of the potential pluperfect; as, "If all the world could have seen it, the
wo _had been_ universal."--_Shakspeare_. That is,--"_would have been_
universal." "I _had been drowned_, but that the shore was shelvy and
shallow."--_Id._ That is,--"I _should have been drowned_." This mode of
expression may be referred to the figure _enallage_, in which one word or
one modification is used for an other. Similar to this is the use of _were_
for _would be_: "It _were_ injustice to deny the execution of the law to
any individual;" that is, "it _would_ be injustice."--_Murray's Grammar_,
p. 89. In some instances, _were_ and _had been_ seem to have the same
import; as, "Good _were_ it for that man if he had never been
born."--_Mark_, xiv, 21. "It _had been_ good for that man if he had not
been born."--_Matt._, xxvi, 24. In prose, all these licenses are needless,
if not absolutely improper. In poetry, their brevity may commend them to
preference; but to this style, I think, they ought to be confined: as,
"That _had been_ just, replied the reverend bard;
But done, fair youth, thou ne'er _hadst met_ me here."--_Pollok_.
"The keystones of the arch!--though all were o'er,
For us repeopled _were_ the solitary shore."--_Byron_.
OBS. 17.--With an adverb of comparison or preference, as _better, rather,
best, as lief_, or _as lieve_, the auxiliary _had_ seems sometimes to be
used before the infinitive to form the potential imperfect or pluperfect:
as, "He that loses by getting, _had better lose_ than get."--_Penn's
Maxims_. "Other prepositions _had better have been substituted_."--
_Priestley's Gram._, p. 166. "I had as lief say."--LOWTH: _ib._, p. 110.
"It compels me to think of that which I _had rather forget_."--
_Bickersteth, on Prayer_, p. 25. "You _had much better say_ nothing upon
the subject."--_Webster's Essays_, p. 147. "I _had much rather show_ thee
what hopes thou hast before thee."--_Baxter_. "I _had rather speak_ five
words with my understanding, than ten thousand words in an unknown
tongue."--_1 Cor._, xiv, 19. "I knew a gentleman in America who told me
_how much rather he had be_ a woman than the man he is."--_Martineau's
Society in America_, Vol. i, p. 153. "I _had as lief go_ as not."--
_Webster's Dict., w. Lief_. "I _had as lieve_ the town crier spoke my
lines."--SHAK.: _Hamlet_. "We _had best leave_ nature to her own
operations."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, Vol. i, p. 310. "What method _had he
best take_?"--_Harris's Hermes_, p. ix. These are equivalent to the
phrases, _might better lose--might_ better have been substituted--_would_
as lief say--_would_ rather forget--_might_ much better say--_would_ much
rather show--_would_ rather speak--how much rather he _would_ be--_would_
as lief go--_should_ best leave--_might_ he best take; and, for the sake of
regularity, these latter forms ought to be preferred, as they sometimes
are: thus, "For my own part, I _would rather look_ upon a tree in all its
luxuriancy."--_Addison, Spect._, No. 414; _Blair's Rhet._, p. 223. The
following construction is different: "Augustus _had like to_ have been
slain."--_S. Butler_. Here _had_ is a principal verb of the indicative
imperfect. The following examples appear to be positively erroneous: "Much
that was said, _had better remained_ unsaid."--_N. Y. Observer_. Say,
"_might better have remained_." "A man that is lifting a weight, if he put
not sufficient strength to it, _had as good_ put none at all."--_Baxter_.
Say, "_might as well put_." "You _were better pour_ off the first infusion,
and use the latter."--_Bacon_. Say, "_might better pour_;" or, if you
prefer it, "_had better pour._" Shakspeare has an expression which is still
worse:--
"Or, by the worth of mine eternal soul,
Thou _hadst been better have been born_ a dog."--_Beauties_, p. 295.
OBS. 18.--The form of conjugating the active verb, is often called the
_Active Voice_, and that of the passive verb, the _Passive Voice_. These
terms are borrowed from the Latin and Greek grammars, and, except as
serving to diversify expression, are of little or no use in English
grammar. Some grammarians deny that there is any propriety in them, with
respect to any language. De Sacy, after showing that the import of the verb
does not always follow its form of voice, adds: "We must, therefore,
carefully distinguish the Voice of a Verb from its signification. To
facilitate the distinction, I denominate that an _Active_ Verb which
contains an Attribute in which the action is considered as performed by the
Subject; and that a _Passive_ Verb which contains an Attribute in which the
action is considered as suffered by the Subject, and performed upon it by
some agent. I call that voice a _Subjective_ Voice which is generally
appropriated to the Active Verb, and that an _Objective_ Voice which is
generally appropriated to the Passive Verb. As to the Neuter Verbs, if they
possess a peculiar form, I call it a Neuter Voice."--_Fosdick's
Translation_, p. 99.
OBS. 19.--A recognition of the difference between actives and passives, in
our original classification of verbs with respect to their signification,--
a principle of division very properly adopted in a great majority of our
grammars and dictionaries, but opinionately rejected by Webster, Bolles,
and sundry late grammarians,--renders it unnecessary, if not improper, to
place Voices, the Active Voice and the Passive, among the _modifications_
of our verbs, or to speak of them as such in the conjugations. So must it
be in respect to "a Neuter Voice," or any other distinction which the
classification involves. The significant characteristic is not overlooked;
the distinction is not neglected as nonessential; but it is transferred to
a different category. Hence I cannot exactly approve of the following
remark, which "the Rev. W. Allen" appears to cite with approbation: "'The
distinction of active or passive,' says the accurate Mr. Jones, '_is not
essential_ to verbs. In the infancy of language, it was, in all
probability, not known. In Hebrew, the difference but imperfectly exists,
and, in the early periods of it, probably did not exist at all. In Arabic,
the only distinction which obtains, arises from the vowel points, a late
invention compared with the antiquity of that language. And in our own
tongue, the names of _active_ and _passive_ would have remained unknown, if
they had not been learnt in Latin.'"--_Allen's Elements of English Gram._,
p. 96.
OBS. 20.--By _the conjugation_ of a verb, some teachers choose to
understand nothing more than the naming of its principal parts; giving to
the arrangement of its numbers and persons, through all the moods and
tenses, the name of _declension._ This is a misapplication of terms, and
the distinction is as needless, as it is contrary to general usage. Dr.
Bullions, long silent concerning principal parts, seems now to make a
singular distinction between "_conjugating_" and "_conjugation._" His
_conjugations_ include the moods, tenses, and inflections of verbs; but he
teaches also, with some inaccuracy, as follows: "The principal parts of the
verb are the _Present indicative_, the _Past indicative_ and the _Past
participle._ The mentioning of these parts is called CONJUGATING THE
VERB."--_Analyt. and Pract. Gram._, 1849, p. 80.
OBS. 21.--English verbs having but very few inflections to indicate to what
part of the scheme of moods and tenses they pertain, it is found convenient
to insert in our conjugations the preposition _to_, to mark the infinitive;
personal _pronouns_, to distinguish the persons and numbers; the
conjunction _if_, to denote the subjunctive mood; and the adverb _not_, to
show the form of negation. With these additions, or indexes, a verb may be
conjugated in _four ways_:--
1. Affirmatively; as, I write, I do write, or, I am writing; and so on.
2. Negatively; as, I write not, I do not write, or, I am not writing.
3. Interrogatively; as, Write I? Do I write? or, Am I writing?
4. Interrogatively and negatively; as, Write I not? Do I not write? or, Am
I not writing?
1. SIMPLE FORM, ACTIVE OR NEUTER.
The simplest form of an English conjugation, is that which makes the
present and imperfect tenses without auxiliaries; but, even in these,
auxiliaries are required for the potential mood, and are often preferred
for the indicative.
FIRST EXAMPLE.
_The regular active verb LOVE, conjugated affirmatively_.
PRINCIPAL PARTS.
_Present. Preterit. Imperfect Participle. Perfect Participle._
Love. Loved. Loving. Loved.
INFINITIVE MOOD.[260]
The infinitive mood is that form of the verb, which expresses the being,
action, or passion, in an unlimited manner, and without person or number.
It is used only in the present and perfect tenses.
PRESENT TENSE.
This tense is the _root_, or _radical verb_; and is usually preceded by the
preposition _to_, which shows its relation to some other word: thus,
To love.
PERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary _have_ to the perfect participle; and,
like the infinitive present, is usually preceded by the preposition _to_:
thus,
To have loved.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
The indicative mood is that form of the verb, which simply indicates or
declares a thing, or asks a question. It is used in all the tenses.
PRESENT TENSE.
The present indicative, in its simple form, is essentially the same as the
present infinitive, or radical verb; except that the verb _be_ has _am_ in
the indicative.
1. The simple form of the present tense is varied thus:--
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1st person, I love, 1st person. We love,
2d person, Thou lovest, 2d person, You love,
3d person, He loves; 3d person, They love.
2. This tense may also be formed by prefixing the auxiliary _do_ to the
verb: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I do love, 1. We do love,
2. Thou dost love, 2. You do love,
3. He does love; 3. They do love.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense, in its simple form is _the preterit_; which, in all regular
verbs, adds _d_ or _ed_ to the present, but in others is formed variously.
1. The simple form of the imperfect tense is varied thus:--
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I loved, 1. We loved,
2. Thou lovedst, 2. You loved,
3. He loved; 3. They loved.
2. This tense may also be formed by prefixing the auxiliary _did_ to the
present: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I did love, 1. We did love,
2. Thou didst love, 2. You did love,
3. He did love; 3. They did love.
PERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary _have_ to the perfect participle: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I have loved, 1. We have loved,
2. Thou hast loved, 2. You have loved,
3. He has loved; 3. They have loved.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary _had_ to the perfect participle: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I had loved, 1. We had loved,
2. Thou hadst loved, 2. You had loved,
3. He had loved; 3. They had loved.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary _shall_ or _will_ to the present: thus,
1. Simply to express a future action or event:--
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I shall love, 1. We shall love,
2. Thou wilt love, 2. You will love,
3. He will love; 3. They will love;
2. To express a promise, volition, command, or threat:--
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I will love, 1. We will love,
2. Thou shalt love, 2. You shall love,
3. He shall love; 3. They shall love.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliaries _shall have_ or _will have_ to the
perfect participle: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I shall have loved, 1. We shall have loved,
2. Thou wilt have loved, 2. You will have loved,
3. He will have loved; 3. They will have loved.
OBS.--The auxiliary _shall_ may also be used in the second and third
persons of this tense, when preceded by a conjunction expressing condition
or contingency; as, "_If_ he _shall have completed_ the work by
midsummer."--_L. Murray's Gram._, p. 80. So, with the conjunctive adverb
_when_; as, "Then cometh the end, _when_ he _shall have delivered_ up the
kingdom to God, even the Father; _when_ he _shall have put_ down all rule
and all authority and power."--_1 Cor._, xv, 24. And perhaps _will_ may
here be used in the first person to express a promise, though such usage, I
think, seldom occurs. Professor Fowler has given to this tense, first, the
"_Predictive_" form, as exhibited above, and then a form which he calls
"_Promissive_," and in which the auxiliaries are varied thus: "Singular. 1.
I _will_ have taken. 2. Thou _shalt_ have taken, you _shall_ have taken. 3.
He _shall_ have taken. Plural. 1. We _will_ have taken. 2. Ye _or_ you
_shall_ have taken. 3. He [say _They_,] _shall_ have taken."--_Fowler's E.
Gram._, 8vo., N. Y., 1850, p. 281. But the other instances just cited show
that such a form is not always promissory.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
The potential mood is that form of the verb, which expresses the power,
liberty, possibility, or necessity of the being, action, or passion. It is
used in the first four tenses; but the potential _imperfect_ is properly an
_aorist_: its time is very indeterminate; as, "He _would be_ devoid of
sensibility were he not greatly satisfied."--_Lord Kames, El. of Crit._,
Vol. i, p. 11.
