The Grammar of English Grammars Part 285

--cla.s.sed with the semivowels --final, changed or unchanged before terminations --do., when, by former practice, retained in verbs ending in _y_, before conson. terminations --sounds of --in poet. format. of adjectives

_Ye_, nom. plur., solemn style --its use as the obj. case --as a mere explet. in burlesque --its use in the lang. of tragedy --used for _thee_ --in the Eng. Bible not found in the obj. case --_Ye_ and _you_, promisc. use of, in the same case and the same style, ineleg.

_Yes, yea_, in a simp. affirmation, construc. and cla.s.s of --derivation of, from Anglo-Sax.

_You_, use of, for thou --_You_, with _was_, ("YOU WAS BUILDING,") approved by DR. WEBST. _et al._, as the better form for the sing. numb.

--_You_, and VERB PLUR., in reference to _one person_, how to be treated in parsing. _Your_, facet. in conversation, and how uttered ("_Dwells, like_ YOUR _miser_, sir," &c., SHAK.,) _Yourself_, its pecul. of construc.

_Your Majesty, your Highness_, &c., see _Address_.

_Youyouing_ and _theethouing_, history of

Z.

Z, its name and plur.

--has been called by several names; WALK., on the name --peculiarity of its ordinary _form_ --its sounds described

_Zeugma_, (i.e., JUGATIO, _vel_ CONNEXIO, _Sanct._,) the various forms of, were named and noticed, but not censured, by the ancient grammarians --constructions of _adjectives_, referred to the figure, ("ONE _or a_ FEW _judges_,"); do. of verbs, ("_But_ HE NOR I FEEL _more_," YOUNG,)

THE END OF THE INDEX,

AND OF THE GRAMMAR OF ENGLISH GRAMMARS.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Ben Jonson's notion of grammar, and of its parts, was as follows: "Grammar is the art of true and well-speaking a language: the writing is but an accident.

The Parts of Grammar are

Etymology which is / the true notation of words, Syntaxe / the right ordering of them.

A word is a part of speech or note, whereby a thing is known or called; and consisteth of one or more letters. A letter is an indivisible part of a syllable, whose prosody, or right sounding, is perceived by the power; the orthography, or right writing, by the form. Prosody, and Orthography, are not parts of grammar, but diffused, like blood and spirits, through the whole."--_Jonson's Grammar_, Book I.

[2] Horne Tooke eagerly seized upon a part of this absurdity, to prove that Dr. Lowth, from whom Murray derived the idea, was utterly unprepared for what he undertook in the character of a grammarian: "Dr. Lowth, when he undertook to write his _Introduction_, with the best intention in the world, most a.s.suredly sinned against his better judgment. For he begins most judiciously, thus--'Universal grammar explains the principles which are common to _all_ languages. The grammar of any particular language, _applies_ those common principles to that particular language.' And yet, with _this clear truth_ before his eyes, he boldly proceeds to give a _particular_ grammar; without being himself possessed of one single principle of universal grammar."--_Diversions of Purley_, Vol. 1, p. 224.

If Dr. Lowth discredited his better judgement in attempting to write an English grammar, perhaps Murray, and his weaker copyists, have little honoured theirs, in supposing they were adequate to such a work. But I do not admit, that either Lowth or Murray "_begins most judiciously_," in speaking of Universal and Particular grammar in the manner above cited. The authors who have started with this fundamental blunder, are strangely numerous. It is found in some of the most dissimilar systems that can be named. Even Oliver B. Peirce, who has a much lower opinion of Murray's ability in grammar than Tooke had of Lowth's, adopts this false notion with all implicitness, though he decks it in language more objectionable, and scorns to acknowledge whence he got it. See his _Gram._, p. 16. De Suey, in his Principles of General Grammar, says, "All rules of Syntax relate to two things, _Agreement and Government_."--_Foxd.i.c.k's Tr._, p. 108. And again: "None of these rules properly belong to General Grammar, as each language follows, in regard to the rules of Agreement and Government, a course peculiar to itself."--_Ibid._, p. 109." "It is with Construction [i.e., Arrangement] as with Syntax. It follows no general rule common to all languages."--_Ibid._ According to these positions, which I do not admit to be strictly true, General or Universal Grammar has no principles of _Syntax_ at all, whatever else it may have which Particular Grammar can a.s.sume and apply.

[3] This verb "_do_" is wrong, because "_to be contemned_" is pa.s.sive.

[4] "A very good judge has left us his opinion and determination in this matter; that he 'would take for his rule in speaking, not what might happen to be the faulty caprice of the mult.i.tude, but the consent and agreement of learned men.'"--_Creighton's Dict._, p. 21. The "good judge" here spoken of, is Quintilian; whose words on the point are these: "Necessarium est judicium, const.i.tuendumque imprimis, id ipsum quid sit, quod _consuetudinem_ vocemus. * * * In loquendo, non, si quid vitiose multis insederit, pro regula sermonis, amplendum est. * * * Ergo consuetudinem sermonis, vocabo _consensum eruditorum_ sicut vivendi, consenum honorum."--_De Inst. Orat._, Lib. i. Cap. 6, p. 57.

