The Grammar of English Grammars, Goold Brown [ebook reader for manga txt] 📗

is implied as the antecedent, they are commonly connected with other words as if they stood for two cases at once: as, "Whoever seeks, shall find." That is, "Any person who seeks, shall find." But as the case of this compound, like that of the simple word who, whose, or whom, is known and determined by its form, it is necessary, in parsing, to treat this phraseology as being elliptical. The compounds of who do not, therefore, actually stand for two cases, though some grammarians affirm that they do.[193] Example: "The soldiers made proclamation, that they would sell the empire to whoever would purchase it at the highest price."—Goldsmith's Rome, p. 231. That is—"to any man who would purchase it." The affix ever or soever becomes unnecessary when the ellipsis is supplied; and this fact, it must be confessed, is a plausible argument against the supposition of an ellipsis. But the supposing of an antecedent understood, is here unavoidable; because the preposition to cannot govern the nominative case, and the word whoever cannot be an objective. And so in all other instances in which the two cases are different: as, "He bids whoever is athirst, to come."—Jenks's Devotions, p. 151. "Elizabeth publicly threatened, that she would have the head of whoever had advised it."—HUME: in Priestley's Gram., p. 104.

OBS. 15.—If it is necessary in parsing to supply the antecedent to whoever or whosoever, when two different cases are represented, it is but analogous and reasonable to supply it also when two similar cases occur: as, "Whoever borrows money, is bound in conscience to repay it."—Paley. "Whoever is eager to find excuses for vice and folly, will find his own backwardness to practise them much diminished."— Chapone. "Whoever examines his own imperfections, will cease to be fastidious; whoever restrains humour and caprice, will cease to be squeamish."—Crabb's Synonymes. In all these examples, we have the word in the third person, singular number, masculine gender, and nominative case. And here it is most commonly found. It is always of the third person; and, though its number may be plural; its gender, feminine; its case, possessive or objective; we do not often use it in any of these ways. In some instances, the latter verb is attended with an other pronoun, which represents the same person or persons; as, "And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely."—Rev., xxii, 17. The case of this compound relative always depends upon what follows it, and not upon what precedes; as, "Or ask of whomsoever he has taught."—Cowper. That is—"of any person whom he has taught." In the following text, we have the possessive plural: "Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them."—John, xx, 23. That is, "Whatever persons' sins."

OBS. 16.—In such phraseology as the following, there is a stiffness which ought to be avoided: "For whomever God loves, he loves them in Christ, and no otherways."—Barclay's Works, Vol. iii, p. 215. Better: "For all whom God loves, he loves in Christ, and no otherwise." "When the Father draws, whomever he draws, may come."—Penington. Better: "When the Father draws, all whom he draws, (or, every one whom he draws.) may come." A modern critic of immense promise cites the following clause as being found in the Bible: "But he loveth whomsoever followeth after righteousness."—O. B. Peirce's Gram., p. 72. It is lamentable to see the unfaithfulness of this gentleman's quotations. About half of them are spurious; and I am confident that this one is neither Scripture nor good English. The compound relative, being the subject of followeth, should be in the nominative case; for the object of the verb loveth is the antecedent every one, understood. But the idea may be better expressed, without any ellipsis, thus: "He loveth every one who followeth after righteousness." The following example from the same hand is also wrong, and the author's rule and reasoning connected with it, are utterly fallacious: "I will give the reward to whomsoever will apprehend the rogue."—Ib., p. 256. Much better say, "to any one who;" but, if you choose the compound word, by all analogy, and all good authority, it must here be whoever or whosoever. The shorter compound whoso, which occurs very frequently in the Bible, is now almost obsolete in prose, but still sometimes used by the poets. It has the same meaning as whosoever, but appears to have been confined to the nominative singular; and whatso is still more rare: as, "Whoso diggeth a pit, shall fall therein."—Prov., xxvi, 27.

"Which whoso tastes, can be enslaved no more."—Cowper.

    "On their intended journey to proceed,
    And over night whatso thereto did need."—Hubbard.

OBS. 17.—The relative that is applied indifferently to persons, to brute animals, and to inanimate things. But the word that is not always a relative pronoun. It is sometimes a pronoun, sometimes an adjective, and sometimes a conjunction. I call it not a demonstrative pronoun and also a relative; because, in the sense in which Murray and others have styled it a "demonstrative adjective pronoun," it is a pronominal adjective, and it is better to call it so. (1.) It is a relative pronoun whenever it is equivalent to who, whom, or which: as, "There is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not"—Eccl., vii, 20. "It was diverse from all the beasts that were before it."—Dan., vii, 7. "And he had a name written, that no man knew but he himself."—Rev., xix, 12. (2.) It is a pronominal adjective whenever it relates to a noun expressed or understood after it: as, "Thus with violence shall that great city, Babylon, be thrown down."—Rev., xviii, 21. "Behold that [thing] which I have seen."—Eccl., v, 18. "And they said, 'What is that[194] [matter] to us? See thou to that' [matter]."—Matt., xxvii, 4. (3.) In its other uses, it is a conjunction, and, as such, it most commonly makes what follows it, the purpose, object, or final cause, of what precedes it: as, "I read that I may learn."—Dr. Adam. "Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious."—St. Paul. "Live well, that you may die well."—Anon. "Take heed that thou speak not to Jacob."—Genesis. "Judge not, that ye be not judged."—Matthew.

