any alteration
in the sense. _A man_ means some one or other of that kind, indefinitely;
_the man_ means, definitely, that particular man, who is spoken of: the
former therefore is called the Indefinite, the latter the Definite,
Article[1].
Example: “_Man_ was made for society, and ought to extend his good-will
to all _men_: but _a man_ will naturally entertain a more particular
kindness for _the men_ with whom he has the most frequent intercourse;
and enter into a still closer union with _the man_, whose temper and
disposition suit best with his own.”
It is of the nature of both the Articles to determine or limit the thing
spoken of: _a_ determines it to be one single thing of the kind, leaving
it still uncertain which; _the_ determines which it is, or of many which
they are. The first therefore can only be joined to Substantives in the
singular number[2]; the last may also be joined to plurals.
There is a remarkable exception to this rule in the use of the Adjectives
_few_ and _many_, (the latter chiefly with the word _great_ before it)
which, though joined with plural Substantives, yet admit of the singular
Article _a_: as, _a few men_, _a great many men_;
“Told of _a many thousand_ warlike French:”—
“The care-craz’d mother of _a many children_.”
SHAKESPEAR.
The reason of it is manifest from the effect which the Article has in
these phrases: it means a small or great number collectively taken, and
therefore gives the idea of a Whole, that is, of Unity. Thus likewise
_a hundred_, _a thousand_, is one whole number, an aggregate of many
collectively taken; and therefore still retains the Article _a_, tho’
joined as an Adjective to a plural Substantive: as, _a hundred years_;[3]
“For harbour at _a thousand doors_ they knock’d;
Not one of all _the thousand_, but was lock’d.”
DRYDEN.
The Definite Article _the_ is sometimes applied to Adverbs in the
comparative degree, and its effect is to mark the degree the more
strongly, and to define it the more precisely: as, “_The more_ I examine
it, _the better_ I like it. I like this _the least_ of any.”
SUBSTANTIVE.
A Substantive, or Noun, is the Name of a thing; of whatever we conceive
in any way to subsist, or of which we have any notion.
Substantives are of two sorts; Proper, and Common, Names. Proper Names
are the names appropriated to individuals; as the names of persons and
places: such are _George_, _London_. Common Names stand for kinds,
containing many sorts; or sorts, containing many individuals under them;
as, _Animal_, _Man_.
Proper Names being the names of individuals, and therefore of things
already as determinate as they can be made, admit not of Articles, or
of Plurality of Number; unless by a Figure, or by Accident: as when
great Conquerors are called _Alexanders_; and some great Conqueror
_An_ Alexander, or _The_ Alexander of his age; when a Common Name is
understood, as _The_ Thames, that is, the _River_ Thames; _The_ George,
that is, the _Sign_ of St. George: or when it happens that there are
many persons of the same name; as, _The_ two _Scipios_.
Whatever is spoken of is represented as one, or more, in Number: these
two manners of representation in respect of number are called the
Singular, and the Plural, Number.
In English, the Substantive Singular is made Plural, for the most
part, by adding to it _s_; or _es_, where it is necessary for the
pronunciation: as, _king_, _kings_; _fox_, _foxes_; _leaf_, _leaves_; in
which last, and many others, _f_ is also changed into _v_, for the sake
of an easier pronunciation, and more agreeable sound. Some few Plurals
end in _en_: as, _oxen_, _chicken_, _children_, _brethren_; and _men_,
_women_, by changing the _a_ of the Singular into _e_[4]. This form we
have retained from the Teutonic; as likewise the introduction of the _e_
in the former syllable of two of the last instances; _weomen_, (for so
we pronounce it) _brethren_, from _woman_, _brother_[5]: something like
which may be noted in some other forms of Plurals; as, _mouse_, _mice_;
_louse_, _lice_; _tooth_, _teeth_; _foot_, _feet_; _goose_, _geese_[6].
The English Language, to express different connexions and relations of
one thing to another, uses, for the most part, Prepositions. The Greek
and Latin among the antient, and some too among the modern languages,
as the German, vary the termination or ending of the Substantive to
answer the same purpose. These different endings are in those languages
called Cases. And the English being derived from the same origin as the
German, that is, from the Teutonic[7], is not wholly without them. For
instance, the relation of Possession, or Belonging, is often expressed
by a Case, or a different ending of the Substantive. This Case answers
to the Genitive Case in Latin, and may still be so called; tho’ perhaps
more properly the Possessive Case. Thus, “_God’s_ grace:” which may
also be expressed by the Preposition; as, “the grace _of God_.” It was
formerly written _Godis_ grace; we now very improperly always shorten it
with an Apostrophe, even tho’ we are obliged to pronounce it fully; as,
“_Thomas’s_ book:” that is, “_Thomasis_ book;” not “_Thomas his_ book,”
as it is commonly supposed[8].
When the thing, to which another is said to belong, is expressed by a
circumlocution, or by many terms, the sign of the Possessive Case is
added to the last term: as, “The King of Great _Britain’s_ Soldiers.”
When it is a Noun ending with _s_, or in the Plural Number in _s_, the
sign of the Possessive Case is not added: as, “for _righteousness_ sake;
on _eagles_ wings.” Both the Sign and the Preposition seem sometimes
to be used: as, “a soldier _of the king’s_:” but here are really two
Possessives; for it means, “one _of_ the soldiers _of_ the king.”
The English in its Substantives has but two different terminations for
Cases; that of the Nominative, which simply expresses the Name of the
thing, and that of the Possessive Case.
Things are frequently considered with relation to the distinction of Sex
or Gender; as being Male, or Female, or Neither the one, nor the other.
Hence Substantives are of the Masculine, or Feminine, or Neuter, that is,
Neither, Gender: which latter is only the exclusion of all consideration
of Gender.
The English Language, with singular propriety, following nature alone,
applies the distinction of Masculine and Feminine only to the names
of Animals; all the rest are Neuter: except when by a Poetical or
Rhetorical fiction things inanimate and Qualities are exhibited as
Persons, and consequently become either Male or Female. And this gives
the English an advantage above most other languages in the Poetical and
Rhetorical Style: for when Nouns naturally Neuter are converted into
Masculine and Feminine[9], the Personification is more distinctly and
forcibly marked.
Some few Substantives are distinguished as to their Gender by their
termination: as, _prince_, _princess_; _actor_, _actress_; _lion_,
_lioness_; _hero_, _heroine_; &c.
The chief use of Gender in English is in the Pronoun of the Third Person,
which must agree in that respect with the Noun for which it stands.
PRONOUN.
A Pronoun is a word standing instead of a Noun, as its Substitute or
Representative.
In the Pronoun are to be considered the Person, Number, Gender and Case.
There are Three Persons which may be the Subject of any discourse: first,
the Person who speaks may speak of himself; secondly, he may speak of the
Person to whom he addresses himself; thirdly, he may speak of some other
Person.
These are called, respectively, the First, Second, and Third, Persons:
and are expressed by the Pronouns _I_, _Thou_, _He_.
As the Speakers, the Persons spoken to, and the Persons spoken of, may
be many, so each of these Persons hath the Plural Number; _We_, _Ye_,
_They_.
The Persons speaking and spoken to are supposed to be present, from which
and other circumstances their Sex is commonly known, and needs not to
be marked by a distinction of Gender in their Pronouns: but the Person
spoken of being absent and in many respects unknown, it is necessary
that it should be marked by a distinction of Gender; at least when some
particular Person is spoken of, who ought to be more distinctly marked:
accordingly the Pronoun Singular of the Third Person hath the Three
Genders, _He_, _She_, _It_.
Pronouns have Three Cases; the Nominative; the Genitive, or Possessive;
like Nouns; and moreover a Case, which follows the Verb Active, or the
Preposition, expressing the Object of an Action, or of a Relation. It
answers to the Oblique Cases in Latin; and may be properly enough called
the Objective Case.
PRONOUNS;
according to their Persons, Numbers, Cases, and Genders.
PERSONS.
1. 2. 3. 1. 2. 3.
Singular. Plural.
I, Thou, He; We, Ye or You, They.
CASES.
Nom. Poss. Obj. Nom. Poss. Obj.
First Person.
I, Mine, Me; We, Ours, Us.
Second Person.
Thou, Thine, Thee; Ye or You, Yours, You[10].
Third Person.
_Masc._ He, His, Him; }
_Fem._ She, Hers, Her; } They, Theirs, Them.
_Neut._ It, Its[11], It; }
The Personal Pronouns have the nature of Substantives, and as such stand
by themselves: the rest have the nature of Adjectives, and as such are
joined to Substantives; and may be called Pronominal Adjectives.
_Thy_, _My_, _Her_, _Our_, _Your_, _Their_, are Pronominal Adjectives:
but _His_, (that is, _Hee’s_) _Her’s_, _Our’s_, _Your’s_, _Their’s_,
have evidently the Form of the Possessive Case: and by Analogy, _Mine_,
_Thine_[12], may be esteemed of the same rank. All these are used, when
the Noun they belong to is understood: the two latter sometimes also
instead of _my_, _thy_, when the Noun following them begins with a vowel.
Beside the foregoing there are several other Pronominal Adjectives; which
tho’ they may sometimes seem to stand by themselves, yet have always some
Substantive belonging to them, either referred to, or understood: as,
_This_, _that_, _other_, _any_, _some_, _one_, _none_; these are called
Definitive, because they define and limit the extent of the thing, to
which they either refer, or are joined. The three first of these are
varied to express Number; as, _These_, _those_, _others_; the last of
which admits of the Plural form only when its Substantive is not joined
to it, but referred to, or understood: none of them are varied to express
the Gender or Case. _One_ is sometimes used in an Indefinite sense
(answering to the French _on_) as in the following phrases; “_one_ is apt
to think;” “_one_ sees;” “_one_ supposes.” _Who_, _which_, _that_, are
called Relatives, because they more directly refer to some Substantive
going before; which therefore is called the Antecedent. They also connect
the following part of the Sentence with the foregoing. These belong to
all the three Persons; whereas the rest belong only to the Third. One of
them only is varied to express the three Cases; _Who_, _whose_[13], (that
is, _who’s_[14]) _whom_: none of them have different endings for the
Numbers. _Who_, _which_, _what_, are called Interrogatives, when they are
used in asking questions. The two latter of them have no variation of
Number or Case.
_Own_, and _self_, in the Plural _selves_, are joined to the Possessives
_my_, _our_, _thy_, _your_, _his_, _her_, _their_; as, _my own_ hand;
_myself_, _yourselves_; both of them expressing emphasis, or opposition;
as, “I did it _my own self_,” that is, and no one else: the latter also
forming the Reciprocal Pronoun; as, “he hurt _himself_.” _Himself_,
_themselves_, seem to be used in the Nominative Case by corruption
instead of _his self_, _their selves_: as, “he came _himself_;” “they
did it _themselves_;” where _himself_, _themselves_, cannot be in the
Objective Case. If this be so, _self_ must be in these instances, not a
Pronoun, but a Noun. Thus Dryden uses it:
“What I show,
Thy _self may_ freely on thy self bestow.”
_Ourself_, the Plural Pronominal Adjective with the Singular Substantive,
is peculiar to the Regal Style.
_Own_ is an Adjective; or perhaps the Participle (_owen_) of the obsolete
verb _owe_; to possess; to be the right owner of a thing.
All Nouns whatever in Grammatical Construction are of the Third Person:
except when an address is made to a Person; then the Noun, answering to
the Vocative Case in Latin, is of the Second Person.
ADJECTIVE.
An Adjective is a word joined to a Substantive to express its
Quality[15].
In English the Adjective is not varied on account of Gender, Number,
or Case. The only variation it admits of is that of the Degrees of
Comparison.
Qualities admit of _more_ and _less_, or of different degrees: and the
words that express Qualities have accordingly proper forms to express
different degrees. When a Quality is simply expressed, without any
relation to the same in a different degree, it is called the Positive;
as, _wise_, _great_. When it is expressed with augmentation, or with
reference to a less degree of the same, it is called the Comparative;
as, _wiser_, _greater_. When it is expressed as being in the highest
degree of all, it is called the Superlative; as, _wisest_, _greatest_.
So that the simple word, or Positive, becomes Comparative by adding _r_
or _er_; and Superlative by adding _st_, or _est_, to the end of it. And
the Adverbs _more_ and _most_ placed before the Adjective have the same
effect; as, _wise_, _more wise_, _most wise_[16].
Monosyllables, for the most part, are compared by _er_ and _est_; and
Dissyllables by _more_ and _most_: as, _mild_, _milder_, _mildest_;
_frugal_, _more frugal_, _most frugal_. Dissyllables ending in _y_ easily
admit of _er_ and _est_; as _happy_, _lovely_. Words of more than two
syllables hardly ever admit of _er_ and _est_.
In some few words the Superlative is formed by adding the Adverb
_most_ to the end of them: as, _nethermost_, _uttermost_, or _utmost_,
_undermost_, _uppermost_, _foremost_.
In English, as in most languages, there are some words of very common use
that are irregular in this respect: as, _good_, _better_, _best_; _bad_,
_worse_, _worst_; _little_, _less_[17], _least_; _much_, _or many_,
_more_, _most_; and a few others.
VERB.
A VERB is a word which signifies to be, to do, or to suffer.
There are three kinds of Verbs; Active, Passive, and Neuter Verbs.
A Verb Active expresses an Action, and necessarily implies an agent, and
an object acted upon: as, _to love_; “I love Thomas.”
A Verb Passive expresses a Passion, or a Suffering, or the receiving of
an Action; and necessarily implies an Object acted upon, and an Agent by
which it is acted upon: as, _to be loved_; “Thomas is loved by me.”
So when the Agent takes the lead in the Sentence, the Verb is Active, and
the Object follows: when the Object takes the lead, the Verb is Passive,
and the Agent follows.
A Verb Neuter expresses Being, or a state or condition of being; when
the Agent and the Object acted upon coincide, and the event is properly
neither Action nor Passion, but rather something between both: as, _I
am_; _I walk_; _I sleep_.
The Verb Active is called also Transitive, because the Action _passeth
over_ to the Object, or hath an effect upon some other thing: and the
Verb Neuter is called Intransitive, because the effect is confined within
the Agent, and doth _not pass over_ to any object.
In English many Verbs are used both in an Active and a Neuter
signification, the construction only determining of which kind they are.
In a Verb are to be considered the Person, the Number, the Time, and the
Mode.
The Verb varies its endings to express, or agree with, the different
Persons: as, “I _love_, Thou _lovest_, He _loveth_, or _loves_.”
So also to express the different Numbers of the same Person: as, “Thou
_lovest_, ye _love_; He _loveth_, they _love_[18].”
So likewise to express different Times: as, “I _love_, I _loved_; I
_bear_, I _bore_, I have _born_.”
The Mode is the _Manner_ of representing the Action or Passion. When it
is simply _declared_, or a question is asked concerning it, it is called
the Indicative Mode; when it is _bidden_, it is called the Imperative;
when it is _subjoined_ as the end or design, or mentioned under a
condition, a supposition, or the like, for the most part depending on
some other Verb, and having a Conjunction before it, it is called the
Subjunctive; when it is barely expressed _without any limitation_ of
person or number, it is called the Infinitive; and when it is expressed
in a form in which it may be joined to a Noun as its quality or accident,
_partaking_ thereby of the nature of an Adjective, it is called the
Participle.
But to express the Time of the Verb the English uses also the assistance
of other Verbs, called therefore Auxiliaries, or Helpers; _do_, _be_,
_have_, _shall_, _will_: as, “I _do_ love, I _did_ love; I _am_ loved, I
_was_ loved; I _have_ loved, I _have been_ loved; I _shall_, or _will_,
love, or _be_ loved.”
The two principal auxiliaries, _to have_, and _to be_, are thus varied
according to Person, Number, Time, and Mode.
Time is Present, Past, or Future.
To HAVE.
Indicative Mode.
Present Time.
Person. Sing. Plur.
1. I have, We }
2. Thou hast[19], Ye } have.
3. He hath, or has; They }
Past Time.
1. I had, We }
2. Thou hadst, Ye } had.
3. He had; They }
Future Time.
1. I shall, or will, } We } shall,
2. Thou shalt, or wilt, } have; Ye } or will,
3. He shall, or will, } They } have.
Imperative Mode.
1. Let us have,
2. Have thou, or, Do thou have, Have ye, or, Do ye have,
3. Let him have; Let them have.
Subjunctive Mode.
Present Time.
1. I } We }
2. Thou } have; Ye } have.
3. He } They }
Infinitive Mode.
Present, To have: Past, To have had.
Participle.
Present, Having: Perfect[20], Had: Past, Having had.
To BE.
Indicative Mode.
Present Time.
1. I am, We }
2. Thou art, Ye } are.
3. He is; They }
Or,
1. I be, We }
2. Thou beest, Ye } be.
3. He is; They }
Past Time.
1. I was, We }
2. Thou wast, Ye } were.
3. He was; They }
Future Time.
1. I shall, or will, } We } shall,
2. Thou shalt, or wilt, } be; Ye } or will,
3. He shall, or will, } They } be.
Imperative Mode.
1. Let us be,
2. Be thou, or, Do thou be, Be ye, or, Do ye be,
3. Let him be; Let them be.
Subjunctive Mode.
Present Time.
1. I } We }
2. Thou } be; Ye } be.
3. He } They }
Past Time.
1. I were, We }
2. Thou wert[21], Ye } were.
3. He were; They }
Infinitive Mode.
Present, To be: Past, To have been.
Participle.
Present, Being: Perfect, Been: Past, Having been.
The Verb Active is thus varied according to Person, Number, Time and Mode.
Indicative Mode.
