OBS. 21.—English verbs having but very few inflections to indicate to what part of the scheme of moods and tenses they pertain, it is found convenient to insert in our conjugations the preposition to, to mark the infinitive; personal pronouns, to distinguish the persons and numbers; the conjunction if, to denote the subjunctive mood; and the adverb not, to show the form of negation. With these additions, or indexes, a verb may be conjugated in four ways:—
1. Affirmatively; as, I write, I do write, or, I am writing; and so on.
2. Negatively; as, I write not, I do not write, or, I am not writing.
3. Interrogatively; as, Write I? Do I write? or, Am I writing?
4. Interrogatively and negatively; as, Write I not? Do I not write? or, Am I not writing?
1. SIMPLE FORM, ACTIVE OR NEUTER.
The simplest form of an English conjugation, is that which makes the present and imperfect tenses without auxiliaries; but, even in these, auxiliaries are required for the potential mood, and are often preferred for the indicative.
FIRST EXAMPLE.
The regular active verb LOVE, conjugated affirmatively.
PRINCIPAL PARTS.
Present. Preterit. Imperfect Participle. Perfect Participle. Love. Loved. Loving. Loved.
INFINITIVE MOOD.[260]
The infinitive mood is that form of the verb, which expresses the being, action, or passion, in an unlimited manner, and without person or number. It is used only in the present and perfect tenses.
PRESENT TENSE.
This tense is the root, or radical verb; and is usually preceded by the preposition to, which shows its relation to some other word: thus,
To love.
PERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary have to the perfect participle; and, like the infinitive present, is usually preceded by the preposition to: thus,
To have loved.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
The indicative mood is that form of the verb, which simply indicates or declares a thing, or asks a question. It is used in all the tenses.
PRESENT TENSE.
The present indicative, in its simple form, is essentially the same as the present infinitive, or radical verb; except that the verb be has am in the indicative.
1. The simple form of the present tense is varied thus:—
Singular. Plural. 1st person, I love, 1st person. We love, 2d person, Thou lovest, 2d person, You love, 3d person, He loves; 3d person, They love.
2. This tense may also be formed by prefixing the auxiliary do to the verb: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I do love, 1. We do love, 2. Thou dost love, 2. You do love, 3. He does love; 3. They do love.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense, in its simple form is the preterit; which, in all regular verbs, adds d or ed to the present, but in others is formed variously.
1. The simple form of the imperfect tense is varied thus:—
Singular. Plural. 1. I loved, 1. We loved, 2. Thou lovedst, 2. You loved, 3. He loved; 3. They loved.
2. This tense may also be formed by prefixing the auxiliary did to the present: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I did love, 1. We did love, 2. Thou didst love, 2. You did love, 3. He did love; 3. They did love.
PERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary have to the perfect participle: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I have loved, 1. We have loved, 2. Thou hast loved, 2. You have loved, 3. He has loved; 3. They have loved.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary had to the perfect participle: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I had loved, 1. We had loved, 2. Thou hadst loved, 2. You had loved, 3. He had loved; 3. They had loved.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary shall or will to the present: thus,
1. Simply to express a future action or event:—
Singular. Plural. 1. I shall love, 1. We shall love, 2. Thou wilt love, 2. You will love, 3. He will love; 3. They will love;
2. To express a promise, volition, command, or threat:—
Singular. Plural. 1. I will love, 1. We will love, 2. Thou shalt love, 2. You shall love, 3. He shall love; 3. They shall love.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliaries shall have or will have to the perfect participle: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I shall have loved, 1. We shall have loved, 2. Thou wilt have loved, 2. You will have loved, 3. He will have loved; 3. They will have loved.
OBS.—The auxiliary shall may also be used in the second and third persons of this tense, when preceded by a conjunction expressing condition or contingency; as, "If he shall have completed the work by midsummer."—L. Murray's Gram., p. 80. So, with the conjunctive adverb when; as, "Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power."—1 Cor., xv, 24. And perhaps will may here be used in the first person to express a promise, though such usage, I think, seldom occurs. Professor Fowler has given to this tense, first, the "Predictive" form, as exhibited above, and then a form which he calls "Promissive," and in which the auxiliaries are varied thus: "Singular. 1. I will have taken. 2. Thou shalt have taken, you shall have taken. 3. He shall have taken. Plural. 1. We will have taken. 2. Ye or you shall have taken. 3. He [say They,] shall have taken."—Fowler's E. Gram., 8vo., N. Y., 1850, p. 281. But the other instances just cited show that such a form is not always promissory.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
The potential mood is that form of the verb, which expresses the power, liberty, possibility, or necessity of the being, action, or passion. It is used in the first four tenses; but the potential imperfect is properly an aorist: its time is very indeterminate; as, "He would be devoid of sensibility were he not greatly satisfied."—Lord Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. 11.
PRESENT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary may, can, or must, to the radical verb: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I may love, 1. We may love, 2. Thou mayst love, 2. You may love, 3. He may love; 3. They may love.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliary might, could, would, or should, to the radical verb: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I might love, 1. We might love, 2. Thou mightst love, 2. You might love, 3. He might love; 3. They might love.
PERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliaries, may have, can have, or must have, to the perfect participle: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I may have loved, 1. We may have loved, 2. Thou mayst have loved, 2. You may have loved, 3. He may have loved; 3. They may have loved.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
This tense prefixes the auxiliaries, might have, could have, would have, or should have, to the perfect participle: thus,
Singular. Plural. 1. I might have loved, 1. We might have loved, 2. Thou mightst have loved, 2. You might have loved, 3. He might have loved; 3. They might have loved.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
The subjunctive mood is that form of the verb, which represents the being, action, or passion, as conditional, doubtful, or contingent. This mood is generally preceded by a conjunction; as, if, that, though, lest, unless, except. But sometimes, especially in poetry, it is formed by a mere placing of the verb before the nominative; as, "Were I," for, "If I were;"—"Had he," for, "If he had;"—"Fall we" for, "If we fall;"—"Knew they," for, "If they knew." It does not vary its termination at all, in the different persons.[261] It is used in the present, and sometimes in the imperfect tense; rarely—and perhaps never properly—in any other. As this mood can be used only in a dependent clause, the time implied in its tenses is always relative, and generally indefinite; as,
"It shall be in eternal restless change,
Self-fed, and self-consum'd: if this fail,
The pillar'd firmament is rottenness."—Milton, Comus, l. 596.
PRESENT TENSE.
This tense is generally used to express some condition on which a future action or event is affirmed. It is therefore erroneously considered by some grammarians, as an elliptical form of the future.
Singular. Plural. 1. If I love, 1. If we love, 2. If Thou love, 2. If you love, 3. If He love; 3. If they love.
OBS.—In this tense, the auxiliary do is sometimes employed; as, "If thou do prosper my way."—Genesis, xxiv, 42. "If he do not utter it."—Leviticus, v, 1. "If he do but intimate his desire."—Murray's Key, p. 207. "If he do promise, he will certainly perform."—Ib., p. 208. "An event which, if it ever do occur, must occur in some future period."—Hiley's Gram., (3d Ed., Lond.,) p. 89. "If he do but promise, thou art safe."—Ib., 89.
"Till old experience do attain
To something like prophetic strain."—MILTON: Il Penseroso.
These examples, if they are right, prove the tense to be present, and not future, as Hiley and some others suppose it to be.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
This tense, like the imperfect of the potential mood, with which it is frequently connected, is properly an aorist, or indefinite tense; for it may refer to time past, present, or future: as, "If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, what further need was there that an other priest should rise?"—Heb., vii, 11. "They must be viewed exactly in the same light, as if the intention to purchase now existed."—Murray's Parsing Exercises, p. 24. "If it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."—Matt., xxiv, 24. "If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing?"—1 Corinthians, xii, 17. "If the thankful refrained, it would be pain and grief to them."—Atterbury.
Singular. Plural. 1. If I loved, 1. If we loved, 2. If thou loved, 2. If you loved, 3. If he loved; 3. If they loved.
OBS.—In this tense, the auxiliary did is sometimes employed. The subjunctive may here be distinguished from the indicative, by these circumstances; namely, that the time is indefinite, and that the supposition is always contrary to the fact: as, "Great is the number of those who might attain to true wisdom, if they did not already think themselves wise."—Dillwyn's Reflections, p. 36. This implies that they do think themselves wise; but an indicative supposition or concession—(as, "Though they did not think themselves wise, they were so—") accords with the fact, and with the literal time of the tense,—here time past. The subjunctive imperfect, suggesting the idea of what is not, and known by the sense, is sometimes introduced without any of the usual signs; as, "In a society of perfect men, where all understood what was morally right, and were determined to act accordingly, it is obvious, that human laws, or even human organization to enforce God's laws, would be altogether unnecessary, and could serve no valuable purpose."—PRES. SHANNON: Examiner, No. 78.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
The imperative mood is that form of the verb, which is used in commanding, exhorting, entreating, or permitting. It is commonly used only in the second person of the present tense.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. 2. Love [thou,] or Do thou love;
Plural. 2. Love [ye or you,] or Do you love.
OBS.—In the Greek language, which has three numbers, the imperative mood is used in the second and third persons of them all; and has also several different tenses, some of which cannot be clearly rendered in English. In Latin, this mood has a distinct form for the third person, both singular and plural. In Italian, Spanish, and French, the first person plural is also given it. Imitations of some of these forms are occasionally employed in English, particularly by the poets. Such imitations must be referred to this mood, unless by ellipsis and transposition we make them out to be something else; and against this there are strong objections. Again, as imprecation on one's self is not impossible, the first person singular may be added; so that this mood may possibly have all the persons and numbers. Examples: "Come we now to his translation of the Iliad."—Pope's Pref. to Dunciad. "Proceed we therefore in our subject."—Ib. "Blessed be he that blesseth thee."—Gen., xxvii, 29. "Thy kingdom come."—Matt., vi, 10. "But pass we that."—W. Scott. "Third person: Be he, Be they."—Churchill's Gram., p. 92.
"My soul, turn from them—turn we to survey," &c.—Goldsmith.
"Then turn we to her latest tribune's name."—Byron.
"Where'er the eye could light these words you read:
'Who comes this way—behold, and fear to sin!'"—Pollok.
"Fall he that must, beneath his rival's arms,
And live the rest, secure of future harms."—Pope.
"Cursed be I that did so!—All the charms
Of Sycorax, toads, beetles, bats, light on you!"—Shakspeare.
"Have done thy charms, thou hateful wither'd hag!"—Idem.
PARTICIPLES.
1. The Imperfect. 2. The Perfect. 3. The Preperfect. Loving. Loved. Having loved.
SYNOPSIS OF THE FIRST EXAMPLE.
FIRST PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. I love or do love, I loved or did love, I have loved. I had loved, I shall or will love, I shall or will have loved. POT. I may, can, or must love; I might, could, would, or should love; I may, can, or must have loved; I might, could, would, or should have loved. SUBJ. If I love, If I loved.
