containing a nominative and a verb; as, "Reward sweetens labour."
The _principal parts_ of a sentence are usually three; namely, the SUBJECT,
or nominative,--the attribute, or finite VERB,--and the case put after, or
the OBJECT[322] governed by the verb: as, "_Crimes deserve punishment_."
The _other_ or _subordinate parts_ depend upon these, either as primary or
as secondary _adjuncts_; as, "_High_ crimes _justly_ deserve _very severe_
punishments."
Sentences are usually said to be of two kinds, _simple_ and
_compound_.[323]
A _simple sentence_ is a sentence which consists of one single assertion,
supposition, command, question, or exclamation; as, "David and Jonathan
loved each other."--"If thine enemy hunger."--"Do violence to no man."--"Am
I not an apostle?"--_1 Cor._, ix, 1. "What immortal glory shall I have
acquired!"--HOOKE: _Mur. Seq._, p. 71.
A _compound sentence_ is a sentence which consists of two or more simple
ones either expressly or tacitly connected; as, "Send men to Joppa, _and_
call for Simon, _whose_ surname is Peter; _who_ shall tell thee words,
_whereby_ thou and all thy house shall be saved."--_Acts_, xi, 13. "The
more the works of Cowper are read, the more his readers will find reason to
admire the variety and the extent, the graces and the energy, of his
literary talents."--HAYLEY: _Mur. Seq._, p. 250.
A _clause_, or _member_, is a subdivision of a compound sentence; and is
itself a sentence, either simple or compound: as, "If thine enemy be
hungry, give him bread to eat; if he be thirsty, give him water to
drink."--_Prov._, xxv, 21.[324]
A _phrase_ is two or more words which express some relation of different
ideas, but no entire proposition; as, "By the means appointed."--"To be
plain with you."--"Having loved his own."
Words that are omitted by _ellipsis_, and that are necessarily understood
in order to complete the construction, (and only such,) must be supplied in
parsing.
The _leading principles_ to be observed in the construction of sentences,
are embraced in the following twenty-four rules, which are arranged, as
nearly as possible, in the order of the parts of speech.
THE RULES OF SYNTAX.
RULE I.--ARTICLES.
Articles relate to the nouns which they limit.
RULE II.--NOMINATIVES.
A Noun or a Pronoun which is the subject of a finite verb, must be in the
nominative case.
RULE III.--APPOSITION. A Noun or a personal Pronoun used to explain a
preceding noun or pronoun, is put, by apposition, in the same case.
RULE IV.--POSSESSIVES.
A Noun or a Pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the name of the
thing possessed.
RULE V.--OBJECTIVES.
A Noun or a Pronoun made the object of an active-transitive verb or
participle, is governed by it in the objective case.
RULE VI.--SAME CASES.
A Noun or a Pronoun put after a verb or participle not transitive, agrees
in case with a preceding noun or pronoun referring to the same thing.
RULE VII.--OBJECTIVES.
A Noun or a Pronoun made the object of a preposition, is governed by it in
the objective case.
RULE VIII.--NOM. ABSOLUTE.
A Noun or a Pronoun is put absolute in the nominative, when its case
depends on no other word.
RULE IX.--ADJECTIVES.
Adjectives relate to nouns or pronouns.
RULE X.--PRONOUNS.
A Pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or pronoun which it
represents, in person, number, and gender.
RULE XI--PRONOUNS.
When the antecedent is a collective noun conveying the idea of plurality,
the Pronoun must agree with it in the plural number.
RULE XII.--PRONOUNS.
When a Pronoun has two or more antecedents connected by _and_, it must
agree with them jointly in the plural, because they are taken together.
RULE XIII.--PRONOUNS.
When a Pronoun has two or more antecedents connected by _or_ or _nor_, it
must agree with them singly, and not as if taken together.
RULE XIV.--FINITE VERBS.
Every finite Verb must agree with its subject, or nominative, in person and
number.
RULE XV.--FINITE VERBS.
When the nominative is a collective noun conveying the idea of plurality,
the Verb must agree with it in the plural number.
RULE XVI.--FINITE VERBS.
When a Verb has two or more nominatives connected by _and_, it must agree
with them jointly in the plural, because they are taken together.
RULE XVII.--FINITE VERBS.
When a Verb has two or more nominatives connected by _or_ or _nor_, it must
agree with them singly, and not as if taken together.
RULE XVIII.--INFINITIVES.
The Infinitive Mood is governed in general by the preposition TO, which
commonly connects it to a finite verb.
RULE XIX.--INFINITIVES.
The active verbs, _bid, dare, feel, hear, let, make, need, see_, and their
participles, usually take the Infinitive after them without the preposition
TO.
RULE XX.--PARTICIPLES.
Participles relate to nouns or pronouns, or else are governed by
prepositions.
RULE XXI.--ADVERBS.
Adverbs relate to verbs, participles, adjectives, or other adverbs.
RULE XXII.--CONJUNCTIONS.
Conjunctions connect words, sentences, or parts of sentences.
RULE XXIII.--PREPOSITIONS.
Prepositions show the relations of words, and of the things or thoughts
expressed by them.
RULE XXIV.--INTERJECTIONS.
Interjections have no dependent construction; they are put absolute, either
alone, or with other words.
GENERAL OR CRITICAL OBSERVATIONS ON SYNTAX.
OBS. 1.--An explanation of the relation, agreement, government, and
arrangement, of words in sentences, constitutes that part of grammar which
we call _Syntax_. But many grammarians, representing this branch of their
subject as consisting of two parts only, "_concord_ and _government_" say
little or nothing of the _relation_ and _arrangement_ of words, except as
these are involved in the others. The four things are essentially different
in their nature, as may be seen by the definitions given above, yet not so
distinct in practice that they can well be made the basis of any perfect
division of the rules of syntax. I have therefore, on this occasion,
preferred the order of the parts of speech; each of which will form a
chapter in the Syntax of this work, as each forms a chapter in the
Etymology.
OBS. 2.--_Agreement_ and _concord_ are one and the same thing. _Relation_
and _agreement_, though different, may yet coincide, and be taken together.
The latter is moreover naturally allied to the former. Seven of the ten
parts of speech are, with a few exceptions, incapable of any agreement; of
these the _relation_ and _use_ must be explained in parsing; and all
_requisite agreement_ between any of the rest, is confined to words that
_relate_ to each other. For one word may _relate_ to an other and not
_agree_ with it; but there is never any _necessary agreement_ between words
that have not a _relation_ one to the other, or a connexion according to
the sense. Any similarity happening between unconnected words, is no
syntactical concord, though it may rank the terms in the same class
etymologically.
OBS. 3.--From these observations it may be seen, that the most important
and most comprehensive principle of English syntax, is the simple
_Relation_ of words, according to the sense. To this head alone, ought to
be referred all the rules of construction by which our articles, our
nominatives, our adjectives, our participles, our adverbs, our
conjunctions, our prepositions, and our interjections, are to be parsed. To
the ordinary syntactical use of any of these, no rules of concord,
government, or position, can at all apply. Yet so defective and erroneous
are the schemes of syntax which are commonly found in our English grammars,
that _no rules_ of simple relation, none by which any of the above-named
parts of speech can be consistently parsed, are in general to be found in
them. If there are any exceptions to this censure, they are very few, and
in treatises still marked with glaring defects in regard to the syntax of
some of these parts of speech.
OBS. 4.--Grammarians, of course, do not utter falsehoods intentionally; but
it is lamentable to see how often they pervert doctrine by untruths uttered
ignorantly. It is the design of this pandect, to make every one who reads
it, an intelligent judge of the _perversions_, as well as of the true
doctrines, of English grammar. The following citations will show him the
scope and parts which have commonly been assigned to our syntax: "The
construction of sentences depends principally upon the _concord_ or
_agreement_, and the _regimen_ or _government_, of words."--_Lowth's
Gram._, p. 68; _Churchill's_, 120. "Words in sentences have a _twofold
relation_ to one another; namely, that of _Concord_ or Agreement; and that
of _Government_ or Influence."--_Dr. Adam's Latin and English Grammar_, p.
151. "The third part of Grammar is SYNTAX, which treats of the _agreement
and construction_ of words in a sentence."--_E. G. Greene's Grammatical
Text-Book_, p. 15. "Syntax principally consists of two parts, _Concord_ and
_Government_."--_Murray's Gram._, p. 142; _Ingersoll's_, 170; _Alger's_,
51; _R. C. Smith's_, 119; and many others. "Syntax consists of two parts,
_Concord_ and _Government_."--_Kirkham's Gram._, p. 175; _Wright's_, 124.
"The Rules of Syntax may all be included under three heads, _Concord,
Government_, and _Position_."--_Bullions's E. Gram._, p. 87. "_Position_
means the _place_ which a word occupies in a sentence."--_Ib._ "These rules
may be mostly ranked under the two heads of _agreement_ and _government_;
the remainder may be termed _miscellaneous_."--_Nutting's Gram._, p. 92.
"Syntax treats of the agreement, government and proper arrangement of words
in _a sentence_."--_Frost's El. of Gram._, p. 43. This last-named author,
in touching the text of my books, has often _corrupted_ it, as he does
here; but my definitions of _the tenses_ he copied without marring them
much. The borrowing occurred as early as 1828, and I add this notice now,
lest any should suppose _me_ the plagiarist.
OBS. 5.--Most of our English grammars have _more_ rules of syntax than are
needed, and yet are very deficient in _such_ as are needed. To say, as some
do, that articles, adjectives, and participles, _agree_ with nouns, is to
teach Greek or Latin syntax, and not English. To throw, as Nutting does,
the whole syntax of adverbs into a remark on _such a rule of agreement_, is
to choose disorder for its own sake. To say, with Frost, Hall, Smith,
Perley, Kirkham, Sanborn, Rand, and others, "The nominative case _governs_
the verb in number and person," and again, "A verb must _agree_ with its
nominative case in number and person," is to confound the meaning of
_government_ and _agreement_, to say the same thing in different words, and
to leave the subject of a verb still without a rule: for rules of
government are applicable only to the words governed, and nothing ever
agrees with that which governs it.[325] To say, with Murray and others,
"Participles have the same government as the verbs from which they are
derived," is to say nothing by which either verbs or participles may be
parsed, or any of their errors corrected: those many grammarians,
therefore, who make this their only rule for participles, leave them all
without any syntax. To say, with Murray, Alger, and others, "Adverbs,
_though they have no government of case, tense, &c._, require an
appropriate _situation_ in the sentence," is to squander words at random,
and leave the important question unanswered, "To what do adverbs relate?"
To say again, with the same gentlemen, "Conjunctions connect _the same
moods and tenses of verbs, and cases_ of nouns and pronouns," is to put an
ungrammatical, obscure, and useless assertion, in the place of an important
rule. To say merely, "Prepositions govern the objective case," is to rest
all the syntax of prepositions on a rule that never applies to them, but
which is meant only for one of the constructions of the objective case. To
say, as many do, "Interjections _require_ the objective case of a pronoun
of the first person after them, and the nominative case of the second," is
to tell what is utterly false as the words stand, and by no means true in
the sense which the authors intend. Finally, to suppose, with Murray, that,
"the Interjection _does not require a distinct, appropriate rule_," is in
admirable keeping with all the foregoing quotations, and especially with
his notion of what it _does_ require; namely, "the _objective case_ of the
first person:" but who dares deny that the following exclamation is good
English?
"_O_ wretched _we!_ why were we hurried down
This lubric and adulterate age!"--_Dryden_.
OBS. 6.--The _truth_ of any doctrine in science, can be nothing else than
its conformity to facts, or to the nature of things; and chiefly by what he
knows of the things themselves, must any one judge of what others say
concerning them. Erroneous or inadequate views, confused or inconsistent
statements, are the peculiar property of those who advance them; they have,
in reality, no relationship to science itself, because they originate in
ignorance; but all science is knowledge--it is knowledge methodized. What
general rules are requisite for the syntactical parsing of the several
parts of speech in English, may be seen at once by any one who will
consider for a moment the usual construction of each. The correction of
false syntax, in its various forms, will require more--yes, five times as
many; but such of these as answer only the latter purpose, are, I think,
better reserved for notes under the principal rules. The doctrines which I
conceive most worthy to form the leading canons of our syntax, are those
which are expressed in the twenty-four rules above. If other authors
prefer more, or fewer, or different principles for their chief rules, I
must suppose, it is because they have studied the subject less. Biased, as
we may be, both by our knowledge and by our ignorance, it is easy for men
to differ respecting matters of _expediency_; but that clearness, order,
and consistency, are both _expedient_, and _requisite_, in didactic
compositions, is what none can doubt.
OBS. 7.--Those English grammarians who tell us, as above, that syntax is
divided into _parts_, or included under a certain number of _heads_, have
almost universally contradicted themselves by treating the subject without
any regard to such a division; and, at the same time, not a few have
somehow been led into the gross error of supposing broad principles of
concord or government where no such things exist. For example, they have
invented general RULES like these: "The adjective _agrees_ with its noun in
number, case, and gender."--_Bingham's English Gram._, p. 40.
