The Grammar of English Grammars Part 50

"During the three or four first years of its existence."--_Taylor's District School_, p. 27.

[FORMULE.--Not proper, because the cardinal numbers, _three_ and _four_ are put before the ordinal _first_. But, according to the 7th part of Obs. 7th, page 280th, "In specifying any part of a series, we ought to place the cardinal number after the ordinal." Therefore the words _three_ and _four_ should be placed after _first_; thus, "During the _first three_ or _four_ years of its existence."]

"To the first of these divisions, my ten last lectures have been devoted."--_Adams's Rhet._, Vol. i, p. 391. "There are in the twenty-four states not less than sixty thousand common schools."--_Taylor's District School_, p. 38. "I know of nothing which gives teachers so much trouble as this want of firmness."--_Ib._, p. 57. "I know of nothing that throws such darkness over the line which separates right from wrong."--_Ib._, p. 58.

"None need this purity and simplicity of language and thought so much as the common school instructor."--_Ib._, p. 64. "I know of no periodical that is so valuable to the teacher as the Annals of Education."--_Ib._, p. 67.

"Are not these schools of the highest importance? Should not every individual feel the deepest interest in their character and condition?"--_Ib._, p. 78. "If instruction were made a profession, teachers would feel a sympathy for each other."--_Ib._, p. 93. "Nothing is so likely to interest children as novelty and change."--_Ib._, p. 131. "I know of no labour which affords so much happiness as that of the teacher's."--_Ib._, p. 136. "Their school exercises are the most pleasant and agreeable of any that they engage in."--_Ib._, p. 136. "I know of no exercise so beneficial to the pupil as that of drawing maps."--_Ib._, p. 176. "I know of nothing in which our district schools are so defective as they are in the art of teaching grammar."--_Ib._, p. 196. "I know of nothing so easily acquired as history."--_Ib._ p. 206. "I know of nothing for which scholars usually have such an abhorrence, as composition."--_Ib._, p. 210. "There is nothing in our fellow-men that we should respect with so much sacredness as their good name."--_Ib._, p. 307. "Sure never any thing was so unbred as that odious man."--CONGREVE: _in Joh. Dict._ "In the dialogue between the mariner and the shade of the deceast."--_Philological Museum_, i, 466. "These master-works would still be less excellent and finisht"--_Ib._, i, 469.

"Every attempt to staylace the language of polisht conversation, renders our phraseology inelegant and clumsy."--_Ib._, i, 678. "Here are a few of the unpleasant'st words that ever blotted paper."--SHAK.: _in Joh. Dict._ "With the most easy, undisobliging transitions."--BROOME: _ib._ "Fear is, of all affections, the unaptest to admit any conference with reason."--HOOKER: _ib._ "Most chymists think gla.s.s a body more undestroyable than gold itself."--BOYLE: _ib._ "To part with unhackt edges, and bear back our barge undinted."--SHAK.: _ib._ "Erasmus, who was an unbigotted Roman Catholic, was transported with this pa.s.sage."--ADDISON: _ib._ "There are no less than five words, with any of which the sentence might have terminated."--_Campbell's Rhet._, p. 397. "The one preach Christ of contention; but the other, of love."--_Philippians_, i, 16. "Hence we find less discontent and heart-burnings, than where the subjects are unequally burdened."--_Art of Thinking_, p. 56.

"The serpent, subtil'st beast of all the field, I knew; but not with human voice indu'd."

--MILTON: _Joh. Dict., w. Human._

"How much more grievous would our lives appear, To reach th' eighth hundred, than the eightieth year?"

--DENHAM: B. P., ii, 244.

LESSON III.--MIXED.

"Brutus engaged with Aruns; and so fierce was the attack, that they pierced one another at the same time."--_Lempriere's Dict._

[FORMULE.--Not proper, because the phrase _one another_ is here applied to two persons only, the words _an_ and _other_ being needlessly compounded.