[5] "The opinion of plenty is amongst the causes of want; and the great quant.i.ty of books maketh a show rather of superfluity than lack; which surcharge, nevertheless, is not to be removed by making no more books, but by making more good books, which, as the serpent of Moses, might devour the serpents of the enchanters."--_Bacon_. In point of style, his lords.h.i.+p is here deficient; and he has also mixed and marred the figure which he uses.

But the idea is a good one.

[6] Not, "_Oldham_, in Hamps.h.i.+re," as the Universal Biographical Dictionary has it; for _Oldham_ is in _Lancas.h.i.+re_, and the name of Lily's birthplace has sometimes been spelled "_Odiam_."

[7] There are other Latin grammars now in use in England; but what one is most popular, or whether any regard is still paid to the ancient edict or not, I cannot say. Dr. Adam, in his preface, dated 1793, speaking of Lily, says: "His Grammar was appointed, by an act _which is still in force_, to be taught in the established schools of England." I have somehow gained the impression, that the act is now totally disregarded.--_G. Brown_.

[8] For this there is an obvious reason, or apology, in what his biographer states, as "the humble origin of his Grammar;" and it is such a reason as will go to confirm what I allege. This famous compilation was produced at the request of _two or three young teachers_, who had charge of a _small female school_ in the neighbourhood of the author's residence: and nothing could have been more unexpected to their friend and instructor, than that he, in consequence of this service, should become known the world over, as _Murray the Grammarian_. "In preparing the work, and consenting to the publicaton, he had no expectation that it would be read, except by the school for which it was designed, and two or three other schools conducted by persons who were also his friends."--_Life of L Murray_, p. 250.

[9] Grammatici namque auctoritas per se nulla est; quom ex sola doctissimorum oraturum, historicorum, poetarum, et aliorum ideonorum scriptorum observatione, constet ortam esse veram grammaticam. _Multa dicenda forent, si grammatistarum ineptias refellere vellem_: sed nulla est gloria praeterire asellos."--DESPAUTERII _Praef. Art. Versif._, fol. iii, 1517.

[10] The Latin word for _participle_ is _participium_, which makes _participio_ in the dative or the ablative case; but the Latin word for _partake_ is _participo_, and not "_participio_."--G. BROWN.

[11] This sentence is manifestly bad English: either the singular verb "_appears_" should be made plural, or the plural noun "_investigations_"

should be made singular.--G. BROWN.

[12] "What! a book have _no merit_, and yet be called for at the rate of _sixty thousand copies a year_! What a slander is this upon the public taste! What an insult to the understanding and discrimination of the good people of these United States! According to this reasoning, all the inhabitants of our land must be fools, except one man, and that man is GOOLD BROWN!"--KIRKHAM, _in the Knickerbocker_, Oct. 1837, p. 361.

Well may the honest critic expect to be called a slanderer of "the public taste," and an insulter of the nation's "understanding," if both the merit of this vaunted book and the wisdom of its purchasers are to be measured and proved by the author's profits, or the publisher's account of sales!

But, possibly, between the intrinsic merit and the market value of some books there may be a difference. Lord Byron, it is said, received from Murray his bookseller, nearly ten dollars a line for the Fourth Canto of Childe Harold, or about as much for every two lines as Milton obtained for the whole of Paradise Lost. Is this the true ratio of the merit of these authors, or of the wisdom of the different ages in which they lived?

[13] Kirkham's real opinion of Murray cannot be known from this pa.s.sage only. How able is that writer who is chargeable with the _greatest want_ of taste and discernment? "In regard to the application of the final pause in reading blank verse, _nothing can betray a greater want of rhetorical taste and philosophical ac.u.men_, than the directions of Mr. Murray."--_Kirkham's Elocution_, p. 145. Kirkham is indeed no judge either of the merits, or of the demerits, of Murray's writings; nor is it probable that this criticism originated with himself. But, since it appears in his name, let him have the credit of it, and of representing the compiler whom he calls "_that able writer_" and "_that eminent philologist_," as an untasteful dunce, and a teacher of _nonsense_: "To say that, unless we 'make every _line_ sensible to the ear,' we mar the melody, and suppress the numbers of the poet, is _all nonsense_."--_Ibid._ See Murray's Grammar, on "Poetical Pauses;" 8vo, p. 260; 12mo, 210.

[14] "Now, in these instances, I should be fair game, were it not for the _trifling_ difference, that I happen to present the doctrines and notions of _other writers_, and NOT my own, as stated by my learned censor."--KIRKHAM, _in the Knickerbocker_, Oct. 1837, p. 360. If the instructions above cited are not his own, there is not, within the lids of either book, a penny's worth that is. His fruitful copy-rights are void in law: the "learned censor's" pledge shall guaranty this issue.--G. B. 1838.

[15] I am sorry to observe that the gentleman, Phrenologist, as he professes to be, has so little _reverence_ in his crown. He could not read the foregoing suggestion without scoffing at it. Biblical truth is not powerless, though the scornful may refuse its correction.--G. B. 1838.