"Interjections _govern_ the nominative case, and sometimes the objective:
as, '_O thou! alas me!_'"--_Ib._, p. 43. "Adjectives _agree_ with their
nouns in number."--_Wilbur and Livingston's Gram._, p. 22. "Participles
_agree_ with their nouns in number."--_Ib._, p. 23. "Every adjective
_agrees in number_ with some substantive expressed or understood."--
_Hiley's Gram._, Rule 8th, p. 77. "The article THE _agrees_ with nouns in
either number: as, _The wood, the woods_."--_Bucke's Classical Grammar of
the English Language_, p. 84. "O! oh! ah! _require_ the accusative case of
a pronoun in the first person after them: as '_Ah me!_' But when the second
person is used, _it requires_ a nominative case: as, '_O thou!_'"--_Ib._,
p. 87. "Two or more Nominatives in the singular number, connected by the
Conjunction _or, nor_, EITHER, NEITHER, _govern_ a singular Verb. But
Pronouns singular, of different persons, joined by _or_, EITHER, _nor_,
NEITHER, _govern_ a plural Verb."--_Ib._, p. 94. "One Nominative frequently
_governs_ many Verbs."--_Ib._, p. 95. "Participles are sometimes _governed_
by the article."--_Murray's Gram._, 8vo, p. 192. "An adverb, an adjective,
or a participle, may involve in itself the force of _a preposition, and
govern_ the objective case."--_Nutting's Gram._, p. 99. "The nominative
case _governs_ the verb." [326]--_Greenleaf's Gram._, p. 32; _Kirkham's_,
176; and others. "The nominative case _comes before_ the verb."--_Bingham's
Gram._, p. 38; _Wilbur and Livingston's_, 23. "The Verb TO BE, _always
governs_ a Nominative, _unless it be_ of the Infinitive Mood."--_Buchanan's
Syntax_, p. 94. "A verb in the infinitive mood _may be governed_ by a verb,
noun, adjective, participle, or pronoun."--_Kirkham's Gram._, p. 187. Or,
(as a substitute for the foregoing rule,) say, according to this author: "A
verb in the infinitive mood, _refers_ to some noun or pronoun, as its
subject or actor."--_Ib._, p. 188. Now what does he know of English
grammar, who supposes any of these rules to be worthy of the place which
they hold, or have held, in the halls of instruction?
OBS. 8.--It is a very common fault with the compilers of English grammars,
to join together in the same rule the syntax of different parts of speech,
uniting laws that must ever be applied separately in parsing. For example:
"RULE XI. Articles and adjectives _relate to nouns_ expressed or
understood; and the adjectives _this, that, one, two_, must agree in number
with the nouns to which they relate."--_Comly's Gram._, p. 87. Now, in
parsing an _article_, why should the learner have to tell all this story
about _adjectives_? Such a mode of expressing the rule, is certainly in bad
taste; and, after all, the syntax of adjectives is not here comprised, for
they often relate to pronouns. "RULE III. Every adjective and participle
_belongs_ to some noun or pronoun expressed or understood."--_Frost's El.
of Gram._, p. 44. Here a compiler who in his etymology supposes participles
to be _verbs_, allows them no other construction than that of _adjectives_.
His rule implicitly denies that they can either be parts of their verbs in
the formation of _tenses_, or be governed by prepositions in the character
of _gerunds_. To suppose that a _noun_ may govern the objective case, is
both absurd in itself, and contrary to all authority; yet, among his
forty-nine rules, this author has the following: "RULE XXV. A participial
_noun_ is sometimes governed by a preposition, and _may govern an objective
case_; as, 'George is too fond of _wasting time_ in trifles.'"--_Frost's
El. of Gram._, p. 47. Here again is the fault of which I am speaking, two
rules in one; and this fault is combined with an other still worse.
_Wasting_ is a participle, governed by _of_; and _time_ is a _noun_,
governed by _wasting_. The latter is a declinable word, and found in the
objective case; the former is indeclinable, and found in no case. It is an
error to suppose that cases are the only things which are susceptible of
being governed; nor is the brief rule, "Prepositions govern the objective
case," so very clear a maxim as never to be misapprehended. If the learner
infer from it, that _all_ prepositions must necessarily govern the
objective case, or that the objective case _is always_ governed by a
preposition, he will be led into a great mistake.
OBS. 9.--This error of crowding things together, is still more conspicuous
in the following examples: "RULE IV. Every article, adjective, and
participle, _must qualify_ some noun, or pronoun, either expressed or
understood."--_Nutting's Gram._, p. 94. "RULE IX. The objective case is
governed by a transitive verb or a preposition, usually coming before
it."--_Ib._, p. 98. Here an author who separates participles from verbs,
has attempted first to compress the entire syntax of three different parts
of speech into one short rule; and, secondly, to embrace all the forms of
dependence, incident to objective nouns and pronouns, in an other as short.
This brevity is a poor exchange for the order and distribution which it
prevents--especially as none of its objects are here reached. Articles do
not relate to pronouns, unless the obsolete phrase _the which_ is to be
revived;[327] participles have other constructions than those which
adjectives admit; there are exceptions to the rules which tie articles to
nouns, and adjectives to nouns or pronouns; and the objective case may not
only be governed by a participle, but may be put in apposition with an
other objective. The objective case in English usually stands for the Latin
genitive, dative, accusative, and ablative; hence any rule that shall
embrace the whole construction of this one case, will be the sole
counterpart to four fifths of all the rules in any code of Latin syntax.
For I imagine the construction of these four oblique cases, will be found
to occupy at least that proportion of the syntactical rules and notes in
any Latin grammar that can be found. Such rules, however, are often placed
under false or equivocal titles;[328] as if they contained the construction
of the _governing_ words, rather than that of the _governed_. And this
latter error, again, has been transferred to most of our English grammars,
to the exclusion of any rule for the proper construction of participles, of
adverbs, of conjunctions, of prepositions, or of interjections. See the
syntax of Murray and his copyists, whose treatment of these parts of speech
is noticed in the fifth observation above.
OBS. 10.--It is doubtless most convenient, that, in all rules for the
construction of _cases_, nouns and pronouns be taken together; because the
very same doctrines apply equally well to both, and a case is as distinct a
thing in the mind, as a part of speech. This method, therefore, I have
myself pursued; and it has indeed the authority of all grammarians--not
excepting those who violate its principles by adopting two special rules
for the relative pronoun, which are not needed. These special rules, which
I shall notice again hereafter, may be seen in Murray's Rule 6th, which is
double, and contains them both. The most complex rule that I have admitted,
is that which embraces the government of objectives by verbs and
participles. The regimen by verbs, and the regimen by participles, may not
improperly be reckoned distinct principles; but the near alliance of
participles to their verbs, seems to be a sufficient reason for preferring
one rule to two, in this instance.
OBS. 11.--An other common fault in the treatment of this part of grammar,
is the practice of making many of the rules _double_, or even _triple_, in
their form. Of L. Murray's twenty-two rules, for instance, there are six
which severally consist of two distinct paragraphs; and one is composed of
three such parts, with examples under each. Five others, though simple in
their form, are complex in their doctrine, and liable to the objections
which have been urged above against this characteristic. These twelve,
therefore, I either reject entirely from my catalogue, or divide and
simplify to fit them for their purpose. In short, by comparing the
twenty-two rules which were adopted by this popular grammarian, with the
twenty-four which are given in this work, the reader may see, that twelve
of the former have pleased me too little to have any place at all among the
latter, and that none of the remaining ten have been thought worthy to be
copied without considerable alteration. Nor are the rules which I adopt,
more nearly coincident with those of any other writer. I do not proffer to
the schools the second-hand instructions of a mere compiler. In his
twenty-two rules, independently of their examples, Hurray has used six
hundred and seventeen words, thus giving an average of twenty-eight to each
rule; whereas in the twenty-four rules which are presented above, the words
are but four hundred and thirty-six, making the average less than nineteen.
And yet I have not only divided some of his propositions and extended
others, but, by rejecting what was useless or erroneous, and filling up the
deficiencies which mark his code, I have delivered twice the amount of
doctrine in two thirds of the space, and furnished eleven important rules
which are not contained in his grammar. Thus much, in this place, to those
who so frequently ask, "Wherein does your book differ from Murray's?"
OBS. 12.--Of all the systems of syntax, or of grammar, which it has been my
fortune to examine, a book which was first published by Robinson and
Franklin of New York in 1839, a fair-looking duodecimo volume of 384 pages,
under the brief but rather ostentatious title, "THE GRAMMAR _of the English
Language_" is, I think, the most faulty,--the most remarkable for the
magnitude, multitude, and variety, of its strange errors, inconsistencies,
and defects. This singular performance is the work of _Oliver B. Peirce_,
an itinerant lecturer on grammar, who dates his preface at "Rome, N. Y.,
December 29th, 1838." Its leading characteristic is boastful innovation; it
being fall of acknowledged "contempt for the works of other writers."--P.
379. It lays "claim to _singularity_" as a merit, and boasts of a new thing
under the sun--"in a theory RADICALLY NEW, a Grammar of the English
Language; something which I believe," says the author, "has NEVER BEFORE
BEEN FOUND."--P. 9. The old scholastic notion, that because Custom is the
arbitress of speech, novelty is excluded from grammar, this hopeful
reformer thoroughly condemns; "repudiating this sentiment to the full
extent of it," (_ib._) and "writing his theory as though he had never seen
a book, entitled an English Grammar."--_Ib._ And, for all the ends of good
learning, it would have been as well or better, if he never had. His
passion for novelty has led him not only to abandon or misapply, in an
unprecedented degree, the usual terms of the art, but to disregard in many
instances its most unquestionable principles, universal as well as
particular. His parts of speech are the following ten: "Names, Substitutes,
_Asserters_, Adnames, Modifiers, Relatives, Connectives, Interrogatives,
Repliers, and Exclamations."--_The Gram._, p. 20. His _names_ are nouns;
his _substitutes_ are pronouns, and any adjectives whose nouns are not
expressed; his _asserters_ are verbs and participles, though the latter
assert nothing; his _adnames_ are articles, adjectives whose nouns or
pronouns are expressed, and adverbs that relate to adjectives; his
_modifiers_ are such adverbs as "modify the sense or sound of a whole
sentence;" his _relatives_ are prepositions, some of which _govern no
object_; his _connectives_ are conjunctions, with certain adverbs and
phrases; his _interrogatives_ and _repliers_ are new parts of speech, very
lamely explained; his _exclamations_ are interjections, and "_phrases used
independently_; as, O hapless choice!"--_The Gram._, p. 22. In parsing, he
finds a world of "_accommodatives_;" as, "John is _more than five years_
older than William."--_Ib._ p. 202. Here he calls the whole phrase "_more
than five years_" "a secondary _adname_" i. e., _adjective_. But, in the
phrase, "_more than five years_ afterwards," he would call the same words
"a secondary _modifier_;" i. e., _adverb_.--_Ib._, p. 203. And, in the
phrase, "_more than five years_ before the war," he would call them "a
secondary _relative_;" i. e., _preposition_.--_Ib._, p. 204. And so of
other phrases innumerable. His cases are five, two of which are new, "the
_Independent_" and "the _Twofold_ case." His "_independent_ case" is
sometimes the nominative in form, as "_thou_" and "_she_;" (p. 62;)
sometimes the objective, as, "_me_" and "_him_;" (p. 62 and p. 199;)
sometimes erroneously supposed to be the subject of a finite verb; while
_his nominative_ is sometimes as erroneously said to have _no_ verb. His
code of syntax has two sorts of rules, Analytical and Synthetical. The
former are professedly seventeen in number; but, many of them consisting of
two, three, or four distinct parts, their real number is more properly
thirty-four. The latter are reckoned forty-five; but if we count their
separate parts, they are fifty-six: and these with the others make
_ninety_. I shall not particularize their faults. All of them are
whimsically conceived and badly written. In short, had the author artfully
designed to turn English grammar into a subject of contempt and ridicule,
by as ugly a caricature of it as he could possibly invent, he could never
have hit the mark more exactly than he has done in this "_new
theory_"--this rash production, on which he so sincerely prides himself.
Alone as he is, in well-nigh all his opinions, behold how prettily he talks
of "COMMON SENSE, the only sure foundation of any theory!" and says, "On
this imperishable foundation--this rock of eternal endurance--I rear my
superstructure, _the edifice of scientific truth_, the temple of
Grammatical consistency!"--_Peirce's Preface_, p. 7.