But, according to Observation 15th, on the Cla.s.ses of Adjectives, _each other_ must be applied to two persons or things, and _one an other_ to more than two. Therefore _one another_ should here be _each other_; thus, "Brutus engaged with Aruns; and so fierce was the attack, that they pierced _each other_ at the same time."]

"Her two brothers were one after another turned into stone."--_Art of Thinking_, p. 194. "Nouns are often used as adjectives; as, A _gold_-ring, a _silver_-cup."--_Lennie's Gram._, p. 14. "Fire and water destroy one another."--_Wanostrocht's Gram._, p. 82. "Two negatives in English destroy one another, or are equivalent to an affirmative."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. 94; _E. Devis's_, 111; _Mack's_, 147; _Murray's_, 198; _Churchill's_, 148; _Putnam's_, 135; _C. Adams's_, 102; _Hamlin's_, 79; _Alger's_, 66; _Fisk's_, 140; _Ingersoll's_, 207; and _many others_. "Two negatives destroy one another, and are generally equivalent to an affirmative."--_Kirkham's Gram._, p. 191; _Felton's_, 85. "Two negatives destroy one another and make an affirmative."--_J. Flint's Gram._, p. 79.

"Two negatives destroy one another, being equivalent to an affirmative."--_Frost's El. of E. Gram._, p. 48. "Two objects, resembling one another, are presented to the imagination."--_Parker's Exercises in Comp._, p. 47. "Mankind, in order to hold converse with each other, found it necessary to give names to objects."--_Kirkham's Gram._, p. 42. "Words are derived from each other[185] in various ways."--_Cooper's Gram._, p.

108. "There are many other ways of deriving words from one another."--_Murray's Gram._, p. 131. "When several verbs connected by conjunctions, succeed each other in a sentence, the auxiliary is usually omitted except with the first."--_Frost's Gram._, p. 91. "Two or more verbs, having the same nominative case, and immediately following one another, are also separated by commas." [186]--_Murray's Gram._, p. 270; _C. Adams's_, 126; _Russell's_, 113; and others. "Two or more adverbs immediately succeeding each other, must be separated by commas."--_Same Grammars_. "If, however, the members succeeding each other, are very closely connected, the comma is unnecessary."--_Murray's Gram._, p. 273; _Comly's_, 152; _and others_. "Grat.i.tude, when exerted towards one another, naturally produces a very pleasing sensation in the mind of a grateful man."--_Mur._, p. 287. "Several verbs in the infinitive mood, having a common dependence, and succeeding one another, are also divided by commas."--_Comly's Gram._, p. 153. "The several words of which it consists, have so near a relation to each other."--_Murray's Gram._, p. 268; _Comly's_, 144; _Russell's_, 111; _and others_. "When two or more verbs have the same nominative, and immediately follow one another, or two or more adverbs immediately succeed one another, they must be separated by commas."--_Comly's Gram._, p. 145. "Nouns frequently succeed each other, meaning the same thing."--_Sanborn's Gram._, p. 63. "And these two tenses may thus answer one another."--_Johnson's Gram._ _Com._, p. 322. "Or some other relation which two objects bear to one another."--_Jamieson's Rhet._, p. 149. "That the heathens tolerated each other, is allowed."--_Gospel its own Witness_, p. 76. "And yet these two persons love one another tenderly."--_Murray's E. Reader_, p. 112. "In the six hundredth and first year."--_Gen._, viii, 13. "Nor is this arguing of his but a reiterate clamour."--_Barclay's Works_, i, 250. "In severals of them the inward life of Christianity is to be found."--_Ib._, iii, 272. "Though Alvarez, Despauterius, and other, allow it not to be Plural."--_Johnson's Gram.

Com._, p. 169. "Even the most dissipate and shameless blushed at the sight."--_Lemp. Dict., w. Antiochus_. "We feel a superior satisfaction in surveying the life of animals, than that of vegetables."--_Jamieson's Rhet._, 172. "But this man is so full fraughted with malice."--_Barclay's Works_, i11, 205. "That I suggest some things concerning the properest means."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 337.