Present Time.
Person. Sing. Plur.
1. I love, We }
2. Thou lovest, Ye } love.
3. He loveth, or loves; They }
Past Time.
1. I loved, We }
2. Thou lovedst, Ye } loved.
3. He loved; They }
Future Time.
1. I shall, or will, } We }
2. Thou shalt, or wilt, } love; Ye } shall, or will, love.
3. He shall, or will, } They }
Imperative Mode.
1. Let us love,
2. Love thou, or, Do thou love, Love ye, or, Do ye love,
3. Let him love; Let them love.
Subjunctive Mode.
Present Time.
1. I } We }
2. Thou } love; Ye } love.
3. He } They }
And,
1. I may } We } may love;
2. Thou mayst } love; Ye } and
3. He may } They } have loved[22].
Past Time.
1. I might } We } might love;
2. Thou mightest } love; Ye } and
3. He might } They } have loved[22].
And,
I could, should, would; Thou couldst, &c. love; and have loved.
Infinitive Mode.
Present, To love: Past, To have loved.
Participle.
Present, Loving: Perfect, Loved: Past, Having loved.
But in discourse we have often occasion to speak of Time not only as
Present, Past, and Future, at large and indeterminately, but also as such
with some particular distinction and limitation; that is, as passing, or
finished; as imperfect, or perfect. This will best be seen in an example
of a Verb laid out and distributed according to these distinctions of
Time.
Indefinite, or Undetermined, Time:
Present, Past, Future,
I love; I loved; I shall love.
Definite, or Determined, Time:
Present Imperfect: I am (now) loving.
Present Perfect: I have (now) loved.
Past Imperfect: I was (then) loving.
Past Perfect: I had (then) loved.
Future Imperf. I shall (then) be loving.
Future Perf. I shall (then) have loved.
To express the Present and Past Imperfect of the Active and Neuter Verb
the Auxiliary _do_ is sometimes used: I _do_ (now) love; I _did_ (then)
love.
Thus with very little variation of the Principal Verb the several
circumstances of Mode and Time are clearly expressed by the help of the
Auxiliaries, _be_, _have_, _do_, _let_, _may_, _can_, _shall_, _will_.
The peculiar force of the several Auxiliaries is to be observed. _Do_
and _did_ mark the Action itself, or the Time of it[23], with greater
force and distinction. They are also of frequent and almost necessary
use in Interrogative and Negative Sentences. _Let_ does not only express
permission; but praying, exhorting, commanding. _May_ and _might_ express
the possibility or liberty of doing a thing; _can_ and _could_, the
power. _Must_ is sometimes called in for a helper, and denotes necessity.
_Would_ expresses the intention of the doer; _should_ simply the event.
_Will_ in the first Person singular and plural promises or threatens; in
the second and third Persons only foretells: _shall_ on the contrary,
in the first Person simply foretells; in the second and third Persons
commands or threatens[24].
_Do_ and _have_ make the Present Time; _did_, _had_, the Past; _shall_,
_will_, the Future: _let_ the Imperative Mode; _may_, _might_, _could_,
_would_, _should_, the Subjunctive. The Preposition _to_ placed before
the Verb makes the Infinitive Mode. _Have_, through its several Modes and
Times, is placed only before the Perfect Participle; and _be_, in like
manner, before the Present and Passive Participles: the rest only before
the Verb itself in its Primary Form[25].
The Passive Verb is only the Participle Passive, (which for the most
part is the same with the Indefinite Past Time Active, and always the
same with the Perfect Participle) joined to the Auxiliary Verb _to be_
through all its Variations: as, I _am loved_; I _was loved_; I _have been
loved_; I _shall be loved_: and so on through all the Persons, Numbers,
Times, and Modes.
The Neuter Verb is varied like the Active; but, having somewhat of the
Nature of the Passive, admits in many instances of the Passive form,
retaining still the Neuter signification; chiefly in such Verbs as
signify some sort of motion, or change of place or condition: as, I _am
come_; I _was gone_; I _am grown_; I _was fallen_[26]. The Verb _am_ in
this case precisely defines the Time of the action or event, but does not
change the nature of it; the Passive form still expressing, not properly
a Passion, but only a state or condition of Being.
IRREGULAR VERBS.
In English both the Past Time Active and the Participle Perfect, or
Passive, are formed by adding to the Verb _ed_; or _d_ only when the Verb
ends in _e_: as, _turn_, _turned_; _love_, _loved_. The Verbs that vary
from this rule, in either or in both cases, are esteemed Irregular.
The nature of our language, the Accent and Pronunciation of it, inclines
us to contract even all our Regular Verbs: thus _loved_, _turned_, are
commonly pronounced in one syllable, _lov’d_, _turn’d_; and the second
Person which was originally in three syllables, _lovedest_, _turnedest_,
is become a dissyllable, _lovedst_, _turnedst_: for as we generally throw
the accent as far back as possible towards the first part of the word,
(in some even to the fourth syllable from the end,) the stress being
laid on the first syllables, the rest are pronounced in a lower tone,
more rapidly and indistinctly; and so are often either wholly dropt, or
blended into one another.
It sometimes happens also, that the word which arises from a regular
change does not sound easily or agreeably; sometimes by the rapidity of
our pronunciation the vowels are shortened or lost; and the consonants
which are thrown together do not easily coalesce with one another, and
are therefore changed into others of the same organ, or of a kindred
species: this occasions a further deviation from the regular form: thus,
_loveth_, _turneth_, are contracted into _lov’th_, _turn’th_, and these
for easier pronunciation immediately become _loves_, _turns_.
Verbs ending in _ch_, _ck_, _p_, _x_, _ll_, _ss_, in the Past Time Active
and the Participle Perfect or Passive admit the change of _ed_ into
_t_; as, _snatcht_, _checkt_, _snapt_, _mixt_, dropping also one of the
double letters, _dwelt_, _past_; for _snatched_, _checked_, _snapped_,
_mixed_, _dwelled_, _passed_: those that end in _l_, _m_, _n_, _p_,
after a diphthong, moreover shorten the diphthong, or change it into a
single short vowel; as, _dealt_, _dreamt_, _meant_, _felt_, _slept_, &c:
all for the same reason; from the quickness of the pronunciation, and
because the _d_ after a short vowel will not easily coalesce with the
preceding consonant. Those that end in _ve_ change also _v_ into _f_; as,
_bereave_, _bereft_; _leave_, _left_; because likewise _v_ after a short
vowel will not easily coalesce with _t_.
All these, of which we have hitherto given examples, are considered not
as Irregular, but as Contracted only; and in all of them the Intire as
well as the Contracted form is used.
The formation of Verbs in English, both Regular and Irregular, is derived
from the Saxon.
The Irregular Verbs in English are all Monosyllables, unless Compounded;
and they are for the most part the same words which are Irregular Verbs
in the Saxon.
As all our Regular Verbs are subject to some kind of Contraction, so the
first Class of Irregulars is of those that become so from the same cause.
I.
Irregulars by Contraction.
Some Verbs ending in _d_ or _t_ have the Present, the Past Time, and
the Participle Perfect and Passive, all alike, without any variation:
as, Beat, burst[27], cast, cost, cut, hit, hurt, knit, let, lift[28],
put, read[29], rent, rid, set, shed, shred, shut, slit, spread, thrust,
wet[28].
These are Contractions from _beated_, _bursted_, _casted_, &c; because of
the disagreeable sound of the syllable _ed_ after _d_ or _t_[30].
Others in the Past Time, and Participle Perfect and Passive, vary a
little from the Present by shortening the diphthong, or changing the
_d_ into _t_: as, Lead, led; sweat, swet; meet, met; bleed, bled;
breed, bred; feed, fed; speed, sped; bend, bent[28]; lend, lent; rend,
rent; send, sent; spend, spent; build, built[28]; geld, gelt[28]; gild,
gilt[28]; gird, girt[28].
Others not ending in _d_ or _t_ are formed by Contraction; have, _had_,
for _haved_; make, _made_, for _maked_; flee, _fled_, for _flee-ed_.
The following beside the Contraction change also the Vowel; Sell, sold;
tell, told; clothe, clad[28].
Stand, stood; and dare, durst, (which in the Participle hath regularly
_dared_;) are directly from the Saxon, _standan_, _stod_; _dyrran_,
_dorste_.
II.
Irregulars in _ght_.
The Irregulars of the Second Class end in _ght_, both in the Past Time
and Participle; and change the vowel or diphthong into _au_ or _ou_: they
are taken from the Saxon, in which the termination is _hte_.
Saxon.
Bring, brought: Bringan, brohte.
Buy, bought: Bycgean, bohte.
Catch, caught:
Fight, fought: Feotan, fuht.
Teach, taught: Tæchan, tæhte.
Think, thought: Thencan, thohte.
Seek, sought: Secan, sohte.
Work, wrought: Weorcan, worhte.
_Fraught_ seems rather to be an Adjective than the Participle of the Verb
_to freight_, which has regularly _freighted_. _Raught_ from _reach_ is
obsolete.
III.
Irregulars in _en_.
The Irregulars of the Third Class form the Past Time by changing the
vowel or diphthong of the Present; and the Participle Perfect and Passive
by adding the termination _en_, beside, for the most part, the change of
the vowel or diphthong. These also derive their formation in both parts
from the Saxon.
Present. Past. Participle.
_a_ changed into _e_.
Fall, fell, fallen.
_a_ into _o_.
Awake, awoke, [awaked.]
_a_ into _oo_.
Forsake, forsook, forsaken.
Shake, shook, shaken.
Take, took, taken.
_aw_ into _ew_.
Draw, drew, drawn[31].
_ay_ into _ew_.
Slay, slew, slayn[31].
_e_ into _a_ or _o_, _o_.
Get, gat, or got, gotten.
Help, [helped,] holpen.
Melt, [melted,] molten[28].
Swell, [swelled,] swollen[28].
_ea_ into _a_ or _o_.
Eat, ate, eaten.
Bear, bare, or bore, born.
Break, brake, or broke, broken.
Cleave, clave, or clove[28], cloven[28].
Speak, spake, or spoke, spoken.
Swear, sware, or swore, sworn.
Tear, tare, or tore, torn.
Wear, ware, or wore, worn.
Heave, hove[28], hoven.
Shear, shore, shorn.
Steal, stole, stolen, or stoln.
Tread, trode, trodden.
Weave, wove, woven.
_ee_ into _o_, _o_.
Creep, crope, [creeped, or crept.]
Freeze, froze, frozen.
Seethe, sod, sodden.
_ee_ into _aw_.
See, saw, seen.
_i_ long into _i_ short, _i_ short.
Bite, bit, bitten.
Chide, chid, chidden.
Hide, hid, hidden.
Slide, slid, slidden.
_i_ long into _o_, _i_ short.
Abide, abode.
Drive, drove, driven.
Ride, rode, ridden.
Rise, rose, risen.
Shine, shone, [shined.]
Shrive, shrove, shriven.
Smite, smote, smitten.
Stride, strode, stridden.
Strive, strove[28], striven[28].
Thrive, throve, thriven.
Write[32], wrote, written.
_i_ long into _u_, _i_ short.
Strike, struck, stricken, or strucken.
_i_ short into _a_.
Bid, bade, bidden.
Give, gave, given.
Sit[33], sat, sitten.
Spit, spat, spitten.
_i_ short into _u_.
Dig, dug[28], [digged.]
_ie_ into _ay_.
Lie[34], lay, lien, or lain.
_o_ into _e_.
Hold, held, holden.
_o_ into _i_.
Do, did, done, i. e. doen.
_oo_ into _o_, _o_.
Choose, chose, chosen[35].
_ow_ into _ew_.
Blow, blew, blown.
Crow, crew, [crowed.]
Grow, grew, grown.
Know, knew, known.
Throw, threw, thrown.
_y_ into _ew_, _ow_.
Fly[36], flew, flown.
The following are Irregular only in the Participle; and that without
changing the vowel.
Bake, [baked,] baken[28].
Grave, [graved,] graven[28].
Hew, [hewed,] hewen, or hewn[28].
Lade, [laded,] laden.
Load, [loaded,] loaden[28].
Mow, [mowed,] mown[28].
Rive, [rived,] riven.
Saw, [sawed,] sawn[28].
Shave, [shaved,] shaven[28].
Shew, [shewed,] shewn[28].
Sow, [sowed,] sown[28].
Straw, -ew, or -ow, [strawed, &c.] strown[28].
Wax, [waxed,] waxen[28].
Some Verbs which change _i_ short into _a_ or _u_, and _i_ long into
_ou_, have dropt the termination _en_ in the Participle.
_i_ short into _a_ or _u_, _u_.
Begin, began, begun.
Cling, clang, or clung, clung.
Drink, drank, drunk, or drunken.
Fling, flung, flung.
Ring, rang, or rung, rung.
Shrink, shrank, or shrunk, shrunk.
Sing, sang, or sung, sung.
Sink, sank, or sunk, sunk.
Sling, slang, or slung, slung.
Slink, slunk, slunk.
Spin, span, or spun, spun.
Spring, sprang, or sprung, sprung.
Sting, stung, stung.
Stink, stank, or stunk, stunk.
String, strung, strung.
Swim, swam, or swum, swum.
Swing, swung, swung.
Wring, wrung, wrung.
In many of the foregoing the original and analogical form of the Past
Time in _a_, which distinguished it from the Participle, is grown quite
obsolete.
_i_ long into _ou_, _ou_.
Bind, bound, bound, or bounden.
Find, found, found.
Grind, ground, ground.
Wind, wound, wound.
That all these had originally the termination _en_ in the Participle,
is plain from the following considerations. _Drink_ and _bind_ still
retain it; _drunken_, _bounden_; from the Saxon, _druncen_, _bunden_:
and the rest are manifestly of the same analogy with these. _Begonnen_,
_sonken_, and _founden_, are used by Chaucer; and some others of them
appear in their proper shape in the Saxon; _scruncen_, _spunnen_,
_sprungen_, _stungen_, _wunden_. As likewise in the German, which is only
another off-spring of the Saxon: _begunnen_, _geklungen_, _getruncken_,
_gesungen_, _gesuncken_, _gespunnen_, _gesprungen_, _gestuncken_,
_geschwummen_, _geschwungen_.
The following seem to have lost the _en_ of the Participle in the same
manner:
Hang, hung, hung.
Shoot, shot, shot.
Stick, stuck, stuck.
Come, came, come.
Run, ran, run.
Win, won, won.
_Hangen_, and _scoten_, are the Saxon originals of the two first
Participles; the latter of which is likewise still in use in its
first form in one phrase; a _shotten_ herring. _Stuck_ seems to be a
contraction from _stucken_, as _struck_ now in use for _strucken_.
Chaucer hath _comen_ and _wonnen_: _becommen_ is even used by Lord
Bacon[37]. And most of them still subsist intire in the German;
_gehangen_, _kommen_, _gerunnen_, _gewonnen_.
To this third Class belong the Defective Verbs, Be, been; and Go, gone;
i. e. goen.
From this Distribution and account of the Irregular Verbs, if it be
just, it appears, that originally there was no exception whatever from
the Rule, That the Participle Præterit, or Passive, in English ends in
_d_, _t_, or _n_. The first form included all the Regular Verbs, and
those which are become Irregular by Contraction ending in _t_. To the
second properly belonged only those which end in _ght_, from the Saxon
Irregulars in _hte_. To the third, those from the Saxon Irregulars in
_en_, which have still, or had originally, the same termination.
The same Rule affords a proper foundation for a division of the English
Verbs into Three Conjugations, of which the three different Terminations
of the Participle might respectively be the Characteristics. The
Contracted Verbs, whose Participles now end in _t_, might perhaps be best
reduced to the first Conjugation, to which they naturally and originally
belonged; and they seem to be of a very different analogy from those
in _ght_. But as the Verbs of the first Conjugation would so greatly
exceed in number those of both the others, which together make but about
110[38]; and as those of the third Conjugation are so various in their
form, and so incapable of being reduced to one plain Rule; it seems
better in practice to consider the first in _ed_ as the only Regular
form, and the others as deviations from it; after the example of the
Saxon and German Grammarians.
To the Irregular Verbs are to be added the Defective; which are not only
for the most part Irregular, but are also wanting in some of their parts.
They are in general words of most frequent and vulgar use; in which
Custom is apt to get the better of Analogy. Such are the Auxiliary Verbs,
most of which are of this number. They are in use only in some of their
Times, and Modes; and some of them are a Composition of Times of several
Defective Verbs having the same signification.
Present. Past. Participle.
Am, or Be, was, been.
Can, could.
Go, went, gone.
May, might.
Must.
Ought, ought.
Quoth, quoth.
Shall, should.
Weet, wit, or wot; wot.
Will, would.
Wist, wist.
There are not in English so many as a Hundred Verbs, (being only the
chief part, but not all, of the Irregulars of the Third Class,) which
have a distinct and different form for the Past Time Active and the
Participle Perfect or Passive. The General bent and turn of the language
is towards the other form, which makes the Past Time and the Participle
the same. This general inclination and tendency of the language, seems
to have given occasion to the introducing of a very great Corruption;
by which the Form of the Past Time is confounded with that of the
Participle in these Verbs, few in proportion, which have them quite
different from one another. This confusion prevails greatly in common
discourse, and is too much authorised by the example of some of our best
Writers[39]. Thus it is said, _He begun_, for _he began_; _he run_, for
_he ran_; _he drunk_, for _he drank_: the Participle being used instead
of the Past Time. And much more frequently the Past Time instead of the
Participle: as, _I had wrote_, _it was wrote_, for _I had written_, _it
was written_; _I have drank_, for _I have drunk_; _bore_, for _born_;
_chose_, for _chosen_; _bid_, for _bidden_; _got_, for _gotten_; &c.
