A critical analysis requires that the adjective when used without its
noun, should be parsed as an adjective belonging to its noun understood;
as, "The _virtuous_ [_persons_] and the _sincere_ [_persons_] are always
respected;" "Providence rewards the _good_ [_people,_] and punishes the
_bad_ [_people._]"
"The _evil_ [_deed_ or _deeds_] that men do, lives after them;
"The _good_ [_deed_ or _deeds_] is oft-interred with their bones."
But sometimes the adjective, by its _manner_ of meaning, becomes a noun,
and has another adjective joined to it; as, "the chief _good_;" "The
vast _immense_ [_immensity_] of space."
Various nouns placed before other nouns, assume the character of
adjectives, according to their _manner_ of meaning; as, "_Sea_ fish,
_iron_ mortar, _wine_ vessel, _gold_ watch, _corn_ field, _meadow_
ground, _mountain_ height."
The principle which recognises _custom_ as the standard of grammatical
accuracy, might rest for its support on the usage of only _six_ words,
and defy all the subtleties of innovating skeptics to gainsay it. If the
genius and analogy of our language were the standard, it would be
correct to observe this analogy, and say, "Good, good_er_, good_est_;
bad, bad_der_, bad_dest_; little, littl_er_, littl_est_; much,
much_er_; much_est_." "By _this mean_;" "What _are_ the _news_." But such
a criterion betrays only the weakness of those who attempt to establish
it. Regardless of the dogmas and edicts of the philosophical umpire, the
good sense of the people will cause them, in this instance, as well as
in a thousand others, to yield to _custom_, and say, "Good, _better,
best_; bad, _worse, worst_; little, _less, least_; much, _more, most_;"
"By _this means_;" "What _is_ the _news_?"
With regard to the using of adjectives and other qualifying words, care
must be taken, or your language will frequently amount to absurdity or
nonsense. Let the following general remark, which is better than a dozen
rules, put you on your guard. Whenever you utter a sentence, or put your
pen on paper to write, weigh well in your mind _the meaning of the
words_ which you are about to employ. See that they convey precisely the
ideas which you wish to express by them, and thus you will avoid
innumerable errors. In speaking of a man, we may say, with propriety, he
is _very_ wicked, or _exceedingly_ lavish, because the terms _wicked_ and
_lavish_ are adjectives that admit of comparison; but, if we take the
words in their literal acceptation, there is a solecism in calling a man
_very_ honest, or _exceedingly_ just, for the words _honest_ and _just_,
literally admit of no comparison. In point of fact, a man is _honest_ or
_dishonest, just_ or _unjust_: there can be no medium or excess in this
respect. _Very_ correct, _very_ incorrect, _very_ right, _very_ wrong,
are common expressions; but they are not _literally_ proper. What is not
_correct_, must be _incorrect_; and that which is not _incorrect_, must
be _correct_: what is not _right_, must be _wrong_; and that which is
not _wrong_, must be _right_. To avoid that circumlocution which must
otherwise take place, our best speakers and writers, however, frequently
compare adjectives which do not literally admit of comparison: "The
_most established_ practice;" "The _most uncertain_ method;" "Irving, as
a writer, _is far more accurate_ than Addison;" "The metaphysical
investigations of our philosophical grammars, are _still more
incomprehensible_ to the learner." Comparisons like these, should
generally be avoided; but sometimes they are so convenient in practice,
as to render them admissible. Such expressions can be reconciled with
the principles of grammar, only by considering them as figurative.
Comparative members of sentences, should be set in _direct opposition_
to each other; as, "Pope was _rich_, but Goldsmith was _poor_." The
following sentences are inaccurate: "Solomon was _wiser_ than Cicero was
_eloquent_." "The principles of the reformation were _deeper_ in the
prince's mind than to be _easily eradicated_." This latter sentence
contains _no comparison_ at all; neither does it literally convey _any
meaning_. Again, if the Psalmist had said, "I am the wisest of my
teachers," he would have spoken absurdly, because the phrase would
imply, that he was one of his teachers. But in saying, "I am wiser
_than_ my teachers," he does not consider himself one of them, but
places himself in contradistinction to them.