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

Dr. Webster give for such examples as the following: "There was more than a hundred and fifty thousand pounds?" 37. What grammarians teach, that two or more nouns connected by and, "always require the verb or pronoun to which they refer, to be in the plural number?" 38. Does Murray acknowledge or furnish any exceptions to this doctrine? 39. On what principle can one justify such an example as this: "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy?" 40. What is remarked of instances like the following: "Prior's Henry and Emma contains an other beautiful example?" 41. What is said of the suppression of the conjunction and? 42. When the speaker changes his nominative, to take a stronger one, what concord has the verb? 43. When two or more nominatives connected by and explain a preceding one, what agreement has the verb? 44. What grammarian approves of such expressions as, "Two and two is four?" 45. What is observed of verbs that agree with the nearest nominative, and are understood to the rest? 46. When the nominatives connected are of different persons, of what person is the verb? LESSON XXIV.—VERBS.

47. What is the syntax of the verb, when one of its nominatives is expressed, and an other or others implied? 48. What is the syntax of the verb, when there are nominatives connected by as? 49. What is the construction when two nominatives are connected by as well as, but, or save? 50. Can words connected by with be properly used as joint nominatives? 51. Does the analogy of other languages with ours prove any thing on this point? 52. What does Cobbett say about with put for and? 53. What is the construction of such expressions as this: "A torch, snuff and all, goes out in a moment?" 54. Does our rule for the verb and disjunct nominatives derive confirmation from the Latin and Greek syntax? 55. Why do collective nouns singular, when connected by or or nor, admit of a plural verb? 56. In the expression, "I, thou, or he, may affirm," of what person and number is the verb? 57. Who says, "the verb agrees with the last nominative?" 58. What authors prefer "the nearest person," and "the plural number?" 59. What authors prefer "the nearest nominative, whether singular or plural?" 60. What author declares it improper ever to connect by or or nor any nominatives that require different forms of the verb? 61. What is Cobbett's "clear principle" on this head? 62. Can a zeugma of the verb be proved to be right, in spite of these authorities? 63. When a verb has nominatives of different persons or numbers, connected by or or nor, with which of them does it commonly agree? 64. When does it agree with the remoter nominative? 65. When a noun is implied in an adjective of a different number, which word is regarded in the formation of the verb? 66. What is remarked concerning the place of the pronoun of the first person singular? 67. When verbs are connected by and, or, or nor, do they necessarily agree with the same nominative? 68. Why is the thirteenth rule of the author's Institutes and First Lines not retained as a rule in this work? 69. Are verbs often connected without agreeing in mood, tense, and form?

LESSON XXV.—VERBS.

70. What particular convenience do we find in having most of our tenses composed of separable words? 71. Is the connecting of verbs elliptically, or by parts, anything peculiar to our language? 72. What faults appear in the teaching of our grammarians concerning do used as a "substitute for other verbs?" 73. What notions have been entertained concerning the word to as used before the infinitive verb? 74. How does Dr. Ash parse to before the infinitive? 75. What grammarians have taught that the preposition to governs the infinitive mood? 76. Does Lowth agree with Murray in the anomaly of supposing to a preposition that governs nothing? 77. Why do those teach just as inconsistently, who forbear to call the to a preposition? 78. What objections are there to the rule, with its exceptions, "One verb governs an other in the infinitive mood?" 79. What large exception to this rule has been recently discovered by Dr. Bullions? 80. Are the countless examples of this exception truly elliptical? 81. Is the infinitive ever governed by a preposition in French, Spanish, or Italian? 82. What whimsical account of the English infinitive is given by Nixon? 83. How was the infinitive expressed in the Anglo-Saxon of the eleventh century? 84. What does Richard Johnson infer from the fact that the Latin infinitive is sometimes governed by a preposition? 85. What reasons can be adduced to show that the infinitive is not a noun? 86. How can it be proved that to before the infinitive is a preposition? 87. What does Dr. Wilson say of the character and import of the infinitive? 88. To what other terms can the infinitive be connected? 89. What is the infinitive, and for what things may it stand? 90. Do these ten heads embrace all the uses of the infinitive? 91. What is observed of Murray's "infinitive made absolute?" 92. What is said of the position of the infinitive? 93. Is the infinitive ever liable to be misplaced?

LESSON XXVI.—VERBS.

94. What is observed of the frequent ellipses of the verb to be, supposed by Allen and others? 95. What is said of the suppression of to and the insertion of be; as, "To make himself be heard?" 96. Why is it necessary to use the sign to before an abstract infinitive, where it shows no relation? 97. What is observed concerning the distinction of voice in the simple infinitive and the first participle? 98. What do our grammarians teach concerning the omission of to before the infinitive, after bid, dare, feel, &c.? 99. How do Ingersoll, Kirkham, and Smith, agree with their master Murray, concerning such examples as, "Let me go?" 100. What is affirmed of the difficulties of parsing the infinitive according to the code of Murray? 101. How do Nutting, Kirkham, Nixon, Cooper, and Sanborn, agree with Murray, or with one an other, in pointing out what governs the infinitive? 102. What do Murray and others mean by "neuter verbs," when they tell us that the taking of the infinitive without to "extends only to active and neuter verbs?" 103. How is the infinitive used after bid? 104. How, after dare? 105. How, after feel? 106. How, after hear? 107. How, after let? 108. How, after make? 109. How, after need? 110. Is need ever an auxiliary? 111. What errors are taught by Greenleaf concerning dare and need or needs? 112. What is said of see, as governing the infinitive? 113. Do any other verbs, besides these eight, take the infinitive after them without to? 114. How is the infinitive used after have, help, and find? 115. When two or more infinitives occur in the same construction, must to be used with each? 116. What is said of the sign to after than or as?