SECOND PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. Thou lovest or dost love, Thou lovedst or didst love, Thou hast loved, Thou hadst loved, Thou shalt or wilt love, Thou shalt or wilt have loved. POT. Thou mayst, canst, or must love; Thou mightst, couldst, wouldst, or shouldst love; Thou mayst, canst, or must have loved; Thou mightst, couldst, wouldst or shouldst have loved. SUBJ. If thou love, If thou loved. IMP. Love [thou,] or Do thou love.
THIRD PERSON SINGULAR.
IND. He loves or does love, He loved or did love, He has loved, He had loved, He shall or will love, He shall or will have loved. POT. He may, can, or must love; He might, could, would, or should love; He may, can, or must have loved; He might, could, would, or should have loved. SUBJ. If he love, If he loved.
FIRST PERSON PLURAL.
IND. We love or do love, We loved or did loved, We have loved, We had loved, We shall or will love, We shall or will have loved. POT. We may, can, or must love, We might, could, would, or should love; We may, can, or must have loved; We might, could, would, or should have loved. SUBJ. If we love, If we loved.
SECOND PERSON PLURAL.
IND. You love or do love, You loved or did love, You have loved, You had loved, You shall or will love, You shall or will have loved. POT. You may, can, or must love; You might, could, would, or should love; You may, can, or must have loved; You might, could, would, or should have loved. SUBJ. If you love, If you loved. IMP. Love [ye or you,] or Do you love.
THIRD PERSON PLURAL.
IND. They love or do love, They loved or did love, They have loved, They had loved, They shall or will love, They shall or will have loved. POT. They may, can, or must love; They might, could, would, or should love; They may, can, or must have loved; They might, could, would, or should have loved. SUBJ. If they love, If they loved.
FAMILIAR FORM WITH 'THOU.'
NOTE.—In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb, is usually and more properly formed thus:
IND. Thou lov'st or dost love, Thou loved or did love, Thou hast loved, Thou had loved, Thou shall or will love, Thou shall or will have loved. POT. Thou may, can, or must love; Thou might, could, would, or should love; Thou may, can, or must have loved; Thou might, could, would, or should have loved. SUBJ. If thou love, If thou loved. IMP. Love [thou,] or Do thou love.
SECOND EXAMPLE.
The irregular active verb SEE, conjugated affirmatively.
PRINCIPAL PARTS.
Present. Preterit. Imp. Participle. Perf. Participle. See. Saw. Seeing. Seen.
INFINITIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE. To See.
PERFECT TENSE. To have seen.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I see, 2. Thou seest, 3. He sees;
Plural. 1. We see, 2. You see, 3. They see.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I saw, 2. Thou sawest, 3. He saw;
Plural. 1. We saw, 2. You saw, 3. They saw.
PERFECT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I have seen, 2. Thou hast seen, 3. He has seen;
Plural. 1. We have seen, 2. You have seen, 3. They have seen.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I had seen, 2. Thou hadst seen, He had seen;
Plural. 1. We had seen, 2. You had seen, 3. They had seen.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
Singular. 1. I shall see, 2. Thou wilt see, He will see;
Plural. 1. We shall see, 2. You will see, 3. They will see.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
Singular. 1. I shall have seen, 2. Thou wilt have seen, 3. He will have seen;
Plural. 1. We shall have seen, 2. You will have seen, 3. They will have seen.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I may see, 2. Thou mayst see, 3. He may see;
Plural. 1. We may see, 2. You may see, 3. They may see.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I might see, 2. Thou mightst see, 3. He might see;
Plural. 1. We might see, 2. You might see, 3. They might see.
PERFECT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I may have seen, 2. Thou mayst have seen, 3. He may have seen;
Plural. 1. We may have seen, 2. You may have seen, 3. They may have seen.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. 1. I might have seen, 2. Thou mightst have seen, 3. He might have seen;
Plural. 1. We might have seen, 2. You might have seen, 3. They might have seen.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. 1. If I see, 2. If thou see, 3. If he see;
Plural. 1. If we see, 2. If you see, 3. If they see.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. 1. If I saw, 2. If thou saw, 3. If he saw;
Plural. 1. If we saw, 2. If you saw, 3. If they saw.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. 2. See [thou,] or Do thou see; Plural. 2. See [ye or you,] or Do you see.
PARTICIPLES.
1. The Imperfect. 2. The Perfect. 3. The Preperfect.
Seeing. Seen. Having seen.
NOTES.
NOTE I—The student ought to be able to rehearse the form of a verb, not only according to the order of the entire conjugation, but also according to the synopsis of the several persons and numbers. One sixth part of the paradigm, thus recited, gives in general a fair sample of the whole: and, in class recitations, this mode of rehearsal will save much time: as, IND. I see or do see, I saw or did see, I have seen, I had seen, I shall or will see, I shall or will have seen. POT. I may, can, or must see; I might, could, would, or should see; I may, can, or must have seen; I might, could, would, or should have seen. SUBJ. If I see, If I saw.
NOTE II.—In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb is usually and more properly formed thus: IND. Thou seest or dost see, Thou saw or did see, Thou hast seen, Thou had seen, Thou shall or will see, Thou shall or will have seen. POT. Thou may, can, or must see; Thou might, could, would, or should see; Thou may, can, or must have seen; Thou might, could, would, or should have seen. SUBJ. If thou see, If thou saw. IMP. See [thou,] or Do thou see.
THIRD EXAMPLE.
The irregular neuter verb BE, conjugated affirmatively.
PRINCIPAL PARTS.
Present. Preterit. Imp. Participle. Perf. Participle. Be. Was. Being. Been.
INFINITIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
To be.
PERFECT TENSE.
To have been.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I am, 1. We are, 2. Thou art, 2. You are, 3. He is; 3. They are.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I was, 1. We were, 2. Thou wast, (or wert,)[262] 2. You were, 3. He was; 3. They were.
PERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I have been, 1. We have been, 2. Thou hast been, 2. You have been, 3. He has been; 3. They have been.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I had been, 1. We had been, 2. Thou hadst been, 2. You had been, 3. He had been; 3. They had been.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I shall be, 1. We shall be, 2. Thou wilt be, 2. You will be, 3. He will be; 3. They will be.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I shall have been, 1. We shall have been, 2. Thou wilt have been, 2. You will have been, 3. He will have been; 3. They will have been.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I may be, 1. We may be, 2. Thou mayst be, 2. You may be, 3. He may be, 3. They may be.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I might be, 1. We might be, 2. Thou mightst be, 2. You might be, 3. He might be; 3. They might be.
PERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I may have been, 1. We may have been, 2. Thou mayst have been, 2. You may have been, 3. He may have been; 3. They may have been.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I might have been, 1. We might have been, 2. Thou mightst have been, 2. You might have been, 3. He might have been; 3. They might have been.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. If I be, 1. If we be, 2. If thou be, 2. If you be, 3. If he be; 3. If they be.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. If I were,[263] 1. If we were, 2. If thou were, or wert,[264] 2. If you were, 3. If he were; If they were.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. 2. Be [thou,] or Do thou be; Plural. 2. Be [ye or you,] or Do you be.
PARTICIPLES.
1. The Imperfect. 2. The Perfect. 3. The Preperfect. Being. Been. Having been.
FAMILIAR FORM WITH 'THOU.'
NOTE.—In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb, is usually and more properly formed thus: IND. Thou art, Thou was, Thou hast been, Thou had been, Thou shall or will be, Thou shall or will have been. POT. Thou may, can, or must be; Thou might, could, would, or should be; Thou may, can, or must have been; Thou might, could, would, or should have been. SUBJ. If thou be, If thou were. IMP. Be [thou,] or Do thou be.
OBSERVATIONS.
OBS. 1.—It appears that be, as well as am, was formerly used for the indicative present: as, "I be, Thou beest, He be; We be, Ye be, They be." See Brightland's Gram., p. 114. Dr. Lowth, whose Grammar is still preferred at Harvard University, gives both forms, thus: "I am, Thou art, He is; We are, Ye are, They are. Or, I be, Thou beest, He is; We be, Ye be, They be." To the third person singular, he subjoins the following example and remark: "'I think it be thine indeed, for thou liest in it.' Shak. Hamlet. Be, in the singular number of this time and mode, especially in the third person, is obsolete; and is become somewhat antiquated in the plural."—Lowth's Gram., p. 36. Dr. Johnson gives this tense thus: "Sing. I am; thou art; he is; Plur. We are, or be; ye are, or be; they are, or be." And adds, "The plural be is now little in use."—Gram. in Johnson's Dict., p. 8. The Bible commonly has am, art, is, and are, but not always; the indicative be occurs in some places: as, "We be twelve brethren."—Gen., xlii, 32. "What be these two olive branches?"—Zech., iv, 12. Some traces of this usage still occur in poetry: as,
"There be more things to greet the heart and eyes
In Arno's dome of Art's most princely shrine,
Where Sculpture with her rainbow sister vies;
There be more marvels yet—but not for mine."
—Byron's Childe Harold, Canto iv, st. 61.
OBS. 2.—Respecting the verb wert, it is not easy to determine whether it is most properly of the indicative mood only, or of the subjunctive mood only, or of both, or of neither. The regular and analogical form for the indicative, is "Thou wast;" and for the subjunctive, "If thou were." Brightland exhibits, "I was or were, Thou wast or wert, He was or were," without distinction of mood, for the three persons singular; and, for the plural, were only. Dr. Johnson gives us, for the indicative, "Thou wast, or wert;" with the remark, "Wert is properly of the conjunctive mood, and ought not to be used in the indicative."—Johnson's Gram., p. 8. In his conjunctive (or subjunctive) mood, he has, "Thou beest," and "Thou wert." So Milton wrote, "If thou beest he."—P. Lost, B. i, l. 84. Likewise Shakspeare: "If thou beest Stephano."—Tempest. This inflection of be is obsolete: all now say, "If thou be." But wert is still in use, to some extent, for both moods; being generally placed by the grammarians in the subjunctive only, but much oftener written for the indicative: as, "Whate'er thou art or wert."—Byron's Harold, Canto iv, st. 115. "O thou that wert so happy!"—Ib., st. 109. "Vainly wert thou wed."—Ib., st. 169.
OBS. 3.—Dr. Lowth gave to this verb, BE, that form of the subjunctive mood, which it now has in most of our grammars; appending to it the following examples and questions: "'Before the sun, Before the Heavens, thou wert.'—Milton. 'Remember what thou wert.'—Dryden. 'I knew thou wert not slow to hear.'—Addison. 'Thou who of old wert sent to Israel's court.'—Prior. 'All this thou wert.'—Pope. 'Thou, Stella, wert no longer young.'—Swift. Shall we, in deference to these great authorities," asks the Doctor, "allow wert to be the same with wast, and common to the indicative and [the] subjunctive mood? or rather abide by the practice of our best ancient writers; the propriety of the language, which requires, as far as may be, distinct forms, for different moods; and the analogy of formation in each mood; I was, thou wast; I were, thou wert? all which conspire to make wert peculiar to the subjunctive mood."—Lowth's Gram., p. 37; Churchill's, p. 251. I have before shown, that several of the "best ancient writers" did not inflect the verb were, but wrote "thou were;" and, surely, "the analogy of formation," requires that the subjunctive be not inflected. Hence "the propriety which requires distinct forms," requires not wert, in either mood. Why then should we make this contraction of the old indicative form werest, a solitary exception, by fixing it in the subjunctive only, and that in opposition to the best authorities that ever used it? It is worthier to take rank with its kindred beest, and be called an archaism.