PRESENT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary _may, can_, or _must_, to the radical
verb: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I may love, 1. We may love,
2. Thou mayst love, 2. You may love,
3. He may love; 3. They may love.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary _might, could, would_, or _should_, to
the radical verb: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might love, 1. We might love,
2. Thou mightst love, 2. You might love,
3. He might love; 3. They might love.
PERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliaries, _may have, can have_, or _must have_,
to the perfect participle: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I may have loved, 1. We may have loved,
2. Thou mayst have loved, 2. You may have loved,
3. He may have loved; 3. They may have loved.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliaries, _might have, could have, would have_,
or _should have_, to the perfect participle: thus,
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might have loved, 1. We might have loved,
2. Thou mightst have loved, 2. You might have loved,
3. He might have loved; 3. They might have loved.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
The subjunctive mood is that form of the verb, which represents the being,
action, or passion, as conditional, doubtful, or contingent. This mood is
generally preceded by a conjunction; as, _if, that, though, lest, unless,
except_. But sometimes, especially in poetry, it is formed by a mere
placing of the verb before the nominative; as, "_Were I_," for, "_If I
were_;"--"_Had he_," for, "_If he had_;"--"_Fall we_" for, "_If we
fall_;"--"_Knew they_," for, "_If they knew_." It does not vary its
termination at all, in the different persons.[261] It is used in the
present, and sometimes in the imperfect tense; rarely--and perhaps never
_properly_--in any other. As this mood can be used only in a dependent
clause, the _time_ implied in its tenses is always relative, and generally
indefinite; as,
"It shall be in eternal restless change,
Self-fed, and self-consum'd: _if this fail_,
The pillar'd firmament is rottenness."--_Milton, Comus_, l. 596.
PRESENT TENSE.
This tense is generally used to express some condition on which a future
action or event is affirmed. It is therefore erroneously considered by some
grammarians, as an elliptical form of the future.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I love, 1. If we love,
2. If Thou love, 2. If you love,
3. If He love; 3. If they love.
OBS.--In this tense, the auxiliary _do_ is sometimes employed; as, "If thou
_do prosper_ my way."--_Genesis_, xxiv, 42. "If he _do_ not _utter_
it."--_Leviticus_, v, 1. "If he _do_ but _intimate_ his desire."--_Murray's
Key_, p. 207. "If he _do promise_, he will certainly perform."--_Ib._, p.
208. "An event which, if it ever _do occur_, must occur in some future
period."--_Hiley's Gram._, (3d Ed., Lond.,) p. 89. "If he _do_ but
_promise_, thou art safe."--_Ib._, 89.
"Till old experience _do attain_
To something like prophetic strain."--MILTON: _Il Penseroso_.
These examples, if they are right, prove the tense to be _present_, and not
_future_, as Hiley and some others suppose it to be.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense, like the imperfect of the potential mood, with which it is
frequently connected, is properly an aorist, or indefinite tense; for it
may refer to time past, present, or future: as, "If therefore perfection
_were_ by the Levitical priesthood, what further need _was_ there that an
other priest _should rise_?"--_Heb._, vii, 11. "They must be viewed
_exactly_ in the same light, as if the intention to purchase _now
existed_."--_Murray's Parsing Exercises_, p. 24. "If it _were_ possible,
they _shall deceive_ the very elect."--_Matt._, xxiv, 24. "If the whole
body _were_ an eye, where _were_ the hearing?"--_1 Corinthians_, xii, 17.
"If the thankful _refrained_, it _would be_ pain and grief to
them."--_Atterbury_.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I loved, 1. If we loved,
2. If thou loved, 2. If you loved,
3. If he loved; 3. If they loved.
OBS.--In this tense, the auxiliary _did_ is sometimes employed. The
subjunctive may here be distinguished from the indicative, by these
circumstances; namely, that the time is indefinite, and that the
supposition is always contrary to the fact: as, "Great is the number of
those who might attain to true wisdom, if they _did not already think_
themselves wise."--_Dillwyn's Reflections_, p. 36. This implies that they
_do think_ themselves wise; but an indicative supposition or
concession--(as, "Though they _did not think_ themselves wise, they were
so--") accords with the fact, and with the literal time of the tense,--here
time past. The subjunctive imperfect, suggesting the idea of what is not,
and known by the sense, is sometimes introduced without any of the _usual
signs_; as, "In a society of perfect men, _where all understood_ what was
morally right, and _were determined_ to act accordingly, it is obvious,
that human laws, or even human organization to enforce God's laws, would be
altogether unnecessary, and could serve no valuable purpose."--PRES.
SHANNON: _Examiner_, No. 78.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
The imperative mood is that form of the verb, which is used in commanding,
exhorting, entreating, or permitting. It is commonly used only in the
second person of the present tense.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular._ 2. Love [thou,] _or_ Do thou love;
_Plural._ 2. Love [ye _or_ you,] _or_ Do you love.
OBS.--In the Greek language, which has three numbers, the imperative mood
is used in the second and third persons of them all; and has also several
different tenses, some of which cannot be clearly rendered in English. In
Latin, this mood has a distinct form for the third person, both singular
and plural. In Italian, Spanish, and French, the first person plural is
also given it. Imitations of some of these forms are occasionally employed
in English, particularly by the poets. Such imitations must be referred to
this mood, unless by ellipsis and transposition we make them out to be
something else; and against this there are strong objections. Again, as
imprecation on one's self is not impossible, the first person singular may
be added; so that this mood _may possibly have_ all the persons and
numbers. Examples: "_Come we_ now to his translation of the
Iliad."--_Pope's Pref. to Dunciad_. "_Proceed we_ therefore in our
subject."--_Ib._ "_Blessed be he_ that blesseth thee."--_Gen._, xxvii, 29.
"Thy _kingdom come_."--_Matt._, vi, 10. "But _pass we_ that."--_W. Scott_.
"Third person: _Be he, Be they_."--_Churchill's Gram._, p. 92.
"My soul, _turn_ from them--_turn we_ to survey," &c.--_Goldsmith_.
"Then _turn we_ to her latest tribune's name."--_Byron_.
"Where'er the eye could light these words you read:
'Who _comes_ this way--_behold_, and _fear_ to sin!'"--_Pollok_.
"_Fall he_ that must, beneath his rival's arms,
And _live the rest_, secure of future harms."--_Pope_.
"_Cursed be I_ that did so!--All the _charms_
Of Sycorax, toads, beetles, bats, _light_ on you!"--_Shakspeare_.
"_Have done_ thy charms, thou hateful wither'd hag!"--_Idem_.
PARTICIPLES.
1. _The Imperfect_. 2. _The Perfect_. 3. _The Preperfect_.
Loving. Loved. Having loved.
SYNOPSIS OF THE FIRST EXAMPLE.
FIRST PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. I love _or_ do love, I loved _or_ did love, I have loved. I had loved,
I shall _or_ will love, I shall _or_ will have loved. POT. I may, can, _or_
must love; I might, could, would, _or_ should love; I may, can, _or_ must
have loved; I might, could, would, _or_ should have loved. SUBJ. If I love,
If I loved.
SECOND PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. Thou lovest _or_ dost love, Thou lovedst _or_ didst love, Thou hast
loved, Thou hadst loved, Thou shalt _or_ wilt love, Thou shalt _or_ wilt
have loved. POT. Thou mayst, canst, _or_ must love; Thou mightst, couldst,
wouldst, _or_ shouldst love; Thou mayst, canst, _or_ must have loved; Thou
mightst, couldst, wouldst _or_ shouldst have loved. SUBJ. If thou love, If
thou loved. IMP. Love [thou,] _or_ Do thou love.
THIRD PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. He loves _or_ does love, He loved _or_ did love, He has loved, He had
loved, He shall _or_ will love, He shall _or_ will have loved. POT. He may,
can, _or_ must love; He might, could, would, _or_ should love; He may, can,
_or_ must have loved; He might, could, would, _or_ should have loved. SUBJ.
If he love, If he loved.
FIRST PERSON PLURAL.
IND. We love _or_ do love, We loved _or_ did loved, We have loved, We had
loved, We shall _or_ will love, We shall _or_ will have loved. POT. We may,
can, _or_ must love, We might, could, would, _or_ should love; We may, can,
_or_ must have loved; We might, could, would, _or_ should have loved. SUBJ.
If we love, If we loved.
SECOND PERSON PLURAL.
IND. You love _or_ do love, You loved _or_ did love, You have loved, You
had loved, You shall _or_ will love, You shall _or_ will have loved. POT.
You may, can, _or_ must love; You might, could, would, _or_ should love;
You may, can, _or_ must have loved; You might, could, would, _or_ should
have loved. SUBJ. If you love, If you loved. IMP. Love [ye _or_ you,] _or_
Do you love.
THIRD PERSON PLURAL.
IND. They love _or_ do love, They loved _or_ did love, They have loved,
They had loved, They shall _or_ will love, They shall _or_ will have loved.
POT. They may, can, _or_ must love; They might, could, would, _or_ should
love; They may, can, _or_ must have loved; They might, could, would, _or_
should have loved. SUBJ. If they love, If they loved.
FAMILIAR FORM WITH 'THOU.'
NOTE.--In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb, is
usually and more properly formed thus:
IND. Thou lov'st _or_ dost love, Thou loved _or_ did love, Thou hast loved,
Thou had loved, Thou shall _or_ will love, Thou shall _or_ will have loved.
POT. Thou may, can, _or_ must love; Thou might, could, would, _or_ should
love; Thou may, can, _or_ must have loved; Thou might, could, would, _or_
should have loved. SUBJ. If thou love, If thou loved. IMP. Love [thou,]
_or_ Do thou love.
SECOND EXAMPLE.
_The irregular active verb SEE, conjugated affirmatively._
PRINCIPAL PARTS.
_Present_. _Preterit_. _Imp. Participle_. _Perf. Participle_.
See. Saw. Seeing. Seen.
INFINITIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE. To See.
PERFECT TENSE. To have seen.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I see, 2. Thou seest, 3. He sees;
_Plural_. 1. We see, 2. You see, 3. They see.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I saw, 2. Thou sawest, 3. He saw;
_Plural_. 1. We saw, 2. You saw, 3. They saw.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I have seen, 2. Thou hast seen, 3. He has seen;
_Plural_. 1. We have seen, 2. You have seen, 3. They have seen.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I had seen, 2. Thou hadst seen, He had seen;
_Plural_. 1. We had seen, 2. You had seen, 3. They had seen.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I shall see, 2. Thou wilt see, He will see;
_Plural_. 1. We shall see, 2. You will see, 3. They will see.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I shall have seen, 2. Thou wilt have seen, 3. He will have
seen;
_Plural_. 1. We shall have seen, 2. You will have seen, 3. They will have
seen.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I may see, 2. Thou mayst see, 3. He may see;
_Plural_. 1. We may see, 2. You may see, 3. They may see.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I might see, 2. Thou mightst see, 3. He might see;
_Plural_. 1. We might see, 2. You might see, 3. They might see.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I may have seen, 2. Thou mayst have seen, 3. He may have
seen;
_Plural._ 1. We may have seen, 2. You may have seen, 3. They may have seen.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. I might have seen, 2. Thou mightst have seen, 3. He might
have seen;
_Plural_. 1. We might have seen, 2. You might have seen, 3. They might have
seen.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. If I see, 2. If thou see, 3. If he see;
_Plural_. 1. If we see, 2. If you see, 3. If they see.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. 1. If I saw, 2. If thou saw, 3. If he saw;
_Plural_. 1. If we saw, 2. If you saw, 3. If they saw.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular._ 2. See [thou,] _or_ Do thou see; _Plural._ 2. See [ye _or_
you,] _or_ Do you see.
PARTICIPLES.