LESSON XXVII.—PARTICIPLES.

1. What questionable uses of participles are commonly admitted by grammarians? 2. Why does the author incline to condemn these peculiarities? 3. What is observed of the multiplicity of uses to which the participle in ing may be turned? 4. What is said of the participles which some suppose to be put absolute? 5. How are participles placed? 6. What is said of the transitive use of such words as unbecoming? 7. What distinction, in respect to government, is to be observed between a participle and a participial noun? 8. What shall we do when of after the participial noun is objectionable? 9. What is said of the correction of those examples in which a needless article or possessive is put before the participle? 10. What is stated of the retaining of adverbs with participial nouns? 11. Can words having the form of the first participle be nouns, and clearly known to be such, when they have no adjuncts? 12. What strictures are made on Murray, Lennie, and Bullions, with reference to examples in which an infinitive follows the participial noun? 13. In what instances is the first participle equivalent to the infinitive? 14. What is said of certain infinitives supposed to be erroneously put for participles? 15. What verbs take the participle after them, and not the infinitive? 16. What is said of those examples in which participles seem to be made the objects of verbs? 17. What is said of the teaching of Murray and others, that, "The participle with its adjuncts may be considered as a substantive phrase?" 18. How does the English participle compare with the Latin gerund? 19. How do Dr. Adam and others suppose "the gerund in English" to become a "substantive," or noun? 20. How does the French construction of participles and infinitives compare with the English?

LESSON XXVIII.—PARTICIPLES.

21. What difference does it make, whether we use the possessive case before words in ing, or not? 22. What is said of the distinguishing or confounding of different parts of speech, such as verbs, participles, and nouns? 23. With how many other parts of speech does W. Allen confound the participle? 24. How is the distinguishing of the participle from the verbal noun inculcated by Allen, and their difference of meaning by Murray? 25. Is it pretended that the authorities and reasons which oppose the mixed construction of participles, are sufficient to prove such usage altogether inadmissible? 26. Is it proper to teach, in general terms, that the noun or pronoun which limits the meaning of a participle should be put in the possessive case? 27. What is remarked of different cases used indiscriminately before the participle or verbal noun? 28. What say Crombie and others about this disputable phraseology? 29. What says Brown of this their teaching? 30. How do Priestley and others pretend to distinguish between the participial and the substantive use of verbals in ing? 31. What does Brown say of this doctrine? 32. If when a participle becomes an adjective it drops its regimen, should it not also drop it on becoming a noun? 33. Where the sense admits of a choice of construction in respect to the participle, is not attention due to the analogy of general grammar? 34. Does it appear that nouns before participles are less frequently subjected to their government than pronouns? 35. Why must a grammarian discriminate between idioms, or peculiarities, and the common mode of expression? 36. Is the Latin gerund, like the verbal in ing, sometimes active, sometimes passive; and when the former governs the genitive, do we imitate the idiom in English? 37. Is it agreed among grammarians, that the Latin gerund may govern the genitive of the agent? 38. What distinction between the participial and the substantive use of verbals in ing do Crombie and others propose to make? 39. How does this accord with the views of Murray, Lowth, Adam, and Brown?. 40. How does Hiley treat the English participle? 41. What further is remarked concerning false teaching in relation to participles?

LESSON XXIX.—ADVERBS.

1. What is replied to Dr. Adam's suggestion, "Adverbs sometimes qualify substantives?" 2. Do not adverbs sometimes relate to participial nouns? 3. If an adverbial word relates directly to a noun or pronoun, does not that fact constitute it an adjective? 4. Are such expressions as, "the then ministry," "the above discourse," good English, or bad—well authorized, or not? 5. When words commonly used as adverbs assume the construction of nouns, how are they to be parsed? 6. Must not the parser be careful to distinguish adverbs used substantively or adjectively, from such as may be better resolved by the supposing of an ellipsis? 7. How is an adverb to be parsed, when it seems to be put for a verb? 8. How are adverbs to be parsed in such expressions as, "Away with him?" 9. What is observed of the relation of conjunctive adverbs, and of the misuse of when? 10. What is said in regard to the placing of adverbs? 11. What suggestions are made concerning the word no? 12. What is remarked of two or more negatives in the same sentence? 13. Is that a correct rule which says, "Two negatives, in English, destroy each other, or are equivalent to an affirmative?" 14. What is the dispute among grammarians concerning the adoption of or or nor after not or no? 15. What fault is found with the opinion of Priestley, Murray, Ingersoll, and Smith, that "either of them may be used with nearly equal propriety?" 16. How does John Burn propose to settle this dispute? 17. How does Churchill treat the matter? 18. What does he say of the manner in which "the use of nor after not has been introduced?" 19. What other common modes of