The Grammar of English Grammars, Goold Brown [ebook reader for manga txt] 📗
- Author: Goold Brown
- Performer: -
Book online «The Grammar of English Grammars, Goold Brown [ebook reader for manga txt] 📗». Author Goold Brown
"And by is likewise us'd with Names that shew
The Means made use of, or the Method how."—Ward's Gram., p. 105.
"Many adverbs admit of degrees of comparison as well as adjectives."—Priestley's Gram., p. 133. "But the author, who, by the number and reputation of his works, formed our language more than any one, into its present state, is Dryden."—Blair's Rhet., p. 180. "In some States, Courts of Admiralty have no juries, nor Courts of Chancery at all."—Webster's Essays, p, 146. "I feel myself grateful to my friend."—Murray's Key, p. 276. "This requires a writer to have, himself, a very clear apprehension of the object he means to present to us."—Blair's Rhet., p. 94. "Sense has its own harmony, as well as sound."—lb., p. 127. "The apostrophe denotes the omission of an i which was formerly inserted, and made an addition of a syllable to the word."—Priestley's Gram., p. 67. "There are few, whom I can refer to, with more advantage than Mr. Addison."—Blair's Rhet., p. 139. "DEATH, in theology, [is a] perpetual separation from God, and eternal torments."—Webster's Dict. "That could inform the traveler as well as the old man himself!"—O. B. Peirce's Gram., p. 345.
UNDER NOTE VIII.—YE AND YOU IN SCRIPTURE."Ye daughters of Rabbah, gird ye with sackcloth."—ALGER'S BIBLE: Jer., xlix, 3. "Wash ye, make you clean."—Brown's Concordance, w. Wash. "Strip ye, and make ye bare, and gird sackcloth upon your loins."—ALGER'S BIBLE: Isaiah, xxxii, 11. "You are not ashamed that you make yourselves strange to me."—FRIENDS' BIBLE: Job, xix, 3. "You are not ashamed that ye make yourselves strange to me."—ALGER'S BIBLE: ib. "If you knew the gift of God."—Brown's Concordance, w. Knew. "Depart from me, ye workers of iniquity, I know ye not."—Penington's Works, ii, 122.
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: as, "It is I."—"These are they."—"The child was named John."—"It could not be he."—"The Lord sitteth King forever."—Psalms, xxix, 10.
"What war could ravish, commerce could bestow,
And he return'd a friend, who came a foe."
—Pope, Ep. iii, l. 206.
OBS. 1.—Active-transitive verbs, and their imperfect and preperfect participles, always govern the objective case; but active-intransitive, passive, and neuter verbs, and their participles, take the same case after as before them, when both words refer to the same thing. The latter are rightly supposed not to govern[357] any case; nor are they in general followed by any noun or pronoun. But, because they are not transitive, some of them become connectives to such words as are in the same case and signify the same thing. That is, their finite tenses may be followed by a nominative, and their infinitives and participles by a nominative or an objective, agreeing with a noun or a pronoun which precedes them. The cases are the same, because the person or thing is one; as, "I am he."—"Thou art Peter."—"Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent."—Jefferson's Notes, p. 129. Identity is both the foundation and the characteristic of this construction. We chiefly use it to affirm or deny, to suggest or question, the sameness of things; but sometimes figuratively, to illustrate the relations of persons or things by comparison:[358] as, "I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman."—John, xv, 1. "I am the vine, ye are the branches."—John, xv, 5. Even the names of direct opposites, are sometimes put in the same case, under this rule; as,
"By such a change thy darkness is made light,
Thy chaos order, and thy weakness might."—Cowper, Vol. i, p. 88.
OBS. 2.—In this rule, the terms after and preceding refer rather to the order of the sense and construction, than to the mere placing of the words; for the words in fact admit of various positions. The proper subject of the verb is the nominative to it, or before it, by Rule 2d; and the other nominative, however placed, is understood to be that which comes after it, by Rule 6th. In general, however, the proper subject precedes the verb, and the other word follows it, agreeably to the literal sense of the rule. But when the proper subject is placed after the verb, as in certain instances specified in the second observation under Rule 2d, the explanatory nominative is commonly introduced still later; as, "But be thou an example of the believers."—1 Tim. iv, 12. "But what! is thy servant a dog?"—2 Kings, viii, 13. "And so would I, were I Parmenio."—Goldsmith. "O Conloch's daughter! is it thou?"—Ossian. But in the following example, on the contrary, there is a transposition of the entire lines, and the verb agrees with the two nominatives in the latter:
"To thee were solemn toys or empty show,
The robes of pleasure and the veils of wo."—Dr. Johnson.
OBS. 3.—In interrogative sentences, the terms are usually transposed,[359] or both are placed after the verb; as, "Am I a Jew?"—John, xviii, 35. "Art thou a king then?"—Ib., ver. 37. "What is truth?"—Ib., ver. 38. "Who art thou?"—Ib., i, 19. "Art thou Elias?"—Ib., i, 21. "Tell me, Alciphron, is not distance a line turned endwise to the eye?"—Berkley's Dialogues, p. 161.
"Whence, and what art thou, execrable shape?"—Milton.
"Art thou that traitor angel? art thou he?"—Idem.