1. _The Imperfect_. 2. _The Perfect_. 3. _The Preperfect_.
Seeing. Seen. Having seen.
NOTES.
NOTE I--The student ought to be able to rehearse the form of a verb, not
only according to the order of the entire conjugation, but also according
to the synopsis of the several persons and numbers. One sixth part of the
paradigm, thus recited, gives in general a fair sample of the whole: and,
in class recitations, this mode of rehearsal will save much time: as, IND.
I see _or_ do see, I saw _or_ did see, I have seen, I had seen, I shall
_or_ will see, I shall _or_ will have seen. POT. I may, can, _or_ must see;
I might, could, would, _or_ should see; I may, can, _or_ must have seen; I
might, could, would, _or_ should have seen. SUBJ. If I see, If I saw.
NOTE II.--In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb is
usually and more properly formed thus: IND. Thou seest _or_ dost see, Thou
saw _or_ did see, Thou hast seen, Thou had seen, Thou shall _or_ will see,
Thou shall _or_ will have seen. POT. Thou may, can, _or_ must see; Thou
might, could, would, _or_ should see; Thou may, can, _or_ must have seen;
Thou might, could, would, _or_ should have seen. SUBJ. If thou see, If thou
saw. IMP. See [thou,] _or_ Do thou see.
THIRD EXAMPLE.
_The irregular neuter verb BE, conjugated affirmatively_.
PRINCIPAL PARTS.
_Present._ _Preterit._ _Imp. Participle._ _Perf. Participle._
Be. Was. Being. Been.
INFINITIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
To be.
PERFECT TENSE.
To have been.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I am, 1. We are,
2. Thou art, 2. You are,
3. He is; 3. They are.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I was, 1. We were,
2. Thou wast, (_or_ wert,)[262] 2. You were,
3. He was; 3. They were.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I have been, 1. We have been,
2. Thou hast been, 2. You have been,
3. He has been; 3. They have been.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I had been, 1. We had been,
2. Thou hadst been, 2. You had been,
3. He had been; 3. They had been.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I shall be, 1. We shall be,
2. Thou wilt be, 2. You will be,
3. He will be; 3. They will be.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I shall have been, 1. We shall have been,
2. Thou wilt have been, 2. You will have been,
3. He will have been; 3. They will have been.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I may be, 1. We may be,
2. Thou mayst be, 2. You may be,
3. He may be, 3. They may be.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might be, 1. We might be,
2. Thou mightst be, 2. You might be,
3. He might be; 3. They might be.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I may have been, 1. We may have been,
2. Thou mayst have been, 2. You may have been,
3. He may have been; 3. They may have been.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might have been, 1. We might have been,
2. Thou mightst have been, 2. You might have been,
3. He might have been; 3. They might have been.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I be, 1. If we be,
2. If thou be, 2. If you be,
3. If he be; 3. If they be.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I were,[263] 1. If we were,
2. If thou were, _or_ wert,[264] 2. If you were,
3. If he were; If they were.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. 2. Be [thou,] _or_ Do thou be;
_Plural_. 2. Be [ye _or_ you,] _or_ Do you be.
PARTICIPLES.
1. _The Imperfect_. 2. _The Perfect_. 3. _The Preperfect_.
Being. Been. Having been.
FAMILIAR FORM WITH 'THOU.'
NOTE.--In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb, is
usually and more properly formed thus: IND. Thou art, Thou was, Thou hast
been, Thou had been, Thou shall _or_ will be, Thou shall _or_ will have
been. POT. Thou may, can, _or_ must be; Thou might, could, would, _or_
should be; Thou may, can, _or_ must have been; Thou might, could, would,
_or_ should have been. SUBJ. If thou be, If thou were. IMP. Be [thou,] _or_
Do thou be.
OBSERVATIONS.
OBS. 1.--It appears that _be_, as well as _am_, was formerly used for the
indicative present: as, "I be, Thou beest, He be; We be, Ye be, They be."
See _Brightland's Gram._, p. 114. Dr. Lowth, whose Grammar is still
preferred at Harvard University, gives both forms, thus: "I am, Thou art,
He is; We are, Ye are, They are. Or, I be, Thou beest, He _is_; We be, Ye
be, They be." To the third person singular, he subjoins the following
example and remark: "'I think it _be_ thine indeed, for thou liest in it.'
Shak. Hamlet. _Be_, in the singular number of this time and mode,
especially in the third person, is obsolete; and _is become_ somewhat
antiquated _in the plural_."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. 36. Dr. Johnson gives
this tense thus: "_Sing_. I am; thou art; he is; _Plur_. We are, _or_ be;
ye are, _or_ be; they are, _or_ be." And adds, "The plural _be_ is now
little in use."--_Gram. in Johnson's Dict._, p. 8. The Bible commonly has
_am, art, is_, and _are_, but not always; the indicative _be_ occurs in
some places: as, "We _be_ twelve brethren."--_Gen._, xlii, 32. "What _be_
these two olive branches?"--_Zech._, iv, 12. Some traces of this usage
still occur in poetry: as,
"There _be_ more things to greet the heart and eyes
In Arno's dome of Art's most princely shrine,
Where Sculpture with her rainbow sister vies;
There _be_ more marvels yet--but not for mine."
--_Byron's Childe Harold_, Canto iv, st. 61.
OBS. 2.--Respecting the verb _wert_, it is not easy to determine whether it
is most properly of the indicative mood only, or of the subjunctive mood
only, or of both, or of neither. The _regular_ and _analogical_ form for
the indicative, is "Thou _wast_;" and for the subjunctive, "If thou
_were_." Brightland exhibits, "I _was_ or _were_, Thou _wast_ or _wert_, He
_was_ or _were_," without distinction of mood, for the three persons
singular; and, for the plural, _were_ only. Dr. Johnson gives us, for the
indicative, "Thou wast, _or_ wert;" with the remark, "_Wert_ is properly of
the _conjunctive_ mood, and ought not to be used in the
indicative."--_Johnson's Gram._, p. 8. In his conjunctive (or subjunctive)
mood, he has, "Thou _beest_," and "Thou _wert_." So Milton wrote, "If thou
_beest_ he."--_P. Lost_, B. i, l. 84. Likewise Shakspeare: "If thou _beest_
Stephano."--_Tempest_. This inflection of _be_ is obsolete: all now say,
"If thou _be_." But _wert_ is still in use, to some extent, _for both
moods_; being generally placed by the grammarians in the subjunctive only,
but much oftener written for the indicative: as, "Whate'er thou art or
_wert_."--_Byron's Harold_, Canto iv, st. 115. "O thou that _wert_ so
happy!"--_Ib._, st. 109. "Vainly _wert_ thou wed."--_Ib._, st. 169.
OBS. 3.--Dr. Lowth gave to this verb, BE, that form of the subjunctive
mood, which it now has in most of our grammars; appending to it the
following examples and questions: "'Before the sun, Before the Heavens,
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_. 'Thou, Stella,
_wert_ no longer young.'--_Swift_. Shall we, in deference to these great
authorities," asks the Doctor, "allow _wert_ to be the same with _wast_,
and common to the indicative and [the] subjunctive mood? or rather abide by
the practice of our best ancient writers; the propriety of the language,
which requires, as far as may be, distinct forms, for different moods; and
the analogy of formation in each mood; I _was_, thou _wast_; I _were_, thou
_wert_? all which conspire to make _wert_ peculiar to the subjunctive
mood."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. 37; _Churchill's_, p. 251. I have before shown,
that several of the "best ancient writers" _did not inflect_ the verb
_were_, but wrote "_thou were_;" and, surely, "the analogy of formation,"
requires that the subjunctive _be not inflected_. Hence "the propriety
which requires distinct forms," requires not _wert_, in either mood. Why
then should we make this contraction of the old indicative form _werest_, a
_solitary exception_, by fixing it in the subjunctive only, and that in
opposition to the best authorities that ever used it? It is worthier to
take rank with its kindred _beest_, and be called an _archaism_.
OBS. 4.--The chief characteristical difference between the indicative and
the subjunctive mood, is, that in the latter the verb is _not inflected at
all_, in the different persons: IND. "Thou _magnifiest_ his work." SUBJ.
"Remember that thou _magnify_ his work."--_Job_, xxxvi, 24. IND. "He _cuts_
off, _shuts_ up, and _gathers_ together." SUBJ. "If he _cut_ off, and
_shut_ up, or _gather_ together, then who can hinder him?"--_Job_, xl, 10.
There is also a difference of meaning. The Indicative, "If he _was_,"
admits the fact; the Subjunctive, "If he _were_," supposes that he was
not. These moods may therefore be distinguished by the sense, even when
their forms are alike: as, "Though _it thundered_, it did not
rain."--"Though _it thundered_, he would not hear it." The indicative
assumption here is, "Though it _did thunder_," or, "Though there _was
thunder_;" the subjunctive, "Though it _should thunder_," or, "Though there
_were_ thunder." These senses are clearly different. Writers however are
continually confounding these moods; some in one way, some in an other.
Thus S. R. Hall, the teacher of a _Seminary for Teachers_: "SUBJ. _Present
Tense_. 1. If I be, _or_ am, 2. If thou be, _or_ art, 3. If he be, _or_ is;
1. If we be, _or_ are, 2. If ye _or_ you be, _or_ are, 3. If they be, _or_
are. _Imperfect Tense_. 1. If I were, _or_ was, 2. If thou wert, _or_ wast,
3. If he were, _or_ was; 1. If we were, 2. If ye _or_ you were, 3. If they
were."--_Hall's Grammatical Assistant_, p. 11. Again: "SUBJ. _Present
Tense_. 1. If I love, 2. If thou _lovest_, 3. If he love," &c. "The
remaining tenses of this _mode_, are, _in general_, similar to the
correspondent tenses of the Indicative _mode, only_ with the conjunction
prefixed."--_Ib._, p. 20. Dr. Johnson observes, "The indicative and
conjunctive moods are by modern writers frequently confounded; or rather
the conjunctive is wholly neglected, when some convenience of versification
does not invite its revival. It is used among the purer writers of former
times; as, 'Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham _be_ ignorant of
us, and Israel _acknowledge_ us not.'"--_Gram. in Joh. Dict._, p. 9. To
neglect the subjunctive mood, or to confound it with the indicative, is to
augment several of the worst faults of the language.
II. COMPOUND OR PROGRESSIVE FORM.
Active and neuter verbs may also be conjugated, by adding the Imperfect
Participle to the auxiliary verb BE, through all its changes; as, "I _am
writing_ a letter."--"He _is sitting_ idle."--"They _are going_." This form
of the verb denotes a _continuance_ of the action or state of being, and
is, on many occasions, preferable to the simple form of the verb.
FOURTH EXAMPLE.
_The irregular active verb READ, conjugated affirmatively, in the Compound
Form._
PRINCIPAL PARTS OF THE SIMPLE VERB.
_Present._ _Preterit._ _Imp. Participle._ _Perf. Participle._
R=ead. R~ead. R=eading. R~ead.
INFINITIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
To be reading.
PERFECT TENSE.
