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

Throop, 1832. "The Yearly Meeting have purchased with its funds these publications."—Foster's Reports, i, 76. "Have the legislature power to prohibit assemblies?"—Wm. Sullivan. "So that the whole number of the streets were fifty."—Rollin's Ancient Hist., ii, 8. "The number of inhabitants were not more than four millions."—SMOLLETT: see Priestley's Gram., p. 193. "The House of Commons were of small weight."—HUME: Ib., p. 188. "The assembly of the wicked have enclosed me."—Psal. xxii, 16; Lowth's Gram., p. 75. "Every kind of convenience and comfort are provided."—Com. School Journal, i, 24. "Amidst the great decrease of the inhabitants of Spain, the body of the clergy have suffered no diminution; but has rather been gradually increasing."—Payne's Geog., ii, 418. "Small as the number of inhabitants are, yet their poverty is extreme."—Ib., ii, 417. "The number of the names were about one hundred and twenty."—Ware's Gram., p. 12; see Acts, i, 15. 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: as, "True rhetoric and sound logic are very nearly allied."—Blair's Rhet., p. 11. "Aggression and injury in no case justify retaliation."—Wayland's Moral Science, p. 406.

   "Judges and senates have been bought for gold,
    Esteem and love were never to be sold."—Pope.

EXCEPTION FIRST.

When two nominatives connected by and serve merely to describe one person or thing, they are either in apposition or equivalent to one name, and do not require a plural verb; as, "Immediately comes a hue and cry after a gang of thieves."—L'Estrange. "The hue and cry of the country pursues him."—Junius, Letter xxiii. "Flesh and blood [i. e. man, or man's nature,] hath not revealed it unto thee."—Matt., xvi, 17." Descent and fall to us is adverse."—Milton, P. L., ii, 76. "This philosopher and poet was banished from his country."—"Such a Saviour and Redeemer is actually provided for us."—Gurney's Essays, p. 386. "Let us then declare what great things our God and Saviour has done for us."—Dr. Scott, on Luke viii. "Toll, tribute, and custom, was paid unto them."—Ezra, iv, 20.

   "Whose icy current and compulsive course
    Ne'er feels retiring ebb, but keeps due on."—Shakspeare.

EXCEPTION SECOND.

When two nominatives connected by and, are emphatically distinguished, they belong to different propositions, and, if singular, do not require a plural verb; as, "Ambition, and not the safety of the state, was concerned."—Goldsmith. "Consanguinity, and not affinity, is the ground of the prohibition."—Webster's Essays, p. 324. "But a modification, and oftentimes a total change, takes place."—Maunder. "Somewhat, and, in many circumstances, a great deal too, is put upon us."—Butler's Analogy, p. 108. "Disgrace, and perhaps ruin, was the certain consequence of attempting the latter."—Robertson's America, i, 434.

"Ay, and no too, was no good divinity."—_Shakespeare.

"Love_, and love only, is the loan for love."—Young.

EXCEPTION THIRD.

When two or more nominatives connected by and are preceded by the adjective each, every, or no, they are taken separately, and do not require a plural verb; as, "When no part of their substance, and no one of their properties, is the same."—Bp. Butler. "Every limb and feature appears with its respective grace."—Steele. "Every person, and every occurrence, is beheld in the most favourable light."—Murray's Key, p. 190. "Each worm, and each insect, is a marvel of creative power."

   "Whose every look and gesture was a joke
    To clapping theatres and shouting crowds."—Young.

EXCEPTION FOURTH.

When the verb separates its nominatives, it agrees with that which precedes it, and is understood to the rest; as, "The earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof."—Murray's Exercises, p. 36.

"Disdain forbids me, and my dread of shame."—Milton.

    "———Forth in the pleasing spring,
    Thy beauty walks, thy tenderness, and love."—Thomson.

OBSERVATIONS ON RULE XVI.