This abuse has been long growing upon us, and is continually making
further incroachments: as it may be observed in the example of those
Irregular Verbs of the Third Class, which change _i_ short into _a_
and _u_; as, Cling, clang, clung; in which the original and analogical
form of the Past Time in _a_ is almost grown obsolete; and, the _u_
prevailing instead of it, the Past Time is now in most of them confounded
with the Participle. The Vulgar Translation of the Bible, which is the
best standard of our language, is free from this corruption, except in
a few instances; as, _hid_ is used for _hidden_; _held_, for _holden_,
frequently: _bid_, for _bidden_; _begot_, for _begotten_, once or twice:
in which, and a few other like words, it may perhaps be allowed as a
Contraction. And in some of these Custom has established it beyond
recovery. In the rest it seems wholly inexcusable. The absurdity of it
will be plainly perceived in the example of some of these Verbs, which
Custom has not yet so perverted. We should be immediately shocked at
_I have knew_, _I have saw_, _I have gave_, &c: but our ears are grown
familiar with _I have wrote_, _I have drank_, _I have bore_, &c. which
are altogether as barbarous.
ADVERB.
ADVERBS are _added to Verbs_ and Adjectives to denote some modification
or circumstance of an action or quality: as, the manner, order, time,
place, distance, motion, relation, quantity, quality, comparison, doubt,
affirmation, negation, demonstration, interrogation.
In English they admit of no Variation; except some few of them, which
have the degrees of Comparison: as,[40] “often, oftener, oftenest;”
“soon, sooner, soonest.”
An Adverb is sometimes joined to another Adverb to modify or qualify its
meaning; as, “very much; much too little; not very prudently.”
PREPOSITION.
PREPOSITIONS, so called because they are commonly _put before_ the words
to which they are applied, serve to connect words with one another, and
to shew the relation between them.
One great use of Prepositions in English, is to express those relations
which in some languages are chiefly marked by Cases, or the different
endings of the Noun.
Most Prepositions originally denote the relation of Place, and have been
thence transferred to denote by similitude other relations. Thus, _out_,
_in_, _through_, _under_, _by_, _to_, _from_, _of_, &c. _Of_ is much the
same with _from_; “ask _of_ me,” that is, _from_ me: “made _of_ wood;”
“Son _of_ Philip;” that is, sprung _from_ him. _For_, in its primary
sense, is _pro_, _loco alterius_, in the stead, or place, of another. The
notion of Place is very obvious in all the rest.
CONJUNCTION.
The Conjunction connects or _joins together_ Sentences; so as out of two
to make one Sentence.
Thus, “You, _and_ I, _and_ Peter, rode to London,” is one Sentence made
up of these three by the Conjunction _and_ twice employed; “You rode to
London; I rode to London; Peter rode to London.” Again, “You _and_ I rode
to London, _but_ Peter staid at home,” is one Sentence made up of three
by the Conjunctions _and_ and _but_: both of which equally connect the
Sentences, but the latter expresses an Opposition in the Sense. The first
is therefore called a Conjunction Copulative; the other a Conjunction
Disjunctive.
The use of Copulative Conjunctions is to connect, or to continue, the
Sentence, by expressing an addition, _and_; a supposition, or condition,
_if_, _as_; a cause, _because_[41], _then_; a motive, _that_; an
inference, _therefore_; &c.
The use of Disjunctives is to connect and to continue the Sentence; but
to express Opposition of meaning in different degrees: as, _or_, _but_,
_than_, _altho’_, _unless_, &c.
INTERJECTION.
Interjections, so called because they are _thrown in_ between the parts
of a sentence without making any other alteration in it, are a kind of
Natural Sounds to express the affection of the Speaker.
The different Passions have for the most part different Interjections to
express them.
The Interjection _O_ placed before a Substantive expresses more strongly
an address made to that person or thing; as it marks in Latin what is
called the Vocative Case.
SENTENCES.
A SENTENCE is an assemblage of words, expressed in proper form, and
ranged in proper order, and concurring to make a complete sense.
Concord, or agreement of words, is when one word is required to be in
like case, number, gender, or person, with another.
Regimen, or government, is when a word causeth a following word to be in
some case, or mode.
Sentences are Simple, or Compounded.
A Simple Sentence hath in it but one Subject, and one Finite Verb; that
is, a Verb in the Indicative, Imperative, or Subjunctive Mode.
A Phrase is two or more words rightly put together in order to make a
part of a Sentence; and sometimes making a whole Sentence.
* * * * *
The most common PHRASES used in simple Sentences are as follows:
1st Phrase: The Substantive before a Verb Active, Passive, or Neuter;
when it is said what thing _is_, _does_, or _is done_: as, “I am;” “Thou
writest;” “Thomas is loved:” where _I_, _Thou_, _Thomas_, are the
Nominative[42] Cases; and answer to the question _who_, or _what?_ as,
“Who is loved? Thomas.” And the Verb agrees with the Nominative Case in
number and person[43]; as, _Thou_ being the Second Person Singular, the
Verb _writest_ is so too.
2d Phrase: The Substantive after a Verb Neuter or Passive; when it is
said, that such a thing _is_, or _is made_, or _thought_, or _called_,
such _another thing_; or, when the Substantive after the Verb is spoken
of the same thing or person with the Substantive before the Verb: as,
“a calf becomes an ox;” “Plautus is accounted a Poet;” “I am He.” Here
the latter Substantive is in the Nominative Case as well as the former;
and the Verb is said to govern the Nominative Case: or, the latter
Substantive may be said to agree in Case with the former.
3d Phrase: The Adjective after a Verb Neuter or Passive, in like manner:
as, “Life _is short_, and Art _is long_.” “Exercise _is esteemed
wholesome_.”
4th Phrase: The Substantive after a Verb Active, or Transitive: as
when one thing is said to _act_ upon, or _do_ something to another:
as, “to open a door;” “to build a house;” “Alexander conquered the
Persians.” Here the thing acted upon is in the Objective[44] Case; as it
appears plainly when it is expressed by the Pronoun, which has a proper
termination for that Case; “Alexander conquered _them_;” and the Verb is
said to govern the Objective Case.
5th Phrase: A Verb following another Verb; as, “boys love to play:” where
the latter Verb is in the Infinitive Mode.
6th Phrase: When one thing is said to belong to another; as, “Milton’s
poems:” where the thing to which the other belongs is placed first, and
is in the Possessive Case; or else last with the Preposition _of_ before
it; as, “the poems of Milton.”
7th Phrase: When another Substantive is added to express and explain the
former more fully; as, “Paul the Apostle;” “King George:” where they are
both in the same case; and the latter is said to be put in Apposition to
the former.
8th Phrase: When the quality of the Substantive is expressed by adding
an Adjective to it: as, “a wise man;” “a black horse.” Participles have
the nature of Adjectives; as, “a learned man;” “a loving father.”
9th Phrase: An Adjective with a Verb in the Infinitive Mode following it:
as, “worthy to die;” “fit to be trusted.”
10th Phrase: When a circumstance is added to a Verb, or to an Adjective,
by an Adverb: as, “you read well;” “he is very prudent.”
11th Phrase: When a circumstance is added to a Verb or an Adjective by
a Substantive with a Preposition before it: as, “I write for you;” “he
reads with care;” “studious of praise;” “ready for mischief.”
12th Phrase: When the same Quality in different Subjects is compared;
the Adjective in the Positive having after it the Conjunction _as_,
in the Comparative the Conjunction _than_, and in the Superlative the
Preposition _of_: as, “white as snow;” “wiser than I;” “greatest of all.”
* * * * *
The PRINCIPAL PARTS of a Simple Sentence are the Agent, the Attribute,
and the Object. The Agent is the thing chiefly spoken of; the Attribute
is the thing or action affirmed or denied of it; and the Object is the
thing affected by such action.
In English the Nominative Case denoting the Agent, usually goes before
the Verb, or Attribution, and the Objective Case, denoting the Object,
follows the Verb; and it is the order that determines the cases in Nouns:
as, “Alexander conquered the Persians.” But the Pronoun, having a proper
form for each of those cases, sometimes when it is in the Objective Case
is placed before the Verb, and when it is in the Nominative Case follows
the Object and Verb: as, “Whom ye ignorantly worship, _him declare I_
unto you.” And the Nominative Case is sometimes placed after a Verb
Neuter: as, “Upon thy right hand _did stand the Queen_:” “On a sudden
_appeared the King_.” And frequently with the Adverbs _there_ and then:
as, “There _was a man_:” “Then _came_ unto him _the Pharisees_.” The
reason of it is plain: the Neuter Verb not admitting of an Objective Case
after it, no ambiguity of case can arise from such a position of the Noun.
_Who_, _which_, _what_, and the Relative _that_, though in the Objective
Case, are always placed before the Verb; as are also their Compounds,
_whoever_, _whosoever_, &c: as, “He _whom_ you _seek_.” “This is _what_,
or the thing _which_, or _that_, you _want_.” “_Whomsoever_ you please
_to appoint_.”
When the Verb is a Passive, the Agent and Object change places in the
Sentence; and the thing acted upon is in the Nominative Case, and the
Agent is accompanied with a Preposition: as, “The Persians were conquered
by Alexander.”
A Noun of Multitude[45], or signifying many; and two Nouns in the
Singular Number, joined together by a Conjunction Copulative; have Verbs,
Nouns, and Pronouns, agreeing with them in the Plural Number: as, “When
the King’s trump, the _mob are_ for the King.” Dryden. “_Socrates and
Plato were_ wise; _they were_ the most eminent _Philosophers_ of Greece.”
If the Singulars so joined together are of several Persons, in making the
Plural Pronoun agree with them in Person, the second Person takes place
of the third, and the first of both: “_He and You and I_ won it at the
hazard of _our_ lives: _You and He_ shared it between _you_.”
The Verb _to Be_ has always a Nominative Case after it; as, “it _was I_,
and not _He_, that did it:” unless it be in the Infinitive Mode; “though
you took it _to be Him_[46].”
The Adverbs _when_, _while_, _after_, &c. being left out, the Phrase is
formed with the Participle independently of the rest of the Sentence: as,
“The doors being shut, Jesus stood in the midst.” This is called the Case
Absolute. And the Case is in English always the Nominative: as,
“God from the mount of Sinai, whose gray top
Shall tremble, _He descending_[47], will himself,
In thunder, lightning, and loud trumpet’s sound,
Ordain them laws.”
Milton, P. L. xii. 227.
_To_ before a Verb is the sign of the Infinitive Mode: but there are some
few Verbs, which have other Verbs following them in the Infinitive Mode
without the sign _to_: as, bid, dare, need, make, see, hear; and, let,
have, not used as Auxiliaries: as, “I bade him do it; you dare not do
it; I saw him[48] do it; I heard him say it.”
The Infinitive Mode has much of the nature of a Substantive, expressing
the Action itself which the Verb signifies; as the Participle has the
nature of an Adjective. Thus the Infinitive Mode does the office of a
Substantive in different cases; in the Nominative; as, “_to play is_
pleasant:” in the Objective; as, “boys _love to play_.” In Greek it
admits of the Article through all its cases, with the Preposition in the
Oblique cases: in English the Article is not wanted, but the Preposition
may be used: “For _to will is_ present with me; but _to perform_ that
which is good I find not[49].” “All their works they do _for to be seen_
of men[50].”
“For not _to have been dip’d_ in Lethe’s lake
Could save the Son of Thetis _from to die_.”
Spenser.
Perhaps therefore the Infinitive and the Participle might be more
properly called the Substantive Mode and the Adjective Mode[51].
The Participle with a Preposition before it, and still retaining its
Government, answers to what is called in Latin the Gerund: as, “Happiness
is to be attained, by avoiding evil, and by doing good; by seeking peace,
and by pursuing it.”
The Participle, with an Article before it, and the Preposition _of_ after
it, becomes a Substantive, expressing the action itself which the Verb
signifies[52]: as, “These are the Rules of Grammar, by _the observing
of_ which you may avoid mistakes.” Or it may be expressed by the
Participle, or Gerund; “by _observing_ which:” not, “by _observing of_
which;” nor, “by _the observing_ which:” for either of those two Phrases
would be a confounding of two distinct forms.
I will add another example, and that of the best authority: “The middle
station of life seems to be the most advantageously situated for _the
gaining of_ wisdom. Poverty turns our thoughts too much upon _the
supplying of_ our wants, and riches _upon enjoying our_ superfluities.”
Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 464.
The Participle frequently becomes altogether an Adjective; when it is
joined to a Substantive merely to denote its quality; without any respect
to time; expressing, not an Action, but a Habit; and as such it admits
of the degrees of Comparison: as, “a learned, a more learned, a most
learned, man; a loving, more loving, most loving, father.”
Simple Sentences are 1. Explicative, or explaining: 2. Interrogative, or
asking: 3. Imperative, or commanding[53].
1. An Explicative Sentence is when a thing is said to be, or not to be;
to do, or not to do; to suffer, or not to suffer; in a direct manner; as
in the foregoing examples. If the Sentence be Negative, the Adverb _not_
is placed after the Auxiliary, or after the Verb itself when it has no
Auxiliary: as, “it _did not_ touch him;” or, “it _touched_ him _not_[54].”
2. In an Interrogative Sentence, or when a Question is asked, the
Nominative Case follows the Principal Verb, or the Auxiliary: as, “_was
it_ he?” “_did Alexander_ conquer the Persians?” So that the Question
depends intirely on the order of the words[55].
3. In an Imperative Sentence, when a thing is commanded to be, to do, to
suffer, or not, the Nominative Case follows the Verb or the Auxiliary:
as, “Go, thou traytor;” or, “do thou go:” or the Auxiliary _let_ with the
Objective[56] Case after it is used: as, “Let us be gone[57].”
The Adjective in English, having no variation of Gender or Number,
cannot but agree with the Substantive in those respects; some of the
Pronominal Adjectives only excepted, which have the Plural Number: as,
_these_, _those_, and _they_; which must agree in Number[58] with their
Substantives.
The Adjective generally goes before the Noun: as, “a wise man; a good
horse;” unless something depend on the Adjective; as, “food convenient
for me:” or the Adjective be emphatical; as, “Alexander the great.” And
the Article goes before the Adjective: except the Adjectives _such_ and
_many_, and others subjoined to the Adverbs _so_, _as_, and _how_: as,
“_such a_ man;” “_many a_ man;” “so _good a_ man;” “as _good a_ man as
ever lived;” “how _beautiful a_ prospect is here!” And sometimes when
there are two or more Adjectives joined to the Noun: as, “a man learned
and religious.”
* * * * *
Every Verb, except in the Infinitive or the Participle, hath its
Nominative Case, either expressed or implied[59]; as,
“Awake, arise, or be for ever fall’n:”
that is, “Awake _ye_, &c.”
Every Nominative Case, except the Case Absolute, and when an address is
made to a Person, belongs to some Verb, either expressed or implied[60]:
as in the answer to a Question; “Who wrote this book; Cicero:” that is,
“Cicero _wrote it_.” Or when the Verb is understood; as, “To whom thus
Adam:” that is, _spake_.
Every Possessive Case supposes some Noun to which it belongs: as when we
say, “St. Paul’s, or St. James’s,” we mean St. Paul’s _Church_, or St.
James’s _Palace_.
Every Adjective has relation to some Substantive, either expressed or
implied: as, “The Twelve,” that is, _Apostles_; “the wife, the elect,”
that is, _persons_.
In some instances the Adjective becomes a Substantive, and has an
Adjective joined to it: as, “the chief Good;” “Evil, be Thou my
Good!”[61]
* * * * *
ADVERBS have no Government.[62]
* * * * *
PREPOSITIONS have a Government of Cases; and in English they always
require the Objective Case after them: as, “_with him_; _from her_; _to
me_.”[63]
The Preposition is often separated from the Relative which it governs,
and joined to the Verb at the end of the Sentence, or of some member
of it: as, “Horace is an author, _whom_ I am much delighted _with_.”
“The[64] world is too well bred to shock authors with a truth, _which_
generally their booksellers are the first that inform them _of_.” This
is an Idiom which our language is strongly inclined to; 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.
Verbs are often compounded of a Verb and a Preposition; as, _to uphold_,
_to outweigh_, _to overlook_: and this composition sometimes gives a new
sense to the Verb; as, _to understand_, _to withdraw_, _to forgive_[65].
But in English the Preposition is more frequently placed after the Verb,
and separate from it, like an Adverb; in which situation it is no less
apt to affect the sense of it, and to give it a new meaning; and may
still be considered as belonging to the Verb, and a part of it. As,
_to cast_ is to throw; but _to cast up_, or to compute, _an account_,
is quite a different thing: thus, _to fall on_, _to bear out_, _to give
over_; &c. So that the meaning of the Verb, and the propriety of the
phrase, depend on the Preposition subjoined[66].
As the Preposition subjoined to the Verb hath the construction and
nature of an Adverb, so the Adverbs _here_, _there_, _where_, with a
Preposition subjoined, as _hereof_, _therewith_, _whereupon_[67], have
the construction and nature of Pronouns.
The Prepositions _to_ and _for_ are often understood; as, “give me the
book; get me some paper;” that is, _to me_, _for me_[68].
* * * * *
Two or more Simple Sentences, joined together by one or more CONNECTIVE
WORDS, become a Compounded Sentence.
There are two sorts of words which connect Sentences: 1. Relatives; 2.
Conjunctions.
Examples: 1. “Blessed is the man, _who_ feareth the Lord.” 2. “Life is
short, _and_ art is long.” 1. and 2. “Blessed is the Man, _who_ feareth
the Lord, _and_ keepeth his commandments.”