To have been reading.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I am reading, 1. We are reading,
2. Thou art reading, 2. You are reading,
3. He is reading; 3. They are reading.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I was reading, 1. We were reading,
2. Thou wast reading, 2. You were reading,
3. He was reading; 3. They were reading.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I have been reading, 1. We have been reading,
2. Thou hast been reading, 2. You have been reading,
3. He has been reading; 3. They have been reading.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I had been reading, 1. We had been reading,
2. Thou hadst been reading, 2. You had been reading,
3. He had been reading; 3. They had been reading.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I shall be reading, 1. We shall be reading,
2. Thou wilt be reading, 2. You will be reading,
3. He will be reading; 3. They will be reading.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular._ _Plural._
1. I shall have been reading, 1. We shall have been reading,
2. Thou wilt have been reading, 2. You will have been reading,
3. He will have been reading; 3. They will have been reading.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I may be reading, 1. We may be reading,
2. Thou mayst be reading, 2. You may be reading,
3. He may be reading; 3. They may be reading.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might be reading, 1. We might be reading,
2. Thou mightst be reading, 2. You might be reading,
3. He might be reading; 3. They might be reading.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I may have been reading, 1. We may have been reading,
2. Thou mayst have been reading, 2. You may have been reading,
3. He may have been reading; 3. They may have been reading.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might have been reading, 1. We might have been reading,
2. Thou mightst have been reading, 2. You might have been reading,
3. He might have been reading; 3. They might have been reading.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I be reading, 1. If we be reading,
2. If thou be reading, 2. If you be reading,
3. If he be reading; 3. If they be reading.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I were reading, 1. If we were reading,
2. If thou were reading, 2. If you were reading,
3. If he were reading; 3. If they were reading.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
Sing. 2. Be [thou] reading, _or_ Do thou be reading;
Plur. 2. Be [ye or you] reading, _or_ Do you be reading.
PARTICIPLES.
1. _The Imperfect_. 2. _The Perfect_. 3. _The Preperfect_.
Being reading. --------- Having been reading.
FAMILIAR FORM WITH 'THOU.'
NOTE.--In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb, is
usually and more properly formed thus: IND. Thou art reading, Thou was
reading, Thou hast been reading, Thou had been reading, Thou shall _or_
will be reading, Thou shall _or_ will have been reading. POT. Thou may,
can, _or_ must be reading; Thou might, could, would, _or_ should be
reading; Thou may, can, _or_ must have been reading; Thou might, could,
would, _or_ should have been reading. SUBJ. If thou be reading, If thou
were reading. IMP. Be [thou,] reading, _or_ Do thou be reading.
OBSERVATIONS.
OBS. 1.--Those verbs which, in their simple form, imply continuance, do not
admit the compound form: thus we say, "I _respect_ him;" but not, "I _am
respecting_ him." This compound form seems to imply that kind of action,
which is susceptible of intermissions and renewals. Affections of the mind
or heart are supposed to last; or, rather, actions of this kind are
complete as soon as they exist. Hence, _to love, to hate, to desire, to
fear, to forget, to remember_, and many other such verbs, are _incapable_
of this method of conjugation.[265] It is true, we often find in grammars
such models, as, "I _was loving_, Thou _wast loving_, He _was loving_," &c.
But this language, to express what the authors intend by it, is not
English. "He _was loving_," can only mean, "He was _affectionate_:" in
which sense, loving is an adjective, and susceptible of comparison. Who, in
common parlance, has ever said, "He _was loving me_," or any thing like it?
Yet some have improperly published various examples, or even whole
conjugations, of this spurious sort. See such in _Adam's Gram._, p. 91;
_Gould's Adam_, 83; _Bullions's English Gram._, 52; _his Analyt. and Pract.
Gram._, 92; _Chandler's New Gram._, 85 and 86; _Clark's_, 80; _Cooper's
Plain and Practical_, 70; _Frazee's Improved_, 66 and 69; _S. S. Greene's_,
234; _Guy's_, 25; _Hallock's_, 103; _Hart's_, 88; _Hendrick's_, 38;
_Lennie's_, 31; _Lowth's_, 40; _Harrison's_, 34; _Perley's_, 36; _Pinneo's
Primary_, 101.
OBS. 2.--Verbs of this form have sometimes a passive signification; as,
"The books _are now selling_."--_Allen's Gram._, p. 82. "As the money _was
paying_ down."--_Ainsworth's Dict., w._ As. "It requires no motion in the
organs whilst it _is forming_."--_Murray's Gram._, p. 8. "Those works _are
long forming_ which must always last."--_Dr. Chetwood_. "While the work of
the temple _was carrying_ on."--_Dr. J. Owen_. "The designs of Providence
_are carrying on_."--_Bp. Butler_. "A scheme, which _has been carrying_ on,
and _is_ still _carrying_ on."--_Id., Analogy_, p. 188. "We are permitted
to know nothing of what _is transacting_ in the regions above us."--_Dr.
Blair_. "While these things _were transacting_ in Germany."--_Russell's
Modern Europe_, Part First, Let. 59. "As he _was carrying_ to execution, he
demanded to be heard."--_Goldsmith's Greece_, Vol. i, p. 163. "To declare
that the action _was doing_ or done."--_Booth's Introd._, p. 28. "It _is
doing_ by thousands now."--_Abbott's Young Christian_, p. 121. "While the
experiment _was making_, he was watching every movement."--_Ib._, p. 309.
"A series of communications from heaven, which _had been making_ for
fifteen hundred years."--_Ib._, p. 166. "Plutarch's Lives _are
re-printing_."--_L. Murray's Gram._, 8vo, p. 64. "My Lives _are
reprinting_."--DR. JOHNSON: _Worcester's Univ. and Crit. Dict._, p. xlvi.
"All this _has been transacting_ within 130 miles of London."--BYRON:
_Perley's Gram._, p. 37. "When the heart _is corroding_ by
vexations."--_Student's Manual_, p. 336. "The padlocks for our lips _are
forging_."--WHITTIER: _Liberator_, No. 993. "When his throat _is
cutting_."--_Collier's Antoninus_. "While your story _is
telling_."--_Adams's Rhet._, i, 425. "But the seeds of it _were sowing_
some time before."--_Bolingbroke, on History_, p. 168. "As soon as it was
formed, nay even whilst it _was forming_."--_Ib._, p. 163. "Strange schemes
of private ambition _were formed and forming_ there."--_Ib._, p. 291. "Even
when it _was making and made_."--_Ib._, 299. "Which have been made and _are
making_."--HENRY CLAY: _Liberator_, ix, p. 141. "And they are in measure
_sanctified_, or _sanctifying_, by the power thereof."--_Barclay's Works_,
i, 537. "Which _is_ now _accomplishing_ amongst the uncivilized countries
of the earth."--_Chalmers, Sermons_, p. 281. "Who _are ruining_, or
_ruined_, [in] this way."--_Locke, on Ed._, p. 155. "Whilst they _were
undoing_."--_Ibid._ "Whether he was employing fire to consume [something,]
or _was_ himself _consuming_ by fire."--_Crombie, on Etym. and Syntax_, p.
148. "At home, the greatest exertions _are making_ to promote its
progress."--_Sheridan's Elocution_, p. iv. "With those [sounds] which _are
uttering_."--_Ib._, p. 125. "Orders _are now concerting_ for the dismissal
of all officers of the Revenue marine."--_Providence Journal_, Feb. 1,
1850. Expressions of this kind are condemned by some critics, under the
notion that the participle in _ing_ must never be passive; but the usage is
unquestionably of far better authority, and, according to my apprehension,
in far better taste, than the more complex phraseology which some late
writers adopt in its stead; as, "The books _are_ now _being sold_."--"In
all the towns about Cork, the whiskey shops _are being closed_, and soup,
coffee, and tea houses [are] _establishing_ generally."--_Dublin Evening
Post_, 1840.
OBS. 3.--The question here is, Which is the most correct expression, "While
the bridge _was building_,"--"While the bridge was _a_ building,"--or,
"While the bridge _was being built_?" And again, Are they all wrong? If
none of these is right, we must reject them all, and say, "While _they were
building_ the bridge;"--"While the bridge _was in process of
erection_;"--or resort to some other equivalent phrase. Dr. Johnson, after
noticing the compound form of active-intransitives, as, "I _am
going_"--"She _is dying_,"--"The tempest _is raging_,"--"I _have been
walking_," and so forth, adds: "There is another manner of using the active
participle, which gives it a _passive_ signification:[266] as, The grammar
is now printing, _Grammatica jam nunc chartis imprimitur_. The brass is
forging, _Æra excuduntur_. This is, in my opinion," says he, "a _vitious_
expression, probably corrupted from a phrase more pure, but now somewhat
obsolete: The book is _a_ printing, The brass is _a_ forging; _a_ being
properly _at_, and _printing_ and _forging_ verbal nouns signifying action,
according to the analogy of this language."--_Gram. in Joh. Dict._, p. 9.
OBS. 4.--_A_ is certainly sometimes a _preposition_; and, as such, it may
govern a participle, and that without converting it into a "_verbal noun_."
But that such phraseology ought to be preferred to what is exhibited with
so many authorities, in a preceding paragraph, and with an example from
Johnson among the rest, I am not prepared to concede. As to the notion of
introducing a new and more complex passive form of conjugation, as, "The
bridge is _being built_," "The bridge _was being built_," and so forth, it
is one of the most absurd and monstrous innovations ever thought of. Yet
some two or three men, who seem to delight in huge absurdities, declare
that this "modern _innovation_ is _likely to supersede_" the simpler mode
of expression. Thus, in stead of, "The work _is now publishing_," they
choose to say, "The work is _now being published_."--_Kirkham's Gram._, p.
82. This is certainly no better English than, "The work _was being
published, has been being published, had been being published, shall or
will be being published, shall or will have been being published_;" and so
on, through all the moods and tenses. What a language shall we have when
our verbs are thus conjugated!
OBS. 5.--A certain _Irish_ critic, who even outdoes in rashness the
above-cited American, having recently arrived in New York, has republished
a grammar, in which he not only repudiates the passive use of the
participle in _ing_, but denies the usual passive form of the present
tense, "_I am loved, I am smitten_" &c., as taught by Murray and others, to
be good English; and tells us that the true form is, "_I am being loved, I
am being smitten_," &c. See the 98th and 103d pages of _Joseph W. Wright's
Philosophical Grammar_, (_Edition of_ 1838,) _dedicated_ "TO COMMON
SENSE!" [267] But both are offset, if not refuted, by the following
observations from a source decidedly better: "It has lately become common
to use the present participle passive [,] to express the suffering of an
action as _continuing_, instead of the participle in _-ing_ in the passive
sense; thus, instead of, 'The house _is building_,' we now very frequently
hear, 'The house _is being built_.' This mode of expression, besides being
awkward, is incorrect, and _does not express the idea intended_. This will
be obvious, I think, from the following considerations.
"1. The expression, '_is being_,' is equivalent to '_is_,' and expresses no
more; just as, '_is loving_,' is equivalent to, '_loves_.' Hence, '_is
being built_,' is precisely equivalent to, '_is built_.'
"2. '_Built_,' is a perfect participle; and therefore cannot, in any
connexion, express an action, or the suffering of an action, _now in
progress_. The verb _to be_, signifies _to exist_; '_being_,' therefore, is
equivalent to '_existing_.' If then we substitute the synonyme, the nature
of the expression will be obvious; thus, 'the house is _being built_,' is,
in other words, 'the house is _existing built_,' or more simply as before,
'the house _is built_;' plainly importing an action not progressing, but
now _existing in a finished state_.
"3. If the expression, '_is being built_,' be a correct form of the present
indicative passive, then it must be equally correct to say in the perfect,
'_has been being built_;' in the past perfect, '_had been being built_;' in
the present infinitive,'_to be being built_;' in the perfect
infinitive,'_to have been being built_;' and in the present participle,
'_being being built_;' which all will admit to be expressions as incorrect
as they are inelegant, but precisely analogous to that which now begins to
prevail."--_Bullions's Principles of English Gram._, p. 58.