OBS. 13.--For the teaching of different languages, it has been thought very
desirable to have "a Series of grammars, Greek, Latin, English, &c., all,
so far as general principles are concerned, upon the same plan, and as
nearly in the same words as the genius of the languages would permit."--See
_Bullions's Principles of E. Gram._, 2d Ed., pp. iv and vi. This scheme
necessarily demands a minute comparison not only of the several languages
themselves, but also of the various grammars in which their principles,
whether general or particular, are developed. For by no other means can it
be ascertained to what extent uniformity of this kind will be either
profitable to the learner, or consistent with truth. Some books have been
published, which, it is pretended, are thus accommodated to one an other,
and to the languages of which they treat. But, in view of the fact, that
the Latin or the Greek grammars now extant, (to say nothing of the French,
Spanish, and others,) are almost as various and as faulty as the English, I
am apprehensive that this is a desideratum not soon to be realized,--a
design more plausible in the prospectus, than feasible in the attempt. At
any rate, the grammars of different languages must needs differ as much as
do the languages themselves, otherwise some of their principles will of
course be false; and we have already seen that the nonobservance of this
has been a fruitful source of error in respect to English syntax. The
achievement, however, is not altogether impossible, if a man of competent
learning will devote to it a sufficient degree of labour. But the mere
revising or altering of some one grammar in each language, can scarcely
amount to any thing more than a pretence of improvement. Waiving the
pettiness of compiling upon the basis of an other man's compilation, the
foundation of a good grammar for any language, must be both deeper and
broader than all the works which Professor Bullions has selected to build
upon: for the Greek, than Dr. Moor's "_Elementa Linguæ, Græcæ_;" for the
Latin, than Dr. Adam's "_Rudiments of Latin and English Grammar_;" for the
English, than Murray's "_English Grammar_," or Lennie's "_Principles of
English Grammar_;" which last work, in fact, the learned gentleman
preferred, though he pretends to have mended the code of Murray. But,
certainly, Lennie never supposed himself a copyist of Murray; nor was he
to much extent an imitator of him, either in method or in style.
OBS. 14.--We have, then, in this new American form of "_The Principles of
English Grammar_," Lennie's very compact little book, altered, enlarged,
and bearing on its title-page (which is otherwise in the very words of
Lennie) an other author's name, and, in its early editions, the false and
self-accusing inscription, "(ON THE PLAN OF MURRAY'S GRAMMAR.)" And this
work, claiming to have been approved "by the most competent judges," now
challenges the praise not only of being "better adapted to the use of
academies and schools _than any yet published_" but of so presenting "_the
rules and principles of general grammar_, as that they may apply to, and be
in perfect harmony with, _the grammars of the dead languages_"--
_Recommendations_, p. iv. These are admirable professions for a critical
author to publish; especially, as every rule or principle of General
Grammar, condemning as it must whoever violates it, cannot but "be in
_perfect harmony_ with" every thing that is true. In this model for all
grammars, Latin, Greek, &c., the doctrines of punctuation, of
abbreviations, and of capital letters, and also sections on the rhetorical
divisions of a discourse, the different kinds of composition, the different
kinds of prose composition, and the different kinds of poetry, are made
_parts of the Syntax_; while his hints for correct and elegant writing, and
his section on the composition of letters and themes, which other writers
suppose to belong rather to syntax, are here subjoined as _parts of
Prosody_. In the exercises for parsing appended to his _Etymology_, the
Doctor furnishes _twenty-five Rules of Syntax_, which, he says, "are not
intended to be committed to memory, but to be used as directions to the
beginner in parsing the exercises under them."--_E. Gram._, p. 75. Then,
for his syntax proper, he copies from Lennie, with some alterations,
_thirty-four other rules_, nine of which are double, and all are jumbled
together by both authors, without any regard to the distinction of concord
and government, so common in the grammars of the dead languages, and even,
so far as I can discover, without any principle of arrangement whatever.
They profess indeed to have placed those rules first, which are eaisest
[sic--KTH] to learn, and oftenest to be applied; but the syntax of
_articles_, which even on this principle should have formed the first of
the series, is placed by Lennie as the thirty-fourth rule, and by his
amender as the thirty-second. To all this complexity the latter adds
_twenty-two Special Rules_, with an abundance of "_Notes_" "_Observations_"
and "_Remarks_" distinguished by these titles, on some principle which no
one but the author can understand. Lastly, his _method of syntactical
parsing_ is not only mixed up with etymological questions and answers, but
his _directions_ for it, with their _exemplification_, are perplexingly at
variance with his own _specimen_ of the performance. See his book, pages
131 and 133. So much for this grand scheme.
OBS. 15.--Strictures like the foregoing, did they not involve the defence
of grammar itself, so as to bear upon interests more important than the
success or failure of an elementary book, might well be withheld through
motives of charity, economy, and peace. There is many a grammar now extant,
concerning which a truly critical reader may know more at first sight, than
ever did he that made it. What such a reader will be inclined to rate
beneath criticism, an other perhaps will confidently pronounce above it. If
my remarks are just, let the one approve them for the other's sake. For
what becomes of the teaching of grammar, when that which is received as the
most excellent method, must be exempted from censure by reason of its utter
worthlessness? And what becomes of Universal Syntax, when the imperfect
systems of the Latin and Greek grammars, in stead of being amended, are
modelled to the grossest faults of what is worthless in our own?[329]
OBS. 16.--What arrangement of Latin or Greek syntax may be best in itself,
I am not now concerned to show. Lily did not divide his, as others have
divided the subject since; but first stated briefly his _three concords_,
and then proceeded to what he called _the construction_ of the several
parts of speech, taking them in their order. The three concords of Lily are
the following: (1.) Of the _Nominative and Verb_; to which the accusative
before an infinitive, and the collective noun with a plural verb, are
reckoned exceptions; while the agreement of a verb or pronoun with two or
more nouns, is referred to the figure _syllepsis_. (2.) Of the _Substantive
and Adjective_; under which the agreement of participles, and of some
pronouns, is placed in the form of a note. (3.) Of the _Relative and
Antecedent_; after which the two special rules for the _cases_ of relatives
are given as underparts. Dr. Adam divided his syntax into two parts; of
Simple Sentences, and of Compound Sentences. His three concords are the
following: (1.) Of one _Substantive with an Other_; which construction is
placed by Lily and many others among the figures of syntax, and is called
_apposition_. (2.) Of an _Adjective with a Substantive_; under which
principle, we are told to take adjective pronouns and participles. (3.) Of
a _Verb with a Nominative_; under which, the collective noun with a verb of
either number, is noticed in an observation. The construction of relatives,
of conjunctions, of comparatives, and of words put absolute, this author
reserves for the second part of his syntax; and the agreement of plural
verbs or pronouns with joint nominatives or antecedents, which Ruddiman
places in an observation on his _four concords_, is here absurdly reckoned
a part of the construction of conjunctions. Various divisions and
subdivisions of the Latin syntax, with special dispositions of some
particular principles of it, may be seen in the elaborate grammars of
Despauter, Prat, Ruddiman, Grant, and other writers. And here it may be
proper to observe, that, the mixing of syntax with etymology, after the
manner of Ingersoll, Kirkham, R. W. Green, R. C. Smith, Sanborn, Felton,
Hazen, Parkhurst, Parker and Fox, Weld, and others, is a modern innovation,
pernicious to both; either topic being sufficiently comprehensive, and
sufficiently difficult, when they are treated separately; and each having,
in some instances, employed the pens of able writers almost to the
exclusion of the other.
OBS. 17.--The syntax of any language must needs conform to the
peculiarities of its etymology, and also be consistent with itself; for all
will expect better things of a scholar, than to lay down positions in one
part of his grammar, that are irreconcilable with what he has stated in an
other. The English language, having few inflections, has also few concords
or agreements, and still fewer governments. Articles, adjectives, and
participles, which in many other languages agree with their nouns in
gender, number, and case, have usually, in English, no modifications in
which they _can agree_ with their nouns. Yet _Lowth_ says, "The adjective
in English, having no variation of gender and number, _cannot but agree_
with the substantive in these respects."--_Short Introd. to Gram._, p. 86.
What then is the _agreement_ of words? Can it be anything else than their
_similarity_ in some common property or modification? And is it not
obvious, that no two things in nature can at all _agree_, or _be alike_,
except in some quality or accident which belongs to each of them? Yet how
often have _Murray_ and others, as well as _Lowth_, forgotten this! To give
one instance out of many: "_Gender_ has respect only to the third person
singular of the pronouns, _he, she, it_."--_Murray, J. Peirce, Flint, Lyon,
Bacon, Russell, Fisk, Maltby, Alger, Miller, Merchant, Kirkham_, and other
careless copyists. Yet, according to these same gentlemen, "Gender is _the
distinction of nouns_, with regard to sex;" and, "Pronouns _must always
agree_ with their antecedents, _and the nouns_ for which they stand, in
gender." Now, not one of these three careless assertions can possibly be
reconciled with either of the others!
OBS. 18.--_Government_ has respect only to nouns, pronouns, verbs,
participles, and prepositions; the other five parts of speech neither
govern nor are governed. The _governing_ words may be either nouns, or
verbs, or participles, or prepositions; the words _governed_ are either
nouns, or pronouns, or verbs, or participles. In parsing, the learner must
remember that the rules of government are not to be applied to the
_governing_ words, but to those which _are governed_; and which, for the
sake of brevity, are often technically named after the particular form or
modification assumed; as, _possessives, objectives, infinitives,
gerundives_. These are the only things in English, that can properly be
said to be subject to government; and these are always so, in their own
names; unless we except such infinitives as stand in the place of
nominatives. _Gerundives_ are participles governed by prepositions; but,
there being little or no occasion to distinguish these from other
participles, we seldom use this name. The Latin _Gerund_ differs from a
participle, and the English _Gerundive_ differs from a participial noun.
The participial noun may be the subject or the object of a verb, or may
govern the possessive case before it, like any other noun; but the true
English gerundive, being essentially a participle, and governing an object
after it, like any other participle, is itself governed only by a
preposition. At least, this is its usual and allowed construction, and no
other is acknowledged to be indisputably right.
OBS. 19.--The simple _Relations_ of words in English, (or those several
_uses_ of the parts of speech which we may refer to this head,) are the
following nine: (1.) Of Articles to nouns, by Rule 1st; (2.) Of Nominatives
to verbs, by Rule 2d; (3.) Of Nominatives absolute or independent, by Rule
8th; (4.) Of Adjectives to nouns or pronouns, by Rule 9th; (5.) Of
Participles to nouns or pronouns, by Rule 20th; (6.) Of Adverbs to verbs,
participles, &c., by Rule 21st; (7.) Of Conjunctions as connecting words,
phrases, or sentences, by Rule 22nd; (8.) Of Prepositions as showing the
relations of things, by Rule 23d; (9.) Of Interjections as being used
independently, by Rule 24th.
OBS. 20.--The syntactical _Agreements_ in English, though actually much
fewer than those which occur in Latin, Greek, or French, may easily be so
reckoned as to amount to double, or even triple, the number usually spoken
of by the old grammarians. The twenty-four rules above, embrace the
following ten heads, which may not improperly be taken for so many distinct
concords: (1.) Of a Noun or Pronoun in direct apposition with another, by
Rule 3d; (2.) Of a Noun or Pronoun after a verb or participle not
transitive, by Rule 6th; (3.) Of a Pronoun with its antecedent, by Rule
10th; (4.) Of a Pronoun with a collective noun, by Rule 11th; (5.) Of a
Pronoun with joint antecedents, by Rule 12th; (6.) Of a Pronoun with
disjunct antecedents, by Rule 13th; (7.) Of a Verb with its nominative, by
Rule 14th; (8.) Of a Verb with a collective noun, by Rule 15th; (9.) Of a
Verb with joint nominatives, by Rule 16th; (10.) Of a Verb with disjunct
nominatives, by Rule 17th. To these may be added two other _special_
concords, less common and less important, which will be explained in
_notes_ under the rules: (11.) Of one Verb with an other, in mood, tense,
and form, when two are connected so as to agree with the same nominative;
(12.) Of Adjectives that imply unity or plurality, with their nouns, in
number.
OBS. 21.--Again, by a different mode of reckoning them, the
concords or the _general principles_ of agreement, in our language, may be
made to be only three or four; and some of these much _less general_, than
they are in other languages: (1.) _Words in apposition agree in case_,
according to Rule 3d; of which principle, Rule 6th may be considered a
modification. (2.) _Pronouns agree, with their nouns, in person, number,
and gender_, according to Rule 10th; of which principle, Rules 11th, 12th,
and 13th, may be reckoned modifications. (3.) _Verbs agree with their
nominatives, in person and number_, according to Rule 14th; of which
principle Rules 15th, 16th, and 17th, and the occasional agreement of one
verb with an other, may be esteemed mere modifications. (4.) _Some
adjectives agree with their nouns in number_. These make up the twelve
concords above enumerated.
OBS. 22.--The rules of _Government_ in the best Latin grammars are about
sixty; and these are usually distributed (though not very properly) under
three heads; "1. Of Nouns. 2. Of Verbs. 3. Of Words indeclinable."--
_Grant's Lat. Gram._, p. 170. "Regimen est triplex: 1. Nominum. 2.
Verborum. 3. Vocum indeclinabilium."--_Ruddiman's Gram._, p. 138. This
division of the subject brings all the _titles_ of the rules wrong. For
example, if the rule be, "Active verbs govern the accusative case," this is
not properly "the government of _verbs_" but rather the government _of the
accusative_ by verbs. At least, such titles are _equivocal_, and likely to
mislead the learner. The governments in English are only seven, and these
are expressed, perhaps with sufficient distinctness, in six of the
foregoing rules: (1.) Of Possessives by nouns, in Rule 4th; (2.) Of
Objectives by verbs, in Rule 5th; (3.) Of Objectives by participles, in
Rule 5th; (4.) Of Objectives by prepositions, in Rule 7th; (5.) Of
Infinitives by the preposition _to_, in Rule 18th; (6.) Of Infinitives by
the verbs _bid, dare_, &c., in Rule 19th; (7.) Of Participles by
prepositions, in Rule 20th.