"So hand in hand they pa.s.s'd, the loveliest pair That ever since in love's embraces met."

--_Milton_, P. L., B., iv, l. 321.

"Aim at the high'est, without the high'est attain'd Will be for thee no sitting, or not long."

--_Id._, P. R., B. iv, l. 106.

CHAPTER V.--p.r.o.nOUNS.

A p.r.o.noun is a word used in stead of a noun: as, The boy loves _his_ book; _he_ has long lessons, and _he_ learns _them_ well.

The p.r.o.nouns in our language are twenty-four; and their variations are thirty-two: so that the number of _words_ of this cla.s.s, is fifty-six.

OBSERVATIONS.

OBS. 1.--The word for which a p.r.o.noun stands, is called its _antecedent_, because it usually precedes the p.r.o.noun. But some have limited the term _antecedent_ to the word represented by a _relative_ p.r.o.noun. There can be no propriety in this, unless we will have every p.r.o.noun to be a relative, when it stands for a noun which precedes it; and, if so, it should be called something else, when the noun is to be found elsewhere. In the example above, _his_ and _he_ represent _boy_, and _them_ represents _lessons_; and these nouns are as truly the antecedents to the p.r.o.nouns, as any can be. Yet _his, he_, and _them_, in our most approved grammars, are not called relative p.r.o.nouns, but personal.

OBS. 2.--Every p.r.o.noun may be explained as standing for the _name_ of something, for the _thing itself_ unnamed, or for a _former p.r.o.noun_; and, with the noun, p.r.o.noun, or thing, for which it stands, every p.r.o.noun must agree in person, number, and gender. The exceptions to this, whether apparent or real, are very few; and, as their occurrence is unfrequent, there will be little occasion to notice them till we come to syntax. But if the student will observe the use and import of p.r.o.nouns, he may easily see, that some of them are put _substantively_, for nouns not previously introduced; some, _relatively_, for nouns or p.r.o.nouns going before; some, _adjectively_, for nouns that must follow them in any explanation which can be made of the sense. These three modes of subst.i.tution, are very different, each from the others. Yet they do not serve for an accurate division of the p.r.o.nouns; because it often happens, that a subst.i.tute which commonly represents the noun in one of these ways, will sometimes represent it in an other.

OBS. 3.--The p.r.o.nouns _I_ and _thou_, in their different modifications, stand immediately for persons that are, in general, sufficiently known without being named; (_I_ meaning _the speaker_, and _thou, the hearer_;) their antecedents, or nouns, are therefore generally _understood_. The other personal p.r.o.nouns, also, are sometimes taken in a general and demonstrative sense, to denote persons or things not previously mentioned; as, "_He_ that hath knowledge, spareth his words."--_Bible_. Here _he_ is equivalent to _the man_, or _the person_. "The care of posterity is most in _them_ that have no posterity."--_Bacon_. Here _them_ is equivalent to _those persons_. "How far do you call _it_ to such a place?"--_Priestley's Gram._, p. 85. Here _it_, according to Priestley, is put for _the distance_. "For the priest's lips should keep knowledge, and _they_ should seek the law at his mouth."--_Malachi_, ii, 7. Here _they_ is put indefinitely for _men_ or _people_. So _who_ and _which_, though called relatives, do not always relate to a noun or p.r.o.noun going before them; for _who_ may be a direct subst.i.tute for _what person_; and _which_ may mean _which person_, or _which thing_: as, "And he that was healed, wist not _who_ it was."--_John_, v, 13. That is, "_The man who_ was healed, knew not _what person_ it was." "I care not _which_ you take; they are so much alike, one cannot tell _which_ is _which_."

OBS. 4.--A p.r.o.noun with which a question is asked, usually stands for some person or thing unknown to the speaker; the noun, therefore, cannot occur before it, but may be used after it or in place of it. Examples: "In the grave, _who_ shall give thee thanks?"--_Ps._, vi, 5. Here the word _who_ is equivalent to _what person_, taken interrogatively. "Which of you convinceth me of sin?"--_John_, viii, 46. That is, "_Which man_ of you?"