OBS. 6.--It may be replied, that the verbs _to be_ and _to exist_ are not
always synonymous; because the former is often a mere auxiliary, or a mere
copula, whereas the latter always means something positive, as _to be in
being, to be extant_. Thus we may speak of a thing as _being destroyed_, or
may say, it _is annihilated_; but we can by no means speak of it as
_existing destroyed_, or say, it _exists annihilated_. The first argument
above is also nugatory. These drawbacks, however, do not wholly destroy the
force of the foregoing criticism, or at all extenuate the obvious tautology
and impropriety of such phrases as, _is being, was being_, &c. The
gentlemen who affirm that this new form of conjugation "_is being
introduced_ into the language," (since they allow participles to follow
possessive pronouns) may very fairly be asked, "What evidence have you of
_its being being introduced_?" Nor can they, on their own principles,
either object to the monstrous phraseology of this question, or tell how to
better it![268]
OBS. 7.--D. H. Sanborn, an other recent writer, has very emphatically
censured this innovation, as follows: "English and American writers have of
late introduced a new kind of phraseology, which has become quite prevalent
in the periodical and popular publications of the day. Their intention,
doubtless, is, to supersede the use of the verb in the _definite form_,
when it has a passive signification. They say, 'The ship is _being_
built,'--'time is _being wasted_,"--'the work is _being advanced_,' instead
of, 'the ship is _building_, time is _wasting_, the work is _advancing_.'
Such a phraseology is a solecism too palpable to receive any favor; it is
at war with the practice of the most distinguished writers in the English
language, such as Dr. Johnson and Addison. "When an individual says, 'a
house is being burned,' he declares that a house is _existing, burned_,
which is impossible; for _being_ means existing, and _burned, consumed by
fire_. The house ceases to exist as such, after it is consumed by fire. But
when he says, 'a house _is burning_,' we understand that it is _consuming
by fire_; instead of inaccuracy, doubt, and ambiguity, we have a form of
expression perfectly intelligible, beautiful, definite, and
appropriate."--_Sanborn's Analytical Gram._, p. 102.
OBS. 8.--Dr. Perley speaks of this usage thus: "An attempt has been made of
late to introduce a kind of passive participial voice; as, 'The temple is
being built.' This ought not to be encouraged. For, besides being an
innovation, it is less convenient than the use of the present participle in
the passive sense. _Being built_ signifies action _finished_; and how can,
_Is being built_, signify an _action unfinished?"--Perley's Gram._, p. 37.
OBS. 9.--The question now before us has drawn forth, on either side, a deal
of ill scholarship and false logic, of which it would be tedious to give
even a synopsis. Concerning the import of some of our most common words and
phrases, these ingenious masters,--Bullions, Sanborn, and
Perley,--severally assert some things which seem not to be exactly true. It
is remarkable that critics can err in expounding terms so central to the
language, and so familiar to all ears, as "_be, being, being built, burned,
being burned, is, is burned, to be burned_," and the like. _That to be_ and
_to exist_, or their like derivatives, such as _being_ and _existing, is_
and _exists_, cannot always explain each other, is sufficiently shown
above; and thereby is refuted Sanborn's chief argument, that, "_is being
burned_," involves the contradiction of "_existing, burned_," or "_consumed
by fire_." According to his reasoning, as well as that of Bullions, _is
burned_ must mean _exists consumed; was burned, existed consumed_; and thus
our whole passive conjugation would often be found made up of bald
absurdities! That this new _unco-passive_ form conflicts with the older and
better usage of taking the progressive form sometimes passively, is
doubtless a good argument against the innovation; but that "Johnson and
Addison" are fit representatives of the older "practice" in this case, may
be doubted. I know not that the latter has anywhere made use of such
phraseology; and one or two examples from the former are scarcely an offset
to his positive verdict against the usage. See OBS. 3rd, above.
OBS. 10.--As to what is called "_the present_ or _the imperfect participle
passive_,"--as, "_being burned_," or "_being burnt_,"--if it is rightly
interpreted in _any_ of the foregoing citations, it is, beyond question,
very improperly _thus_ named. In participles, _ing_ denotes _continuance_:
thus _being_ usually means _continuing to be; loving, continuing to love;
building, continuing to build_,--or (as taken passively) _continuing to be
built_: i. e., (in words which express the sense more precisely and
certainly,) _continuing to be in process of construction_. What then is
"being built," but "_continuing to be built_," the same, or nearly the
same, as "_building_" taken passively? True it is, that _built_, when
alone, being a perfect participle, does not mean "_in process of
construction_," but rather, "_constructed_" which intimates _completion_;
yet, in the foregoing passive phrases, and others like them, as well as in
all examples of this unco-passive voice, continuance of the passive state
being first suggested, and cessation of the act being either regarded as
future or disregarded, the imperfect participle passive is for the most
part received as equivalent to the simple imperfect used in a passive
sense. But Dr. Bullions, who, after making "_is being built_ precisely
equivalent to _is built_," classes the two participles differently, and
both erroneously,--the one as a "_present_ participle," and the other, of
late, as a "_past_,"--has also said above, "'_Built_,' is a _perfect_
participle: and THEREFORE cannot, in _any connexion_, express an action, or
the suffering of an action, _now in progress_." And Dr. Perley, who also
calls the compound of _being_ a "_present_ participle," argues thus:
"_Being built_ signifies an _action, finished_; and how can _Is being
built_, signify an _action unfinished_?" To expound a _passive_ term
_actively_, or as "signifying _action_," is, at any rate, a near approach
to absurdity; and I shall presently show that the fore-cited notion of "a
perfect participle," now half abandoned by Bullions himself, has been the
seed of the very worst form of that ridiculous neology which the good
Doctor was opposing.
OBS. 11.--These criticisms being based upon the _meaning_ of certain
participles, either alone or in phrases, and the particular terms spoken of
being chiefly meant to represent _classes_, what is said of them may be
understood of their _kinds_. Hence the appropriate _naming_ of the kinds,
so as to convey no false idea of any participle's import, is justly brought
into view; and I may be allowed to say here, that, for the first participle
passive, which begins with "_being_," the epithet "_Imperfect_" is better
than "_Present_," because this compound participle denotes, not always
what is _present_, but always _the state_ of something by which an action
is, _or was, or will be, undergone or undergoing--a state continuing_, or
so regarded, though perhaps the action causative may be ended--or sometimes
perhaps imagined only, and not yet really begun. With a marvellous
instability of doctrine, for the professed systematizer of different
languages and grammars, Dr. Bullions has recently changed his names of the
second and third participles, in both voices, from "_Perfect_" and
"_Compound Perfect_," to "_Past_" and "_Perfect_." His notion now is, that,
"_The Perfect_ participle is always compound; as, _Having finished, Having
been finished_."--_Bullions's Analyt. and Pract. Grammar_, 1849, p. 77. And
what was the "_Perfect_" before, in his several books, is now called the
"_Past_;" though, with this change, he has deliberately made an other which
is repugnant to it: this participle, being the basis of three tenses
always, and of all the tenses sometimes, is now allowed by the Doctor to
lend the term "_perfect_" to the three,--"_Present-perfect, Past-perfect,
Future-perfect,"_--even when itself is named otherwise!
OBS. 12.--From the erroneous conception, that a perfect participle must, in
every connexion, express "_action finished_," _action past_,--or perhaps
from only a moiety of this great error,--the notion that such a participle
cannot, in connexion with an auxiliary, constitute a passive verb of the
_present tense_,--J. W. Wright, above-mentioned, has not very unnaturally
reasoned, that, "The expression, '_I am loved_,' which Mr. Murray has
employed to exhibit the passive conjugation of the _present tense_, may
much more _feasibly_ represent _past_ than _present_ time."--See _Wright's
Philosophical Gram._, p. 99. Accordingly, in his own paradigm of the
passive verb, he has formed _this_ tense solely from what he calls the
participle _present_, thus: "I _am being smitten_, Thou _art being
smitten_," &c.--_Ib._, p. 98. His "_Passed Tense_," too, for some reason
which I do not discover, he distinguishes above the rest by a _double
form_, thus: "I _was smitten, or being smitten_; Thou _wast smitten, or
being smitten_;" &c.--P. 99. In his opinion, "Few will object to _the
propriety of_ the more familiar phraseology, '_I am in the_ ACT,--or,
_suffering_ the ACTION _of_ BEING SMITTEN;' and yet," says he, "in
substance and effect, it is wholly the same as, '_I am being smitten_,'
which is THE TRUE FORM of the verb in the _present_ tense of the _passive
voice!_"--_Ibid._ Had we not met with some similar expressions of English
or American blunderers, "the _act_ or _action of being smitten_," would be
accounted a downright Irish bull; and as to this ultra notion of
neologizing all our passive verbs, by the addition of "_being_,"--with the
author's cool talk of "_the presentation of this theory, and_ [_the_]
_consequent suppression of that hitherto employed_,"--there is a
transcendency in it, worthy of the most sublime aspirant among grammatical
newfanglers.
OBS. 13.--But, with all its boldness of innovation, Wright's Philosophical
Grammar is not a little _self-contradictory_ in its treatment of the
passive verb. The entire "suppression" of the usual form of its present
tense, did not always appear, even to this author, quite so easy and
reasonable a matter, as the foregoing citations would seem to represent it.
The passive use of the participle in _ing_, he has easily disposed of:
despite innumerable authorities for it, one false assertion, of seven
syllables, suffices to make it quite impossible.[269] But the usual passive
form, which, with some show of truth, is accused of not having always
precisely the same meaning as the progressive used passively,--that is, of
not always denoting _continuance in the state of receiving continued
action_,--and which is, for that remarkable reason, judged worthy of
_rejection_, is nevertheless admitted to have, in very many instances, a
conformity to this idea, and therefore to "belong [thus far] to the present
tense."--P. 103. This contradicts to an indefinite extent, the proposition
for its rejection. It is observable also, that the same examples, '_I am
loved_' and 'I _am smitten_,'--the same "_tolerated, but erroneous forms_,"
(so called on page 103,) that are given as specimens of what he would
reject,--though at first pronounced "_equivalent_ in grammatical
construction," censured for the same pretended error, and proposed to be
changed alike to "_the true form_" by the insertion of "_being_,"--are
subsequently declared to "belong to" different classes and different
tenses. "_I am loved_," is referred to that "numerous" class of verbs,
which "_detail_ ACTION _of prior, but retained, endured, and continued
existence_; and therefore, in this sense, _belong to the present tense_."
But "_I am smitten_," is idly reckoned of an opposite class, (said by Dr.
Bullions to be "perhaps the greater number,") whose "ACTIONS described are
neither _continuous_ in their nature, nor _progressive_ in their duration;
but, on the contrary, _completed_ and _perfected_; and [which] are
consequently descriptive of _passed_ time and ACTION."--_Wright's Gram._,
p. 103. Again: "In what instance soever this latter form and signification
_can_ be introduced, _their import should be, and, indeed, ought to be,
supplied by the perfect tense construction_:--for example, '_I am
smitten_,' [should] be, '_I have been smitten_.'"--_Ib._ Here is
self-contradiction indefinitely extended _in an other way_. Many a good
phrase, if not every one, that the author's first suggestion would turn to
the unco-passive form, his present "_remedy_" would about as absurdly
convert into "the perfect tense."
OBS. 14.--But Wright's inconsistency, about this matter, ends not here: it
runs through all he says of it; for, in this instance, error and
inconsistency constitute his whole story. In one place, he anticipates and
answers a question thus: "To what tense do the constructions, 'I am
pleased;' 'He is expected;' '_I am smitten_;' 'He is bound;' belong?" "We
answer:--_So far as_ these and like constructions are applicable to the
delineation of _continuous_ and _retained_ ACTION, they express _present_
time; and must be treated accordingly."--P. 103. This seems to intimate
that even, "_I am smitten_," and its likes, as they stand, may have some
good claim to be of the present tense; which suggestion is contrary to
several others made by the author. To expound this, or any other passive
term, _passively_, never enters his mind: with him, as with sundry others,
"ACTION," "_finished_ ACTION," or "_progressive_ ACTION," is all any
_passive_ verb or participle ever means! No marvel, that awkward
perversions of the forms of utterance and the principles of grammar should
follow such interpretation. In Wright's syntax a very queer distinction is
apparently made between a passive verb, and the participle chiefly
constituting it; and here, too, through a fancied ellipsis of "_being_"
before the latter, most, if not all, of his other positions concerning
passives, are again disastrously overthrown by something worse--a word
"_imperceptibly understood_." "'_I am smitten_;' '_I was smitten_;' &c.,
are," he says, "the _universally acknowledged forms_ of the VERBS in these
tenses, in the passive voice:--not of the _PARTICIPLE_. In all verbal
constructions of the character of which we have hitherto treated, (see page
103) _and, where_ the ACTIONS described are _continuous_ in their
_operations_,--the participle BEING is _imperceptibly omitted, by
ellipsis_."--P. 144.