OBS. 23.--The _Arrangement_ of words, (which will be sufficiently treated
of in the observations hereafter to be made on the several rules of
construction,) is an important part of syntax, in which not only the beauty
but the propriety of language is intimately concerned, and to which
particular attention should therefore be paid in composition. But it is to
be remembered, that the mere collocation of words in a sentence never
affects the method of parsing them: on the contrary, the same words,
however placed, are always to be parsed in precisely the same way, so long
as they express precisely the same meaning. In order to show that we have
parsed any part of an inverted or difficult sentence rightly, we are at
liberty to declare the meaning by any arrangement which will make the
construction more obvious, provided we retain both the sense and all the
words unaltered; but to drop or alter any word, is to pervert the text
under pretence of resolving it, and to make a mockery of parsing. Grammar
rightly learned, enables one to understand both the sense and the
construction of whatsoever is rightly written; and he who reads what he
does not understand, reads to little purpose. With great indignity to the
muses, several pretenders to grammar have foolishly taught, that, "In
parsing poetry, in order to _come at the meaning_ of the author, the
learner will find it necessary to transpose his language."--_Kirkham's
Gram._, p. 166. See also the books of _Merchant, Wilcox, O. B. Peirce,
Hull, Smith, Felton_, and others, to the same effect. To what purpose can
he _transpose_ the words of a sentence, who does not first see what they
mean, and how to explain or parse them as they stand?
OBS. 24.--Errors innumerable have been introduced into the common modes of
parsing, through a false notion of what constitutes a _simple sentence_.
Lowth, Adam, Murray, Gould, Smith, Ingersoll, Comly, Lennie, Hiley,
Bullions, Wells, and many others, say, "A simple sentence has in it _but
one subject_, and _one finite verb_: as, 'Life is short.'"--_L. Murray's
Gram._, p. 141. In accordance with this assertion, some assume, that,
"Every nominative _has its own verb_ expressed or understood;" and that,
"Every verb (except in the infinitive mood and participle) _has its own
nominative_ expressed or understood."--_Bullions's E. Gram._, p. 87. The
adopters of these dogmas, of course think it right to _supply_ a nominative
whenever they do not find a separate one expressed for every finite verb,
and a verb whenever they do not find a separate one expressed for every
nominative. This mode of interpretation not only precludes the agreement of
a verb with two or more nominatives, so as to render nugatory two of the
most important rules of these very gentlemen's syntax; but, what is worse,
it perverts many a plain, simple, and perfect sentence, to a form which its
author did not choose, and a meaning which he never intended. Suppose, for
example, the text to be, "A good constitution and good laws make good
subjects."--_Webster's Essays_, p. 152. Does not the verb _make_ agree with
_constitution_ and _laws_, taken conjointly? and is it not a _perversion_
of the sentence to interpret it otherwise? Away then with all this
_needless subaudition!_ But while we thus deny that there can be a true
ellipsis of what is not necessary to the construction, it is not to be
denied that there _are_ true ellipses, and in some men's style very many.
The assumption of O. B. Peirce, that no correct sentence is elliptical, and
his impracticable project of a grammar founded on this principle, are among
the grossest of possible absurdities.
OBS. 25.--Dr. Wilson says, "There may be several subjects to the same verb,
several verbs to the same subject, or several objects to the same verb, and
the sentence be simple. But when the sentence remains simple, the same verb
must be differently affected by its several adjuncts, or the sense liable
to be altered by a separation. If the verb or the subject _be_ affected in
the same manner, or the sentence _is_ resolvable into more, it is
compounded. Thus, 'Violet, indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange, and red,
mixed in due proportion, produce white,' is a simple sentence, for the
subject is indivisible. But, 'Violet, indigo, blue, green, yellow, orange,
and red, are refrangible rays of light,' is a compound sentence, and may be
separated into seven."--_Essay on Gram._, p. 186. The propriety of the
distinction here made, is at least questionable; and I incline to consider
the second example a simple sentence, as well as the first; because what
the writer calls a separation into seven, involves a change of _are_ to
_is_, and of _rays_ to _ray_, as well as a sevenfold repetition of this
altered predicate, "_is a refrangible ray of light_." But the parser, in
interpreting the words of others, and expounding the construction of what
is written, has no right to alter anything in this manner. Nor do I admit
that he has a right to insert or repeat anything _needlessly_; for the
nature of a sentence, or the syntax of some of its words, may often be
altered without change of the sense, or of any word for an other: as, "'A
wall seven feet high;' that is, 'A wall _which is_ seven feet
high.'"--_Hiley's Gram._, p. 109. "'He spoke and acted prudently;' that is,
'He spoke _prudently_, and _he_ acted prudently.'"--_Ibid._ '"He spoke and
acted wisely;' that is, 'He spoke _wisely_, and _he_ acted
wisely.'"--_Murray's Gram._, p. 219; _Alger's_, 70: _R. C. Smith's_, 183;
_Weld's_, 192; and others. By this notion of ellipsis, the connexion or
joint relation of words is destroyed.
OBS. 26.--Dr. Adam, who thought the division of sentences into simple and
compound, of sufficient importance to be made the basis of a general
division of syntax into two parts, has defined a simple sentence to be,
"that which has but one nominative, and one finite verb;" and a compound
sentence, "that which has more than one nominative, or one finite verb."
And of the latter he gives the following erroneous and self-contradictory
account: "A compound sentence is made up of two or more simple sentences or
_phrases_, and is commonly called a _Period_. The parts of which a compound
sentence consists, are called _Members_ or _Clauses_. In every compound
sentence there are either several subjects and one attribute, or several
attributes and one subject, or both several subjects and several
attributes; that is, there are either several nominatives applied to the
same verb, or several verbs applied to the same nominative, or both. Every
verb marks a judgment or attribute, and every attribute must have a
subject. There must, therefore, be in every sentence or period, as many
propositions as there are verbs of a finite mode. Sentences are compounded
by means of relatives and conjunctions; as, Happy is the man _who_ loveth
religion, and practiseth virtue."--_Adam's Gram._, p. 202; _Gould's_, 199;
and others.
OBS. 27.--Now if every compound sentence consists of such
parts, members, or clauses, as are in themselves sentences, either simple
or compound, either elliptical or complete; it is plain, in the first
place, that the term "phrases" is misapplied above, because a phrase is
properly only a part of some simple sentence. And if "a simple sentence is
that which has but one nominative and one finite verb," and "a compound
sentence is made up of two or more simple sentences," it follows, since
"all sentences are either simple or compound," that, _in no sentence, can
there be_ "either several nominatives applied to the same verb, or several
verbs applied to the same nominative." What, therefore, this author
regarded as _the characteristic_ of all compound sentences, is, according
to his own previous positions, utterly impossible to any sentence. Nor is
it less repugnant to his subsequent doctrine, that, "Sentences are
compounded by means of _relatives_ and _conjunctions_;" for, according to
his notion, "A conjunction is an indeclinable word, which serves to join
_sentences_ together."--_Adam's Gram._, p. 149. It is assumed, that, "In
every _sentence_ there must be a verb and a nominative expressed or
understood."--_Ib._, p. 151. Now if there happen to be two nominatives to
one verb, as when it was said, "Even the _winds_ and the _sea_ obey him;"
this cannot be anything more than a simple sentence; because one single
verb is a thing indivisible, and how can we suppose it to form the most
essential part of two different sentences at once?
OBS. 28.--The distinction, or real difference, between those simple
sentences in which two or more nominatives or verbs are taken conjointly,
and those compound sentences in which there is an ellipsis of some of the
nominatives or verbs, is not always easy to be known or fixed; because in
many instances, a supposed _ellipsis_, without at all affecting the sense,
may obviously change the construction, and consequently the nature of the
sentence. For example: "And they all forsook him, and [they all]
fled."--_Mark_, xiv, 50. Some will say, that the words in brackets are here
_understood_. I may deny it, because they are needless; and nothing
needless can form a true ellipsis. To the supplying of useless words, if we
admit the principle, there may be no end; and the notion that conjunctions
join sentences only, opens a wide door for it. For example: "And that man
was perfect and upright, and one that feared God, and eschewed
evil."--_Job_, i, 1. No additional words will make this clause any plainer,
and none are really necessary to the construction; yet some grammarians
will parse it with the following impletions, or more: "And that man was _a_
perfect _man_, and _he was an_ upright _man_, and _he was_ one _man_ that
feared God, and _that_ eschewed evil _things_." It is easy to see how this
liberty of interpretation, or of interpolation, will change simple
sentences to compound sentences, as well as alter the nature and relation
of many particular words; and at the same time, it takes away totally those
peculiarities of construction by which Dr. Adam and others would recognize
a sentence as being compound. What then? are there not two kinds of
sentences? Yes, truly; but these authors are wrong in their notions and
definitions of both. Joint nominatives or joint verbs may occur in either;
but they belong primarily to some simple sentences, and only for that
reason are found in any that are compound. A sentence, too, may possibly be
made compound, when a simple one would express the whole meaning as well or
better; as, "And [David] smote the Philistines from Geba _until thou come_
to Gazer."--_2 Sam._, v, 25. Here, if we omit the words in Italics, the
sentence will become simple, not elliptical.
THE ANALYZING OF SENTENCES.
To analyze a sentence, is, to resolve it into some species of constituent
parts, but most properly into words, its first significant elements, and to
point out their several relations and powers in the given connexion.
The component parts of a sentence are _members, clauses, phrases_, or
_words_. Some sentences, which are short and simple, can only be divided
into their words; others, which are long and complex, may be resolved into
parts again and again divisible.
Of analysis applicable to sentences, there are several different methods;
and, so far as their difference may compatibly aid the application of
different principles of the science of grammar, there may be an advantage
in the occasional use of each.
FIRST METHOD OF ANALYSIS.
_Sentences not simple may be reduced to their constituent members, clauses,
or simple sentences; and the means by which these are united, may be shown.
Thus_:--
EXAMPLE ANALYZED.
"Even the Atheist, who tells us that the universe is self-existent and
indestructible--even he, who, instead of seeing the traces of a manifold
wisdom in its manifold varieties, sees nothing in them all but the
exquisite structures and the lofty dimensions of materialism--even he, who
would despoil creation of its God, cannot look upon its golden suns, and
their accompanying systems, without the solemn impression of a magnificence
that fixes and overpowers him."--DR. CHALMERS, _Discourses on Revelation
and Astronomy_, p. 231.
ANALYSIS.--This is a compound sentence, consisting of three complex
members, which are separated by the two dashes. The three members are
united in one sentence, by a suspension of the sense at each dash, and by
two virtual repetitions of the subject, "_Atheist_" through the pronoun
"_he_," put in the same case, and representing this noun. The sense mainly
intended is not brought out till the period ends. Each of the three members
is complex, because each has not only a relative clause, commencing with
"_who_," but also an antecedent word which makes sense with "_cannot
look_," &c. The first of these relative clauses involves also a
subordinate, supplementary clause,--"_the universe is self-existent and
indestructible_"--introduced after the verb "_tells_" by the conjunction
"_that_." The last phrase, "_without the solemn impression_," &c., which is
subjoined by "_without_" to "_cannot look_," embraces likewise a
subordinate, relative clause,--"_that fixes and overpowers him_,"--which
has two verbs; the whole, antecedent and all, being but an adjunct of an
adjunct, yet an essential element of the sentence.
SECOND METHOD OF ANALYSIS.
_Simple sentences, or the simple members of compound sentences, may be
resolved into their PRINCIPAL and their SUBORDINATE PARTS; the subject, the
verb, and the case put after or governed by the verb, being first pointed
out as THE PRINCIPAL PARTS; and the other words being then detailed as
ADJUNCTS to these, according to THE SENSE, or as adjuncts to adjuncts.
Thus_:--
EXAMPLE ANALYZED.
"Fear naturally quickens the flight of guilt. Rasselas could not catch the
fugitive, with his utmost efforts; but, resolving to weary, by
perseverance, him whom he could not surpass in speed, he pressed on till
the foot of the mountain stopped his course."--DR. JOHNSON, _Rasselas_, p.
23.
ANALYSIS.--The first period here is a simple sentence. Its principal parts
are--_Fear, quickens, flight_; _Fear_ being the subject, _quickens_ the
verb, and _flight_ the object. _Fear_ has no adjunct; _naturally_ is an
adjunct of _quickens_; _the_ and _of guilt_ are adjuncts of _flight_. The
second period is composed of several clauses, or simple members, united.
The first of these is also a simple sentence, having, three principal
parts--_Rasselas, could catch_, and _fugitive_; the subject, the verb, and
its object, in their order. _Not_ is added to _could catch_, reversing the
meaning; _the_ is an adjunct to _fugitive_; _with_ joins its phrase to
_could not catch_; but _his_ and _utmost_ are adjuncts of _efforts_. The
word _but_ connects the two chief members as parts of one sentence.