"Master, _what_ shall we do?"--_Luke_, iii, 12. That is, "_What act_, or _thing_?" These solutions, however, convert _which_ and _what_ into _adjectives_: and, in fact, as they have no inflections for the numbers and cases, there is reason to think them at all times essentially such. We call them p.r.o.nouns, to avoid the inconvenience of supposing and supplying an infinite mult.i.tude of ellipses. But _who_, though often equivalent (as above) to an adjective and a noun, is never itself used adjectively; it is always a p.r.o.noun.

OBS. 5.--In respect to _who_ or _whom_, it sometimes makes little or no difference to the sense, whether we take it as a demonstrative p.r.o.noun equivalent to _what person_, or suppose it to relate to an antecedent understood before it: as, "Even so the Son quickeneth _whom_ he will."--_John_, v, 21. That is--"_what persons_ he will," or, "_those persons_ whom he will;" for the Greek word for _whom_, is, in this instance, plural. The former is a shorter explanation of the meaning, but the latter I take to be the true account of the construction; for, by the other, we make _whom_ a double relative, and the object of two governing words at once. So, perhaps, of the following example, which Dr. Johnson cites under the word _who_, to show what he calls its "_disjunctive_ sense:"--

"There thou tellst _of_ kings, and _who_ aspire; _Who_ fall, _who_ rise, _who_ triumph, _who_ do moan."--_Daniel_.

OBS. 6.--It sometimes happens that the real antecedent, or the term which in the order of the sense must stand before the p.r.o.noun, is not placed antecedently to it, in the order given to the words: as, "It is written, To _whom_ he was not spoken of, _they_ shall see; and they that have not heard, shall understand."--_Romans_, xv, 21. Here the sense is, "_They_ to _whom_ he was not spoken of, shall see." Whoever takes the pa.s.sage otherwise, totally misunderstands it. And yet the same order of the words might be used to signify, "They shall see _to whom_ (that is, _to what persons_) he was not spoken of." Transpositions of this kind, as well as of every other, occur most frequently in poetry. The following example is from an Essay on Satire, printed with Pope's Works, but written by one of his friends:--

"_Whose_ is the crime, the scandal too be _theirs_; The knave and fool are their own libellers."--_J. Brown._

OBS. 7.--The personal and the interrogative p.r.o.nouns often stand in construction as the antecedents to other p.r.o.nouns: as, "_He_ also _that_ is slothful in his work, is brother to _him that_ is a great waster."--_Prov._, xviii. 9. Here _he_ and _him_ are each equivalent to _the man_, and each is taken as the antecedent to the relative which follows it. "For both _he that_ sanctifieth, and _they who_ are sanctified, are all of one: for which cause, _he_ is not ashamed to call _them_ brethren."--_Heb._, ii, 11. Here _he_ and _they_ may be considered the antecedents to _that_ and _who_, of the first clause, and also to _he_ and _them_, of the second. So the interrogative _who_ may be the antecedent to the relative _that_; as, "_Who that_ has any moral sense, dares tell lies?"

Here _who_, being equivalent to _what person_, is the term with which the other p.r.o.noun agrees. Nay, an interrogative p.r.o.noun, (or the noun which is implied in it,) may be the antecedent to a _personal_ p.r.o.noun; as, "_Who_ hath first given to Him, and it shall be recompensed to _him_ again?"--_Romans_, xi, 35. Here the idea is, "_What person_ hath first given _any thing_ to _the Lord_, so that it ought to be repaid _him_?" that is, "so that _the gift_ ought to be recompensed from Heaven to _the giver_?" In the following example, the first p.r.o.noun is the antecedent to all the rest:--

"And _he that_ never doubted of _his_ state, _He_ may perhaps--perhaps _he_ may--too late."--_Cowper_.