OBS. 15.--Dr. Bullions has stated, that, "The present participle active,
and the present participle passive, are _not counterparts_ to each other in
signification; [,] the one signifying the present doing, and the other the
present suffering of an action, [;] for the latter _always intimates the
present being of an_ ACT, _not in progress, but completed_."--_Prin. of
Eng. Gram._, p. 58. In this, he errs no less grossly than in his idea of
the "_action_ or the suffering" expressed by "a _perfect_ participle," as
cited in OBS. 5th above; namely, that it must have _ceased_. Worse
interpretation, or balder absurdity, is scarcely to be met with; and yet
the reverend Doctor, great linguist as he should be, was here only trying
to think and tell the common import of a very common sort of _English_
participles; such as, "_being loved_" and "_being seen_." In grammar, "_an
act_," that has "_present being_," can be nothing else than an act now
doing, or "_in progress_;" and if, "_the present being of an_ ACT _not in
progress_," were here a possible thought, it surely could not be intimated
by any _such_ participle. In Acts, i, 3 and 4, it is stated, that our
Saviour showed himself to the apostles, "alive after his passion, by many
infallible proofs, _being seen_ of them forty days, and _speaking_ of the
things _pertaining_ to the kingdom of God; and, _being assembled_ together
with them commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem." Now,
of these misnamed "_present_ participles," we have here one "_active_," one
"_passive_," and two others--(one in each form--) that are _neuter_; but
_no present time_, except what is in the indefinite date of "_pertaining_."
The events are past, and were so in the days of St. Luke. Yet each of the
participles denotes _continuance_: not, indeed, in or to the _present
time_, but _for a time_. "_Being seen_" means _continuing to be seen_; and,
in this instance, the period of the continuance was "forty days" of time
past. But, according to the above-cited "_principle of English Grammar_,"
so long and so widely inculcated by "the Rev. Peter Bullions, D. D.,
Professor of Languages," &c.,--a central principle of interpretation,
presumed by him to hold "_always_"--this participle must intimate "_the
present being of an act, not in progress, but completed_;"--that is, "_the
present being of" the apostles' act in formerly seeing the risen Saviour_!
OBS. 16.--This grammarian has lately taken a deal of needless pains to
sustain, by a studied division of verbs into two classes, similar to those
which are mentioned in OBS. 13th above, a part of the philosophy of J. W.
Wright, concerning our usual form of passives in the present tense. But, as
he now will have it, that the two voices sometimes tally as counterparts,
it is plain that he adheres but partially to his former erroneous
conception of a perfect or "past" participle, and the terms which hold it
"in any connexion." The awkward substitutes proposed by the Irish critic,
he does not indeed countenance; but argues against them still, and, in some
respects, very justly. The doctrine now common to these authors, on this
point, is the highly important one, that, in respect to half our verbs,
what we commonly take for the passive present, _is not such_--that, in "the
_second_ class, (perhaps the greater number,) the _present-passive_ implies
that _the act expressed by the active voice has ceased_. Thus, 'The house
is built.' * * * Strictly speaking, then," says the Doctor, "the PAST
PARTICIPLE with the verb TO BE _is not the present tense in the passive
voice of verbs thus used_; that is, this form does not express passively
the _doing_ of the act."--_Bullions's Analyt. and Pract. Grammar_, Ed. of
1849, p. 235. Thus far these two authors agree; except that Wright seems to
have avoided the incongruity of _calling_ that "_the present-passive_"
which he _denies_ to be such. But the Doctor, approving none of this
practitioner's "remedies," and being less solicitous to provide other
treatment than expulsion for the thousands of present passives which both
deem spurious, adds, as from the chair, this verdict: "These verbs either
_have no present-passive_, or it is made by annexing the participle in
_ing_, in its passive sense, to the verb _to be_; as, 'The house _is
building_.'"--_Ib._, p. 236.
OBS. 17.--It would seem, that Dr. Bullions thinks, and in reality Wright
also, that nothing can be a present passive, but what "_expresses passively
the_ DOING _of the act_." This is about as wise, as to try to imagine every
active verb to _express actively the receiving of an act_! It borders
exceedingly hard upon absurdity; it very much resembles the nonsense of
"_expressing receptively the giving of something_!" Besides, the word
"DOING," being used substantively, does not determine well what is here
meant; which is, I suppose, _continuance_, or an _unfinished state_ of the
act received--an idea which seems adapted to the participle in _ing_, but
which it is certainly no fault of a participle ending in _d, t_, or _n_,
not to suggest. To "_express passively the doing of the act_," if the
language means any thing rational, may be, simply to say, that the act _is_
or _was done_. For "_doings_" are, as often as any-wise, "_things done_,"
as _buildings_ are _fabrics built_; and "_is built_," and "_am smitten_,"
the gentlemen's choice examples of _false passives_, and of "_actions
finished_,"--though neither of them necessarily intimates either
continuance or cessation of the act suffered, or, if it did, would be the
less or the more passive or present,--may, in such a sense, "express _the
doing_ of the act," if any passives can:--nay, the "finished act" has such
completion as may be stated with degrees of progress or of frequency; as,
"The house _is partly built_."--"I _am oftener smitten_." There is,
undoubtedly, some difference between the assertions, "The house _is
building_,"--and, "The house _is partly built_;" though, for practical
purposes, perhaps, we need not always be very nice in choosing between
them. For the sake of variety, however, if for nothing else, it is to be
hoped, the doctrine above-cited, which limits half our passive verbs of the
present tense, _to the progressive form only_, will not soon be generally
approved. It impairs the language more than unco-passives are likely ever
to corrupt it.
OBS. 18.--"No _startling novelties_ have been introduced," says the preface
to the "Analytical and Practical Grammar of the English Language." To have
shunned all shocking innovations, is only to have exercised common
prudence. It is not pretended, that any of the Doctor's errors here
remarked upon, or elsewhere in this treatise, will _startle_ any body; but,
if errors exist, even in plausible guise, it may not be amiss, if I tell of
them. To suppose every verb or participle to be either "_transitive_" or
"_intransitive_," setting all _passives_ with the former sort, all
_neuters_ with the latter; (p. 59;)--to define the _transitive_ verb or
participle as expressing always "_an act_ DONE _by one person or thing to
another_;" (p. 60;)--to say, after making passive verbs transitive, "The
object of a transitive verb is in the _objective case_," and, "A verb that
does not make sense with an objective after it, is intransitive;" (p.
60;)--to insist upon a precise and almost universal _identity of "meaning_"
in terms so obviously _contrasted_ as are the two voices, "active" and
"passive;" (pp. 95 and 235;)--to allege, as a general principle, "that
whether we use the active, or the passive voice, _the meaning is the same_,
except in some cases in the present tense;" (p. 67;)--to attribute to the
forms naturally opposite in voice and sense, that sameness of meaning which
is observable only in certain _whole sentences_ formed from them; (pp. 67,
95, and 235;)--to assume that each "VOICE is a particular _form of the
verb_," yet make it include _two cases_, and often a preposition before one
of them; (pp. 66, 67, and 95;)--to pretend from the words, "The PASSIVE
VOICE represents the subject of the verb as _acted upon_," (p. 67,) that,
"_According to the_ DEFINITION, the passive voice expresses, passively,
_the same thing_ that the active does actively;" (p. 235;)--to affirm that,
"'Cæsar _conquered_ Gaul,' and 'Gaul _was conquered_ by Cæsar,' express
_precisely the same idea_,"--and then say, "It will be felt at once that
the expressions, 'Cæsar _conquers_ Gaul,' and 'Gaul _is conquered_ by
Cæsar,' _do not express the same thing_;" (p. 235;)--to deny that passive
verbs or neuter are worthy to constitute a distinct class, yet profess to
find, in one single tense of the former, such a difference of meaning as
warrants a general division of verbs in respect to it; (_ib._;)--to
announce, in bad English, that, "_In regard to this matter_ [,] there are
evidently Two CLASSES of verbs; namely, those _whose_ present-passive
expresses precisely the same thing, passively, as the active voice does
actively, and those _in which it_ does not:" (_ib._;)--to do these several
things, as they have been done, is, to set forth, not "novelties" only, but
errors and inconsistencies.
OBS. 19.--Dr. Bullions still adheres to his old argument, that _being_
after its own verb must be devoid of meaning; or, in his own words, "that
_is being built_, if it mean anything, can mean nothing more than _is
built_, which is not the idea intended to be expressed."--_Analyt. and
Pract. Gram._, p. 237. He had said, (as cited in OBS. 5th above,) "The
expression, '_is being_,' is equivalent to _is_, and expresses _no more_;
just as, '_is loving_,' is equivalent to '_loves_.' Hence, '_is being
built_,' is precisely equivalent to '_is built_.'"--_Principles of E.
Gram._, p. 58. He has now discovered "that _there is no progressive form_
of the verb _to be_, and no need of it:" and that, "hence, _there is no
such expression_ in English as _is being_."--_Analyt. and Pract. Gram._, p.
236. He should have noticed also, that "_is loving_" is not an authorized
"equivalent to _loves_;" and, further, that the error of saying "_is being
built_," is only in the relation of the _first two words_ to each other. If
"_is being_," and "_is loving_," are left unused for the same reason, the
truth may be, that _is_ itself, like _loves_, commonly denotes
"_continuance_;" and that _being_ after it, in stead of being necessary or
proper, can only be awkwardly tautologous. This is, in fact, THE GRAND
OBJECTION to the new phraseology--"_is being practised_"--"_am being
smitten_"--and the like. Were there no danger that petty writers would one
day seize upon it with like avidity, an other innovation, exactly similar
to this in every thing but tense--similar in awkwardness, in tautology, in
unmistakeableness--might here be uttered for the sake of illustration. Some
men conceive, that "The _perfect_ participle is always compound; as,
_having seen, having written_;"--and that the simple word, _seen_ or
_written_, had originally, and still ought to have, only a passive
construction. For such views, they find authorities. Hence, in lieu of the
common phrases, "_had we seen_," "_we have written_," they adopt such
English as this; "_Had we having seen_ you, we should have stopped."--"_We
have having written_ but just now, to our correspondent." Now, "_We are
being smitten_," is no better grammar than this;--and no worse: "The idea
intended" is in no great jeopardy in either case.
OBS. 20.--J. R. Chandler, of Philadelphia, in his Common School Grammar of
1847, has earnestly undertaken the _defence_ of this new and much-mooted
passive expression: which he calls "_the Definite Passive Voice_," or "_the
Passive Voice of the Definite Form_." He admits it, however, to be a form
that "does not _sound well_,"--a "_novelty_ that strikes the ear
unpleasantly;" but he will have the defect to be, not in the tautologous
conceit of "_is being_," "_was being_," "_has been being_," and the like,
but in everybody's organ of hearing,--supposing all ears corrupted, "from
infancy," to a distaste for correct speech, by "the habit of _hearing_ and
using words _ungrammatically_!"--See p. 89. Claiming this new form as "_the
true passive_," in just contrast with the progressive active, he not only
rebukes all attempts "to evade" the use of it, "by some real or supposed
_equivalent_," but also declares, that, "The attempt to deprive the
transitive definite verb of [this] _its passive voice_, is _to strike at
the foundation of the language_, and _to strip it of one of its most
important qualities_; that of making both actor and sufferer, each in turn
and at pleasure, the subject of conversation."--_Ibid._ Concerning
_equivalents_, he evidently argues fallaciously; for he urges, that the
using of them "_does not dispense with the necessity of the definite
passive voice_."--P. 88. But it is plain, that, of the many fair
substitutes which may in most cases be found, if any one is preferred, this
form, and all the rest, are of course rejected for the time.
