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.