* * * * *
The RELATIVES _who_, _which_, _that_, having no variation of gender or
number, cannot but agree with their Antecedents. _Who_ is appropriated
to persons; and so may be accounted Masculine and Feminine only: _which_
is used of things only; and so may be accounted Neuter. But formerly
they were both indifferently used of persons: “Our Father, _which_ art
in heaven.” _That_ is used indifferently both of persons and things: but
perhaps would be more properly confined to the latter. _What_ includes
both the Antecedent and the Relative: as, “This was _what_ he wanted;”
that is, “_the thing which_ he wanted[69].”
The Relative is the Nominative Case to the Verb, when no other Nominative
comes between it and the Verb: but when another Nominative comes between
it and the Verb, the Relative is governed by some word in its own member
of the Sentence: as, “The God _who_ preserveth me; _whose_ I am, and
_whom_ I serve[70].”
Every Relative must have an Antecedent to which it refers, either
expressed, or understood: as, “_Who_ steals my purse, steals trash:” that
is, _the man, who_ ⸺.
The Relative is of the same person with the Antecedent; and the Verb
agrees with it accordingly: as, “Who is _this, that cometh_ from Edom;
_this that is_ glorious in his apparel?⸺_I that speak_ in righteousness.”
Isaiah lxiii. 1. “O Shepherd of Israel, _Thou that leadest_ Joseph like
a flock; _Thou that dwellest_ between the Cherubims.” Ps. lxxx. 1.[71]
The Relative is often understood, or omitted: as, “The man I love;” that
is, “_whom_ I love[72].”
The accuracy and clearness of the Sentence depend very much upon the
proper and determinate use of the Relative, so that it may readily
present its Antecedent to the mind of the hearer or reader without any
obscurity or ambiguity. The same may be observed of the Pronoun and the
Noun, which by some are called also the Relative and the Antecedent[73].
* * * * *
CONJUNCTIONS have sometimes a Government of Modes. Some Conjunctions
require the Indicative, some the Subjunctive Mode after them: others
have no influence at all on the Mode.
Hypothetical, Conditional, Concessive, and Exceptive Conjunctions seem
to require properly the Subjunctive Mode after them: as, _if_, _tho’_,
_unless_, _except_, _whether—or_, &c. but by use they often admit of
the Indicative. Examples: “_If_ thou _be_ the Son of God.” Matt. iv.
3. “_Tho’_ he _slay_ me, yet will I put my trust in him.” Job xiii. 15.
“_Unless_ he _wash_ his flesh.” Lev. xxii. 6. “No power, _except_ it
_were_ given from above.” John xix. 11. “_Whether_ it _were_ I _or_ they,
so we preach.” 1 Cor. xv. 11. The Subjunctive in these instances implies
something contingent or doubtful; the Indicative would express a more
absolute and determinate sense.
_That_ expressing the motive or end has the Subjunctive Mode, with _may_,
_might_, _should_, after it.
_Lest_; and _that_ with a Negative following it; and _if_ with _but_
following it; necessarily require the Subjunctive Mode: Examples; “Let
him that standeth, take heed, _lest_ he _fall_.” 1 Cor. x. 12. “Take
heed, _that_ thou _speak not_ to Jacob.” Gen. xxxi. 24. “_If_ he _do
but_ touch the hills, they shall smoke.” Ps. civ. 32.[74]
Other Conjunctions, expressing a Continuation, an Addition, an Inference,
&c. being of a positive and absolute nature, require the Indicative Mode;
or rather leave the Mode to be determined by the other circumstances and
conditions of the Sentence.
When the Qualities of different things are compared, the latter Noun is
governed, not by the Conjunction _than_, or _as_, (for a Conjunction has
no Government of Cases,) but by the Verb or the Preposition, expressed,
or understood. As, “Thou art wiser than _I_ [am.]” “You are not so tall
as _I_ [am.]” “You think him handsomer than [you think] _me_; and you
love him more than [you love] _me_.” In all other instances, if you
complete the Sentence in like manner, by supplying the part which is
understood, the Case of the latter Noun will be determined. Thus, “Plato
observes, that God geometrizes; and the same thing was observed before by
a wiser man than _he_:” that is, than _he was_. “It was well expressed
by Plato; but more elegantly by Solomon than _him_:” that is, than _by
him_[75].
The Conjunction _that_ is often omitted and understood: as, “I beg you
would come to me:” “See, thou do it not:” that is, “_that_ you would;”
“_that_ thou do[76].”
The Nominative Case following the Auxiliary, or the Verb itself,
sometimes supplies the place of the Conjunctions _if_ and _tho’_: as,
“Had he done this, he had escaped:” “Charm he never so[77] wisely:” that
is, “_if_ he had done this;” “_tho’_ he charm.”
Some Conjunctions have their Correspondent Conjunctions belonging to
them; so that in the subsequent Member of the Sentence the latter answers
to the former: as, _although_ ⸺, _yet_, or _nevertheless_; _whether_ ⸺,
_or_; _either_ ⸺, _or_; _neither_ ⸺, _nor_; _as_ ⸺, _as_; expressing a
Comparison of equality; “_as_ white _as_ snow:” _as_ ⸺, _so_; expressing
a Comparison sometimes of equality; “_as_ the stars, _so_ shall thy seed
be;” that is, equal in number: but most commonly a Comparison in respect
of quality; “and it shall be, _as_ with the people, _so_ with the priest;
_as_ with the servant, _so_ with his master:” “_as_ is the good, _so_ is
the sinner; _as_ the one dieth, _so_ dieth the other:” that is, in like
manner: _so_ ⸺, _as_; with a Verb expressing a Comparison of quality;
“To see thy glory, _so as_ I have seen thee in the sanctuary:” but with
a Negative and an Adjective, a Comparison in respect of quantity; as,
“Pompey had eminent abilities: but he was not either _so_ eloquent and
politic a statesman, or _so_ brave and skilful a general; nor was he upon
the whole _so_ great a man, _as_ Cæsar:” _so_ ⸺, _that_; expressing a
Consequence: &c.[78]
* * * * *
INTERJECTIONS in English have no Government.
Though they are usually attended with Nouns in the Nominative Case[79],
and Verbs in the Indicative Mode, yet the Case and Mode is not
influenced by them, but determined by the nature of the sentence.
PUNCTUATION.
Punctuation is the art of marking in writing the several pauses, or
rests, between sentences, and the parts of sentences, according to their
proper quantity or proportion, as they are expressed in a just and
accurate pronunciation.
As the several articulate sounds, the syllables and words, of which
sentences consist, are marked by Letters; so the rests and pauses between
sentences and their parts are marked by Points.
But, tho’ the several articulate sounds are pretty fully and exactly
marked by Letters of known and determinate power; yet the several pauses,
which are used in a just pronunciation of discourse, are very imperfectly
expressed by Points.
For the different degrees of connexion between the several parts of
sentences, and the different pauses in a just pronunciation, which
express those degrees of connexion according to their proper value,
admit of great variety; but the whole number of Points, which we have to
express this variety, amounts only to Four.
Hence it is, that we are under a necessity of expressing pauses of the
same quantity, on different occasions, by different points; and more
frequently of expressing pauses of different quantity by the same points.
So that the doctrine of Punctuation must needs be very imperfect: few
precise rules can be given, which will hold without exception in all
cases; but much must be left to the judgement and taste of the writer.
On the other hand, if a greater number of marks were invented to express
all the possible different pauses of pronunciation; the doctrine of them
would be very perplexed and difficult, and the use of them would rather
embarass than assist the reader.
It remains therefore, that we be content with the Rules of Punctuation,
laid down with as much exactness as the nature of the subject will
admit; such as may serve for a general direction, to be accommodated to
different occasions, and to be supplied where deficient by the writers
judgement.
The several degrees of Connexion between Sentences, and between their
principal constructive parts, Rhetoricians have considered under the
following distinctions, as the most obvious and remarkable: the Period,
Colon, Semicolon, and Comma.
The Period is the whole Sentence, compleat in itself, wanting nothing to
make a full and perfect sense, and not connected in construction with a
subsequent Sentence.
The Colon, or Member, is a chief constructive part, or greater division,
of a Sentence.
The Semicolon, or Half-member, is a less constructive part, or
subdivision of a Sentence or Member.
A Sentence or Member is again subdivided into Commas, or Segments; which
are the least constructive parts of a Sentence, or Member, in this way of
considering it; for the next subdivision would be the resolution of it
into Phrases and Words.
The Grammarians have followed this division of the Rhetoricians, and
have appropriated to each of these distinctions its mark, or Point; which
takes its name from the part of the Sentence which it is employed to
distinguish; as follows:
The Period } { .
The Colon } is thus marked { :
The Semicolon} { ;
The Comma } { ,
The proportional quantity or time of the Points with respect to one
another is determined by the following general rule: The Period is a
pause in quantity or duration double of the Colon; the Colon is double
of the Semicolon; and the Semicolon is double of the Comma. So that they
are in the same proportion to one another as the Semibrief, the Minim,
the Crotchet, and the Quaver, in Music. The precise quantity or duration
of each Pause or Note cannot be defined; for that varies with the Time;
and both in Discourse and Music the same Composition may be rehearsed in
a quicker or a slower Time: but in Music the proportion between the Notes
remains ever the same; and in Discourse, if the Doctrine of Punctuation
were exact, the proportion between the Pauses would be ever invariable.
The Points then being designed to express the Pauses, which depend on
the different degrees of connexion between Sentences, and between their
principal constructive parts; to understand the meaning of the Points,
and to know how to apply them properly, we must consider the nature of
a Sentence, as divided into its principal constructive parts; and the
degrees of connexion between those parts, upon which such division of it
depends.
To begin with the least of these principal constructive parts, the Comma.
In order the more clearly to determine the proper application of the
Point which marks it, we must distinguish between an Imperfect Phrase, a
Simple Sentence, and a Compounded Sentence.
An Imperfect Phrase contains no assertion, or does not amount to a
Proposition or Sentence.
A Simple Sentence has but one Subject and one finite Verb.
A Compounded Sentence has more than one Subject or one finite Verb,
either expressed or understood; or it consists of two or more simple
Sentences connected together.
In a Sentence, the Subject and the Verb may be each of them accompanied
with several Adjuncts; as the Object, the End, the Circumstances of Time,
Place, Manner, and the like; and this either immediately, or mediately,
that is, by being connected with some thing, which is connected with some
other; and so on.
If the several Adjuncts affect the Subject or the Verb in a different
manner, they are only so many Imperfect Phrases, and the Sentence is
Simple.
A Simple Sentence admits of no Point, by which it may be divided, or
distinguished into parts.
If the several Adjuncts affect the Subject or the Verb in the same
manner, they may be resolved into so many Simple Sentences: the Sentence
then becomes Compounded, and it must be divided into its parts by Points.
For if there are several Subjects belonging in the same manner to one
Verb, or several Verbs belonging in the same manner to one Subject, the
Subjects and Verbs are still to be accounted equal in number: for every
Verb must have its Subject, and every Subject its Verb; and every one of
the Subjects, or Verbs, should or may have its point of distinction.
EXAMPLES.
“The passion for praise produces excellent effects in women of sense.”
Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 73. In this Sentence _passion_ is the Subject, and
_produces_ the Verb; each of which is accompanied and connected with
its adjuncts. The Subject is not passion in general, but a particular
passion determined by its Adjunct of Specification, as we may call it,
the passion for praise. So likewise the Verb is immediately connected
with its object, _excellent effects_; and mediately, that is, by the
intervention of the word _effects_, with _women_, the Subject in which
these effects are produced; which again is connected with its Adjunct
of Specification; for it is not meant of women in general, but of women
of sense only. Lastly it is to be observed, that these several Adjuncts
are connected with the Verb each in a different manner; namely, with
_effects_, as the object; with _women_, as the subject of them; with
_sense_, as the quality or characteristic of those women. The Adjuncts
therefore are only so many imperfect Phrases; the Sentence is a Simple
Sentence, and admits of no Point, by which it may be distinguished into
parts.
“The Passion for praise, which is so very vehement in the fair sex,
produces excellent effects in women of sense.” Here a new Verb is
introduced, accompanied with Adjuncts of its own; and the Subject is
repeated by the Relative Pronoun _which_. It now becomes a Compounded
Sentence, made up of two Simple Sentences, one of which is inserted in
the middle of the other; it must therefore be distinguished into its
component parts by a Point placed on each side of the additional Sentence.
“How many instances have we [in the fair sex] of chastity, fidelity,
devotion? How many Ladies distinguish themselves by the education of
their children, care of their families, and love of their husbands;
which are the great qualities and achievements of woman-kind: as the
making of war, the carrying on of traffic, the administration of justice,
are those by which men grow famous, and get themselves a name?” Ibid.
In the first of these two Sentences the Adjuncts _chastity_, _fidelity_,
_devotion_, are connected with the Verb by the word _instances_ in
the same manner, and in effect make so many distinct Sentences: “how
many instances have we of chastity? how many instances have we of
fidelity? how many instances have we of devotion?” They must therefore
be separated from one another by a Point. The same may be said of the
Adjuncts “education of their children, &c” in the former part of the next
Sentence: as likewise of the several Subjects, “the making of war, &c”
in the latter part; which have in effect each their Verb; for each of
these “is an atchievement by which men grow famous.”
As Sentences themselves are divided into Simple and Compounded, so the
members of sentences may be divided likewise into Simple and Compounded
members: for whole Sentences, whether Simple or Compounded, may become
members of other Sentences by means of some additional connexion.
Simple members of Sentences closely connected together in one Compound
member or sentence, are distinguished or separated by a Comma: as in the
foregoing examples.
So likewise the Case Absolute; Nouns in Apposition, when consisting of
many terms; the Participle with something depending on it; are to be
distinguished by the Comma: for they may be resolved into Simple members.
When an address is made to a person, the Noun, answering to the Vocative
Case in Latin, is distinguished by a Comma.
EXAMPLES.
“This said, He form’d thee, Adam; thee, O man,
Dust of the ground.”
“Now Morn, her rosy steps in th’ eastern clime
Advancing, sow’d the earth with orient pearl.”
Milton.
Two Nouns, or two Adjectives, connected by a single Copulative or
Disjunctive, are not separated by a Point: but when there are more than
two, or where the Conjunction is understood, they must be distinguished
by a Comma.
Simple members connected by Relatives and Comparatives are for the
most part distinguished by a Comma: but when the members are short
in Comparative Sentences; and when two members are closely connected
by a Relative, restraining the general notion of the Antecedent to a
particular sense; the pause becomes almost insensible, and the Comma is
better omitted.
EXAMPLES.
“Raptures, transports, and extasies are the rewards which they confer:
sighs and tears, prayers and broken hearts, are the offerings which are
paid to them.” Addison, Ibid.
“Gods partial, changeful, passionate, unjust;
Whose attributes were rage, revenge, or lust.”
Pope.
“What is sweeter than honey? and what is stronger than a lion?”
A member of a Sentence, whether Simple or Compounded, that requires
a greater pause than a Comma, yet does not of itself make a compleat
Sentence, but is followed by something closely depending on it, may be
distinguished by a Semicolon.
EXAMPLE.
“But as this passion for admiration, when it works according to reason,
improves the beautiful part of our species in every thing that is
laudable; so nothing is more destructive to them, when it is governed
by vanity and folly.” Addison, ibid.
Here the whole Sentence is divided into two parts by the Semicolon; each
of which parts are Compounded Members, divided into their Simple Members
by Commas.
A member of a Sentence, whether Simple or Compounded, which of itself
would make a compleat Sentence, and so requires a greater pause than a
Semicolon, yet is followed by an additional part making a more full and
perfect Sense, may be distinguished by a Colon.
EXAMPLE.
“Were all books reduced to their quintessence, many a bulky author would
make his appearance in a penny paper: there would be scarce any such
thing in nature as a folio: the works of an age would be contained on a
few shelves: not to mention millions of volumes, that would be utterly
annihilated.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 124.
Here the whole Sentence is divided into four parts by Colons: the first
and last of which are Compounded Members, each divided by a Comma; the
second and third are Simple Members.
When a Semicolon has preceded, and a greater pause is still necessary; a
Colon may be employed, tho’ the Sentence be incompleat.
The Colon is also commonly used, when an Example, or a Speech is
introduced.
When a Sentence is so far perfectly finished, as not to be connected in
construction with the following Sentence, it is marked with a Period.
In all cases the proportion of the several Points in respect to one
another is rather to be regarded, than their supposed precise quantity,
or proper office, when taken separately.
Beside the Points which mark the pauses in discourse, there are others
which denote a different modulation of the voice in correspondence with
the sense. These are
The Interrogation Point } thus { ?
The Exclamation Point } marked { !
The Parenthesis } { ()
The Interrogation and Exclamation Points are sufficiently explained by
their names: they are indeterminate as to their quantity or time, and may
be equivalent in that respect to a Semicolon, a Colon, or a Period, as
the sense requires. They mark an Elevation of the voice.
The Parenthesis incloses in the body of a Sentence a member inserted
into it, which is neither necessary to the Sense, nor at all affects the
Construction. It marks a moderate depression of the voice, with a pause
greater than a Comma.
A PRAXIS, or Example of Grammatical Resolution.
1. In the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, Pontius Pilate
late being Governour of Judea, the word of God came unto John the Son of
Zecharias in the wilderness.
2. And he came into all the country about Jordan preaching the baptism of
repentance for the remission of sins.
3. And the same John had his raiment of camel’s hair, and a leathern
girdle about his loins, and his meat was locusts and wild honey.
4. Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him,
O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to
come? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance.
5. And as all men mused in their hearts of John, whether he were the
Christ, or not; John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you
with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I
am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and
with fire.
6. Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that, Jesus
also being baptized and praying, the heaven was opened, and the Holy
Ghost descended in a bodily shape upon him; and lo! a voice from heaven
saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
1. _In_ is a Preposition; _the_ the Definite Article; _fifteenth_, an
Adjective; _year_, a Substantive, or Noun, in the Objective Case governed
by the Preposition _in_; _of_, a Preposition; _the reign_, a Substantive,
Objective Case, governed by the Preposition _of_; _of Tiberius Cæsar_,
both Substantives, Proper Names, Government and Case, as before; _Pontius
Pilate_, Proper Names; _being_, the Present Participle of the Verb
Neuter _to be_; _Governour_, a Substantive; _of Judea_, a Proper Name,
Government and Case as before: _Pontius Pilate being governour_, is the
Case Absolute, that is, the Nominative Case with a Participle without
a Verb following and agreeing with it; the meaning is the same as,
_when_ Pilate _was_ governour: _the word_, a Substantive; _of God_, a
Substantive; _came_, a Verb Neuter, Indicative Mode, Past Time, third
Person Singular Number, agreeing with the Nominative Case _word_; _unto_,
a Preposition; _John_, a Proper Name; _the Son_, a Substantive, put in
Apposition to _John_; that is, in the same Case, governed by the same
Preposition _unto_; _of Zecharias_, a Proper Name; _in_, a Preposition;
_the wilderness_, a Substantive, Government and Case as before.
2. _And_, a Conjunction Copulative; _he_, a Pronoun, third Person
Singular, Masculine Gender, Nominative Case, standing for _John_; _came_,
as before; _into_, a Prep. _all_, an Adjective; the country, a Subst.
_about_, a Prep. _Jordan_, a Proper Name; _preaching_, the Present
Participle of the Verb Active _to preach_, joined like an Adjective
to the Pronoun _he_; _the baptism_, a Substantive in the Objective
Case following the Verb Active _preaching_, and governed by it; _of
repentance_, a Subst. Government and Case as before; _for_, a Prep.
_the remission of sins_, Substantives, the latter in the Plural Number,
Government and Case as before.
3. _And_, (b. that is, _as before_) _the same_, an Adjective; _John_
(b.) _had_, a Verb Active, Indicative Mode, Past Time, third Person
Sing. agreeing with the Nominative Case _John_; _his_, a Pronoun, third
Person Sing. Possessive Case; _raiment_, a Subst. in the Objective Case,
following the Verb Active _had_, and governed by it; _of camel’s_, a
Substantive, Possessive Case; _hair_, Subst. Objective Case, governed
by the Preposition _of_, the same as, _of the hair of a camel_; _and_,
(b.) _a_, the Indefinite Article; _leathern_, an Adj. _girdle_, a Subst.
_about_, (b.) _his_, (b.) _loins_, Subst. plural Number; _and his_, (b.)
_meat_, Subst. _was_, Indicative Mode, Past Time, third Person Singular
of the Verb Neuter _to be_; _locusts_, Subst. plural Number, Nominative
Case after the Verb _was_; _and_, (b.) _wild_, Adj. _honey_, Subst.
4. _Then_, an Adverb; _said_, a Verb Active, Past Time, third Person
Sing. agreeing with the Nominative Case _he_ (b.) _to_, a Prep. _the
multitude_, Subst. Objective Case, governed by the Prep. _to_; _that_,
a Relative Pronoun, its Antecedent is _the multitude_; _came_, (b.)
_forth_, an Adverb; _to_, a Prep. and before a Verb the sign of the
Infinitive Mode; _be baptized_, a Verb Passive, made of the Participle
Passive of the Verb _to baptize_, and the Auxiliary Verb _to be_, in
the Infinitive Mode; _of him_, Pronoun, third Person Sing. standing
for _John_, in the Objective Case governed by the Prep. _of_; _O_,
an Interjection; _generation_, Subst. Nominative Case; _of vipers_,
Subst. plural Number; _who_, an Interrogative Pronoun; _hath warned_,
a Verb Active, Present Perfect Time, made of the Perfect Participle
_warned_ and the Auxiliary Verb _hath_, third Person Singular agreeing
with the Nominative Case _who_; _you_, Pronoun, second Person plural,
Objective Case, following the Verb Active _warned_ and governed by it;
_to flee_, Verb Neuter, Infinitive Mode; _from_, a Prep.; _the wrath_,
Subst. Objective Case, governed by the Prep. _from_; _to come_, Verb
Neuter, Infinitive Mode; _bring_, Verb Active, Imperative Mode, second
Person plural, agreeing with the Nominative Case _ye_ understood, as
if it were, _bring ye_; _forth_, an Adverb; _therefore_, a Conjunction;
_fruits_, a Subst. plur. Objective Case, following the Verb Active
_bring_, and governed by it; _meet_, an Adjective, joined to _fruits_,
but placed after it, because it has something depending on it; _for
repentance_, a Subst. governed by a Prep. as before.
5. _And_, (b.) _as_, an Adverb; _all_, (b.) _men_, Subst. plural Number;
_mused_, a Verb Neuter, Past Time, third Person plural, agreeing with
the Nominative Case _men_; _in_, (b.) _their_, a Pronominal Adjective,
from the Pronoun _they_; _hearts_, Subst. plural Number, Objective Case
governed by the Prep. _in_; _of John_, (b.) _whether_, a Conjunction;
_he_, (b.) _were_, Subjunctive Mode, governed by the Conjunction
_whether_, Past Time, third Person Sing. of the Verb _to be_, agreeing
with the Nominative Case _he_; _the Christ_, Subst. Nominative Case
after the Verb _were_; _or_, a Disjunctive Conjunction, corresponding
to the preceding Conjunction _whether_; _not_, an Adverb; _John_, (b.)
_answered_, a Verb Active, Indicative Mode, Past Time, third Person Sing.
agreeing with the Nominative Case _John_; _saying_, Present Participle
of the Verb Active _to say_, joined to the Substantive _John_; _unto_,
(b.) _them_, a Pronoun, third Person plural, Objective Case governed
by the Prep. _unto_; _all_, (b.) _I_, Pronoun, first Person Singular;
_indeed_, an Adverb; _baptize_, a Verb Active, Indicative Mode, Present
Time, first Person Singular, agreeing with the Nominative Case _I_;
_you_, Pronoun, second Person plural, Objective Case, following the
Verb Active _baptize_, and governed by it; _with_, a Prep. _water_,
Subst. _but_, a Disjunctive Conjunction; _one_, a Pronoun, standing
for some Person not mentioned by name; _mightier_, an Adjective in the
Comparative Degree, from the Positive _mighty_; _than_, a Conjunction,
used after a Comparative word; _I_, (b.) the Verb _am_ being understood,
that is, _than I am_; _cometh_, a Verb Neuter, Indicative Mode, Present
Time, third Person Sing. agreeing with the Nominative Case _one_; _the
latchet_, Subst. _of_, (b.) _whose_, Pronoun Relative, _one_ being the
Antecedent to it, in the Possessive Case; _shoes_, Subst. plural; _I_,
(b.) _am_, Indicative Mode, Present Time, first Person Sing. of the Verb
_to be_, agreeing with the Nominative Case _I_; _not_, (b.) _worthy_,
an Adjective; _to unloose_, a Verb Active, in the Infinitive Mode,
governing the Substantive _latchet_ in the Objective Case; _he_, (b.)
_shall baptize_, a Verb Active, Indicative Mode, Future Time, made by
the Auxiliary _shall_, third Person Sing. agreeing with, the Nominative
Case _he_; _you_, (b.) _with the_, (b.) _Holy_, an Adjective; _Ghost_, a
Subst. _and with_, (b.) _fire_, a Subst. this and the former both in the
Objective Case governed by the Prep. _with_.
6. _Now_, an Adverb; _when_, an Adverb; _all_, (b.) _the people_, a
Subst. _were baptized_, a Verb Passive, made of the Auxiliary Verb
_to be_ joined with the Participle Passive of the Verb _to baptize_,
Indicative Mode, third Person plural, agreeing with the Nominative Case
Sing. _people_, being a Noun of multitude; _it_, Pronoun, third Person
Sing. Neuter Gender, Nominative Case; _came_, (b.) _to pass_, Verb
Neuter, Infinitive Mode; _that_, a Conjunction; _Jesus_, a Proper Name;
_also_, an Adverb; _being_, Present Participle of the Verb _to be_;
_baptized_, Participle Passive of the Verb _to baptize_; _and_, (b.)
_praying_, Present Participle of the Verb Neuter _to pray_; _Jesus being
baptized and praying_ is the Case Absolute, as before; _the heaven_,
Subst. _was opened_, Verb Passive, Indicative Mode, Past Time, third
Person Sing. agreeing with the Nominative Case _heaven_, the Auxiliary
Verb _to be_ being joined to the Participle Passive, as before; _and
the Holy Ghost_, (b.) _descended_, Verb Neuter, Indicative Mode, Past
Time, third Person Sing. agreeing with the Nominative Case _Ghost_; _in
a_ (b.) _bodily_, an Adjective; _shape_, a Subst. _like_, an Adjective;
_a dove_, a Subst. Objective Case, the Prep. _to_ being understood,
that is, _like to a dove_; _upon_, Prep. _him_, Pronoun, third Person
Sing. Objective Case governed by the Prep. _upon_; _and_, (b.) _lo!_ an
Interjection; _a voice_, a Subst. Nominative Case, _there was_ being
understood, that is, _there was a voice_; _from_, Prep. _heaven_, Subst.
Objective Case, (b.) _saying_, (b.) _this_, a Pronominal Adjective,
_person_ being understood; _is_, Indicative Mode, Present Time, of the
Verb _to be_, third Person Sing. agreeing with the Nominative Case
_this_; _my_, a Pronominal Adjective; _beloved_, an Adjective; _Son_, a
Subst. Nominative Case after the Verb _is_; _in_, (b.) _whom_, Pronoun
Relative, Objective Case governed by the Prep. _in_, the Substantive
_Son_ being its Antecedent; _I am_, (b.) _well_, an Adverb; _pleased_,
the Passive Participle of the Verb _to please_, making with the Auxiliary
Verb _am_ a Passive Verb, in the Indicative Mode, Present Time, first
Person Sing. agreeing with the Nominative Case _I_.
THE END.
FOOTNOTES
[1] “And I persecuted this way unto _the_ death.” _Acts_ xxii. 4. The
Apostle does not mean any particular sort of death, but death in general:
the Definite Article therefore is improperly used. It ought to be _unto
death_, without any Article: agreeably to the Original, αχρι θανατου.
“When He the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you into _all
Truth_.” _John_ xvi. 13. That is, according to this Translation, into
all Truth whatsoever, into Truth of all kinds: very different from the
meaning of the Evangelist, and from the Original, εις πασαν την αληθειαν,
into _all the Truth_; that is, into all Evangelical Truth.
“Truly this was _the_ Son of God.” _Matt._ xxvii. 54. and _Mark_ xv.
39. This Translation supposes, that the Roman Centurion had a proper
and adequate notion of the character of Jesus, as the Son of God in a
peculiar and incommunicable sense: whereas, it is probable, both from the
circumstances of the History, and from the expression of the Original,
(ὑιος Θεου, a Son of God, not ὁ υιος, _the_ Son) that he only meant to
acknowledge him to be an extraordinary person, and more than a mere man;
according to his own notion of Sons of Gods in the Pagan Theology. This
is also more agreeable to St. Luke’s account of the same confession
of the Centurion: “Certainly this was δικαιος, a righteous man;” not
ὁ Δικαιος, the Just One. The same may be observed of Nebuchadnezzar’s
words, _Dan._ iii. 25.—“And the form of the fourth is like _the_ Son of
God:” it ought to be by the Indefinite Article, like _a_ Son of God:
ὁμοια ὑιῳ Θεου, as Theodotion very properly renders it: that is, like an
Angel; according to Nebuchadnezzar’s own account of it in the 28th verse:
“Blessed be God, who hath sent his _Angel_, and delivered his servants.”
See also _Luke_ xix. 9.
These Remarks may serve to shew the great importance of the proper use of
the Article; the near affinity there is between the Greek Article, and
the English Definite Article; and the excellence of the English Language
in this respect, which by means of its two Articles does most precisely
determine the extent of signification of Common Names: whereas the Greek
has only one Article, and it has puzzled all the Grammarians to reduce
the use of that to any clear and certain rules.
[2] “A good character should not be rested in as an end, but employed as
_a means_ of doing still farther good.” ATTERBURY’S Sermons. Ought it not
to be _a mean?_
[3] “About _an_ eight days:” that is, a space of eight days. _Luke_ ix.
28. But the expression is obsolete, or at least vulgar; and we may add
likewise improper: for the number _eight_ has not been reduced by use
and convenience into one collective and compact idea, like _a hundred_,
and _a thousand_; each of which, like _a dozen_, or _a score_, we are
accustomed equally to consider on certain occasions as a simple Unity.
[4] And antiently, _eyen_, _shoen_, _housen_, _hosen_; so likewise
antiently _sowen_, _cowen_, now always pronounced and written _swine_,
_kine_.
[5] In the German the vowels _a_, _o_, _u_, of monosyllable Nouns are
generally in the Plural changed into diphthongs with an _e_: as der
_hand_, the hand, die _hände_; der _hut_, the hat, die _hüte_; der
_knopff_, the button, (or knop) die _knöpffe_; &c.
[6] These are directly from the Saxon: _mus_, _mys_; _lus_, _lys_;
_toth_, _teth_; _fot_, _fet_; _gos_, _ges_.
[7] “Lingua Anglorum hodierna avitæ Saxonicæ formam in plerisque
orationis partibus etiamnum retinet. Nam quoad particulas casuales,
quorundam casuum terminationes, conjugationes verborum, verbum
substantivum, formam passivæ vocis, pronomina, participia, conjunctiones,
& præpositiones omnes; denique quoad idiomata, phrasiumque maximam
partem, etiam nunc Saxonicus est Anglorum sermo.” Hickes. Thesaur. Lingg.
Septent. Præf. p. vi. To which may be added the Degrees of comparison,
the form of which is the very same in the English as in the Saxon.
[8] “_Christ his_ sake,” in our Liturgy, is a mistake, either of the
Printers, or of the Compilers.⸺“My paper is the _Ulysses his_ bow, in
which every man of wit or learning may try his strength.” Addison,
Guardian Nᵒ 98. This is no slip of Mr. Addison’s pen: he gives us his
opinion upon this point very explicitly in another place. “The same
single letter [_s_] on many occasions does the office of a whole word,
and represents the _his_ and _her_ of our forefathers.” Addison, Spect.
Nᵒ 135. The latter instance might have shewn him, how groundless this
notion is: for it is not easy to conceive, how the letter _s_ added to a
Feminine Noun should represent the word _her_; any more than it should
the word _their_, added to a Plural Noun: as, “the _children’s_ bread.”
But the direct derivation of this Case from the Saxon Genitive Case is
sufficient of itself to decide this matter.
[9]
“At his command th’ uprooted hills retir’d
Each to _his_ place: they heard his voice and went
Obsequious: Heaven _his_ wonted face renew’d,
And with fresh flowrets hill and valley smil’d.”
Milton, P. L. B. vi.
“Was I deceiv’d, or did a sable Cloud
Turn forth _her_ silver lining on the Night?”
Milton, Comus.
“Go to your Natural Religion: lay before _her_ Mahomet and his disciples
arrayed in armour and in blood:⸺shew _her_ the cities which he set in
flames; the countries which he ravaged:⸺when _she_ has viewed him in
this scene, carry _her_ into his retirements; shew _her_ the Prophet’s
chamber, his concubines and his wives:⸺when _she_ is tired with this
prospect, then shew _her_ the Blessed Jesus.—” See the whole passage in
the conclusion of Bp Sherlock’s 9th Sermon, Vol. I.
In these beautiful passages, as in the English if you put _it_ and _its_
instead of _his_, _she_, _her_, you destroy the images, and reduce, what
was before highly Poetical and Rhetorical, to mere prose and common
discourse; so if you render them into another language, Greek, Latin,
French, Italian, or German, in which Hill, Heaven, Cloud, Religion, are
constantly Masculine, or Feminine, or Neuter, respectively, you make the
images obscure and doubtful, and in proportion diminish their beauty.
This excellent remark is Mr. Harris’s, Hermes, p. 58.
[10] Some Writers have used _Ye_ as the Objective Case Plural of the
Pronoun of the Second Person; very improperly and ungrammatically.
“But Tyrants dread _ye_, lest your just decree
Transfer the pow’r, and set the people free.”
Prior.
“His wrath, which one day will destroy _ye_ both.”
Milton, P. L. ii. 734.
Dr. Bently has corrected this mistake, which is probably an error of the
Press, or of the Editor of whom he talks so much. But he has done it,
without taking the least notice of the matter, or assuming any merit to
himself from an emendation, which is one of the very few that are really
such in his whole performance.
[11] The Neuter Pronoun of the Third Person had formerly no variation
of Cases. Instead of the Possessive _its_ they used _his_, which is
now appropriated to the Masculine. “Learning hath _his_ infancy, when
_it_ is but beginning, and almost childish; then _his_ youth, when _it_
is luxuriant and juvenile; then _his_ strength of years, when _it_ is
solid and reduced; and lastly _his_ old age, when _it_ waxeth dry and
exhaust.” Bacon, Essay 58. In this example _his_ is evidently used as
the Possessive Case of _it_: but what shall we say to the following,
where _her_ is applied in the same manner, and seems to make a strange
confusion of Gender? “He that pricketh the heart maketh _it_ to shew
_her_ knowledge.” _Ecclus._ xxii. 19.