"_Resolving to weary_" is an adjunct to the pronoun _he_, which stands
before _pressed_. "_By perseverance_," is an adjunct to _weary_. _Him_ is
governed by _weary_, and is the antecedent to _whom_. "_Whom he could not
surpass in speed_," is a relative clause, or subordinate simple member,
having three principal parts--_he, could surpass_, and _whom. Not_ and _in
speed_ are adjuncts to the verb _could surpass_. "_He pressed on_" is an
other simple member, or sentence, and the chief clause here used, the
others being subjoined to this. Its principal parts are two, _he_ and
_pressed_; the latter taking the particle _on_ as an adjunct, and being
intransitive. The words dependent on the nominative _he_, (to wit,
_resolving_, &c.,) have already been mentioned. _Till_ is a conjunctive
adverb of time, connecting the concluding clause to _pressed on_. "_The
foot of the mountain stopped his course_," is a subordinate clause and
simple member, whose principal parts are--the subject _foot_, the verb
_stopped_, and the object _course_. The adjuncts of _foot_ are _the_ and
_of the mountain_; the verb in this sentence has no adjunct but _course_,
which is better reckoned a principal word; lastly, _his_ is an adjunct to
_course_, and governed by it.
THIRD METHOD OF ANALYSIS.
_Sentences may be partially analyzed by a resolution into their SUBJECTS
and their PREDICATES, a method which some late grammarians have borrowed
from the logicians; the grammatical subject with its adjuncts, being taken
for the logical subject; and the finite verb, which some call the
grammatical predicate[330] being, with its subsequent case and the adjuncts
of both, denominated the predicate, or the logical predicate. Thus_:--
EXAMPLE ANALYZED.
"Such is the emptiness of human enjoyment, that we are always impatient of
the present. Attainment is followed by neglect, and possession, by disgust.
Few moments are more pleasing than those in which the mind is concerting
measures for a new undertaking. From the first hint that wakens the fancy,
to the hour of actual execution, all is improvement and progress, triumph
and felicity."--DR. JOHNSON, _Rambler_.
ANALYSIS.--Here the first period is a compound sentence, containing two
clauses,--which are connected by _that_. In the first clause, _emptiness_
is the grammatical subject, and "_the emptiness of human enjoyment_" is the
logical. _Is_ some would call the grammatical predicate, and "Such is," or
_is such_, the logical; but the latter consists, as the majority teach, of
"the copula" _is_, and "the attribute," or "predicate," _such_. In the
second clause, (which explains the import of "_Such_,") the subject is
_we_; which is unmodified, and in which therefore the logical form and the
grammatical coincide and are the same. _Are_ may here be called the
grammatical predicate; and "_are always impatient of the present_," the
logical. The second period, too, is a compound sentence, having two
clauses, which are connected by _and_. _Attainment_ is the subject of the
former; and, "_is followed by neglect_" is the predicate. In the latter,
_possession_ alone is the subject; and, "[_is followed_] _by disgust_," is
the predicate; the verb _is followed_ being understood at the comma. The
third period, likewise, is a compound, having three parts, with the two
connectives _than_ and _which_. Here we have _moments_ for the first
grammatical subject, and _Few moments_ for the logical; then, _are_ for the
grammatical predicate, and _are more pleasing_ for the logical: or, if we
choose to say so, for "the copula and the attribute." "_Than those_," is an
elliptical member, meaning, "than _are_ those _moments_," or, "than those
_moments are pleasing_;" both subject and predicate are wholly suppressed,
except that _those_ is reckoned a part of the logical subject. _In which_
is an adjunct of _is concerting_, and serves well to connect the members,
because _which_ represents _those_, i.e. _those moments._ _Mind_, or _the
mind_, is the next subject of affirmation; and _is concerting_, or, "_is
concerting measures for a new undertaking_," is the predicate or matter
affirmed. Lastly, the fourth period, like the rest, is compound. The
phrases commencing with _From_ and _to_, describe a period of time, and are
adjuncts of the verb _is._ The former contains a subordinate relative
clause, of which _that_ (representing _hint_) is the subject, and _wakens_,
or _wakens the fancy_, the predicate. Of the principal clause, the word
_all_, taken as a noun, is the subject, whether grammatical or logical; and
"the copula," or "grammatical predicate," _is_, becomes, with its adjuncts
and the nominatives following, the logical predicate.
FOURTH METHOD OF ANALYSIS.
_All syntax is founded on the_ RELATION _of words one to an other, and the_
CONNEXION _of clauses and phrases, according to_ THE SENSE. _Hence
sentences may be, in some sort, analyzed, and perhaps profitably, by the
tracing of such relation or connexion, from link to link, through a series
of words, beginning and ending with such as are somewhat remote from each
other, yet within the period. Thus_:--
EXAMPLES ANALYZED.
1. "Swift would say, 'The thing has not life enough in it to keep it
sweet;' Johnson, 'The creature possesses not vitality sufficient to
preserve it from putrefaction.'"--MATT. HARRISON, _on the English
Language_, p. 102. ANALYSIS.--What is the general sense of this passage?
and what, the chain of connexion between the words _Swift_ and
_putrefaction_? The period is designed to show, that Swift preferred words
of Saxon origin; and Johnson, of Latin. It has in contrast two coördinate
members, tacitly connected: the verb _would say_ being understood after
_Johnson_, and perhaps also the particle _but_, after the semicolon.
_Swift_ is the subject of _would say_; and _would say_ introduces the
clause after it, as what would be said. _The_ relates to _thing_; _thing_
is the subject of _has_; _has_, which is qualified by _not_, governs
_life_; _life_ is qualified by the adjective _enough_, and by the phrase,
_in it_; _enough_ is the prior term of _to_; _to_ governs _keep_; _keep_
governs _it_, which stands for _the thing_; and _it_, in lieu of _the
thing_, is qualified by _sweet_. The chief members are connected either by
standing in contrast as members, or by _but_, understood before _Johnson._
_Johnson_ is the subject of _would say_, understood: and this _would say_,
again introduces a clause, as what would be said. _The_ relates to
_creature_; _creature_ is the subject of _possesses_; _possesses_, which is
qualified by _not_, governs _vitality_; _vitality_ is qualified by
_sufficient_; _sufficient_ is the prior term of _to_; _to_ governs
_preserve_; _preserve_ governs _it_, and is the prior term of _from_; and
_from_ governs _putrefaction._
2. "There is one Being to whom we can look with a perfect conviction of
finding that security, which nothing about us can give, and which nothing
about us can take away."--GREENWOOD; _Wells's School Gram._, p. 192.[331]
ANALYSIS.--What is the general structure of this passage? and what, the
chain of connexion "between the words _away_ and _is?"_ The period is a
complex sentence, having four clauses, all connected together by relatives;
the second, by _whom_, to the first and chief clause, _"There is one
Being;"_ the third and the fourth, to the second, by _which_ and _which_;
but the last two, having the same antecedent, _security_, and being
coördinate, are also connected one to the other by _and._ As to "the chain
of connexion," _Away_ relates to _can take_; _can take_ agrees with its
nominative _nothing_, and governs _which_; _which_ represents _security_;
_security_ is governed by _finding_; _finding_ is governed by _of_; _of_
refers back to _conviction_; _conviction_ is governed by _with_; _with_
refers back to _can look_; _can look_ agrees with _we_, and is, in sense,
the antecedent of _to_; _to_ governs _whom_; _whom_ represents _Being_; and
_Being_ is the subject of _is._
FIFTH METHOD OF ANALYSIS.
_The best and most thorough method of analysis is that of_ COMPLETE
SYNTACTICAL PARSING; _a method which, for the sake of order and brevity,
should ever be kept free from all mixture of etymological definitions or
reasons, but which may be preceded or followed by any of the foregoing
schemes of resolution, if the teacher choose to require any such
preliminary or subsidiary exposition. This method is fully illustrated in
the Twelfth Praxis below._
OBSERVATIONS ON METHODS OF ANALYSIS.
OBS. 1.--The almost infinite variety in the forms of sentences, will
sometimes throw difficulty in the way of the analyzer, be his scheme or his
skill what it may. The last four or five observations of the preceding
series have shown, that the distinction of sentences as _simple_ or
_compound_, which constitutes the chief point of the First Method of
Analysis above, is not always plain, even to the learned. The definitions
and examples which I have given, will make it _generally_ so; and, where it
is otherwise, the question or puzzle, it is presumed, cannot often be of
much practical importance. If the difference be not obvious, it can hardly
be a momentous error, to mistake a phrase for an elliptical clause, or to
call such a clause a phrase.
OBS. 2.--The Second Method above is, I think, easier of application than
any of the rest; and, if other analysis than the regular method of parsing
seem desirable, this will probably be found as useful as any. There is, in
many of our popular grammars, some recognition of the principles of this
analysis--some mention of "the _principal parts_ of a sentence," in
accordance with what are so called above,--and also, in a few, some
succinct account of the parts called "_adjuncts_;" but there seems to have
been no prevalent practice of applying these principles, in any stated or
well-digested manner. Lowth, Murray, Alger, W. Allen, Hart, Hiley,
Ingersoll, Wells, and others, tell of these "PRINCIPAL PARTS;"--Lowth
calling them, "the _agent_, the _attribute_, and the _object_;" (_Gram._,
p. 72;)--Murray, and his copyists, Alger, Ingersoll, and others, calling
them, "the _subject_, the _attribute_, and the _object_;"--Hiley and Hart
calling them, "the _subject_ or _nominative_, the _attribute_ or _verb_,
and the _object_;"--Allen calling them, "the _nominative_, the _verb_, and
(if the verb is active,) the _accusative_ governed by the verb;" and also
saying, "The nominative is sometimes called the _subject_; the verb, the
_attribute_; and the accusative, the _object_;"--Wells calling them, "the
_subject_ or _nominative_, the _verb_, and the _object_;" and also
recognizing the "_adjuncts_," as a species which "embraces all the words of
a simple sentence [,] except the _principal parts_;"--yet not more than two
of them all appearing to have taken any thought, and they but little, about
the formal _application_ of their common doctrine. In Allen's English
Grammar, which is one of the best, and likewise in Wells's, which is
equally prized, this reduction of all connected words, or parts of speech,
into "the principal parts" and "the adjuncts," is fully recognized; the
adjuncts, too, are discriminated by Allen, as "either primary or
secondary," nor are their more particular species or relations overlooked;
but I find no method prescribed for the analysis intended, except what
Wells adopted in his early editions but has since changed to an other or
abandoned, and no other allusion to it by, Allen, than this Note, which,
with some appearance of intrusion, is appended to his "Method of Parsing
the Infinitive Mood:"--"The pupil _may now begin_ to analyse [_analyze_]
the sentences, by distinguishing the principal words and their
adjuncts."--_W. Allen's E. Gram._, p. 258.
OBS. 3.--These authors in general, and many more, tell us, with some
variation of words, that the agent, subject, or nominative, is that of
which something is said, affirmed, or denied; that the attribute, verb, or
predicate, is that which is said, affirmed, or denied, of the subject; and
that the object, accusative, or case sequent, is that which is introduced
by the finite verb, or affected by the action affirmed. Lowth says, "In
English the nominative case, denoting the agent, usually goes before the
verb, or attribution; and the objective case, denoting the object, follows
the verb active."--_Short Introd._, p. 72. Murray copies, but not
literally, thus: "The nominative denotes the subject, and usually goes
before the verb [,] or attribute; and the word _or phrase_, denoting the
object, follows the verb: as, 'A wise man governs his passions.' Here, a
_wise man_ is the subject; _governs_, the attribute, or thing affirmed; and
_his passions_, the object."--_Murray's Octavo_, p. 142; _Duodecimo_, 116.
To include thus the adjuncts with their principals, as the logicians do, is
_here_ manifestly improper; because it unites what the grammatical analyzer
is chiefly concerned to separate, and tends to defeat the main purpose for
which "THE PRINCIPAL PARTS" are so named and distinguished.