OBS. 4.—The chief characteristical difference between the indicative and the subjunctive mood, is, that in the latter the verb is not inflected at all, in the different persons: IND. "Thou magnifiest his work." SUBJ. "Remember that thou magnify his work."—Job, xxxvi, 24. IND. "He cuts off, shuts up, and gathers together." SUBJ. "If he cut off, and shut up, or gather together, then who can hinder him?"—Job, xl, 10. There is also a difference of meaning. The Indicative, "If he was," admits the fact; the Subjunctive, "If he were," supposes that he was not. These moods may therefore be distinguished by the sense, even when their forms are alike: as, "Though it thundered, it did not rain."—"Though it thundered, he would not hear it." The indicative assumption here is, "Though it did thunder," or, "Though there was thunder;" the subjunctive, "Though it should thunder," or, "Though there were thunder." These senses are clearly different. Writers however are continually confounding these moods; some in one way, some in an other. Thus S. R. Hall, the teacher of a Seminary for Teachers: "SUBJ. Present Tense. 1. If I be, or am, 2. If thou be, or art, 3. If he be, or is; 1. If we be, or are, 2. If ye or you be, or are, 3. If they be, or are. Imperfect Tense. 1. If I were, or was, 2. If thou wert, or wast, 3. If he were, or was; 1. If we were, 2. If ye or you were, 3. If they were."—Hall's Grammatical Assistant, p. 11. Again: "SUBJ. Present Tense. 1. If I love, 2. If thou lovest, 3. If he love," &c. "The remaining tenses of this mode, are, in general, similar to the correspondent tenses of the Indicative mode, only with the conjunction prefixed."—Ib., p. 20. Dr. Johnson observes, "The indicative and conjunctive moods are by modern writers frequently confounded; or rather the conjunctive is wholly neglected, when some convenience of versification does not invite its revival. It is used among the purer writers of former times; as, 'Doubtless thou art our father, though Abraham be ignorant of us, and Israel acknowledge us not.'"—Gram. in Joh. Dict., p. 9. To neglect the subjunctive mood, or to confound it with the indicative, is to augment several of the worst faults of the language.
II. COMPOUND OR PROGRESSIVE FORM.
Active and neuter verbs may also be conjugated, by adding the Imperfect Participle to the auxiliary verb BE, through all its changes; as, "I am writing a letter."—"He is sitting idle."—"They are going." This form of the verb denotes a continuance of the action or state of being, and is, on many occasions, preferable to the simple form of the verb.
FOURTH EXAMPLE.
The irregular active verb READ, conjugated affirmatively, in the Compound Form.
PRINCIPAL PARTS OF THE SIMPLE VERB.
Present. Preterit. Imp. Participle. Perf. Participle. R=ead. R~ead. R=eading. R~ead.
INFINITIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
To be reading.
PERFECT TENSE.
To have been reading.
INDICATIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I am reading, 1. We are reading, 2. Thou art reading, 2. You are reading, 3. He is reading; 3. They are reading.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I was reading, 1. We were reading, 2. Thou wast reading, 2. You were reading, 3. He was reading; 3. They were reading.
PERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I have been reading, 1. We have been reading, 2. Thou hast been reading, 2. You have been reading, 3. He has been reading; 3. They have been reading.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I had been reading, 1. We had been reading, 2. Thou hadst been reading, 2. You had been reading, 3. He had been reading; 3. They had been reading.
FIRST-FUTURE TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I shall be reading, 1. We shall be reading, 2. Thou wilt be reading, 2. You will be reading, 3. He will be reading; 3. They will be reading.
SECOND-FUTURE TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I shall have been reading, 1. We shall have been reading, 2. Thou wilt have been reading, 2. You will have been reading, 3. He will have been reading; 3. They will have been reading.
POTENTIAL MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I may be reading, 1. We may be reading, 2. Thou mayst be reading, 2. You may be reading, 3. He may be reading; 3. They may be reading.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I might be reading, 1. We might be reading, 2. Thou mightst be reading, 2. You might be reading, 3. He might be reading; 3. They might be reading.
PERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I may have been reading, 1. We may have been reading, 2. Thou mayst have been reading, 2. You may have been reading, 3. He may have been reading; 3. They may have been reading.
PLUPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. I might have been reading, 1. We might have been reading, 2. Thou mightst have been reading, 2. You might have been reading, 3. He might have been reading; 3. They might have been reading.
SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD.
PRESENT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. If I be reading, 1. If we be reading, 2. If thou be reading, 2. If you be reading, 3. If he be reading; 3. If they be reading.
IMPERFECT TENSE.
Singular. Plural. 1. If I were reading, 1. If we were reading, 2. If thou were reading, 2. If you were reading, 3. If he were reading; 3. If they were reading.
IMPERATIVE MOOD.
Sing. 2. Be [thou] reading, or Do thou be reading;
Plur. 2. Be [ye or you] reading, or Do you be reading.
PARTICIPLES.
1. The Imperfect. 2. The Perfect. 3. The Preperfect. Being reading. ————- Having been reading.
FAMILIAR FORM WITH 'THOU.'
NOTE.—In the familiar style, the second person singular of this verb, is usually and more properly formed thus: IND. Thou art reading, Thou was reading, Thou hast been reading, Thou had been reading, Thou shall or will be reading, Thou shall or will have been reading. POT. Thou may, can, or must be reading; Thou might, could, would, or should be reading; Thou may, can, or must have been reading; Thou might, could, would, or should have been reading. SUBJ. If thou be reading, If thou were reading. IMP. Be [thou,] reading, or Do thou be reading.