OBS. 21.--By Chandler, as well as others, this new passive form is
justified only on the supposition, that the simple participle in _ing_ can
never with propriety be used passively. No plausible argument, indeed, can
be framed for it, without the assumption, that the simpler form, when used
in the same sense, _is ungrammatical_. But this is, in fact, a begging of
the main question; and that, in opposition to abundant authority for the
usage condemned. (See OBS. 3d, above.) This author pretends that, "_The
RULE of all grammarians_ declares the verb _is_, and a _present participle_
(_is building_, or _is writing_), to be in the active voice" only.--P. 88.
(I add the word "_only_," but this is what he means, else he merely
quibbles.) Now in this idea he is wrong, and so are the several grammarians
who support the principle of this imaginary "_RULE_." The opinion of
critics in general would be better represented by the following suggestions
of the Rev. W. Allen: "When the English verb does not signify _mental
affection_, the distinction of voice is often disregarded: thus we say,
_actively_, they _were selling_ fruit; and, _passively_, the books _are_
now _selling_. The same remark applies to the participle used as a noun:
as, actively, _drawing_ is an elegant amusement, _building_ is expensive;
and, passively, his _drawings_ are good, this is a fine
_building_."--_Allen's Elements of E. Gram._, p. 82.
OBS. 22.--Chandler admits, that, "When it is said, 'The house is
_building_,' the meaning is easily obtained; though," he strangely insists,
"_it is exactly opposite to the assertion_."--P. 89. He endeavours to show,
moreover, by a fictitious example made for the purpose, that the
progressive form, if used in both voices, will be liable to ambiguity. It
may, perhaps, be so in some instances; but, were there weight enough in the
objection to condemn the passive usage altogether, one would suppose there
might be found, somewhere, _an actual example or two_ of the abuse. Not
concurring with Dr. Bullions in the notion that the active voice and the
passive usually "express precisely the same thing," this critic concludes
his argument with the following sentence: "There is an _important
difference_ between _doing_ and _suffering_; and that _difference is
grammatically shown_ by the appropriate use of the active and passive
voices of a verb."--_Chandler's Common School Gram._, p. 89.
OBS. 23.--The opinion given at the close of OBS. 2d above, was first
published in 1833. An opposite doctrine, with the suggestion that it is
"_improper_ to say, '_the house is building_,' instead of 'the house _is
being built_,'"--is found on page 64th of the Rev. David Blair's Grammar,
of 1815,--"Seventh Edition," with a preface dated, "_October 20th_, 1814."
To any grammarian who wrote at a period much earlier than that, the
question about _unco-passives_ never occurred. Many critics have passed
judgement upon them since, and so generally with reprobation, that the man
must have more hardihood than sense, who will yet disgust his readers or
hearers with them.[270] That "This new form has been used by _some
respectable writers_," we need not deny; but let us look at the given
"_instances of it_: 'For those who _are being educated_ in our seminaries.'
R. SOUTHEY.--'It _was being uttered_.' COLERIDGE.--'The foundation _was
being laid_.' BRIT. CRITIC."--_English Grammar with Worcester's Univ. and
Crit. Dict._, p. xlvi. Here, for the first example, it would be much better
to say, "For those who _are educated_," [271]--or, "who _are receiving
their education_;" for the others, "It _was uttering_,"--"_was
uttered_,"--or, "_was in uttering_."--"The foundation _was laying_,"--"_was
laid_,"--or, "_was about being laid_." Worcester's opinion of the "new
form" is to be inferred from his manner of naming it in the following
sentence: "Within a few years, a _strange and awkward_ neologism has been
introduced, by which the _present passive participle_ is substituted, in
such cases as the above, for the participle in _ing_."--_Ibid._ He has two
instances more, in each of which the phrase is linked with an expression of
disapprobation; "' It [[Greek: tetymmenos]] signifies properly, though _in
uncouth English_, one who _is being beaten_.' ABP. WHATELY.--'The bridge
_is being built_, and other phrases of the like kind, _have_ pained the
eye.' D. BOOTH."--_Ibid._[272]
OBS. 24.--Richard Hiley, in the third edition of his Grammar, published in
London, in 1840, after showing the passive use of the participle in _ing_,
proceeds thus: "No ambiguity arises, we presume, from the use of the
participle in this manner. To avoid, however, affixing a passive
signification to the participle in _ing_, an attempt has lately been made
to substitute the passive participle in its place. Thus instead of 'The
house was _building_,' 'The work _imprinting_,' we sometimes hear, 'The
house was _being built_,' 'The work is _being printed_.' But this mode is
_contrary to the English idiom_, and has not yet obtained the sanction of
reputable authority."--_Hiley's Gram._, p. 30.
OBS. 25.--Professor Hart, of Philadelphia, whose English Grammar was first
published in 1845, justly prefers the usage which takes the progressive
form occasionally in a passive sense; but, in arguing against the new
substitute, he evidently remoulds the early reasoning of Dr. Bullions,
errors and all; a part of which he introduces thus: "I know the correctness
of this mode of expression has lately been very much assailed, and an
attempt, to some extent successful, has been made [,] to introduce the form
[,] _'is being built.'_ But, in the first place, the old mode of expression
is a well established usage of the language, being found in our best and
most correct writers. Secondly, _is being built_ does not convey the idea
intended, [;] namely [,] that of _progressive action. Is being_, taken
together, means simply _is_, just as _is writing_ means _writes_;
therefore, _is being built_ means _is built_, a perfect and not a
progressive ACTION. Or, if _being_ [and] _built_ be taken together, _they
signify an_ ACTION COMPLETE, and the phrase means, as before, _the house
is_ (EXISTS) _being built_."--_Hart's Gram._, p. 76. The last three
sentences here are liable to many objections, some of which are suggested
above.
OBS. 26.--It is important, that the central phraseology of our language be
so understood, as not to be _misinterpreted with credit_, or falsely
expounded by popular critics and teachers. Hence errors of _exposition_ are
the more particularly noticed in these observations. In "_being built_,"
Prof. Hart, like sundry authors named above, finds nothing but "ACTION
COMPLETE." Without doubt, Butler interprets better, when he says, "'The
house _is built_,' denotes an _existing state_, rather than a _completed
action_." But this author, too, in his next three sentences, utters as many
errors; for he adds: "The name of the agent _cannot be expressed_ in
phrases of this kind. We _cannot say_, 'The house is built _by John_.' When
we say, 'The house is built by mechanics,' we _do not express an existing
state_."--_Butler's Practical Gram._, p. 80. Unquestionably, "_is built by
mechanics_," expresses _nothing else_ than the "_existing state_" of being
"built by mechanics," together with an affirmation:--that is, the "existing
state" of receiving the action of mechanics, is affirmed of "the house."
And, in my judgement, one may very well say, "_The house is built by
John_;" meaning, "_John is building the house._" St. Paul says, "Every
house _is builded by_ SOME MAN."--_Heb._, iii, 4. In this text, the common
"name of the agent" is "expressed."
OBS. 27.--Wells and Weld, whose grammars date from 1846, being remarkably
chary of finding anything wrong in "respectable writers," hazard no opinion
of their own, concerning the correctness or incorrectness of either of the
usages under discussion. They do not always see absurdity in the
approbation of opposites; yet one should here, perhaps, count them with the
majorities they allow. The latter says, "The participle in _ing_ is
sometimes used passively; as, forty and six years was this temple in
_building_; not in _being built_."--_Weld's English Gram._, 2d Ed., p. 170.
Here, if he means to suggest, that "_in being built_" would "not" be good
English, he teaches very erroneously; if his thought is, that this phrase
would "not" express the sense of the former one, "_in building_," he
palpably contradicts his own position! But he proceeds, in a note, thus:
"The form of expression, _is being built, is being committed_, &c., is
almost universally condemned by grammarians; but it is _sometimes_ met with
in respectable writers. It occurs most frequently in newspaper paragraphs,
and in hasty compositions."--_Ibid._ Wells comments thus: "Different
opinions have long existed among critics respecting this passive use of
the imperfect participle. Many respectable writers substitute the compound
passive participle; as, 'The house is _being built_;' 'The book is _being
printed_.' But the prevailing practice of the best authors is in favor of
the _simple form_; as, 'The house _is building_.'"--_Wells's School Gram._,
1st Ed., p. 148; 113th Ed., p. 161.[273]
OBS. 28.--S. W. Clark, in the second edition of his Practical Grammar,
stereotyped and published in New York in 1848, appears to favour the
insertion of "_being_" into passive verbs; but his instructions are so
obscure, so often inaccurate, and so incompatible one with an other, that
it is hard to say, with certainty, what he approves. In one place, he has
this position: "The Passive Voice of a verb is formed by adding the
_Passive Participle_ of that verb, to the verb _be_. EXAMPLES--To _be_
loved. I _am_ feared. They _are_ worshipped."--Page 69. In an other, he has
this: "When the Subject is to be represented as receiving the action, _the
Passive Participle_ should be used. EXAMPLE--Henry's _lesson_ is BEING
RECITED."--P. 132. Now these two positions utterly confound each other; for
they are equally general, and "_the Passive Participle_" is first one
thing, and then an other. Again, he has the following assertions, both
false: "The Present (or First) Participle _always_ ends in _ing_, and is
_limited to the Active Voice_. The Past (or Second) Participle of Regular
Verbs ends in _d_ or _ed_, and is _limited to the Passive Voice_."--P. 131.
Afterwards, in spite of the fancied limitation, he acknowledges the passive
use of the participle in _ing_, and that there is "_authority_" for it;
but, at the same time, most absurdly supposes the word to predicate
"_action_," and also to be _wrong_: saying, "_Action_ is _sometimes_
predicated of a _passive_ subject. EXAMPLE--'The _house is building_,..
for.. 'The _house is being built_,'.. which means.. The house _is becoming
built_." On this, he remarks thus: "This is one of the instances in which
_Authority_ is against _Philosophy_. For an _act_ cannot _properly_ be
predicated of a _passive agent_. Many good writers _properly reject_ this
idiom. 'Mansfield's prophecy _is being realized_.'--MICHELET'S
LUTHER."--_Clark's Practical Gram._, p. 133. It may require some study to
learn from this _which idiom it is_. that these "many good writers reject:"
but the grammarian who can talk of "_a passive agent_," without perceiving
that the phrase is self-contradictory and absurd, may well be expected to
entertain a "Philosophy" which is against "Authority," and likewise to
prefer a ridiculous innovation to good and established usage.
OBS. 29.--As
most verbs are susceptible of both forms, the simple active and the
compound or progressive, and likewise of a transitive and an intransitive
sense in each; and as many, when taken intransitively, may have a meaning
which is scarcely distinguishable from that of the passive form; it often
happens that this substitution of the imperfect participle passive for the
simple imperfect in _ing_, is quite needless, even when the latter is not
considered passive. For example: "See by the following paragraph, how
widely the bane _is being circulated!_"--_Liberator_, No. 999, p. 34. Here
_is circulating_ would be better; and so would _is circulated_. Nor would
either of these much vary the sense, if at all; for "_circulate_" may mean,
according to Webster, "_to be diffused_," or, as Johnson and Worcester have
it, "_to be dispersed_." See the second marginal note on p. 378.