OBS. 4.--The Third Method of Analysis, described above, is an attempt very
briefly to epitomize the chief elements of a great scheme,--to give, in a
nutshell, the substance of what our grammarians have borrowed from the
logicians, then mixed with something of their own, next amplified with
small details, and, in some instances, branched out and extended to
enormous bulk and length. Of course, they have not failed to set forth the
comparative merits of this scheme in a sufficiently favourable light. The
two ingenious gentlemen who seem to have been chiefly instrumental in
making it popular, say in their preface, "The rules of syntax contained in
this work result directly from the analysis of propositions, and of
compound sentences; and for this reason the student should make himself
perfectly familiar with the sections relating to _subject_ and _predicate_,
and should be able readily to analyze sentences, whether simple or
compound, and to explain their structure and connection. * * * This
exercise _should always precede_ the more minute and subsidiary labor of
parsing. If the latter be conducted, as it often is, independently of
previous analysis, the _principal advantage_ to be derived from the study
of language, as an intellectual exercise, will inevitably be lost."--_Latin
Grammar of Andrews and Stoddard_, p. vi. N. Butler, who bestows upon this
subject about a dozen duodecimo pages, says in his preface, "The rules for
the analysis of sentences, which is a _very useful and interesting_
exercise, have been taken from Andrews' and Stoddard's Latin Grammar, some
changes and additions being made."--_Butler's Practical Gram._, p. iv.[332]
OBS. 5.--Wells, in the early copies of his School Grammar, as has been
hinted, adopted a method of analysis similar to the _Second_ one prescribed
above; yet referred, even from the first, to "Andrews and Stoddard's Latin
Grammar," and to "De Sacy's General Grammar," as if these were authorities
for what he then inculcated. Subsequently, _he changed his scheme_, from
that of _Parts Principal_ and _Adjuncts_, to one of _Subjects_ and
_Predicates_, "either grammatical or logical," also "either simple or
compound;"--to one resembling Andrews and Stoddard's, yet differing from
it, often, as to what constitutes a "grammatical predicate;"--to one
resenbling [sic--KTH] the _Third Method_ above, yet differing from it, (as
does Andrews and Stoddard's,) in taking the logical subject and predicate
before the grammatical. "The chapter on Analysis," said he then, "has been
Revised and enlarged with great care, and will be found to embody all the
most important principles on this subject [.] _which_ are contained in the
works of De Sacy, Andrews and Stoddard, Kühner, Crosby, and Crane. It is
gratifying to observe that the attention of teachers is now so generally
directed _to this important mode_ of investigating the structure of our
language, _in connection with_ the ordinary exercises of _etymological_ and
syntactical parsing."--_Wells's School Gram._, New Ed., 1850, p. iv.
OBS. 6.--In view of the fact, that Wells's chief mode of sentential
analysis had just undergone an almost total metamorphosis, a change
plausible perhaps, but of doubtful utility,--that, up to the date of the
words just cited, and afterwards, so far and so long as any copies of his
early "Thousands" remain in use, the author himself has earnestly directed
attention to a method which he now means henceforth to abandon,--in this
view, the praise and gratulation expressed above seem singular. If it has
been found practicable, to slide "the attention of teachers," and their
approbation too, adroitly over from one "important mode of investigating
the structure of our language," to an other;--if "it is gratifying to
observe," that the direction thus given to public opinion sustains itself
so well, and "is so generally" acquiesced in;--if it is proved, that the
stereotyped praise of one system of analysis may, without alteration, be so
transferred to an other, as to answer the double purpose of commending and
superseding;--it is not improbable that the author's next new plates will
bear the stamp of yet _other_ "most important principles" of analysis. This
process is here recommended to be used "_in connection with_ the ordinary
exercises of _etymological_ and syntactical parsing,"--exercises, which,
in Wells's Grammar, are generally, and very improperly, commingled; and if,
to these, may be profitably conjoined either his present or his former
scheme of analysis, it were well, had he somewhere put them together and
shown how.
OBS. 7.--But there are other passages of the School Grammar, so little
suited to this notion of "_connection_" that one can hardly believe the
word ought to be taken in what seems its only sense. "Advanced classes
should attend less to the common _Order of Parsing_, and more to the
_Analysis_ of language."--_Wells's Grammar_, "3d Thousand," p. 125; "113th
Thousand," p. 132. This implies, what is probably true of the etymological
exercise, that parsing is more rudimental than the other forms of analysis.
It also intimates, what is not so clear, that pupils rightly instructed
must advance from the former to the latter, as to something more worthy of
their intellectual powers. The passage is used with reference to either
form of analysis adopted by the author. So the following comparison, in
which Parsing is plainly disparaged, stands permanently at the head of "the
chapter on Analysis," to commend first one mode, and then an other: "It is
particularly desirable that pupils _should pass as early as practicable
from the formalities_ of common PARSING, to the _more important_ exercise
of ANALYZING critically the structure of language. The mechanical routine
of technical parsing is peculiarly liable to become monotonous and dull,
while the _practice of explaining the various relations and offices of
words in a sentence_, is adapted to call the mind of the learner into
constant and vigorous action, and can hardly fail of exciting the deepest
interest,"--_Wells's Gram._, 3d Th., p. 181; 113th Th., p. 184.
OBS. 8.--An ill scheme of _parsing_, or an ill use of a good one, is almost
as unlucky in grammar, as an ill method of _ciphering_, or an ill use of a
good one, would be in arithmetic. From the strong contrast cited above, one
might suspect that, in selecting, devising, or using, a technical process
for the exercising of learners in the principles of etymology and syntax,
this author had been less fortunate than the generality of his fellows. Not
only is it implied, that parsing is no critical analysis, but even what is
set _in opposition_ to the "mechanical routine," may very well serve for _a
definition_ of Syntactical Parsing--"_the practice of explaining the
various relations and offices of words in a sentence_!" If this "practice,"
well ordered, can be at once interesting and profitable to the learner, so
may parsing. Nor, after all, is even this author's mode of parsing,
defective though it is in several respects, less "important" to the users
of his book, or less valued by teachers, than the analysis which he sets
above it.
OBS. 9.--S. S. Greene, a public teacher in Boston, who, in answer to a
supposed "demand for a _more philosophical plan_ of teaching the English
language," has entered in earnest upon the "Analysis of Sentences," having
devoted to one method of it more than the space of two hundred duodecimo
pages, speaks of analysis and of parsing, thus: "The resolving of a
sentence into its elements, or of any complex element into the parts which
compose it, is called _analysis_."--_Greene's Analysis_, p. 14. "Parsing
consists in naming a part of speech, giving its modifications, relation,
agreement or dependence, and the rule for its construction. _Analysis_
consists in pointing out the words or groups of words which constitute the
elements of a sentence. Analysis _should precede_ parsing."--_Ib._, p. 26.
"A large proportion of the elements of sentences are not single words, but
combinations or groups of words. These groups perform the office of the
_substantive_, the _adjective_, or the _adverb_, and, in some one of these
relations, enter in as the component parts of a sentence. The pupil who
learns to determine the elements of a sentence, _must, therefore, learn the
force of these combinations before_ he separates them into the single words
which compose them. _This advantage_ is wholly lost in the ordinary methods
of parsing."--_Ib._, p. 3.
OBS. 10.--On these passages, it may be remarked in the first place, that
the distinction attempted between analysis and parsing is by no means
clear, or well drawn. Nor indeed could it be; because parsing is a species
of analysis. The first assertion would be just as true as it is now, were
the former word substituted for the latter: thus, "The resolving of a
sentence into its elements, or of any complex element into the _parts_
which compose it, is called _parsing_." Next, the "_Parsing_" spoken of in
the second sentence, is _Syntactical_ Parsing only; and, without a
limitation of the species, neither this assertion nor the one concerning
precedence is sufficiently true. Again, the suggestion, that, "_Analysis_
consists in _pointing out_ the words or groups of words which _constitute
the elements_ of a sentence," has nothing distinctive in it; and, without
some idea of the author's peculiar system of "elements," previously
impressed upon the mind, is scarcely, if at all, intelligible. Lastly, that
a pupil must _understand_ a sentence,--or, what is the same thing, "_learn
the force of the words combined_,"--before he can be sure of parsing each
word rightly, is a very plain and certain truth; but what "advantage" over
parsing this truth gives to the lesser analysis, which deals with "groups,"
it is not easy to discover. If the author had any clear idea of "_this
advantage_," he has conveyed no such conception to his readers.
OBS. 11.--Greene's Analysis is the most expanded form of the Third Method
above.[333] Its nucleus, or germinating kernel, was the old partition of
_subject_ and _predicate_, derived from the art of logic. Its chief
principles may be briefly stated thus: Sentences, which are simple, or
complex, or compound, are made up of _words, phrases_, and _clauses_--three
grand classes of elements, called the _first_, the _second_, and the
_third_ class. From these, each sentence must have two elements; the
_Subject_, or Substantive element, and the _Predicate_, or Predicative
element, which are principal; and a sentence _may_ have five, the
subordinates being the Adjective element, the Objective element, and the
Adverbial element. The five elements have sundry modifications and
subdivisions. Each of the five may, like a sentence, be simple, or complex,
or compound; and each may be of any of the three grand classes. The
development of this scheme forms a volume, not small. The system is
plausible, ingenious, methodical, mostly true, and somewhat elaborate; but
it is neither very useful nor very accurate. It seems too much like a great
tree, beautiful, symmetrical, and full of leaves, but raised or desired
only for fruit, yet bearing little, and some of that little not of good
quality, but knurly or bitter. The chief end of a grammar, designed for our
tongue, is, to show what is, and what is not, good English. To this end,
the system in question does not appear to be well adapted.
OBS. 12.--Dr. Bullions, the projector of the "Series of Grammars, English,
Latin, and Greek, all _on the same plan_," inserted in his Latin Grammar,
of 1841, a short sketch of the new analysis by "subjects and predicates,"
"grammatical and logical," the scheme used by Andrews and Stoddard; but his
English Grammar, which appeared in 1834, was too early for this "new and
improved method of investigating" language. In his later English Grammar,
of 1849, however, paying little regard to _sameness of "plan_" or
conformity of definitions, he carefully devoted to this matter the space of
fifteen pages, placing the topic, not injudiciously, in the first part of
his syntax, and referring to it thus in his Preface: "The subject of
ANALYSIS, wholly omitted in the former work, is here introduced in its
proper place; and to an extent in accordance with its importance."--
_Bullions, Analyt. and Pract. Gram._, p. 3.
OBS. 13.--In applying any of the different methods of analysis, as a school
exercise, it will in general perhaps be best to use each _separately_; the
teacher directing which one is to be applied, and to what examples. The
selections prepared for the stated praxes of this work, will be found as
suitable as any. Analysis of sentences is a central and essential matter in
the teaching or the study of grammar; but the truest and the most important
of the sentential analyses is _parsing_; which, because it is a method
distinguished by a technical name of its own, is not commonly denominated
analysis. The relation which other methods should bear to _parsing_, is, as
we have seen, variously stated by different authors. _Etymological_ parsing
and _Syntactical_ are, or ought to be, distinct exercises. The former,
being the most simple, the most elementary, and also requisite to be used
before the pupil is prepared for the latter, should, without doubt, take
precedence of all the rest, and be made familiar in the first place. Those
who say, "_Analysis should precede parsing_," will scarcely find the
application of other analysis practicable, till this is somewhat known. But
_Syntactical Parsing_ being, when complete in form, the most thorough
process of grammatical resolution, it seems proper to have introduced the
other methods before it, as above. It can hardly be said that any of these
are _necessary_ to this exercise, or to one an other; yet in a full course
of grammatical instruction, each may at times be usefully employed.
OBS. 14.--Dr. Bullions suggests, that, "_Analysis_ should precede
_Syntactical parsing_, because, till we know the parts and elements of a
sentence, we can not understand their relations, nor intelligently combine
them into one consistent whole."--_Analytical and Pract. Gram._, p. 114.
This reason is entirely fictitious and truthless; for the _words_ of a
sentence are intuitively known to be its "parts and elements;" and, to
"_understand_ their relations," is as necessary to one form of analysis as
to another; but, "intelligently to _combine_ them," is no part of the
parser's duty: this belongs to the _writer_; and where he has not done it,
he must be criticised and censured, as one that knows not well what he
says. In W. Allen's Grammar, as in Wells's, Syntactical parsing and
Etymological are not divided. Wells intersperses his "Exercises in
Parsing," at seven points of his Syntax, and places "the chapter on
Analysis," at the end of it. Allen treats first of the several parts of
grammar, didactically; then presents a series of exercises adapted to the
various heads of the whole. At the beginning of these, are fourteen
"Methods of Parsing," which show, successively, the properties and
construction of his nine parts of speech; and, _at the ninth method_, which
resolves _infinitives_, it is proposed that the pupil begin to apply a
method of analysis similar to the Second one above.
EXAMPLES FOR PARSING. PRAXIS XII.--SYNTACTICAL.
_The grand clew to all syntactical parsing is THE SENSE; and as any
composition is faulty which does not rightly deliver the authors meaning,
so every solution of a word or sentence is necessarily erroneous, in which
that meaning is not carefully noticed and literally preserved.
In all complete syntactical parsing, it is required of the pupil--to
distinguish the different parts of speech and their classes; to mention
their modifications in order; to point out their relation, agreement, or
government; and to apply the Rules of Syntax. Thus_:--
EXAMPLE PARSED.
"A young man studious to know his duty, and honestly bent on doing it, will
find himself led away from the sin or folly in which the multitude
thoughtlessly indulge themselves; but, ah! poor fallen human nature! what
conflicts are thy portion, when inclination and habit--a rebel and a
traitor--exert their sway against our only saving principle!"--_G. Brown_.
_A_ is the indefinite article: and relates to _man_, or _young man_;
according to Rule 1st, which says, "Articles relate to the nouns which they
limit." Because the meaning is--_a man--a young man_.
_Young_ is a common adjective, of the positive degree, compared regularly,
_young, younger, youngest_: and relates to _man_; according to Rule 9th,
which says, "Adjectives relate to nouns or pronouns." Because the meaning
is--_young man_.