“Oft have I seen a timely-parted ghost,
Of ashy semblance, meagre, pale, and bloodless,
Being all descended to the lab’ring heart,
_Who_, in the conflict that _it_ holds with death,
Attracts the same for aidance ’gainst the enemy.”
Shakespear.
If the Poet had said _he_ instead of _it_, he would have avoided a
confusion of Genders, and happily compleated the spirited and elegant
Prosopopœia, begun by the Personal Relative _who_. The Neuter Relative
_which_ would have made the sentence more strictly grammatical, but at
the same time more prosaic.
[12] So the Saxon _Ic_ hath the Possessive Case _Min_; _Thu_, Possessive
_Thin_; _He_, Possessive _His_: from which our Possessive Cases of the
same Pronouns are taken without alteration. To the Saxon Possessive Cases
_hire_, _ure_, _eower_, _hira_, (that is, _her’s_, _our’s_, _your’s_,
_their’s_) we have added the _s_, the Characteristic of the Possessive
Case of Nouns. Or _our’s_, _your’s_, are directly from the Saxon _ures_,
_eoweres_; the Possessive Case of the Pronominal Adjectives _ure_,
_eower_; that is, _our_, _your_.
[13] _Whose_ is by some authors made the Possessive Case of _which_, and
applied to things as well as persons; I think, improperly.
“The _question_, _whose_ solution I require,
Is, what the sex of women most desire.”
Dryden.
“Is there any other _doctrine_, _whose_ followers are punished?” Addison.
[14] So the Saxon _hwa_ hath the Possessive Case _hwæs_. Note, that the
Saxons rightly placed the Aspirate before the _w_: as we now pronounce
it. This will be evident to any one that shall consider in what manner he
pronounces the words _what_, _when_; that is, _hoo-àt_, _hoo-èn_.
[15] Adjectives are very improperly called _Nouns_; for they are not
the _Names_ of things. The Adjectives _good_, _white_, are applied to
the Nouns _man_, _snow_, to express the Qualities belonging to those
Subjects; but the Names of those Qualities in the Abstract, (that is,
considered in themselves, and without being attributed to any Subject)
are _goodness_, _whiteness_; and these are Nouns, or Substantives.
[16] The Double Superlative _most highest_ is a Phrase peculiar to the
Old Vulgar Translation of the Psalms, where it acquires a singular
propriety from the Subject to which it is applied, the Supreme Being, who
is _higher than the highest_.
[17] “_Lesser_, says Mr. Johnson, is a barbarous corruption of _Less_,
formed by the vulgar from the habit of terminating comparisons in _er_.”
“Attend to what a _lesser_ Muse indites.”
Addis.
_Worser_ sounds much more barbarous, only because it has not been so
frequently used:
“A dreadful quiet felt, and _worser_ far
Than arms, a sullen interval of war.”
Dryden.
[18] A greater variety of endings to distinguish the Persons in the
Verb is not necessary; as the Verb is always attended with the Personal
Pronoun, wherever an ambiguity would otherwise arise. For the same reason
the Plural termination in _en_, _they loven_, _they weren_, which was
formerly in use, hath been long obsolete.
[19] _Thou_, in the Polite, and even in the Familiar Style, is disused,
and the Plural _You_ is employed instead of it: we say _You have_, not
_Thou hast_. Tho’ in this case we apply _You_ to a single Person, yet the
Verb too must agree with it in the Plural Number: it must necessarily be
_You have_, not _You hast_. _You was_, the Second Person Plural of the
Pronoun placed in agreement with the First or Third Person Singular of
the Verb, is an enormous Solecism: and yet Authors of the first rank have
inadvertently fallen into it. “Knowing that _you was_ my old master’s
good friend.” Addison, Spect. No 517. “Would to God _you was_ within
her reach.” Lord Bolingbroke to Swift, Letter 46. “If _you was_ here.”
Ditto, Letter 47. “I am just now as well, as when _you was_ here.” Pope
to Swift, P. S. to Letter 56. On the contrary the Solemn Style admits
not of _You_ for a Single Person. This hath led Mr. Pope into a great
impropriety in the beginning of his Messiah:
“O _Thou_ my voice inspire
Who _touch’d_ Isaiah’s hallow’d lips with fire!”
The Solemnity of the Style would not admit of _You_ for _Thou_ in the
Pronoun; nor the measure of the Verse _touchedst_, or _didst touch_,
in the Verb; as it indispensably ought to be, in the one, or the other
of these two forms: _You_ who _touched_; or _Thou_ who _touchedst_, or
_didst touch_. Again:
“Just of _thy_ word, in every thought sincere,
Who _knew_ no wish but what the world might hear.”
Pope, Epitaph.
It ought to be _your_ in the first line, or _knewest_ in the second.
[20] This Participle represents the action as complete and finished; and,
being subjoined to the Auxiliary _to have_, constitutes the Perfect Time:
I call it therefore the Perfect Participle. The same subjoined to the
Auxiliary _to be_, constitutes the Passive Verb; and in that state, or
when used without the Auxiliary in a passive sense, is called the Passive
Participle.
[21]
“Before the sun,
Before the heav’ns thou _wert_.”
Milton.
“Remember what thou _wert_.”
Dryden.
“I knew thou _wert_ not slow to hear.”
Addison.
“Thou who of old _wert_ sent to Israel’s court.”
Prior.
“All this thou _wert_.”⸺
Pope.
Shall we in deference to these great authorities allow _wert_ to be the
same with _wast_, and common to the Indicative and Subjunctive Mode? or
rather abide by the practice of our best antient writers; the propriety
of the language, which requires, as far as may be, distinct forms for
different Modes; and the analogy of formation in each Mode; I _was_, Thou
_wast_; I _were_, Thou _wert_? all which conspire to make _wert_ peculiar
to the Subjunctive Mode.
[22] Note, that the Imperfect and Perfect Times are here put together.
And it is to be observed, that in the Subjunctive Mode, the event being
spoken of under a condition, or supposition, or in the form of a wish,
and therefore as doubtful and contingent, the Verb itself in the Present,
and the Auxiliary both of the Present and Past Imperfect Times, often
carry with them somewhat of a Future sense: as, “If he come to-morrow, I
may speak to him:” ⸺ “If he should, or would, come to-morrow, I might,
would, could, or should, speak to him.” Observe also, that the Auxiliary
_should_ in the Imperfect Times is used to express the Present, as well
as the Past; as, “It _is_ my desire, that he _should_ [now] come;” as
well as, “It _was_ my desire that he _should_ [then] come.” So that in
this Mode the precise Time of the Verb is very much determined by the
nature and drift of the Sentence.
[23]
⸺“Perdition catch my soul
But I _do_ love thee!—”
⸺“This to me
In dreadful secrecy impart they _did_.”
Shakespear.
“Die he certainly _did_.”
Sherlock, Vol. 1. Disc. 7.
“Yes, I _did_ love her:” that is, at that time, or once; intimating a
negation, or doubt, of present love.
“The Lord called Samuel: and he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I, for
thou _calledst_ me.⸺And the Lord called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel
arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I, for thou _didst_ call me.” 1
Sam. iii. 4-6.
[24] This distinction was not observed formerly as to the word _shall_,
which was used in the Second and Third Persons to express simply the
Event. So likewise _should_ was used, where we now make use of _would_.
See the Vulgar Translation of the Bible.
[25] Bishop Wilkins gives the following elegant investigation of the
Modes in his _Real Character_, Part iii. Chap. 5.
“To shew in what manner the Subject is to be joined with his Predicate,
the Copula between them is affected with a Particle, which from the use
of it is called _Modus_, the manner or _Mode_.
Now the Subject and Predicate may be joined together either _Simply_, or
with some kind of _Limitation_; and accordingly these Modes are Primary
or Secondary.
The Primary Modes are called by Grammarians Indicative and Imperative.
When the matter is declared to be so, or at least when it seems in the
Speaker’s power to have it be so, as the bare union of Subject and
Predicate would import, then the Copula is nakedly expressed without any
variation: and this manner of expressing it is called the Indicative Mode.
When it is neither declared to be so, nor seems immediately in the
Speaker’s power to have it so; then he can do no more in words but make
out the expression of his will to him that hath the thing in his power;
namely to
{ Superior } { Petition, }
his { Equal } by { Persuasion, }
{ Inferior } { Command. }
And the manner of these affecting the Copula, (Be it so, or, let it
be so,) is called the Imperative Mode; of which there are these three
varieties very fit to be distinctly provided for. As for that other use
of the Imperative Mode, when it signifies _Permission_; this may be
sufficiently expressed by the _Secondary Mode_ of _Liberty_; You _may_ do
it.
The Secondary Modes are such, as, when the Copula is affected with any
of them, make the Sentence to be (as the Logicians call it) a _Modal
Proposition_.
This happens, when the matter in discourse, namely, the being, or doing,
or suffering of a thing, is considered, not _simply by itself_, but
_gradually in its causes_, from which it proceeds _contingently_, or
_necessarily_.
Then a thing seems to be left _Contingent_, when the Speaker expresses
only the _Possibility_ of it, or his own _Liberty_ to it.
1. The _Possibility_ of a thing depends upon the power of its cause; and
may be expressed
when { _Absolute_ } by the Particle { _Can_,
{ _Conditional_ } { _Could_.
2. The _Liberty_ of a thing depends upon a freedom from all obstacles
either within or without, and is usually expressed in our language
when { _Absolute_ } by the Particle { _May_,
{ _Conditional_ } { _Might_.
Then a thing seems to be of _Necessity_, when the Speaker expresseth the
resolution of his own _will_, or some other _obligation_ upon him from
without.
3. The _Inclination of the Will_ is expressed,
if { _Absolute_ } by the Particle { _Will_,
{ _Conditional_ } { _Would_.
4. The Necessity of a thing from some _external Obligation_, whether
_Natural_, or _Moral_, which we call Duty, is expressed,
if { _Absolute_ } by the Particle { _Must_, _ought_, _shall_;
{ _Conditional_ } { _Must_, _ought_, _should_.”
See also HERMES, Book I. Chap. viii.
[26] I doubt much of the propriety of the following examples: “The
rules of our holy Religion, from which we _are_ infinitely _swerved_.”
Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 27. “The whole obligation of that law and
covenant, which God made with the Jews, _was_ also _ceased_.” Ib. Vol.
II. Serm. 52. “Whose number _was_ now _amounted_ to three hundred.”
Swift, Contests and Dissensions, Chap. 3. Neuter Verbs are sometimes
employed very improperly as Actives: “I think, it by no means a fit and
decent thing to _vie Charities_, and to erect the reputation of one upon
the ruins of another.” Atterbury, Vol. I. Serm. 2.
[27] These two have also _beaten_ and _bursten_ in the Participle; and in
that form they belong to the Third Class of Irregulars.
[28] The Verbs marked thus throughout the three Classes of Irregulars,
have the Regular as well as the Irregular form in use.
[29] This Verb in the Past Time and Participle is pronounced short;
_read_, _red_, _red_; like _lead_, _led_, _led_; and perhaps ought to be
written in this manner: our antient writers spelt it _redde_.
[30] They follow the Saxon rule: “Verbs which in the Infinitive end in
_dan_ and _tan_,” (that is, in English, _d_ and _t_; for an is only the
Characteristic termination of the Saxon Infinitive;) “in the Preterit
and Participle Preterit commonly for the sake of better sound throw away
the final ed; as _beot_, _afed_, (both in the Preterit and Participle
Preterit) for _beoted_, _afeded_; from _beotan_, _afedan_.” Hickes,
Grammat. Saxon, cap. 9. So the same Verbs in English, _beat_, _fed_,
instead of _beated_, _feeded_.
[31] When _en_ follows a Vowel or Liquid the _e_ is dropt: so _drawn_,
_slayn_, (or _slain_,) are instead of _drawen_, _slayen_; so likewise
_known_, _born_, are for _knowen_, _boren_, in the Saxon _cnawen_,
_boren_: and so of the rest.
[32] This Verb is also formed like those of _i_ long into _i_ short;
Write, writ, written; and by Contraction _writ_ in the Participle, but, I
think, improperly.
[33] Frequent mistakes are made in the formation of the Participle of
this Verb. The analogy plainly requires _sitten_; which was formerly
in use: “The army having _sitten_ there so long:”⸺“Which was enough to
make him stir, that would not have _sitten_ still, though Hanibal had
been quiet.” Raleigh. “That no Parliament should be dissolved, till it
had _sitten_ five months.” Hobbes, Hist. of Civil Wars, p. 257. But it
is now almost wholly disused, the form of the Past Time _sat_, having
taken its place. Dr. Middleton hath with great propriety restored the
true Participle:⸺“To have _sitten_ on the heads of the Apostles:”⸺“to
have _sitten_ upon each of them.” Works, Vol. II. p. 30. “Blessed is the
man,⸺that hath not _sat_ in the seat of the scornful.” Ps. i. 1. The
old Editions have _sit_; which may be perhaps allowed as a Contraction
of _sitten_. “And when he was _set_, his disciples came unto him:”
καθισαντος αυτου. Matt. v. 1.⸺“who is _set_ on the right hand;”⸺“and
is _set_ down at the right hand of the throne of God:” in both places
εκαθισεν. Heb. viii. 1. & xii. 2. _Set_ can be no part of the Verb _to
sit_. If it belongs to the Verb _to set_, the Translation in these
passages is wrong: for _to set_ signifies _to place_, but without any
designation of the posture of the person placed; which is a circumstance
of importance expressed by the original.
[34] This Neuter Verb is frequently confounded with the Verb Active _to
lay_, [that is, _to put_, or _place_;] which is Regular, and has in the
Past Time and Participle _layed_, or _laid_.
[35] “Thus having _chosed_ each other.⸺” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p.
797. 8ᵛᵒ. Improperly.
[36] That is, as a bird, _volare_; whereas _to flee_ signifies _fugere_,
as from an enemy. This seems to be the proper distinction between _to
fly_, and _to flee_; which in the Present Time are very often confounded.
Our Translation of the Bible is not quite free from this mistake. It
hath _flee_ for _volare_ in perhaps seven or eight places out of a great
number; but never _fly_ for _fugere_.
[37] Essay xxix.
[38] The whole number of Verbs in the English language, Regular and
Irregular, Simple and Compounded, taken together, is about 4300. See Dr.
Ward’s Essays on the English Language; the Catalogue of English Verbs.
[39]
⸺“He would _have spoke_.”
Milton, P. L. x. 517.
“Words _interwove_ with sighs found out their way.”
P. L. i. 621.
“And to his faithful servant _hath_ in place
_Bore_ witness gloriously.”—Samson Ag. ℣. 1752.
“And envious darkness, ere they could return,
_Had stole_ them from me.”—Comus, ℣. 195.
Here it is observable, that the Author’s MS. and the First Edition have
it _stolne_.
⸺“And in triumph _had rode_.”
P. R. iii. 36.
⸺“I _have chose_
This perfect man.”⸺
P. R. i. 165.
⸺“The fragrant brier _was wove_ between.”
Dryden, Fables.
“Then finish what you _have began_,
But scribble faster, if you can.”
Dryden, Poems, Vol. 2. p. 172.
“_Have sprang._”
Atterbury, Vol. 1. Serm. 4.
“_Had spake_”⸺“_had began_.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. Hist. p. 40, & 120. “The
men _begun_ to embellish themselves.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 434.
“Rapt into future times the bard _begun_.”
Pope, Messiah.
And without the necessity of rhyme:
“A second deluge learning thus _o’er-run_,
And the Monks finish’d what the Goths _begun_.”
Essay on Criticism.
“Repeats you verses _wrote_ on glasses.”
Prior.
“Mr. Misson _has wrote_.”—Addison, Preface to his Travels. “He could only
command his voice, _broke_ with sighs and sobbings, so far as to bid her
proceed.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 164.
“No civil broils _have_ since his death _arose_.”
Dryden, on O. Cromwell.
“Illustrious virtues, who by turns _have rose_.”
Prior.
⸺“_Had_ not _arose_.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. and Battle of
Books: and Bolingbroke, Letter to Wyndham, p. 233.⸺“This nimble operator
will _have stole_ it.” Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. “Some philosophers _have
mistook_.” Ibid. Sect. ix.
⸺“Silence
_Was took_ ere she was ware.”
Milton, Comus.
“Into these common places look,
Which from great authors I _have took_.”
Prior, Alma.
“A free Constitution, when it has _been shook_ by the iniquity of former
administrations.” Lord Bolingbroke, Patriot King, p. 111.⸺“Too strong to
_be shook_ by his enemies.” Atterbury. “But there _was_ now an accident
_fell_ out.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. p. 292.
⸺“Ev’n there he should _have fell_.”
Prior, Solomon.
“Sure some disaster _has befell_:
Speak, Nurse; I hope the Boy is well.”
Gay, Fables.
[40] “Was the _easilier_ persuaded.”—Raleigh. “The things _highliest_
important to the growing age.” Lord Shaftesbury, Letter to Lord
Molesworth. Improperly, for _more easily_, _most highly_.
[41] The Conjunction _because_ used to express the motive or end, is
either improper or obsolete: as, “The multitude rebuked them, _because_
they should hold their peace.” Matt. xx. 31. “It is the case of some,
to contrive false periods of business, _because_ they may seem men of
dispatch.” Bacon, Essay xxv. We should now make use of _that_.
[42] “He caused all persons, _whom_ he knew had, or he thought might
have, spoken to him, to be apprehended.” Clarendon, Vol. III. p. 618.