[16] Every schoolboy is familiar with the following lines, and rightly understands the words "_evil_" and "_good_" to be _nouns_, and not _adjectives_.

"The _evil_ that men do, lives after them; The _good_ is oft interred with their bones."--SHAKSPEARE.

_Julius Caesar, Act 3: Antony's Funeral Oration over Caesar's Body._

Kirkham has vehemently censured me for _omitting the brackets_ in which he encloses the words that be supposes to be _understood_ in this couplet. But he forgets two important circ.u.mstances: _First_, that I was quoting, not the bard, but the grammatist; _Second_, that a writer uses brackets, to distinguish _his own_ amendments of what he quotes, and not those of an other man. Hence the marks which he has used, would have been _improper_ for me. Their insertion does not make his reading of the pa.s.sage _good English_, and, consequently, does not avert the point of my criticism.

The foregoing Review of Kirkham's Grammar, was published as an extract from my ma.n.u.script, by the editors of the Knickerbocker, in their number for June, 1837. Four months afterwards, with friends.h.i.+ps changed, they gave, him the "justice" of appearing in their pages, in a long and virulent article against me and my works, representing me, "with emphatic force," as "_a knave, a liar, and a pedant_." The _enmity_ of that effusion I forgave; because I bore him no personal ill-will, and was not selfish enough to quarrel for my own sake. Its _imbecility_ clearly proved, that in this critique there is nothing _with which he could justly find fault_.

Perceiving that no point of this argument could be broken, he _changed the ground_, and satisfied himself with despising, upbraiding, and vilifying the writer. Of what _use_ this was, others may judge.

This extraordinary grammarian survived the publication of my criticism about ten years, and, it is charitably hoped, died happily; while I have had, for a period somewhat longer, all the benefits which his earnest "_castigation_" was fit to confer. It is not perceived, that what was written before these events, should now be altered or suppressed by reason of them. With his pretended "defence," I shall now concern myself no further than simply to deny one remarkable a.s.sertion contained in it; which is this--that I, Goold Brown, "at the funeral of Aaron Ely," in 1830, "praised, and _highly_ praised, this self-same Grammar, and declared it to be 'A GOOD WORK!'"--KIRKHAM, _in the Knickerbocker_, Oct., 1837, p. 362. I treated him always courteously, and, on this solemn occasion, walked with him without disputing on grammar; but, if this statement of his has any reasonable foundation, I know not what it is.--G. B. in 1850.

[17] See _Notes to Pope's Dunciad_, Book II, verse 140.

[18] A modern namesake of the Doctor's, the _Rev. David Blair_, has the following conception of the _utility_ of these speculations: "To enable children to comprehend the _abstract idea_ that all the words in a language consist but of _nine kinds_, it will be found useful to explain how _savage tribes_ WHO _having no language_, would first invent one, beginning with interjections and nouns, and proceeding from one part of speech to another, as their introduction might successively be called for by necessity or luxury."--_Blair's Pract. Gram., Pref._, p. vii.

[19] "Interjections, I _shewed_, or pa.s.sionate exclamations, were the _first elements_ of speech. Men laboured to communicate their feelings to one another, by those expressive cries and gestures which nature taught them."--_Dr. Hugh Blair's Lectures_, p. 57.

[20] "It is certain that the verb was invented before the noun, in all the languages of which a tolerable account has been procured, either in ancient or modern times."--_Dr. Alex. Murray's History of European Languages_, Vol.

I, p. 326.

[21] The Greek of this pa.s.sage, together with a translation not very different from the foregoing, is given as a marginal note, in _Harris's Hermes_, Book III, Chap. 3d.

[22] The Bible does not say positively that there was no diversity of languages _before the flood_; but, since the life-time of Adam extended fifty-six years into that of Lamech, the father of Noah, and two hundred and forty-three into that of Methuselah, the father of Lamech, with both of whom Noah was contemporary nearly six hundred years, it is scarcely possible that there should have occurred any such diversity, either in Noah's day or before, except from some extraordinary cause. Lord Bacon regarded the multiplication of languages at Babel as a general evil, which had had no parallel but in the curse p.r.o.nounced after Adam's transgression.

When "the language of all the earth" was "confounded," Noah was yet alive, and he is computed to have lived 162 years afterwards; but whether in his day, or at how early a period, "grammar" was thought of, as a remedy for this evil, does not appear. Bacon says, "Concerning speech and words, the consideration of them hath produced the science of grammar. For man still striveth to redintegrate himself in those benedictions, of which, by his fault, he hath been deprived; and as he hath striven against the first general curse by the invention of all other arts, so hath he striven to come forth from _the second general curse, which was the confusion of tongues, by the art of grammar_; whereof the use in a mother tongue is small, in a foreign tongue more, but most in such foreign tongues as have ceased to be vulgar tongues, and are turned only to learned tongues."--See _English Journal of Education_, Vol. viii, p. 444.