_Man_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, masculine
gender, and nominative case: and is the subject of _will find_; according
to Rule 2d, which says, "A noun or a pronoun which is the subject of a
finite verb, must be in the nominative case." Because the meaning is--_man
will find_.
_Studious_ is a common adjective, compared by means of the adverbs;
_studious, more studious, most studious_; or, _studious, less studious,
least studious_: and relates to _man_; according to Rule 9th, which says,
"Adjectives relate to nouns or pronouns." Because the meaning is--_man
studious_.
_To_ is a preposition: and shows the relation between _studious_ and
_know_; according to Rule 23d, which says, "Prepositions show the relations
of words, and of the things or thoughts expressed by them." Because the
meaning is--_studious to know_.
_Know_ is an irregular active-transitive verb, from _know, knew, knowing,
known_; found in the infinitive mood, present tense--no person, or number:
and is governed by _to_; according to Rule 18th, which says, "The
infinitive mood is governed in general by the preposition TO, which
commonly connects it to a finite verb." Because the meaning is--_to know_.
_His_ is a personal pronoun, representing _man_, in the third person,
singular number, and masculine gender; according to Rule 10th, which says,
"A pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or pronoun which it
represents, in person, number, and gender:" and is in the possessive case,
being governed by _duty_; according to Rule 4th, which says, "A noun or a
pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the name of the thing
possessed." Because the meaning is--_his duty_;--i. e., the young _man's
duty_.
_Duty_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, neuter
gender, and objective case: and is governed by _know_; according to Rule
5th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun made the object of an
active-transitive verb or participle, is governed by it in the objective
case." Because the meaning is--to _know_ his _duty_.
_And_ is a copulative conjunction: and connects the phrase which follows
it, to that which precedes; according to Rule 22d, which says,
"Conjunctions connect words, sentences, or parts of sentences." Because the
meaning is--studious to know his duty, _and_ honestly bent, &c.
_Honestly_ is an adverb of manner: and relates to _bent_; according to Rule
21st, which says, "Adverbs relate to verbs, participles, adjectives, or
other adverbs." Because the meaning is--_honestly bent_.
_Bent_ is a perfect participle, from the redundant active-transitive verb,
_bend, bent_ or _bended, bending, bent_ or _bended_: and relates to _man_;
according to Rule 20th, which says, "Participles relate to nouns or
pronouns, or else are governed by prepositions." Because the meaning
is--_man bent_. _On_ is a preposition: and shows the relation between
_bent_ and _doing_; according to Rule 23d, which says, "Prepositions show
the relations of words, and of the things or thoughts expressed by them."
Because the meaning is--_bent on doing_.
_Doing_ is an imperfect participle, from the irregular active-transitive
verb, _do, did, doing, done_: and is governed by on; according to Rule
20th, which says, "Participles relate to nouns or pronouns, or else are
governed by prepositions." Because the meaning is--_on doing_.
_It_ is a personal pronoun, representing _duty_, in the third person,
singular number, and neuter gender; according to Rule 10th, which says, "A
pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or pronoun which it
represents, in person, number, and gender:" and is in the objective case,
being governed by _doing_; according to Rule 5th, which says, "A noun or a
pronoun made the object of an active-transitive verb or participle, is
governed by it in the objective case." Because the meaning is--_doing
it_;--i. e., doing _his duty_.
_Will find_ is an irregular active-transitive verb, from _find, found,
finding, found_; found in the indicative mood, first-future tense, third
person, and singular number: and agrees with its nominative _man_;
according to Rule 14th, which says, "Every finite verb must agree with its
subject, or nominative, in person and number." Because the meaning is--_man
will find_.
_Himself_ is a compound personal pronoun, representing man, in the third
person, singular number, and masculine gender; according to Rule 10th,
which says, "A pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or
pronoun which it represents, in person, number, and gender;" and is in the
objective case, being governed by _will find_; according to Rule 5th, which
says, "A noun or a pronoun made the object of an active-transitive verb or
participle, is governed by it in the objective case." Because the meaning
is--_will find himself_;--i. e., his own mind or person.
_Led_ is a perfect participle, from the irregular active-transitive verb,
_lead, led, leading, led_: and relates to _himself_; according to Rule
20th, which says, "Participles relate to nouns or pronouns, or else are
governed by prepositions." Because the meaning is--_himself led_.
_Away_ is an adverb of place: and relates to _led_; according to Rule 21st,
which says, "Adverbs relate to verbs, participles, adjectives, or other
adverbs." Because the meaning is--_led away_.
_From_ is a preposition: and shows the relation between _led_ and _sin or
folly_; according to Rule 23d, which says, "Prepositions show the relations
of words, and of the things or thoughts expressed by them." Because the
meaning is--_led from sin or folly_.
_The_ is the definite article: and relates to _sin_ and _folly_; according
to Rule 1st, which says, "Articles relate to the nouns which they limit."
Because the meaning is--_the sin or folly_.
_Sin_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, neuter
gender, and objective case: and is governed by _from_; according to Rule
7th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun made the object of a preposition, is
governed by it in the objective case." Because the meaning is--_from sin_.
_Or_ is a disjunctive conjunction: and connects _sin_ and _folly_;
according to Rule 22d, which says, "Conjunctions connect words, sentences,
or parts of sentences." Because the meaning is--_sin or folly_.
_Folly_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, neuter
gender, and objective case; and is connected by _or_ to _sin_, and governed
by the same preposition _from_; according to Rule 7th, which says, "A noun
or a pronoun made the object of a preposition, is governed by it in the
objective case." Because the meaning is--_from sin or folly_.
_In_ is a preposition: and shows the relation between _indulge_ and
_which_; according to Rule 23d, which says, "Prepositions show the
relations of words, and of the things or thoughts expressed by them."
Because the meaning is--_indulge in which_--or, _which they indulge in_.
_Which_ is a relative pronoun, representing _sin or folly_, in the third
person, singular number, and neuter gender; according to Rule 13th, which
says, "When a pronoun has two or more antecedents connected by _or_ or
_nor_, it must agree with them singly, and not as if taken together:" and
is in the objective case, being governed by _in_; according to Rule 7th,
which says, "A noun or a pronoun made the object of a preposition, is
governed by it in the objective case." Because the meaning is--_in
which_;--i. e., _in which sin or folly_.
_The_ is the definite article: and relates to _multitude_; according to
Rule 1st, which says, "Articles relate to the nouns which they limit."
Because the meaning is--_the multitude_.
_Multitude_ is a common noun, collective, of the third person, conveying
the idea of plurality, masculine gender, and nominative case: and is the
subject of _indulge_; according to Rule 2d, which says, "A noun or a
pronoun which is the subject of a finite verb, must be in the nominative
case." Because the meaning is--_multitude indulge_.
_Thoughtlessly_ is an adverb of manner: and relates to _indulge_; according
to Rule 21st, which says, "Adverbs relate to verbs, participles,
adjectives, or other adverbs." Because the meaning is--_thoughtlessly
indulge_.
_Indulge_ is a regular active-transitive verb, from _indulge, indulged,
indulging, indulged_; found in the indicative mood, present tense, third
person, and plural number: and agrees with its nominative multitude;
according to Rule 15th, which says, "When the nominative is a collective
noun conveying the idea of plurality, the verb must agree with it in the
plural number." Because the meaning is--_multitude indulge_.
_Themselves_ is a compound personal pronoun, representing _multitude_, in
the third person, plural number, and masculine gender; according to Rule
11th, which says, "When the antecedent is a collective noun conveying the
idea of plurality, the pronoun must agree with it in the plural number:"
and is in the objective case, being governed by _indulge_; according to
Rule 5th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun made the object of an
active-transitive verb or participle, is governed by it in the objective
case." Because the meaning is--_indulge themselves_;--i. e., the
individuals of the multitude indulge themselves.
_But_ is a disjunctive conjunction: and connects what precedes and what
follows; according to Rule 22d, which says, "Conjunctions connect words,
sentences, or parts of sentences." Because the meaning is--A young man,
&c., _but_, ah! &c.
_Ah_ is an interjection, indicating sorrow: and is used independently;
according to Rule 24th, which says, "Interjections have no dependent
construction; they are put absolute, either alone, or with other words."
Because the meaning is--_ah!_--unconnected with the rest of the sentence.
_Poor_ is a common adjective, of the positive degree, compared regularly,
_poor, poorer, poorest_: and relates to _nature_; according to Rule 9th,
which says, "Adjectives relate to nouns or pronouns." Because the meaning
is--_poor human nature_.
_Fallen_ is a participial adjective, compared (perhaps) by adverbs: and
relates to _nature_; according to Rule 9th, which says, "Adjectives relate
to nouns or pronouns." Because the meaning is--_fallen nature_.
_Human_ is a common adjective, not compared: and relates to _nature_;
according to Rule 9th, which says, "Adjectives relate to nouns or
pronouns." Because the meaning is--_human nature_.
_Nature_ is a common noun, of the second person, singular number, neuter
gender, and nominative case: and is put absolute by direct address;
according to Rule 8th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun is put absolute in
the nominative, when its case depends on no other word." Because the
meaning is--_poor fallen human nature!_--the noun being unconnected with
any verb.
_What_ is a pronominal adjective, not compared: and relates to _conflicts_;
according to Rule 9th, which says, "Adjectives relate to nouns or
pronouns." Because the meaning is--_what conflicts_.
_Conflicts_ is a common noun, of the third person, plural number, neuter
gender, and nominative case: and is the subject of _are_; according to Rule
2d, which says, "A noun or a pronoun which is the subject of a finite verb,
must be in the nominative case." Because the meaning is--_conflicts are_.
_Are_ is an irregular neuter verb, from _be, was, being, been_; found in
the indicative mood, present tense, third person, and plural number: and
agrees with its nominative _conflicts_; according to Rule 14th, which says,
"Every finite verb must agree with its subject, or nominative, in person
and number." Because the meaning is--_conflicts are_.
_Thy_ is a personal pronoun, representing _nature_, in the second person,
singular number, and neuter gender; according to Rule 10th, which says, "A
pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or pronoun which it
represents, in person, number, and gender:" and is in the possessive case,
being governed by _portion_; according to Rule 4th, which says, "A noun or
a pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the name of the thing
possessed." Because the meaning is--_thy portion_.
_Portion_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, neuter
gender, and nominative case: and is put after _are_, in agreement with
_conflicts_; according to Rule 6th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun put
after a verb or participle not transitive, agrees in case with a preceding
noun or pronoun referring to the same thing." Because the meaning
is--_conflicts are thy portion_.
_When_ is a conjunctive adverb of time: and relates to the two verbs, _are_
and _exert_; according to Rule 21st, which says, "Adverbs relate to verbs,
participles, adjectives, or other adverbs." Because the meaning is--what
conflicts _are_ thy portion, _when_ inclination and habit _exert_, &c.
_Inclination_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number,
neuter gender, and nominative case: and is one of the subjects of _exert_;
according to Rule 2d, which says, "A noun or a pronoun which is the subject
of a finite verb, must be in the nominative case." Because the meaning
is--_inclination and habit exert_.
_And_ is a copulative conjunction: and connects _inclination_ and _habit_;
according to Rule 22d, which says, "Conjunctions connect words, sentences,
or parts of sentences." Because the meaning is--_inclination and habit_.
_Habit_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, neuter
gender, and nominative case: and is one of the subjects of _exert_;
according to Rule 2d, which says, "A noun or a pronoun which is the subject
of a finite verb, must be in the nominative case." Because the meaning
is--_inclination and habit exert_.
_A_ is the indefinite article: and relates to _rebel_; according to Rule
1st, which says, "Articles relate to the nouns which they limit." Because
the meaning is--_a rebel_.
_Rebel_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, masculine
gender, and nominative case: and is put in apposition with _inclination_;
according to Rule 3d, which says, "A noun or a personal pronoun used to
explain a preceding noun or pronoun, is put, by apposition, in the same
case." Because the meaning is--_inclination, a rebel_.
_And_ is a copulative conjunction: and connects _rebel_ and _traitor_;
according to Rule 22d, which says, "Conjunctions connect words, sentences,
or parts of sentences." Because the meaning is--_a rebel and a traitor_.
_A_ is the indefinite article: and relates to _traitor_; according to Rule
1st, which says, "Articles relate to the nouns which they limit." Because
the meaning is--_a traitor_.
_Traitor_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, masculine
gender, and nominative case: and is put in apposition with _habit_;
according to Rule 3d, which says, "A noun or a personal pronoun used to
explain a preceding noun or pronoun, is put, by apposition, in the same
case." Because the meaning is--_habit, a traitor_.
_Exert_ is a regular active-transitive verb, from _exert, exerted,
exerting, exerted_; found in the indicative mood, present tense, third
person, and plural number: and agrees with its two nominatives _inclination
and habit_; according to Rule 16th, which says, "When a verb has two or
more nominatives connected by _and_, it must agree with them jointly in the
plural, because they are taken together." Because the meaning
is--_inclination and habit exert_.