OBS. 4.—In a declarative sentence also, there may be a rhetorical or poetical transposition of one or both of the terms: as, "And I thy victim now remain."—Francis's Horace, ii, 45. "To thy own dogs a prey thou shalt be made."—Pope's Homer, "I was eyes to the blind, and feet was I to the lame."—Job, xxix, 15. "Far other scene is Thrasymenè now."—Byron. In the following sentence, the latter term is palpably misplaced: "It does not clearly appear at first what the antecedent is to they."—Blair's Rhet., p. 218. Say rather: "It does not clearly appear at first, what is the antecedent to [the pronoun] they." In examples transposed like the following, there is an elegant ellipsis of the verb to which the pronoun is nominative; as, am, art, &c.
"When pain and anguish wring the brow,
A ministering angel thou."—Scott's Marmion.
"The forum's champion, and the people's chief,
Her new-born Numa thou—with reign, alas! too brief."—Byron.
"For this commission'd, I forsook the sky—
Nay, cease to kneel—thy fellow-servant I."—Parnell.
OBS. 5.—In some peculiar constructions, both words naturally come before the verb; as, "I know not who she is."—"Who did you say it was?"—"I know not how to tell thee who I am."—Romeo. "Inquire thou whose son the stripling is."—1 Sam., xvii, 56. "Man would not be the creature which he now is."—Blair. "I could not guess who it should be."—Addison. And they are sometimes placed in this manner by hyberbaton [sic—KTH], or transposition; as, "Yet he it is."—Young. "No contemptible orator he was."—Dr. Blair. "He it is to whom I shall give a sop."—John, xiii, 26. "And a very noble personage Cato is."—Blair's Rhet., p. 457. "Clouds they are without water."—Jude, 12.
"Of worm or serpent kind it something looked,
But monstrous, with a thousand snaky heads."—Pollok, B. i, l. 183.
OBS. 6.—As infinitives and participles have no nominatives of their own, such of them as are not transitive in their nature, may take different cases after them; and, in order to determine what case it is that follows them, the learner must carefully observe what preceding word denotes the same person or thing, and apply the principle of the rule accordingly. This word being often remote, and sometimes understood, the sense is the only clew to the construction. Examples: "Who then can bear the thought of being an outcast from his presence?"—Addison. Here outcast agrees with who, and not with thought. "I cannot help being so passionate an admirer as I am."—Steele. Here admirer agrees with I. "To recommend what the soberer part of mankind look upon to be a trifle."—Steele. Here trifle agrees with what as relative, the objective governed by upon. "It would be a romantic madness, for a man to be a lord in his closet."—Id. Here madness is in the nominative case, agreeing with it; and lord, in the objective, agreeing with man. "To affect to be a lord in one's closet, would be a romantic madness." In this sentence also, lord is in the objective, after to be; and madness, in the nominative, after would be.
"'My dear Tibullus!' If that will not do,
Let me be Horace, and be Ovid you."—Pope, B. ii, Ep. ii, 143.
OBS. 7.—An active-intransitive or a neuter participle in ing, when governed by a preposition, is often followed by a noun or a pronoun the case of which depends not on the preposition, but on the case which goes before. Example: "The Jews were in a particular manner ridiculed for being a credulous people."—Addison's Evidences, p. 28. Here people is in the nominative case, agreeing with Jews. Again: "The learned pagans ridiculed the Jews for being a credulous people." Here people is in the objective case, because the preceding noun Jews is so. In both instances the preposition for governs the participle being, and nothing else. "The atrocious crime of being a young man, I shall neither attempt to palliate or deny."—PITT: Bullions's E. Gram., p. 82; S. S. Greene's, 174. Sanborn has this text, with "nor" for "or."—Analytical Gram., p. 190. This example has been erroneously cited, as one in which the case of the noun after the participle is not determined by its relation to any other word. Sanborn absurdly supposes it to be "in the nominative independent." Bullions as strangely tells us, "it may correctly be called the objective indefinite"—like me in the following example: "He was not sure of its being me."—Bullions's E. Gram., p. 82. This latter text I take to be bad English. It should be, "He was not sure of it as being me;" or, "He was not sure that it was I." But, in the text above, there is an evident transposition. The syntactical order is this: "I shall neither deny nor attempt to palliate the atrocious crime of being a young man." The words man and I refer to the same person, and are therefore in the same case, according to the rule which I have given above.
OBS. 8.—S. S. Greene, in his late Grammar, improperly denominates this case after the participle being, "the predicate-nominative," and imagines that it necessarily remains a nominative even when the possessive case precedes the participle. If he were right in this, there would be an important exception to Rule 6th above. But so singularly absurd is his doctrine about "abridged predicates," that in general the abridging shows an increase of syllables, and often a conversion of good English into bad. For example: "It [the predicate] remains unchanged in the nominative, when, with the participle of the copula, it becomes a verbal noun, limited by the possessive case of the subject; as, 'That he was a foreigner prevented his election,'='His being a foreigner prevented his election.'"—Greene's Analysis, p. 169. Here the number of syllables is unaltered; but foreigner is very improperly called "a verbal noun," and an example which only lacks a comma, is changed to what Wells rightly calls an "anomalous expression," and one wherein that author supposes foreigner and his to be necessarily in the same case. But Greene varies this example into other "abridged forms," thus: "I knew that he was a foreigner," = "I knew his being, or of his being a foreigner." "The fact that he was a foreigner, = of his being a foreigner, was undeniable." "When he was first called a foreigner, = on his being first called a foreigner, his anger was excited."—Ib.,
Comments (0)