OBSERVATIONS.
OBS. 1.—Those verbs which, in their simple form, imply continuance, do not admit the compound form: thus we say, "I respect him;" but not, "I am respecting him." This compound form seems to imply that kind of action, which is susceptible of intermissions and renewals. Affections of the mind or heart are supposed to last; or, rather, actions of this kind are complete as soon as they exist. Hence, to love, to hate, to desire, to fear, to forget, to remember, and many other such verbs, are incapable of this method of conjugation.[265] It is true, we often find in grammars such models, as, "I was loving, Thou wast loving, He was loving," &c. But this language, to express what the authors intend by it, is not English. "He was loving," can only mean, "He was affectionate:" in which sense, loving is an adjective, and susceptible of comparison. Who, in common parlance, has ever said, "He was loving me," or any thing like it? Yet some have improperly published various examples, or even whole conjugations, of this spurious sort. See such in Adam's Gram., p. 91; Gould's Adam, 83; Bullions's English Gram., 52; his Analyt. and Pract. Gram., 92; Chandler's New Gram., 85 and 86; Clark's, 80; Cooper's Plain and Practical, 70; Frazee's Improved, 66 and 69; S. S. Greene's, 234; Guy's, 25; Hallock's, 103; Hart's, 88; Hendrick's, 38; Lennie's, 31; Lowth's, 40; Harrison's, 34; Perley's, 36; Pinneo's Primary, 101.
OBS. 2.—Verbs of this form have sometimes a passive signification; as, "The books are now selling."—Allen's Gram., p. 82. "As the money was paying down."—Ainsworth's Dict., w. As. "It requires no motion in the organs whilst it is forming."—Murray's Gram., p. 8. "Those works are long forming which must always last."—Dr. Chetwood. "While the work of the temple was carrying on."—Dr. J. Owen. "The designs of Providence are carrying on."—Bp. Butler. "A scheme, which has been carrying on, and is still carrying on."—Id., Analogy, p. 188. "We are permitted to know nothing of what is transacting in the regions above us."—Dr. Blair. "While these things were transacting in Germany."—Russell's Modern Europe, Part First, Let. 59. "As he was carrying to execution, he demanded to be heard."—Goldsmith's Greece, Vol. i, p. 163. "To declare that the action was doing or done."—Booth's Introd., p. 28. "It is doing by thousands now."—Abbott's Young Christian, p. 121. "While the experiment was making, he was watching every movement."—Ib., p. 309. "A series of communications from heaven, which had been making for fifteen hundred years."—Ib., p. 166. "Plutarch's Lives are re-printing."—L. Murray's Gram., 8vo, p. 64. "My Lives are reprinting."—DR. JOHNSON: Worcester's Univ. and Crit. Dict., p. xlvi. "All this has been transacting within 130 miles of London."—BYRON: Perley's Gram., p. 37. "When the heart is corroding by vexations."—Student's Manual, p. 336. "The padlocks for our lips are forging."—WHITTIER: Liberator, No. 993. "When his throat is cutting."—Collier's Antoninus. "While your story is telling."—Adams's Rhet., i, 425. "But the seeds of it were sowing some time before."—Bolingbroke, on History, p. 168. "As soon as it was formed, nay even whilst it was forming."—Ib., p. 163. "Strange schemes of private ambition were formed and forming there."—Ib., p. 291. "Even when it was making and made."—Ib., 299. "Which have been made and are making."—HENRY CLAY: Liberator, ix, p. 141. "And they are in measure sanctified, or sanctifying, by the power thereof."—Barclay's Works, i, 537. "Which is now accomplishing amongst the uncivilized countries of the earth."—Chalmers, Sermons, p. 281. "Who are ruining, or ruined, [in] this way."—Locke, on Ed., p. 155. "Whilst they were undoing."—Ibid. "Whether he was employing fire to consume [something,] or was himself consuming by fire."—Crombie, on Etym. and Syntax, p. 148. "At home, the greatest exertions are making to promote its progress."—Sheridan's Elocution, p. iv. "With those [sounds] which are uttering."—Ib., p. 125. "Orders are now concerting for the dismissal of all officers of the Revenue marine."—Providence Journal, Feb. 1, 1850. Expressions of this kind are condemned by some critics, under the notion that the participle in ing must never be passive; but the usage is unquestionably of far better authority, and, according to my apprehension, in far better taste, than the more complex phraseology which some late writers adopt in its stead; as, "The books are now being sold."—"In all the towns about Cork, the whiskey shops are being closed, and soup, coffee, and tea houses [are] establishing generally."—Dublin Evening Post, 1840.
OBS. 3.—The question here is, Which is the most correct expression, "While the bridge was building,"—"While the bridge was a building,"—or, "While the bridge was being built?" And again, Are they all wrong? If none of these is right, we must reject them all, and say, "While they were building the bridge;"—"While the bridge was in process of erection;"—or resort to some other equivalent phrase. Dr. Johnson, after noticing the compound form of active-intransitives, as, "I am going"—"She is dying,"—"The tempest is raging,"—"I have been walking," and so forth, adds: "There is another manner of using the active participle, which gives it a passive signification:[266] as, The grammar is now printing, Grammatica jam nunc chartis imprimitur. The brass is forging, Æra excuduntur. This is, in my opinion," says he, "a vitious expression, probably corrupted from a phrase more pure, but now somewhat obsolete: The book is a printing, The brass is a forging; a being properly at, and printing and forging verbal nouns signifying action, according to the analogy of this language."—Gram. in Joh. Dict., p. 9.