OBS. 1.—According to Lindley Murray, (who, in all his compilation, from whatever learned authorities, refers us to no places in any book but his own.) "Dr. Blair observes, that 'two or more substantives, joined by a copulative, must always require the verb or pronoun to which they refer, to be placed in the plural number:' and this," continues the great Compiler, "is the general sentiment of English grammarians."—Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 150. The same thing is stated in many other grammars: thus, Ingersoll has the very same words, on the 238th page of his book; and R. C. Smith says, "Dr. Blair very justly observes," &c.—Productive Gram., p. 126. I therefore doubt not, the learned rhetorician has somewhere made some such remark: though I can neither supply the reference which these gentlemen omit, nor vouch for the accuracy of their quotation. But I trust to make it very clear, that so many grammarians as hold this sentiment, are no great readers, to say the least of them. Murray himself acknowledges one exception to this principle, and unconsciously furnishes examples of one or two more; but, in stead of placing the former in his Grammar, and under the rule, where the learner would be likely to notice it, he makes it an obscure and almost unintelligible note, in the margin of his Key, referring by an asterisk to the following correction: "Every man and every woman was numbered."—Murray's Gram., 8vo, Vol. ii. p. 190. To justify this phraseology, he talks thus: "Whatever number of nouns may be connected by a conjunction with the pronoun EVERY, this pronoun is as applicable to the whole mass of them, as to any one of the nouns; and therefore the verb is correctly put in the singular number, and refers to the whole separately and individually considered."—Ib. So much, then, for "the pronoun EVERY!" But, without other exceptions, what shall be done with the following texts from Murray himself? "The flock, and not the fleece, is, or ought to be the object of the shepherd's care."—Ib., ii, 184. "This prodigy of learning, this scholar, critic, and antiquary, was entirely destitute of breeding and civility."—Ib., ii, 217. And, in the following line, what conjunction appears, or what is the difference between "horror" and "black despair." that the verb should be made plural?

"What black despair, what horror, fill his mind!"—Ib., ii, 183.

"What black despair, what horror fills his heart!"—Thomson.[395]

OBS. 2.—Besides the many examples which may justly come under the four exceptions above specified, there are several questionable but customary expressions, which have some appearance of being deviations from this rule, but which may perhaps be reasonably explained on the principle of ellipsis: as, "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy."—"Slow and steady often outtravels haste."—Dillwyn's Reflections, p. 23. "Little and often fills the purse."—Treasury of Knowledge, Part i, p. 446. "Fair and softly goes far." These maxims, by universal custom, lay claim to a singular verb; and, for my part, I know not how they can well be considered either real exceptions to the foregoing rule, or real inaccuracies under it; for, in most of them, the words connected are not nouns; and those which are so, may not be nominatives. And it is clear, that every exception must have some specific character by which it may be distinguished; else it destroys the rule, in stead of confirming it, as known exceptions are said to do. Murray appears to have thought the singular verb wrong; for, among his examples for parsing, he has, "Fair and softly go far," which instance is no more entitled to a plural verb than the rest. See his Octavo Gram., Vol. ii, p. 5. Why not suppose them all to be elliptical? Their meaning may be as follows: "To have all work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy."—"What is slow and steady, often outtravels haste."—"To put in little and often, fills the purse."—"What proceeds fair and softly, goes far." The following line from Shakspeare appears to be still more elliptical:

"Poor and content is rich, and rich enough."—Othello.

This may be supposed to mean, "He who is poor and content," &c. In the following sentence again, we may suppose an ellipsis of the phrase To have, at the beginning; though here, perhaps, to have pluralized the verb, would have been as well:

"One eye on death and one full fix'd on heaven, Becomes a mortal and immortal man."—Young.