_Their_ is a personal pronoun, representing _inclination and habit_, in the
third person, plural number, and neuter gender; according to Rule 12th,
which says, "When a pronoun has two or more antecedents connected by _and_,
it must agree with them jointly in the plural, because they are taken
together:" and is in the possessive case, being governed by _sway_;
according to Rule 4th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun in the possessive
case, is governed by the name of the thing possessed." Because the meaning
is--_their sway_;--i. e., the sway of inclination and habit.
_Sway_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, neuter
gender, and objective case; and is governed by _exert_; according to Rule
5th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun made the object of an
active-transitive verb or participle, is governed by it in the objective
case." Because the meaning is--_exert sway_.
_Against_ is a preposition: and shows the relation between _exert_ and
_principle_; according to Rule 23d, which says, "Prepositions show the
relations of words, and of the things or thoughts expressed by them."
Because the meaning is--_exert against principle_.
_Our_ is a personal pronoun, representing _the speakers_, in the first
person, plural number, and masculine gender; according to Rule 10th, which
says, "A pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or pronoun
which it represents, in person, number, and gender:" and is in the
possessive case, being governed by _principle_; according to Rule 4th,
which says, "A noun or a pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the
name of the thing possessed." Because the meaning is--_our principle_;--i.
e., the _speakers_' principle.
_Only_ is a pronominal adjective, not compared: and relates to _principle_;
according to Rule 9th, which says, "Adjectives relate to nouns or
pronouns." Because the meaning is--_only principle_.
_Saving_ is a participial adjective, compared by adverbs when it means
_frugal_, but not compared in the sense here intended: and relates to
_principle_; according to Rule 9th, which says, "Adjectives relate to nouns
or pronouns." Because the meaning is--_saving principle_.
_Principle_ is a common noun, of the third person, singular number, neuter
gender, and objective case: and is governed by _against_; according to Rule
7th, which says, "A noun or a pronoun made the object of a preposition, is
governed by it in the objective case." Because the meaning is--_against
principle_.
LESSON I.--ARTICLES.
"In English heroic verse, the capital pause of every line, is determined by
the sense to be after the fourth, the fifth, the sixth or the seventh
syllable."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 105.
"When, in considering the structure of a tree or a plant, we observe how
all the parts, the roots, the stem, the bark, and the leaves, are suited to
the growth and nutriment of the whole; when we survey all the parts and
members of a living animal; or when we examine any of the curious works of
art--such as a clock, a ship, or any nice machine; the pleasure which we
have in the survey, is wholly founded on this sense of beauty."--_Blair's
Rhet._, p. 49.
"It never can proceed from a good taste, to make a teaspoon resemble the
leaf of a tree; for such a form is inconsistent with the destination of a
teaspoon."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 351.
"In an epic poem, a history, an oration, or any work of genius, we always
require a fitness, or an adjustment of means to the end which the author is
supposed to have in view."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 50.
"Rhetoric, Logic, and Grammar, are three arts that should always walk hand
in hand. The first is the art of speaking eloquently; the second, that of
thinking well; and the third, that of speaking with propriety."--_Formey's
Belles-Lettres_, p. 114.
"Spring hangs her infant blossoms on the trees,
Rock'd in the cradle of the western breeze."--_Cowper_.
LESSON II.--NOUNS.
"There goes a rumour that I am to be banished. And let the sentence come,
if God so will. The other side of the sea is my Father's ground, as well as
this side."--_Rutherford_.
"Gentlemen, there is something on earth greater than arbitrary or despotic
power. The lightning has its power, and the whirlwind has its power, and
the earthquake has its power. But there is something among men more capable
of shaking despotic power than lightning, whirlwind, or earthquake; that
is--the threatened indignation of the whole civilized world."--_Daniel
Webster_.
"And Isaac sent away Jacob; and he went to Padan Aram, unto Laban, son of
Bethuel the Syrian, and brother of Rebecca, Jacob's and Esau's
mother."--See _Gen._, xxviii, 5.
"The purpose you undertake is dangerous." "Why that is certain: it is
dangerous to take a cold, to sleep, to drink; but I tell you, my Lord fool,
out of this nettle danger, we pluck this flower safety."--_Shakespeare_.
"And towards the Jews alone, one of the noblest charters of liberty on
earth--_Magna Charta_, the Briton's boast--legalized an act of
injustice."--_Keith's Evidences_, p. 74.
"Were Demosthenes's Philippics spoken in a British assembly, in a similar
conjuncture of affairs, they would convince and persuade at this day. The
rapid style, the vehement reasoning, the disdain, anger, boldness, freedom,
which perpetually animate them, would render their success infallible over
any modern assembly. I question whether the same can be said of Cicero's
orations; whose eloquence, however beautiful, and however well suited to
the Roman taste, yet borders oftener on declamation, and is more remote
from the manner in which we now expect to hear real business and causes of
importance treated."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 248.
"In fact, every attempt to present on paper the splendid effects of
impassioned eloquence, is like gathering up dewdrops, which appear jewels
and pearls on the grass, but run to water in the hand; the essence and the
elements remain, but the grace, the sparkle, and the form, are
gone."--_Montgomery's Life of Spencer_.
"As in life true dignity must be founded on character, not on dress and
appearance; so in language the dignity of composition must arise from
sentiment and thought, not from ornament."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 144.
"And man, whose heaven-erected face the smiles of love adorn,
Man's inhumanity to man makes countless thousands mourn."
--_Burns_.
"Ah wretched man! unmindful of thy end!
A moment's glory! and what fates attend."
--_Pope, Iliad_, B. xvii, l. 231.
LESSON III.--ADJECTIVES.
"Embarrassed, obscure, and feeble sentences, are generally, if not always,
the result of embarrassed, obscure, and feeble thought."--_Blair's Rhet._,
p. 120.
"Upon this ground, we prefer a simple and natural, to an artificial and
affected style; a regular and well-connected story, to loose and scattered
narratives; a catastrophe which is tender and pathetic, to one which leaves
us unmoved."--_Ib._, p. 23.
"A thorough good taste may well be considered as a power compounded of
natural sensibility to beauty, and of improved understanding."--_Ib._, p.
18.
"Of all writings, ancient or modern, the sacred Scriptures afford us the
highest instances of the sublime. The descriptions of the Deity, in them,
are wonderfully noble; both from the grandeur of the object, and the manner
of representing it."--_Ib._, p. 36.
"It is not the authority of any one person, or of a few, be they ever so
eminent, that can establish one form of speech in preference to another.
Nothing but the general practice of good writers and good speakers can do
it."--_Priestley's Gram._, p. 107.
"What other means are there to attract love and esteem so effectual as a
virtuous course of life? If a man be just and beneficent, if he be
temperate, modest, and prudent, he will infallibly gain the esteem and love
of all who know him."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, i, 167.
"But there are likewise, it must be owned, people in the world, whom it is
easy to make worse by rough usage, and not easy to make better by any
other."--_Abp. Seeker_.
"The great comprehensive truth written in letters of living light on every
page of our history--the language addressed by every past age of New
England to all future ages, is this: Human happiness has no perfect
security but freedom;--freedom, none but virtue;--virtue, none but
knowledge: and neither freedom, nor virtue, nor knowledge, has any vigour
or immortal hope, except in the principles of the Christian faith, and in
the sanctions of the Christian religion."--_President Quincy_.
"For bliss, as thou hast part, to me is bliss;
Tedious, unshared with thee, and odious soon."
--_P. Lost_, B. ix, l. 880.
LESSON IV.--PRONOUNS.
"There is but one governor whose sight we cannot escape, whose power we
cannot resist: a sense of His presence and of duty to Him, will accomplish
more than all the laws and penalties which can be devised without
it."--_Woodbridge, Lit. C._, p. 154.
"Every voluntary society must judge who shall be members of their body, and
enjoy fellowship with them in their peculiar privileges."--_Watts_.
"Poetry and impassioned eloquence are the only sources from which the
living growth of a language springs; and even if in their vehemence they
bring down some mountain rubbish along with them, this sinks to the bottom,
and the pure stream flows along over it."--_Philological Museum_, i, 645.
"This use is bounded by the province, county, or district, which gives name
to the dialect, and beyond which its peculiarities are sometimes
unintelligible, and always ridiculous."--_Campbell's Rhet._, p. 163.
"Every thing that happens, is both a cause and an effect; being the effect
of what goes before, and the cause of what follows."--_Kames, El. of
Crit._, ii, 297.
"Withhold not good from them to whom it is due, when it is in the power of
thine hand to do it."--_Prov._, iii, 27.
"Yet there is no difficulty at all in ascertaining the idea. * * * By
reflecting upon that which is myself now, and that which was myself twenty
years ago, I discern they are not two, but one and the same
self."--_Butler's Analogy_, p. 271.
"If you will replace what has been long expunged from the language, and
extirpate what is firmly rooted, undoubtedly you yourself become an
innovator."--_Campbell's Rhet._, p. 167; _Murray's Gram._, 364.
"To speak as others speak, is one of those tacit obligations, annexed to
the condition of living in society, which we are bound in conscience to
fulfill, though we have never ratified them by any express promise;
because, if they were disregarded, society would be impossible, and human
happiness at an end."--See _Murray's Gram._, 8vo, p. 139.
"In England _thou_ was in current use until, perhaps, near the commencement
of the seventeenth century, though it was getting to be regarded as
somewhat disrespectful. At Walter Raleigh's trial, Coke, when argument and
evidence failed him, insulted the defendant by applying to him the term
_thou_. 'All that Lord Cobham did,' he cried, 'was at _thy_ instigation,
_thou_ viper! for I _thou_ thee, _thou_ traitor!'"--_Fowler's E. Gram._,
§220.
"Th' Egyptian crown I to your hands remit;
And with it take his heart who offers it."--_Shakspeare_.
LESSON V.--VERBS.
"Sensuality contaminates the body, depresses the understanding, deadens the
moral feelings of the heart, and degrades man from his rank in the
creation."--_Murray's Key_, ii, p. 231.
"When a writer reasons, we look only for perspicuity; when he describes, we
expect embellishment; when he divides, or relates, we desire plainness and
simplicity."--_Blair's_ _Rhet._, p. 144.
"Livy and Herodotus are diffuse; Thucydides and Sallust are succinct; yet
all of them are agreeable."--_Ib._, p. 178.
"Whenever petulant ignorance, pride, malice, malignity, or envy, interposes
to cloud or sully his fame, I will take upon me to pronounce that the
eclipse will not last long."--_Dr. Delany_.
"She said she had nothing to say, for she was resigned, and I knew all she
knew that concerned us in this world; but she desired to be alone, that in
the presence of God only, she might without interruption do her last duty
to me."--_Spect._, No. 520.
"Wisdom and truth, the offspring of the sky, are immortal; while cunning
and deception, the meteors of the earth, after glittering for a moment,
must pass away."--_Robert Hall_. "See, I have this day set thee over the
nations, and over the kingdoms, to root out, and to pull down, and to
destroy, and to throw down, to build, and to plant."--_Jeremiah_, i, 10.
"God might command the stones to be made bread, or the clouds to rain it;
but he chooses rather to leave mankind to till, to sow, to reap, to gather
into barns, to grind, to knead, to bake, and then to eat."--_London
Quarterly Review_.
"Eloquence is no invention of the schools. Nature teaches every man to be
eloquent, when he is much in earnest. Place him in some critical situation,
let him have some great interest at stake, and you will see him lay hold of
the most effectual means of persuasion."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 235.
"It is difficult to possess great fame and great ease at the same time.
Fame, like fire, is with difficulty kindled, is easily increased, but dies
away if not continually fed. To preserve fame alive, every enterprise ought
to be a pledge of others, so as to keep mankind in constant
expectation."--_Art of Thinking_, p. 50. "Pope, finding little advantage
from external help, resolved thenceforward to direct himself, and at twelve
formed a plan of study which he completed with little other incitement than
the desire of excellence."--_Johnson's Lives of Poets_, p. 498.
"Loose, then, from earth the grasp of fond desire,
Weigh anchor, and some happier clime explore."--_Young_.
LESSON VI.--PARTICIPLES.
"The child, affrighted with the view of his father's helmet and crest, and
clinging to the nurse; Hector, putting off his helmet, taking the child
into his arms, and offering up a prayer for him; Andromache, receiving back
the child with a smile of pleasure, and at the same instant bursting into
tears; form the most natural and affecting picture that can possibly be
imagined."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 435.
"The truth of being, and the truth of knowing are one; differing no more
than the direct beam and the beam reflected."--_Ld. Bacon_. "Verbs denote
states of being, considered as beginning, continuing, ending, being
renewed, destroyed, and again repeated, so as to suit any
occasion."--_William Ward's Gram._, p. 41.
"We take it for granted, that we have a competent knowledge and skill, and
that we are able to acquit ourselves properly, in our own native tongue; a
faculty, solely acquired by use, conducted by habit, and tried by the ear,
carries us on without reflection."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. vi.
"I mean the teacher himself; who, stunned with the hum, and suffocated with
the closeness of his school-room, has spent the whole day in controlling
petulance, exciting indifference to action, striving to enlighten
stupidity, and labouring to soften obstinacy."--_Sir W. Scott_.