8ᵛᵒ. It ought to be _who_, the Nominative Case to _had_; not _whom_, as
if it were the Objective Case governed by _knew_.
“Scotland and _Thee_ did each in other live.”
Dryden, Poems, Vol. II. p. 220.
It ought to be _Thou_.
[43]
“But _Thou_ false Arcite never _shall_ obtain
Thy bad pretence.”⸺
Dryden, Fables.
“That _Thou might_ fortune to thy side engage.”
Prior.
It ought to be _shalt_, _mightest_. The mistake seems to be owing to the
confounding of _Thou_ and _You_ as equivalent in every respect; whereas
one is Singular, the other Plural. See above, p. 48. “Great _pains has_
[have] been taken.” Pope, P. S. to the Odyssey. “I have considered, _what
have_ [hath] been said on both sides in this controversy.” Tillotson,
Vol. I. Serm. 27.
[44]
“Tell who _loves who_; what favours some partake,
And who is jilted for another’s sake.”
Dryden, Juvenal, Sat. vi.
“Those, _who_ he _thought_ true to his party.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol.
I. p. 667. 8ᵛᵒ. “_Who_ should I _meet_ the other night, but my old
friend?” Spect. Nᵒ 32. “_Who_ should I _see_ in the lid of it, but the
Doctor?” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 57. “He knows, _who_ it is proper to _expose_
foremost.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Conclusion. It ought in all these places
to be _whom_.
[45] “And restores to his _Island_ that tranquillity and repose, to
which they had been _strangers_ during his absence.” Pope, Dissertation
prefixed to the Odyssey. _Island_ is not a Noun of Multitude: it ought
to be, his _people_; or, _it_ had been _a stranger_. “What reason _have
the Church_ of Rome to talk of modesty in this case?” Tillotson, Vol.
I. Serm. 49. “All the virtues of mankind are to be counted upon a few
fingers, but _his_ follies and vices are innumerable.” Swift, Preface to
Tale of a Tub. Is not _mankind_ in this place a Noun of Multitude, and
such as requires the Pronoun refering to it to be in the Plural Number,
_their_?
[46] “_Whom_ do men say, that _I am_?⸺But _whom_ say ye, that _I am_?”
Matt. xvi. 13, 15. So likewise Mark viii. 27, 29. Luke ix. 18, 20. “Whom
think ye, that _I am_?” Acts xiii. 25. It ought in all these places to
be _who_; which is not governed by the Verb _say_ or _think_, but by the
Verb _am_: or agrees in Case with the Pronoun _I_. If the Verb were in
the Infinitive Mode, it would require the Objective Case of the Relative,
agreeing with the Pronoun _me_: “_Whom_ think ye, or do ye think, _me to
be_?”
⸺“To that, _which_ once _was thee_.”
Prior.
It ought to be, _which was thou_; or, _which thou wast_.
[47] On which place says Dr. Bentley, “The Context demands that it
be,⸺_Him_ descending, Illo descendente.” But _him_ is not the Ablative
Case, for the English knows no such Case; nor does _him_ without a
Preposition on any occasion answer to the Latin Ablative _illo_. I might
with better reason contend, that it ought to be “_his_ descending,”
because it is in Greek αυτου καταβαινοντος in the Genitive; and it would
be as good Grammar, and as proper English. This comes of forcing the
English under the rules of a foreign Language, with which it has little
concern: and this _ugly and deformed fault_, to use his own expression,
Bentley has endeavoured to impose upon Milton in several places: see P.
L. vii. 15. ix. 829, 883, 1147. x. 267, 1001. On the other hand, where
Milton has been really guilty of this fault, he, very inconsistently with
himself, corrects him, and sets him right. His Latin Grammar Rules were
happily out of his head, and by a kind of _vernacular instinct_ (so, I
imagine, he would call it) he perceived that his Author was wrong.
“For only in destroying I find ease
To my relentless thoughts; and, _him destroy’d_,
Or won to what may work his utter loss,
For whom all this was made, all this will soon
Follow, as to him link’d in weal or woe.”
P. L. ix. 129.
It ought to be, “_he_ destroy’d,” that is, “_he being_ destroy’d.”
Bentley corrects it, “and _man_ destroy’d.”
Archbishop Tillotson has fallen into the same mistake: “Solomon was of
this mind; and I make no doubt, but he made as wise and true Proverbs as
any body has done since: _Him_ only _excepted_, who was a much greater
and wiser man than Solomon.” Vol. I. Ser. 53.
[48] “To _see_ so many _to make so_ little conscience of so great a sin.”
Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 22. “It cannot but be a delightful spectacle to
God and Angels to _see_ a young person, besieged by powerful temptations
on either side, _to acquit_ himself gloriously, and resolutely _to hold_
out against the most violent assaults: to _behold_ one in the prime and
flower of his age, that is courted by pleasures and honours, by the devil
and all the bewitching vanities of the world, _to reject_ all these, and
_to cleave_ stedfastly unto God.” Ib. Serm. 54. The impropriety of the
Phrases distinguished by Italic Characters is evident.
[49] Το γαρ θελειν παρακειται μοι, το δε κατεργαζεσθαι το καλον ουχ
ευρισχω. Rom. vii. 18.
[50] Προς το θεαθηναι τοις ανθρωποις. Matt. xxiii. 5. The following
sentences seem defective either in the construction, or the order of
the words: “Why do ye that, _which is not lawful to do_ on the sabbath
days?⸺The shew bread, _which is not lawful to eat_, but for the priests
alone.” Luke vi. 2, 4. The Construction may be rectified by supplying
_it_; “which _it_ is not lawful to do; which _it_ is not lawful to eat:”
or the order of the words in this manner; “_to do which_, _to eat which_,
is not lawful:” where the Infinitive _to do_, _to eat_, does the office
of the Nominative Case, and the Relative _which_ is in the Objective Case.
[51] “I am not like other men, _to envy_ the talents I cannot reach.”
Tale of a Tub, Preface. An improper use of the Infinitive.
[52] This Rule arises from the nature and idiom of our Language, and
from as plain a principle as any on which it is founded: namely, that a
word which has the Article before it, and a Noun, with the Possessive
Preposition _of_, after it, must be a Noun; and if a Noun, it ought to
follow the Construction of a Noun, and not have the Regimen of a Verb.
It is the Participial Termination of this sort of words that is apt to
deceive us, and make us treat them as if they were of an amphibious
species, partly Nouns, and partly Verbs. I believe there are hardly any
of our Writers, who have not fallen into this inaccuracy. That it is
such, will perhaps more clearly appear, if we examine and resolve one or
two examples in this kind.
“God, who didst teach the hearts of thy faithful people, by _the
sending_ to them _the light_ of thy Holy Spirit:⸺” Collect, Whitsunday.
_Sending_ is in this place a Noun; for it is accompanied with the
Article: nevertheless it is also a Transitive Verb, for it governs the
Noun _light_ in the Objective Case: but this is inconsistent; let it
be either the one or the other, and abide by its proper Construction.
That these Participial Words are sometimes real Nouns is undeniable; for
they have a Plural Number as such: as, “the _outgoings_ of the morning.”
_The Sending_ is the same with _the Mission_; which necessarily requires
the Preposition _of_ after it, to mark the relation between it and _the
light_; _the mission of the light_; and so, _the sending of the light_.
The Phrase would be proper either way, by keeping to the Construction of
the Noun, _by the sending of the light_; or of the Participle, or Gerund,
_by sending the light_.
Again:⸺“Sent to prepare the way of thy Son our Saviour, _by preaching of
Repentance_:⸺” Collect, St. John Baptist. Here the Participle, or Gerund,
hath as improperly the Preposition _of_ after it; and so is deprived of
its Verbal Regimen, by which as a Transitive it would govern the Noun
_Repentance_ in the Objective Case. Besides, the Phrase is rendered
obscure and ambiguous: for the obvious meaning of it in its present form
is, “by preaching concerning or on the Subject of Repentance;” whereas
the sense intended is, “by publishing the Covenant of Repentance, and
declaring Repentance to be a condition of acceptance with God.” The
Phrase would have been perfectly right and determinate to this sense
either way; by the Noun, _by the preaching of repentance_; or by the
Participle, _by preaching repentance_.
[53] These are the three Primary Modes, or manners of expressing our
thoughts concerning the being, doing, or suffering of a thing. If it
comes within our knowledge, we explain it, or make a declaration of it;
if we are ignorant or doubtful of it, we make an inquiry about it; if it
is not immediately in our power, we express our desire or will concerning
it. In Theory therefore the Interrogative form seems to have as good a
Title to a Mode of its own, as either of the other two; but Practice has
determined it otherwise; and has in all the Languages, with which we are
most acquainted, supplied the place of an Interrogative Mode, either by
Particles of Interrogation, or by a peculiar order of the words in the
sentence. If it be true, as I have somewhere read, that the Modes of the
Verbs are more numerous in the Lapland Tongue than in any other, possibly
the Laplanders may be provided with an Interrogative Mode.
[54]
“The burning lever _not deludes_ his pains.”
Dryden, Ovid. Metam. B. xii.
“I hope, my Lord, said he, I _not offend_.”
Dryden, Fables.
These examples make the impropriety of placing the Adverb _not_ before
the Verb very evident.
[55] “_Did_ he _not fear_ the Lord, and _besought_ the Lord, and the Lord
_repented_ him of the evil, which he had pronounced against them?” Jer.
xxvi. 19. Here the Interrogative and Explicative forms are confounded.
It ought to be, “Did he not _fear_ the Lord, and _beseech_ the Lord? and
_did not_ the Lord _repent_ him of the evil,⸺?” See likewise Matt. xviii.
12.
[56]
“For ever in this humble cell
_Let Thee_ and _I_, my fair one, dwell.”
Prior.
It ought to be _Me_.
[57] It is not easy to give particular rules for the management of the
Modes and Times of Verbs with respect to one another, so that they may
be proper and consistent: nor would it be of much use; for the best
rule that can be given is this very general one, To observe what the
sense necessarily requires. But it may be of use to consider one or two
examples, that seem faulty in these respects, and to examine where the
fault lies.
“Some who the depths of eloquence _have found_,
In that unnavigable Stream _were drown’d_.”
Dryden, Juv. Sat. x.
The event mentioned in the first line is plainly prior in time to that
mentioned in the second; this is subsequent to that, and a consequence
of it. The first event is mentioned in the Present Perfect Time; it
is present and compleated; “they _have_ [now] _found_ the depths of
eloquence.” The second event is expressed in the Past Indefinite Time;
it is past and gone, but, when it happened, uncertain: “they _were
drown’d_.” We observed, that the last mentioned event is subsequent to
the first: but how can the Past Time be subsequent to the Present? It
therefore ought to be in the second line _are drown’d_, in the Present
Perfect, which is consistent with the same Time in the first line: or in
the first line _had found_ in the Past Perfect, which would be consistent
with the Past Indefinite in the second line.⸺There seems to be a fault of
the like nature in the following passage:
“But oh! _’twas_ little that her life
O’er earth and waters _bears_ thy fame:”⸺
Prior.
It ought to be _bore_ in the second line.
Again;
“Him portion’d maids, apprentic’d orphans _blest_,
The young who _labour_, and the old who _rest_.”
Pope, Moral Ep. iii. 267.
The Verb in the first line ought to be in the same Time with those in the
last.
“Had their records been delivered down in the vulgar tongue,⸺they could
not now be understood, unless by Antiquaries, who _made_ it their study
to expound them.” Swift, Letter, on the English Tongue. Here the latter
part of the sentence depends intirely on the _Supposition_ expressed in
the former, “of their records being delivered down in the vulgar tongue:”
therefore _made_ in the Indicative Mode, which implies no supposition,
and in the Past Indefinite Time, is improper: it would be much better in
the Past Definite, _had made_; but indeed ought to be in the Subjunctive
Mode, Present or Past Time, _should make_, or _should have made_.
[58] “By _this means_ thou shalt have no portion on this side the river.”
Ezra, iv. 16. “It renders us careless of approving ourselves to God by
religious duties, and by _that means_ securing the continuance of his
goodness.” Atterbury, Sermons. Ought it not to be, by _these means_, by
_those means_? or by _this mean_, by _that mean_, in the singular number?
as it is used by Hooker, Sidney, Shakespear, &c. “I have not wept _this_
forty _years_.” Dryden. “I am not recommending _these kind_ of sufferings
to your liking.” Bishop Sherlock, Disc. Vol. II. p. 267. So the Pronoun
must agree with its Noun: in which respect let the following example be
considered. “_It is_ an unanswerable argument of a very refined age, the
wonderful _Civilities_ that have passed between the nation of authors and
those of readers.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. As to these wonderful
_Civilities_, one might say, that “_they are_ an unanswerable argument,
&c.” but as the Sentence stands at present it is not easy to reconcile it
to any grammatical propriety. “_A person whom_ all the world allows to
be so much your _betters_.” Swift, Battle of Books. And the Phrase which
occurs in the following examples, tho’ pretty common and authorised by
Custom, yet seems to be somewhat defective in the same way:
“_’Tis these_ that early taint the female soul.”
Pope.
“_’Tis they_ that give the great Atrides’ spoils;
_’Tis they_ that still renew Ulysses’ toils.”
Prior.
[59] “Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God of his goodness to
give you safe deliverance, and _hath preserved_ you in the great
danger of Childbirth:”⸺Liturgy. The Verb _hath preserved_ hath here no
Nominative Case; for it cannot be properly supplied by the preceding
word _God_, which is in the Objective Case. It ought to be, “_and He
hath preserved_ you;” or rather, “_and to preserve_ you.” Some of our
best Writers have frequently fallen into this, which I take to be no
small inaccuracy: I shall therefore add some more examples of it, by
way of admonition; inferring in each within Crotchets, the Nominative
Case that is deficient, and that must necessarily be supplied to support
the proper Construction of the Sentence. “If the calm, in which he was
born, and [which] lasted so long, had continued.” Clarendon, Life, p.
43. “The Remonstrance he had lately received from the House of Commons,
and [which] was dispersed throughout the Kingdom.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol.
I. p. 366. 8ᵛᵒ. “These we have extracted from an Historian of undoubted
credit, a reverend bishop, the learned Paulus Jovius; and [they] are the
same that were practised under the pontificate of Leo X.” Pope, Works,
Vol. VI. p. 301. “A cloud gathering in the North; which we have helped to
raise, and [which] may quickly break in a storm upon our heads.” Swift,
Conduct of the Allies. “A man, whose inclinations led him to be corrupt,
and [who] had great abilities to manage and multiply and defend his
corruptions.” Gulliver, Part I. Chap. vi. “My Master likewise mentioned
another quality, which his servants had discovered in many Yahoos, and
[which] to him was wholly unaccountable.” Gulliver, Part IV. Chap. vii.
“This I filled with the feathers of several birds I had taken with
springes made of Yahoos hairs, and [which] were excellent food.” Ibid.
Chap. x. “Osyris, whom the Grecians call Dionysius, and [who] is the same
with Bacchus.” Swift, Mechan. Oper. of the Spirit, Sect. ii.
[60] “_Which rule_, if it had been observed, a neighbouring Prince would
have wanted a great deal of that incense, which hath been offered up to
him by his adorers.” Atterbury, Vol. I. Serm. 1. The Pronoun _it_ is here
the Nominative Case to the Verb _observed_; and _which rule_ is left by
itself, a Nominative Case without any Verb following it. This manner of
expression, however improper, is very common. It ought to be, “If _this
rule_ had been observed, &c.”
[61] Adjectives are sometimes employed as Adverbs; improperly, and
not agreeably to the Genius of the English Language. As, “_extreme_
elaborate:” Dryden, Essay on Dram. Poet. “_marvellous_ graceful:”
Clarendon, Life, p. 18. “_extreme_ unwilling;” “_extreme_ subject:”
Swift, Tale of a Tub, and Battle of Books. “I shall endeavour to live
hereafter _suitable_ to a man in my station.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 530.
“Homer describes this river _agreeable_ to the vulgar reading.” Pope,
Note on Iliad, ii. v. 1032. So _exceeding_, for _exceedingly_, however
improper, occurs frequently in the Vulgar Translation of the Bible, and
has obtained in common discourse. “We should live soberly, righteously,
and _godly_ in this present world.” Tit. ii. 12.
“O Liberty, Thou Goddess _heavenly_ bright.”
Addison.
On the other hand an Adverb is improperly used as an Adjective in the
following passage: “We may cast in such seeds and principles, as we judge
most likely to take _soonest_ and deepest root.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm.
52.
[62] “_How much soever_ the Reformation of this corrupt and degenerate
Age is _almost utterly_ to be despaired of, we may yet have a more
comfortable prospect of future times.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Pref. to Serm.
49. The first part of this Sentence abounds with Adverbs, and those such
as are hardly consistent with one another.
[63] “We are still much at a loss, _who_ civil power belongs _to_.”
Locke. It ought to be _whom_.
[64] Pope, Preface to his Poems.
[65] _With_ in composition retains the signification, which it hath
among others in the Saxon, of _from_ and _against_: as to _withhold_, to
_withstand_. So also for has a negative signification from the Saxon: as,
to _forbid_, _forbeodan_; to _forget_, _forgitan_.
[66] Examples of impropriety in the use of the Preposition in Phrases of
this kind: “Your character, which I, or any other writer, may now value
ourselves _by_ [upon] drawing.” Swift, Letter on the English Tongue.
“You have bestowed your favours _to_ [upon] the most deserving persons.”