OBS. 4.—A is certainly sometimes a preposition; and, as such, it may govern a participle, and that without converting it into a "verbal noun." But that such phraseology ought to be preferred to what is exhibited with so many authorities, in a preceding paragraph, and with an example from Johnson among the rest, I am not prepared to concede. As to the notion of introducing a new and more complex passive form of conjugation, as, "The bridge is being built," "The bridge was being built," and so forth, it is one of the most absurd and monstrous innovations ever thought of. Yet some two or three men, who seem to delight in huge absurdities, declare that this "modern innovation is likely to supersede" the simpler mode of expression. Thus, in stead of, "The work is now publishing," they choose to say, "The work is now being published."—Kirkham's Gram., p. 82. This is certainly no better English than, "The work was being published, has been being published, had been being published, shall or will be being published, shall or will have been being published;" and so on, through all the moods and tenses. What a language shall we have when our verbs are thus conjugated!
OBS. 5.—A certain Irish critic, who even outdoes in rashness the above-cited American, having recently arrived in New York, has republished a grammar, in which he not only repudiates the passive use of the participle in ing, but denies the usual passive form of the present tense, "I am loved, I am smitten" &c., as taught by Murray and others, to be good English; and tells us that the true form is, "I am being loved, I am being smitten," &c. See the 98th and 103d pages of Joseph W. Wright's Philosophical Grammar, (Edition of 1838,) dedicated "TO COMMON SENSE!" [267] But both are offset, if not refuted, by the following observations from a source decidedly better: "It has lately become common to use the present participle passive [,] to express the suffering of an action as continuing, instead of the participle in -ing in the passive sense; thus, instead of, 'The house is building,' we now very frequently hear, 'The house is being built.' This mode of expression, besides being awkward, is incorrect, and does not express the idea intended. This will be obvious, I think, from the following considerations.
"1. The expression, 'is being,' is equivalent to 'is,' and expresses no more; just as, 'is loving,' is equivalent to, 'loves.' Hence, 'is being built,' is precisely equivalent to, 'is built.'
"2. 'Built,' is a perfect participle; and therefore cannot, in any connexion, express an action, or the suffering of an action, now in progress. The verb to be, signifies to exist; 'being,' therefore, is equivalent to 'existing.' If then we substitute the synonyme, the nature of the expression will be obvious; thus, 'the house is being built,' is, in other words, 'the house is existing built,' or more simply as before, 'the house is built;' plainly importing an action not progressing, but now existing in a finished state.
"3. If the expression, 'is being built,' be a correct form of the present indicative passive, then it must be equally correct to say in the perfect, 'has been being built;' in the past perfect, 'had been being built;' in the present infinitive,'to be being built;' in the perfect infinitive,'to have been being built;' and in the present participle, 'being being built;' which all will admit to be expressions as incorrect as they are inelegant, but precisely analogous to that which now begins to prevail."—Bullions's Principles of English Gram., p. 58.
OBS. 6.—It may be replied, that the verbs to be and to exist are not always synonymous; because the former is often a mere auxiliary, or a mere copula, whereas the latter always means something positive, as to be in being, to be extant. Thus we may speak of a thing as being destroyed, or may say, it is annihilated; but we can by no means speak of it as existing destroyed, or say, it exists annihilated. The first argument above is also nugatory. These drawbacks, however, do not wholly destroy the force of the foregoing criticism, or at all extenuate the obvious tautology and impropriety of such phrases as, is being, was being, &c. The gentlemen who affirm that this new form of conjugation "is being introduced into the language," (since they allow participles to follow possessive pronouns) may very fairly be asked, "What evidence have you of its being being introduced?" Nor can they, on their own principles, either object to the monstrous phraseology of this question, or tell how to better it![268]
OBS. 7.—D. H. Sanborn, an other recent writer, has very emphatically censured this innovation, as follows: "English and American writers have of late introduced a new kind of phraseology, which has become quite prevalent in the periodical and popular publications of the day. Their intention, doubtless, is, to supersede the use of the verb in the definite form, when it has a passive signification. They say, 'The ship is being built,'—'time is being wasted,"—'the work is being advanced,' instead of, 'the ship is building, time is wasting, the work is advancing.' Such a phraseology is a solecism too palpable to receive any favor; it is at war with the practice of the most distinguished writers in the English language, such as Dr. Johnson and Addison. "When an individual says, 'a house is being burned,' he declares that a house is existing, burned, which is impossible; for being means existing, and burned, consumed by fire. The house ceases to exist as such, after it is consumed by fire. But when he says, 'a house is burning,' we understand that it is consuming by fire; instead of inaccuracy, doubt, and ambiguity, we have a form of expression perfectly intelligible, beautiful, definite, and appropriate."—Sanborn's Analytical Gram., p. 102.
OBS. 8.—Dr. Perley speaks of this usage thus: "An attempt has been made of late to introduce a kind of passive participial voice; as, 'The temple is being built.' This ought not to be encouraged. For, besides being an innovation, it is less convenient than the use of the present participle in the passive sense. Being built signifies action finished; and how can, Is being built, signify an action unfinished?"—Perley's Gram., p. 37.