OBS. 3.—The names of two persons are not unfrequently used jointly as the name of their story; in which sense, they must have a singular verb, if they have any; as, "Prior's Henry and Emma contains an other beautiful example."—Jamieson's Rhetoric, p. 179. I somewhat hesitate to call this an exception to the foregoing rule, because here too the phraseology may be supposed elliptical. The meaning is, "Prior's little poem, entitled, 'Henry and Emma,' contains," &c.;—or, "Prior's story of Henry and Emma contains," &c. And, if the first expression is only an abbreviation of one of these, the construction of the verb contains may be referred to Rule 14th. See Exception 1st to Rule 12th, and Obs. 2d on Rule 14th.

OBS. 4.—The conjunction and, by which alone we can with propriety connect different words to make them joint nominatives or joint antecedents, is sometimes suppressed and understood; but then its effect is the same, as if it were inserted; though a singular verb might sometimes be quite as proper in the same sentences, because it would merely imply a disjunctive conjunction or none at all: as, "The high breach of trust, the notorious corruption, are stated in the strongest terms."—Junius, Let. xx. "Envy, self-will, jealousy, pride, often reign there."—Abbott's Corner Stone, p. 111. (See Obs. 4th on Rule 12th.)

"Art, empire, earth itself, to change are doomed."—Beattie.

"Her heart, her mind, her love, is his alone."—Cowley.

In all the foregoing examples, a singular verb might have been used without impropriety; or the last, which is singular, might have been plural. But the following couplet evidently requires a plural verb, and is therefore correct as the poet wrote it; both because the latter noun is plural, and because the conjunction and is understood between the two. Yet a late grammarian, perceiving no difference between the joys of sense and the pleasure of reason, not only changes "lie" to "lies," but uses the perversion for a proof text, under a rule which refers the verb to the first noun only, and requires it to be singular. See Oliver B. Peirce's Gram., p. 250.

   "Reason's whole pleasure, all the joys of sense.
    Lie in three words—health, peace, and competence."
        —Pope's Ess., Ep. iv, l. 80.

OBS. 5.—When the speaker changes his nominative to take a stronger expression, he commonly uses no conjunction; but, putting the verb in agreement with the noun which is next to it, he leaves the other to an implied concord with its proper form of the same verb: as, "The man whose designs, whose whole conduct, tends to reduce me to subjection, that man is at war with me, though not a blow has yet been given, nor a sword drawn."—Blair's Rhet., p. 265. "All Greece, all the barbarian world, is too narrow for this man's ambition."—Ibid. "This self-command, this exertion of reason in the midst of passion, has a wonderful effect both to please and to persuade."—Ib., p. 260. "In the mutual influence of body and soul, there is a wisdom, a wonderful wisdom, which we cannot fathom."—Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 150. If the principle here stated is just, Murray has written the following models erroneously: "Virtue, honour, nay, even self-interest, conspire to recommend the measure."—Ib., p. 150. "Patriotism, morality, every public and private consideration, demand our submission to just and lawful government."—Ibid. In this latter instance, I should prefer the singular verb demands; and in the former, the expression ought to be otherwise altered, thus. "Virtue, honour, and interest, all conspire to recommend the measure." Or thus: "Virtue, honour—nay, even self-interest, recommends the measure." On this principle, too, Thomson was right, and this critic wrong, in the example cited at the close of the first observation above. This construction is again recurred to by Murray, in the second chapter of his Exercises; where he explicitly condemns the following sentence because the verb is singular: "Prudence, policy, nay, his own true interest, strongly recommends the line of conduct proposed to him."—Octavo Gram., Vol. ii, p. 22.

OBS. 6.—When two or more nominatives are in apposition with a preceding one which they explain, the verb must agree with the first word only, because the others are adjuncts to this, and not joint subjects to the verb; as, "Loudd, the ancient Lydda and Diospolis, appears like a place lately ravaged by fire and sword."—Keith's Evidences, p. 93. "Beattie, James,—a philosopher and poet,—was born in Scotland, in the year 1735."—Murray's Sequel, p. 306. "For, the quantity, the length, and shortness of our syllables, is not,