OBS. 18.—The word that, or indeed any other word, should never be so used as to leave the part of speech uncertain; as, "For in the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die."—Gen., ii, 17. Here that seems to be a relative pronoun, representing day, in the third person, singular, neuter; yet, in other respects, it seems to be a conjunction, because there is nothing to determine its case. Better: "For in the day on which thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die." This mongrel construction of the word that, were its justification possible, is common enough in our language to be made good English. But it must needs be condemned, because it renders the character of the term ambiguous, and is such a grammatical difficulty as puts the parser at a dead nonplus. Examples: (1.) "But at the same time THAT men are giving their orders, God on his part is likewise giving his."—Rollin's Hist., ii, 106. Here the phrase, "at the same time that," is only equivalent to the adverb while; and yet it is incomplete, because it means, "at the same time at which," or, "at the very time at which." (2.) "The author of this work, at the same time THAT he has endeavoured to avoid a plan, which may be too concise or too extensive, defective in its parts or irregular in the disposition of them, has studied to render his subject sufficiently easy, intelligible, and comprehensive."—Murray's Gram., Introd., p. 1. This sentence, which is no unfair specimen of its author's original style, needs three corrections: 1. For "at the same time that," say while: 2. Drop the phrase, "which may be," because it is at least useless: 3. For "subject," read treatise, or compilation. You will thus have tolerable diction. Again: (3.) "The participles of active verbs act upon objects and govern them in the objective case, in the same manner that the verbs do, from which they are derived. A participle in the nature of an adjective, belongs or refers to nouns or pronouns in the same manner that adjectives do; and when it will admit the degrees of comparison, it is called a participial adjective."—Sanborn's Gram., p. 38. This is the style of a gentleman of no ordinary pretensions, one who thinks he has produced the best grammar that has ever appeared in our language. To me, however, his work suggests an abundance of questions like these; each of which would palpably involve him in a dilemma: What is here meant by "objects," the words, or the things? if the former, how are they acted upon? if the latter, how are they governed? If "a participle is called an adjective," which is it, an adjective, or a participle? If "a participle refers to nouns or pronouns," how many of these are required by the relation? When does a participle "admit the degrees of comparison?" How shall we parse the word that in the foregoing sentences?

OBS. 19.—The word as, though usually a conjunction or an adverb, has sometimes the construction of a relative pronoun, especially after such, so many, or as many; and, whatever the antecedent noun may be, this is the only fit relative to follow any of these terms in a restrictive sense. Examples: "We have been accustomed to repose on its veracity with such humble confidence as suppresses curiosity."—Johnson's Life of Cowley. "The malcontents made such demands as none but a tyrant could refuse."—Bolingbroke, on Hist., Let. 7. "The Lord added to the church daily such [persons] as should be saved."—Acts, ii, 47. "And as many as were ordained to eternal life, believed."—Acts, xiii, 48. "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten."—Rev., iii, 19. "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ, were baptized into his death?"—Rom., vi, 3. "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ."—Gal., iii, 27. "A syllable is so many letters as are spoken with one motion of the voice."—Perley's Gram., p. 8. "The compound tenses are such as cannot be formed without an auxiliary verb."—Murray's Gram., p. 91. "Send him such books as will please him."—Webster's Improved Gram., p. 37. "In referring to such a division of the day as is past, we use the imperfect."— Murray's Gram., p. 70. "Participles have the same government as the verbs from which they are derived."—Ib., Rule xiv. "Participles have the same government as the verbs have from which they are derived."— Sanborn's Gram., p. 94. In some of these examples, as is in the nominative case, and in others, in the objective; in some, it is of the masculine gender, and in others, it is neuter; in some, it is of the plural number, and in others, it is singular: but in all, it is of the third person; and in all, its person, number, gender, and case, are as obvious as those of any invariable pronoun can be.

OBS. 20.—Some writers—(the most popular are Webster, Bullions, Wells, and Chandler—) imagine that as, in such sentences as the foregoing, can be made a conjunction, and not a pronoun, if we will allow them to consider the phraseology elliptical. Of the example for which I am indebted to him, Dr. Webster says, "As must be considered as the nominative to will please, or we must suppose an ellipsis of several words: as, 'Send him such books as the books which will please him, or as those which will please him.'"—Improved Gram., p. 37. This pretended explanation must be rejected as an absurdity. In either form of it, two nominatives are idly imagined between as and its verb; and, I ask, of what is the first one the subject? If you say, "Of are understood," making the phrase, "such books as the books are;" does not as bear the same relation to this new verb are, that is found in the pronoun who, when one says, "Tell him who you are?" If so, as is a pronoun still; so that, thus far, you gain nothing. And if you will have the whole explanation to be, "Send him such books as the books are books which will please him;" you multiply words, and finally arrive at nothing, but tautology and nonsense. Wells, not condescending to show his pupils what he would supply after this as, thinks it sufficient to say, the word is "followed by an ellipsis of one or more words required to complete the construction; as, 'He was the father of all such as [] handle the harp and organ.'—Gen. 4: 21."—Wells's School Gram., 1st Ed., p. 164; 3d Ed., p. 172.

OBS. 21.—Chandler exhibits the sentence, "These are not such as are worn;" and, in parsing it, expounds