Ibid. “Upon such occasions as fell _into_ [under] their cognisance,”
Swift, Contests and Dissensions &c. Chap. 3. “That variety of factions
_into_ [in] which we are still engaged.” Ibid. Chap. 5. “The utmost
extent of power pretended [to] by the Commons.” Ibid. Chap. 3.⸺“Accused
the ministers _for_ [of] betraying the Dutch.” Swift, Four last years
of the Queen, Book ii. “Ovid, whom you accuse _for_ [of] luxuriancy of
verse.” Dryden, on Dram. Poesy. “Neither the one nor the other shall
make me swerve _out of_ [from] the path, which I have traced to myself.”
Bolingbroke, Letter to Wyndham, p. 252. “They are now reconciled by a
zeal for their cause to what they could not be prompted [to] by a concern
for their beauty.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 81. “If policy can prevail _upon_
[over] force.” Addison, Travels, p. 62. “Ye blind guides, which strain
_at_ a gnat, and swallow a camel.” Matt. xxiii. 24. διυλιζοντες, “which
strain _out_, or take a gnat _out_ of the liquor by straining it:” the
impropriety of the Preposition has wholly destroyed the meaning of the
Phrase. Observe also, that the Noun generally requires after it the
same Preposition as the Verb from which it is formed: “It was perfectly
in compliance _to_ [with] some persons, for whose opinion I have great
deference.” Swift, Pref. to Temple’s Memoirs. “Not from any personal
hatred to them, but in justification _to_ [of] the best of Queens.”
Swift, Examiner, Nᵒ 23. In the last example, the Verb being Transitive
and requiring the Objective Case, the Noun formed from it seems to
require the Possessive Case, or its Preposition, after it. Or perhaps he
meant to say, “in _justice_ to the best of Queens.” “No discouragement
for the authors to proceed.” Tale of a Tub, Preface. “A strict observance
_after_ times and fashions.” Ibid. Sect. ii. So the Noun _Aversion_,
(that is, a turning away,) requires the Preposition _from_ after it; and
does not properly admit of _to_, _for_, or _towards_, which are often
used with it.
[67] These are much disused in common discourse, and are retained only
in the Solemn, or Formulary Style. “They [our Authors] have of late,
’tis true, reformed in some measure the gouty joints and darning-work
of _whereunto’s_, _whereby’s_, _thereof’s_, _therewith’s_, and the rest
of this kind; by which complicated periods are so curiously strung, or
hook’d on, one to another, after the long-spun manner of the bar or
pulpit.” Lord Shaftesbury, Miscel. V.
[68] Or in these and the like Phrases, may not _me_, _thee_, _him_,
_her_, _us_, which in Saxon are the Dative Cases of their respective
Pronouns, be considered as still continuing such in the English, and
including in their very form the force of the Prepositions _to_ and
_for_? There are certainly some other Phrases, which are to be resolved
in this manner: “Wo is _me_!” The Phrase is pure Saxon; “wa is me:”
_me_ is the Dative Case; in English, with the Preposition _to me_. So,
“_methinks_;” Saxon, “_me thincth_,” εμοι δοκει. “O well is _thee_!”
Psal. cxxviii. 2. “Wel is _him_ that ther mai be.” Anglo-Saxon Poem in
Hickes’s Thesaur. Vol. I. p. 231. “Well is _him_, that dwelleth with
a wife of understanding.”⸺“Well is _him_, that hath found prudence.”
Ecclus. xxv. 8, 9. The Translator thought to correct his phrase
afterward, and so hath made it neither Saxon nor English: “Well is _he_,
that is defended from it.” Ecclus. xxviii. 19. “Wo worth the day!”
Ezek. xxx. 2. that is, Wo be _to_ the day. The word _worth_ is not the
Adjective, but the Saxon Verb _weorthan_, or _worthan_, _fieri_, _to be_,
_to become_; which is often used by Chaucer, and is still retained as an
Auxiliary Verb in the German Language.
[69] _That_ has been used in the same manner, as including the Relative
_which_; but it is either improper, or obsolete: as, “To consider
advisedly of _that_ is moved.” Bacon, Essay xxii. “She appeared not to
wish _that_ without doubt she would have been very glad of.” Clarendon,
Hist. Vol. II. p. 363. 8ᵛᵒ. “We speak _that_ we do know, and testify
_that_ we have seen.” John iii. 11.
[70] “_Who_, instead of going about doing good, _they_ are perpetually
intent upon doing mischief.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 18. The Nominative
Case _they_ in this sentence is superfluous; it was expressed before in
the Relative _who_.
[71] “I am _the Lord, that maketh_ all things; _that stretcheth_ forth
the heavens alone:”⸺Isaiah xliv. 24. Thus far is right: _the Lord_ in the
third Person is the Antecedent, and the Verb agrees with the Relative
in the third Person: “I am the Lord, _which Lord_, or _He that, maketh_
all things.” It would have been equally right, if _I_ had been made the
Antecedent, and the Relative and the Verb had agreed with it in the
First Person: “_I_ am the Lord, _that make_ all things.” But when it
follows, “_that spreadeth_ abroad the heavens by _myself_;” there arises
a confusion of Persons, and a manifest Solecism.
“_Thou_ great first Cause, least understood!
_Who_ all my sense _confin’d_
To know but this, that _Thou art_ good,
And that myself am blind:
Yet _gave_ me in this dark estate,” &c.
Pope, Universal Prayer.
It ought to be _confinedst_, or _didst confine_; _gavest_, or _didst
give_; &c. in the second Person. See above, p. 48. Note.
[72]
“Abuse on all he lov’d, or lov’d him, spread.”
Pope, Epist. to Arbuthnot.
That is, “all _whom_ he lov’d, or _who_ lov’d him:” or to make it more
easy by supplying a Relative that has no variation of Cases, “all _that_
he lov’d, or _that_ lov’d him.” The Construction is hazardous, and
hardly justifiable, even in Poetry. “In the temper of mind he was then.”
Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 549. “In the posture I lay.” Swift, Gulliver, Part 1.
Chap. 1. In these and the like Phrases, which are very common, there is
an Ellipsis both of the Relative and the Preposition; which were much
better supplied: “In the temper of mind _in which_ he was then:” “In the
posture _in which_ I lay.” In general, the omission of the Relative seems
to be too much indulged in the familiar style; it is ungraceful in the
serious; and of whatever kind the style be, it is apt to be attended with
obscurity and ambiguity.
[73] The Connective parts of Sentences are of all others the most
important, and require the most care and attention: for it is by these
chiefly that the train of thought, the course of reasoning, and the whole
progress of the mind in continued discourse of all kinds, is laid open;
and on the right use of these the perspicuity, that is, the first and
greatest beauty, of style principally depends. Relatives and Conjunctions
are the instruments of Connection in discourse: it may be of use to point
out some of the most common inaccuracies, that writers are apt to fall
into with respect to them; and a few examples of faults may perhaps be
more instructive, than any rules of propriety that can be given. Here
therefore shall be added some further examples of inaccuracies in the use
of Relatives.
The Relative placed before the Antecedent: Example; “The bodies, which we
daily handle, make us perceive, that whilst they remain between _them_,
they do by an insurmountable force hinder the approach of our _hands_
that press them.” Locke, Essay, B. 2. C. 4. §. 1. Here the sense is
suspended, and the sentence is unintelligible, till you get to the end of
it: there is no Antecedent, to which the Relative _them_ can be referred,
but _bodies_; but, “whilst the bodies remain between the bodies,” makes
no sense at all. When you get to _hands_, the difficulty is cleared
up, the sense helping out the Construction: yet there still remains an
ambiguity in the Relatives _they_, _them_, which in number and gender are
equally applicable to _bodies_ or _hands_; this, tho’ it may not here be
the occasion of much obscurity, which is commonly the effect of it, yet
is always disagreeable and inelegant: as in the following examples.
“Men look with an evil eye upon the good that is in others; and think,
that _their_ reputation obscures _them_; and that _their_ commendable
qualities do stand in _their_ light: and therefore _they_ do what _they_
can to cast a cloud over _them_, that the bright shining of _their_
virtues may not obscure _them_.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 42.
“The Earl of Falmouth and Mr. Coventry were rivals _who_ should have most
influence with the Duke, _who_ loved the Earl best, but thought the other
the wiser man, _who_ supported Pen, _who_ disobliged all the Courtiers,
even against the Earl, _who_ contemned Pen as a fellow of no sense.”
Clarendon, Cont. p. 264.
But the following Sentence cannot possibly be understood without a
careful recollection of circumstances through some pages preceding.
“All which, with the King’s and Queen’s so ample promises to _him_ [the
Treasurer] so few hours before the conferring the place on another, and
the Duke of York’s manner of receiving _him_ [the Treasurer,] after _he_
[the Chancellor] had been shut up with _him_ [the Duke,] as _he_ [the
Treasurer] was informed, might very well excuse _him_ [the Treasurer] for
thinking _he_ [the Chancellor] had some share in the affront _he_ [the
Treasurer] had undergone.” Clarendon, Cont. p. 296.
“Breaking a Constitution by the very same errors, _that_ so many have
been _broke_ before.” Swift, Contests and Dissensions, &c. Chap. 5. Here
the Relative is employed not only to represent the Antecedent Noun _the
errors_, but likewise the Preposition _by_ prefixed to it. It ought to
be, “the same errors, _by which_ so many have been _broken_ before.”
Again: “⸺An Undertaking; _which_, although it has failed, (partly &c, and
partly &c,) is no objection at all to an Enterprize so well concerted,
and with such fair probability of success.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies.
That is, “Which Undertaking is no objection to an Enterprize so well
concerted;” that is, “to itself:” he means, “_the failing of which_ is no
objection at all to it.”
[74] In the following instances the Conjunction _that_ seems to be
improperly accompanied with the Subjunctive Mode: “I cannot but bewail,
_that_ no famous modern _have_ ever yet attempted⸺.” Swift, Tale of a
Tub, Sect. v.
“So much she fears for William’s life,
_That_ Mary’s fate she _dare_ not mourn.”
Prior.
[75] “You are a much greater loser than _me_ by his death.” Swift to
Pope, Letter 63.
“And tho’ by heav’n’s severe decree
She suffers hourly more than _me_.”
Swift to Stella.
“We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to the same
proportion more than _us_.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies.
“King Charles, and more than _him_, the Duke, and the Popish Faction,
were at liberty to form new schemes.” Lord Bolingbroke, Diss. on Parties,
Letter 3.
“A Poem, which is good in itself, cannot lose any thing of its real
value, though it should appear not to be the work of so eminent an
author, as _him_, to whom it was first imputed.” Congreve, Pref. to
Homer’s Hymn to Venus.
“If the King give us leave, you or I may as lawfully preach, as _them_
that do.” Hobbes, Hist. of Civil Wars, p. 62.
“The sun upon the calmest sea
Appears not half so bright as _Thee_.”
Prior.
“Then finish dear Chloe this Pastoral war,
And let us like Horace and Lydia agree:
For thou art a Girl as much brighter than _her_,
As he was a Poet sublimer than _me_.”
Prior.
In these passages it ought to be, _I_, _We_, _He_, _They_, _Thou_, _She_,
reflectively. Perhaps the following example may admit of a doubt, whether
it be properly expressed or not:
“The Lover got a woman of greater fortune than _her_ he had miss’d.”
Addison, Guardian Nᵒ 9. Let us try it by the Rule given above; and see,
whether some correction will not be necessary, when the parts of the
Sentence, which are understood, come to be supplied: “The lover got a
woman of a greater fortune, than _She_ [_was_, _whom_] he had miss’d.”
“Nor hope to be myself less miserable
By what I seek, but others to make such
As _I_.”
Milton, P. L. ix. 126.
“The Syntax, says Dr. Bentley, requires, make such as _me_.” On the
contrary, the Syntax necessarily requires, “make such as _I_:” for it is
not, “I hope to make others such, as to make _me_:” the Pronoun is not
governed by the Verb _make_, but is the Nominative Case to the Verb _am_
understood: “to make others such as _I am_.”
[76] “But it is reason, the memory of their virtues remaine to their
posterity.” Bacon, Essay xiv. In this, and many the like Phrases, the
Conjunction were much better inserted: “_that_ the memory, &c.”
[77] _Never so_⸺This Phrase, says Mr. Johnson, is justly accused of
Solecism. It should be, _ever_ so wisely; that is, _how_ wisely _soever_.
[78] I have been the more particular in noting the proper uses of these
Conjunctions, because they occur very frequently, and, as it was observed
before of Connective words in general, are of great importance with
respect to the clearness and beauty of style. I may add too, because
mistakes in the use of them are very common; as it will appear by the
following Examples.
_Neither_ is sometimes supposed to be included in its correspondent _nor_:
“Simois, _nor_ Xanthus shall be wanting there.”
Dryden.
⸺ “That all the application he could make, _nor_ the King’s own
interposition, could prevail with Her Majesty.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol.
III. p. 179. Sometimes to be supplied by a subsequent Negative: “His rule
holdeth still, that nature, _nor_ the engagement of words, are _not_ so
forcible as custom.” Bacon, Essay xxxix. “The King _nor_ the Queen were
_not_ at all deceived.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 363. These forms of
expression seem both of them equally improper.
_So_ ⸺, _as_, was used by the Writers of the last Century, to express a
Consequence, instead of _So_ ⸺, _that_: Examples; “The relations are _so_
uncertain, _as_ [that] they require a great deal of examination.” Bacon,
Nat. Hist. “_So as_ [that] it is a hard calumny to affirm, ⸺.” Temple.
“This computation being _so_ easy and trivial, _as_ [that] it is a shame
to mention it.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. “That the Spaniards were
_so_ violently affected to the House of Austria, _as_ [that] the whole
kingdom would revolt.” Ibid. Swift, I believe, is the last of our good
Writers, who has frequently used this manner of expression: it seems
improper, and is deservedly grown obsolete.
_As_ instead of _that_, in another manner: “If a man have that
penetration of judgement, _as_ [that] he can discern what things are to
be laid open.” Bacon, Essay vi. “It is the nature of extreme self-lovers,
_as_ [that] they will set an house on fire, _and_ it were but to
roast their eggs.” Id. Essay xxiii. “They would have given him such
satisfaction in other particulars, _as_ [that] a full and happy peace
must have ensued.” Clarendon, Vol. III. p. 214. “We should sufficiently
weigh the objects of our hope; whether they be such, _as_ [that] we may
reasonably expect from them what they propose in their fruition; and
whether they are such, as we are pretty sure of attaining.” Addison,
Spect. Nᵒ 535. “France was then disposed to conclude a peace upon such
conditions, _as_ [that] it was not worth the life of a granadier to
refuse them.” Swift, Four last years of the Queen, B. ii.
_As_ instead of the Relative _that_, or _which_: “The Duke had not
behaved with that loyalty, _as_ [which] he ought to have done.”
Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 460. “⸺ With those thoughts _as_ [which]
might contribute to their honour.” Ibid. p. 565. “In the order, _as_ they
lie in his Preface.” Middleton, Works Vol. III p. 8. It ought to be,
either, “_in order_, as they lie;” or, “in the order, _in which_ they
lie.” “Securing to yourselves a succession of able and worthy men, _as_
[which] may adorn this place.” Atterbury, Sermons, Vol. IV. 12.
The Relative _that_ instead of _as_: “Such sharp replies, _that_ [as]
cost him his life in few months after.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 179.
The Relative _who_ ⸺, instead of _as_: “There was no man _so_ sanguine,
_who did not apprehend_ some ill consequence from the late change.”
Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. It ought to be, either, “_so_ sanguine, _as not to
apprehend_, ⸺” or, “There was no man, _how_ sanguine _soever_, _who_ did
not apprehend.”
_As_ improperly omitted: “They are _so_ bold [as] to pronounce ⸺.” Swift,
Tale of a Tub, Sect. vii.
_Too_ ⸺, _that_, improperly used as Correspondent Conjunctions: “Whose
Characters are _too_ profligate, _that_ the managing of them should be of
any consequence.” Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. And, _too_ ⸺, _than_: “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, Letter 80. _So_ ⸺, _but_:
“If the appointing and apportioning of penalties to crimes be not _so_
properly a consideration of justice, _but rather_ [as] of prudence in the
Lawgiver.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 35. And to conclude with an example,
in which, whatever may be thought of the accuracy of the expression, the
justness of the observation will be acknowledged; which may serve also as
an apology for this and many of the preceding Notes: “No errors are _so_
trivial, _but_ they deserve to be mended.” Pope to Steele, Letter 6.
[79] “Ah me!” seems to be a phrase of the same nature with “Wo is me!”;
for the resolution of which see above p. 132. Note.
ERRATA.
P. 59. l. 11. _read_: _Have_, through its several Modes and Times, is
placed only before the Perfect Participle; and _be_, in like manner,
before the Present and Passive Participles: the rest⸺
P. 88. l. 1. _r._ _drank_. l. 2. _r._ _drunk_.
Transcriber’s Note
The above errata have been corrected. The original text for the first
erratum read “_Have_ and _be_ through their several Modes and Times are
placed only before the Perfect and Passive Participles respectively; the
rest⸺”, and for the second, the two words were transposed. In addition,
the following changes were made to the text to correct apparent printing
errors:
Page 41, “is” changed to “it” (When it is expressed)
Page 47, “it” changed to “is” (when it is expressed)
Page 158, “Sembrief” changed to “Semibrief” (the Semibrief, the Minim,
the Crotchet)
Page 176, “Partiple” changed to “Participle” (the Present Participle of
the Verb Active)
Footnote 20, “Times” changed to “Time” (constitutes the Perfect Time)
Errors in punctuation have been corrected without note.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "A short introduction to English grammar: with critical notes" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.