OBS. 8.--So the personal p.r.o.nouns of the _possessive_ case, (which some call adjectives,) are sometimes represented by relatives, though less frequently than their primitives: as, "How different, O Ortogrul, is _thy_ condition, _who_ art doomed to the perpetual torments of unsatisfied desire!"--_Dr. Johnson_. Here _who_ is of the second person, singular, masculine; and represents the antecedent p.r.o.noun _thy_: for _thy_ is a p.r.o.noun, and not (as some writers will have it) an adjective. Examples like this, disprove the doctrine of those grammarians who say that _my, thy, his, her, its_, and their plurals, _our, your, their_, are adjectives. For, if they were mere adjectives, they could not thus be made antecedents.

Examples of this construction are sufficiently common, and sufficiently clear, to settle that point, unless they can be better explained in some other way. Take an instance or two more: "And they are written for _our_ admonition, upon _whom_ the ends of the world are come."--_1 Cor._, x, 11.

"Be thou the first true merit to befriend; _His_ praise is lost, _who_ stays till all commend."--_Pope_.

CLa.s.sES.

p.r.o.nouns are divided into three cla.s.ses; _personal, relative_, and _interrogative_.

I. A _personal p.r.o.noun_ is a p.r.o.noun that shows, by its form, of what person it is; as, "Whether _it_[187] were _I_ or _they_, so _we_ preach, and so _ye_ believed."--_1 Cor._, xv, 11.

The simple personal p.r.o.nouns are five: namely, _I_, of the first person; _thou_, of the second person; _he, she_, and _it_, of the third person.

The compound personal p.r.o.nouns are also five: namely, _myself_, of the first person; _thyself_, of the second person; _himself, herself_, and _itself_, of the third person.

II. A _relative p.r.o.noun_ is a p.r.o.noun that represents an antecedent word or phrase, and connects different clauses of a sentence; as, "No people can be great, _who_ have ceased to be virtuous."--_Dr. Johnson._

The relative p.r.o.nouns are _who, which, what, that, as_, and the compounds _whoever_ or _whosoever, whichever_ or _whichsoever, whatever_ or _whatsoever_.[188]

_What_ is a kind of _double relative_, equivalent to _that which_ or _those which_; and is to be pa.r.s.ed, first as antecedent, and then as relative: as, "This is _what_ I wanted; that is to say, _the thing which_ I wanted."--_L.

Murray_. III. An _interrogative p.r.o.noun_ is a p.r.o.noun with which a question is asked; as, "_Who_ touched my clothes?"--_Mark_, v, 30.

The interrogative p.r.o.nouns are _who, which_, and _what_; being the same in form as relatives.

_Who_ demands a person's name; _which_, that a person or thing be distinguished from others; _what_, the name of a thing, or a person's occupation and character.

OBSERVATIONS.

OBS. 1.--The p.r.o.nouns _I_ and _myself, thou_ and _thyself_, with their inflections, are literally applicable to persons only; but, _figuratively_, they represent brutes, or whatever else the human imagination invests with speech and reason. The latter use of them, though literal perhaps in every thing _but person_, const.i.tutes the purest kind of personification. For example: "The _trees_ went forth on a time to anoint a king over them: and they said unto the _olive-tree_, 'Reign _thou_ over _us_.' But the _olive-tree_ said unto them, 'Should _I_ leave _my_ fatness, wherewith by _me_ they honour G.o.d and man, and go to be promoted over the trees?'" See _Judges_, ix, from 8 to 16.

OBS. 2.--The p.r.o.nouns _he_ and _himself, she_ and _herself_, with their inflections, are literally applicable to persons and to brutes, and to these only; if applied to lifeless objects, they animate them, and are figurative _in gender_, though literal perhaps in every other respect. For example: "A _diamond_ of beauty and l.u.s.tre, observing at _his_ side in the same cabinet, not only many other gems, but even a _loadstone_, began to question the latter how _he_ came there--_he, who_ appeared to be no better than a mere flint, a sorry rusty-looking pebble, without the least s.h.i.+ning quality to advance _him_ to such honour; and concluded with desiring _him_ to keep _his_ distance, and to pay a proper respect to _his_ superiors."--_Kames's Art of Thinking_, p. 226.