OBS. 30.--R. G. Parker appears to have formed a just opinion of the "modern
innovation," the arguments for which are so largely examined in the
foregoing observations; but the "principle" which he adduces as
"conclusive" against it, if _principle_ it can be called, has scarcely any
bearing on the question; certainly no more than has the simple assertion of
one reputable critic, that our participle in _ing_ may occasionally be used
passively. "Such expressions as the following," says he, "have recently
become very common, not only in the periodical publications of the day, but
are likewise finding favor with popular writers; as, 'The house _is being
built_.' 'The street _is being paved_.' 'The actions that _are_ now _being
performed_,' &c. 'The patents _are being prepared_.' The usage of the best
writers does not sanction these expressions; and Mr. Pickbourn lays down
the following principle, which is conclusive upon the subject. '_Whenever
the participle_ in _ing_ is joined by an auxiliary verb to a nominative
capable of the action, it is taken actively; but, when joined to one
incapable of the action, it becomes passive. If we say, _The man are
building a house_, the participle _building_ is evidently used in an active
sense; _because_ the men are capable of the action. But when we say, _The
house is building_, or, _Patents are preparing_, the participles _building_
and _preparing_ must necessarily be understood in a passive sense; because
neither the house nor the patents are capable of action.'--See Pickbourn on
the English Verb, pp. 78-80."--_Parker's Aids to English Composition_, p.
105. Pickbourn wrote his Dissertation before the question arose which he is
here supposed to decide. Nor is he right in assuming that the common
Progressive Form, of which he speaks, must be either _active-transitive_ or
_passive_: I have shown above that it may be _active-intransitive_, and
perhaps, in a few instances, _neuter_. The class of the verb is determined
by something else than the mere _capableness_ of the "_nominative_."
III. FORM OF PASSIVE VERBS.
Passive verbs, in English, are always of a
compound form; being made from active-transitive verbs, by adding the
Perfect Participle to the auxiliary verb BE, through all its changes: thus
from the active-transitive verb _love_, is formed the passive verb _be
loved_.
FIFTH EXAMPLE.
The regular passive verb BE LOVED, conjugated affirmatively.
PRINCIPAL PARTS or THE ACTIVE VERB.
_Present_. _Preterit_. _Imp. Participle_. _Perf. Participle_.
Love. Loved. Loving. Loved.
INFINITIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
To be loved.
PERFECT TENSE.
To have been loved.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I am loved, 1. We are loved,
2. Thou art loved, 2. You are loved,
3. He is loved; 3. They are loved.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I was loved, 1. We were loved,
2. Thou wast loved, 2. You were loved,
3. He was loved; 3. They were loved.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I have been loved, 1. We have been loved,
2. Thou hast been loved, 2. You have been loved,
3. He has been loved; 3. They have been loved.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I had been loved, 1. We had been loved,
2. Thou hadst been loved, 2. You had been loved,
3. He had been loved; 3. They had been loved.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I shall be loved, 1. We shall be loved,
2. Thou wilt be loved, 2. You will be loved,
3. He will be loved; 3. They will be loved.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I shall have been loved, 1. We shall have been loved,
2. Thou wilt have been loved, 2. You will have been loved,
3. He will have been loved; 3. They will have been loved.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I may be loved, 1. We may be loved,
2. Thou mayst be loved, 2. You may be loved,
3. He may be loved; 3. They may be loved.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might be loved, 1. We might be loved,
2. Thou mightst be loved, 2. You might be loved,
3. He might be loved; 3. They might be loved.
PERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I may have been loved, 1. We may have been loved,
2. Thou mayst have been loved, 2. You may have been loved,
3. He may have been loved; 3. They may have been loved.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. I might have been loved, 1. We might have been loved,
2. Thou mightst have been loved, 2. You might have been loved,
3. He might have been loved; 3. They might have been loved.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I be loved, 1. If we be loved,
2. If thou be loved, 2. If you be loved,
3. If he be loved; 3. If they be loved.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. If I were loved, 1. If we were loved,
2. If thou were loved, 2. If you were loved,
3. If he were loved; 3. If they were loved.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. 2. Be [thou] loved, _or_ Do thou be loved;
_Plural_. 2. Be [ye or you] loved, _or_ Do you be loved.
PARTICIPLES.
1. _The Imperfect_. 2. _The Perfect_. 3. _The Preperfect_.
Being loved. Loved. Having been loved.
FAMILIAR FORM WITH 'THOU.' NOTE.--In the familiar style, the second person
singular of this verb, is usually and more properly formed thus: IND. Thou
art loved, Thou was loved, Thou hast been loved, Thou had been loved, Thou
shall or will be loved, Thou shall or will have been loved. POT. Thou may,
can, _or_ must be loved; Thou might, could, would, _or_ should be loved;
Thou may, can, _or_ must have been loved; Thou might, could, would, _or_
should have been loved. SUBJ. If thou be loved, If thou were loved. IMP. Be
[thou] loved, or Do thou be loved.
OBSERVATIONS.
OBS. 1.--A few active-intransitive verbs, that signify mere motion, change
of place, or change of condition, may be put into this form, with a
_neuter_ signification; making not _passive_ but _neuter_ verbs, which
express nothing more than the state which results from the change: as, "_I
am come_."--"She _is gone_."--"He _is risen_."--"They _are fallen_." These
are what Dr. Johnson and some others call "_neuter_ passives;" a name which
never was very proper, and for which we have no frequent use.
OBS. 2.--Most neuter verbs of the passive form, such as, "_am grown, art
become, is lain, are flown, are vanished, are departed, was sat, were
arrived_," may now be considered errors of conjugation, or perhaps of
syntax. In the verb, _to be mistaken_, there is an irregularity which ought
to be particularly noticed. When applied to _persons_, this verb is
commonly taken in a _neuter_ sense, and signifies, _to be in error, to be
wrong_; as, "I _am mistaken_, thou _art mistaken_, he _is mistake_." But,
when used of _things_, it is a proper passive verb, and signifies, _to be
misunderstood_, or _to be taken wrong_; as, "The sense of the passage _is
mistaken_; that is, not rightly understood." See _Webster's Dict., w.
Mistaken_. "I have known a shadow across a brook _to be mistaken_ for a
footbridge."
OBS. 3.--Passive verbs may be easily distinguished from neuter verbs of the
same form, by a reference to the agent or instrument, common to the former
class, but not to the latter. This frequently is, and always may be,
expressed after _passive_ verbs; but never is, and never can be, expressed
after _neuter_ verbs: as, "The thief has been caught _by the officer_."--
"Pens are made _with a knife_." Here the verbs are passive; but, "_I am not
yet ascended_," (John, xx, 17,) is not passive, because it does not convey
the idea of being ascended _by_ some one's agency.
OBS. 4.--Our ancient writers, after the manner of the French, very
frequently employed this mode of conjugation in a neuter sense; but, with a
very few exceptions, present usage is clearly in favour of the auxiliary
_have_ in preference to _be_, whenever the verb formed with the perfect
participle is not passive; as, "They _have_ arrived,"--not, "They _are_
arrived." Hence such examples as the following, are not now good English:
"All these reasons _are_ now ceased."--_Butler's Analogy_, p. 157. Say,
"_have now_ ceased." "Whether he _were_ not got beyond the reach of his
faculties."--_Ib._, p. 158. Say, "_had_ not got." "Which _is_ now grown
wholly obsolete."--_Churchill's Gram._, p. 330. Say, "_has_ now grown."
"And when he _was_ entered into a ship."--_Bible_. Say, "_had_ entered."--
"What _is_ become of decency and virtue?"--_Murray's Key_, p. 196. Say,
"_has_ become."
OBS. 5.--Dr. Priestley says, "It seems _not to have been determined_ by the
English grammarians, whether the _passive_ participles of verbs neuter
require the auxiliary _am_ or _have_ before them. The French, in this case,
confine themselves strictly to the former. 'What _has become_ of national
liberty?' Hume's History, Vol. 6. p. 254. The French would say, _what is
become_; and, in this instance, perhaps, with more propriety."--
_Priestley's Gram._, p. 128. It is no marvel that those writers who have
not rightly made up their minds upon this point of English grammar, should
consequently fall into many mistakes. The perfect participle of a neuter
verb is not "_passive_," as the doctor seems to suppose it to be; and the
mode of conjugation which he here inclines to prefer, is a mere
_Gallicism_, which is fast wearing out from our language, and is even now
but little countenanced by good writers.
OBS. 6.--There are a few verbs of the passive form which seem to imply that
a person's own mind is the agent that actuates him; as, "The editor _is
rejoiced_ to think," &c.--_Juvenile Keepsake_. "I _am resolved_ what to
do."--_Luke_, xvi, 4. "He _was resolved_ on going to the city to
reside."--_Comly's Gram._, p. 114. "James _was resolved_ not to indulge
himself."--_Murray's Key_, ii, 220. "He _is inclined_ to go."--"He _is
determined_ to go."--"He _is bent_ on going." These are properly passive
verbs, notwithstanding there are active forms which are nearly equivalent
to most of them; as, "The editor _rejoices_ to think."--"I _know_ what to
do."--"He _had resolved_ on going."--"James _resolved_ not to indulge
himself." So in the phrase, "I _am ashamed_ to beg," we seem to have a
passive verb of this sort; but, the verb _to ashame_ being now obsolete,
_ashamed_ is commonly reckoned an _adjective_. Yet we cannot put it before
a noun, after the usual manner of adjectives. _To be indebted_, is an other
expression of the same kind. In the following example, "_am remember'd_" is
used for _do remember_, and, in my opinion, _inaccurately_:
"He said mine eyes were black, and my hair black;
And, now I _am remember'd_, scorn'd at me."--_Shakspeare_.
IV. FORM OF NEGATION.
A verb is conjugated _negatively_, by placing the adverb _not_ after it, or
after the first auxiliary; but the infinitive and participles take the
negative first: as, Not to love, Not to have loved; Not loving, Not loved,
Not having loved.
FIRST PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. I love not, _or_ I do not love; I loved not, _or_ I did not love; I
have not loved; I had not loved; I shall not, _or_ will not, love; I shall
not, _or_ will not, have loved. POT. I may, can, _or_ must not love; I
might, could, would, _or_ should not love; I may, can, _or_ must not have
loved; I might, could, would, _or_ should not have loved, SUBJ. If I love
not, If I loved not.
SECOND PERSON SINGULAR.
SOLEMN STYLE:--IND. Thou lovest not, _or_ Thou dost not love; Thou lovedst
not, _or_ Thou didst not love; Thou hast not loved; Thou hadst not loved;
Thou shalt not, _or_ wilt not, love; Thou shalt not, _or_ wilt not, have
loved. POT. Thou mayst, canst, _or_ must not love; Thou mightst, couldst,
wouldst, _or_ shouldst not love; Thou mayst, canst, _or_ must not have
loved; Thou mightst, couldst, wouldst, _or_ shouldst not have loved. SUBJ.
If thou love not, If thou loved not. IMP. Love [thou] not, _or_ Do thou not
love.
FAMILIAR STYLE:--IND. Thou lov'st not, _or_ Thou dost not love; Thou loved
not, _or_ Thou did not love; Thou hast not loved; Thou had not loved; Thou
shall not, _or_ will not, love; Thou shall not, _or_ will not, have loved.
POT. Thou may, can, _or_ must not love; Thou might, could, would, _or_
should not love; Thou may, can, _or_ must not have loved; Thou might,
could, would, _or_ should not have loved. SUBJ. If thou love not, If thou
loved not. IMP. Love [thou] not, _or_ Do [thou] not love.
THIRD PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. He loves not, _or_ He does not love; He loved not, _or_ He did not
love; He has not loved; He had not loved; He shall not, _or_ will not,
love; He shall not, _or_ will not, have loved. POT. He may, can, _or_ must
not love; He might, could, would, _or_ should not love; He may, can, _or_
must not have loved; He might, could, would, _or_ should not have loved.
SUBJ. If he love not, If he loved not.
V. FORM OF QUESTION.
A verb is conjugated _interrogatively_, in the indicative and potential
moods, by placing the nominative after it, or after the first auxiliary:
as,
FIRST PERSON SINGULAR.