OBS. 9.—The question now before us has drawn forth, on either side, a deal of ill scholarship and false logic, of which it would be tedious to give even a synopsis. Concerning the import of some of our most common words and phrases, these ingenious masters,—Bullions, Sanborn, and Perley,—severally assert some things which seem not to be exactly true. It is remarkable that critics can err in expounding terms so central to the language, and so familiar to all ears, as "be, being, being built, burned, being burned, is, is burned, to be burned," and the like. That to be and to exist, or their like derivatives, such as being and existing, is and exists, cannot always explain each other, is sufficiently shown above; and thereby is refuted Sanborn's chief argument, that, "is being burned," involves the contradiction of "existing, burned," or "consumed by fire." According to his reasoning, as well as that of Bullions, is burned must mean exists consumed; was burned, existed consumed; and thus our whole passive conjugation would often be found made up of bald absurdities! That this new unco-passive form conflicts with the older and better usage of taking the progressive form sometimes passively, is doubtless a good argument against the innovation; but that "Johnson and Addison" are fit representatives of the older "practice" in this case, may be doubted. I know not that the latter has anywhere made use of such phraseology; and one or two examples from the former are scarcely an offset to his positive verdict against the usage. See OBS. 3rd, above.
OBS. 10.—As to what is called "the present or the imperfect participle passive,"—as, "being burned," or "being burnt,"—if it is rightly interpreted in any of the foregoing citations, it is, beyond question, very improperly thus named. In participles, ing denotes continuance: thus being usually means continuing to be; loving, continuing to love; building, continuing to build,—or (as taken passively) continuing to be built: i. e., (in words which express the sense more precisely and certainly,) continuing to be in process of construction. What then is "being built," but "continuing to be built," the same, or nearly the same, as "building" taken passively? True it is, that built, when alone, being a perfect participle, does not mean "in process of construction," but rather, "constructed" which intimates completion; yet, in the foregoing passive phrases, and others like them, as well as in all examples of this unco-passive voice, continuance of the passive state being first suggested, and cessation of the act being either regarded as future or disregarded, the imperfect participle passive is for the most part received as equivalent to the simple imperfect used in a passive sense. But Dr. Bullions, who, after making "is being built precisely equivalent to is built," classes the two participles differently, and both erroneously,—the one as a "present participle," and the other, of late, as a "past,"—has also said above, "'Built,' is a perfect participle: and THEREFORE cannot, in any connexion, express an action, or the suffering of an action, now in progress." And Dr. Perley, who also calls the compound of being a "present participle," argues thus: "Being built signifies an action, finished; and how can Is being built, signify an action unfinished?" To expound a passive term actively, or as "signifying action," is, at any rate, a near approach to absurdity; and I shall presently show that the fore-cited notion of "a perfect participle," now half abandoned by Bullions himself, has been the seed of the very worst form of that ridiculous neology which the good Doctor was opposing.
OBS. 11.—These criticisms being based upon the meaning of certain participles, either alone or in phrases, and the particular terms spoken of being chiefly meant to represent classes, what is said of them may be understood of their kinds. Hence the appropriate naming of the kinds, so as to convey no false idea of any participle's import, is justly brought into view; and I may be allowed to say here, that, for the first participle passive, which begins with "being," the epithet "Imperfect" is better than "Present," because this compound participle denotes, not always what is present, but always the state of something by which an action is, or was, or will be, undergone or undergoing—a state continuing, or so regarded, though perhaps the action causative may be ended—or sometimes perhaps imagined only, and not yet really begun. With a marvellous instability of doctrine, for the professed systematizer of different languages and grammars, Dr. Bullions has recently changed his names of the second and third participles, in both voices, from "Perfect" and "Compound Perfect," to "Past" and "Perfect." His notion now is, that, "The Perfect participle is always compound; as, Having finished, Having been finished."—Bullions's Analyt. and Pract. Grammar, 1849, p. 77. And what was the "Perfect" before, in his several books, is now called the "Past;" though, with this change, he has deliberately made an other which is repugnant to it: this participle, being the basis of three tenses always, and of all the tenses sometimes, is now allowed by the Doctor to lend the term "perfect" to the three,—"Present-perfect, Past-perfect, Future-perfect,"—even when itself is named otherwise!
OBS. 12.—From the erroneous conception, that a perfect participle must, in every connexion, express "action finished," action past,—or perhaps from only a moiety of this great error,—the notion that such a participle cannot, in connexion with an auxiliary, constitute a passive verb of the present tense,—J. W. Wright, above-mentioned, has not very unnaturally reasoned, that, "The expression, 'I am loved,' which Mr. Murray has employed to exhibit the passive conjugation of the present tense, may much more feasibly represent past than present time."—See Wright's Philosophical Gram., p. 99. Accordingly, in his own paradigm of the passive verb, he has formed this tense solely from what he calls the participle present, thus: "I am being smitten, Thou art being smitten," &c.—Ib., p. 98. His "Passed Tense," too, for some reason which I do not discover, he distinguishes above the rest by a double form, thus: "I was smitten, or being smitten; Thou wast smitten, or being smitten;" &c.—P. 99. In his opinion, "Few will object to the propriety of the more familiar phraseology, 'I am in the ACT,—or, suffering the ACTION of BEING SMITTEN;' and yet," says he, "in substance and effect, it is wholly the same as, 'I am being smitten,' which is THE TRUE FORM of the verb in the present tense of the passive voice!"—Ibid. Had we not met with some similar expressions of English or American blunderers, "the act or action of being smitten," would be accounted a downright Irish bull; and as to this ultra notion of neologizing all our passive verbs, by the addition of "being,"—with the author's cool talk of "the presentation of this theory, and [the] consequent suppression of that hitherto employed,"—there is a transcendency in it, worthy of the most sublime aspirant among grammatical newfanglers.
OBS. 13.—But, with all its boldness of innovation, Wright's Philosophical Grammar is not a little self-contradictory in its treatment of the passive verb. The entire "suppression" of the usual form of its present tense, did not always appear, even to this author, quite so easy and reasonable a matter, as the foregoing citations would seem to represent it. The passive use of the participle in ing, he has easily disposed of: despite innumerable authorities for it, one false assertion, of seven syllables, suffices to make it quite impossible.[269] But the usual passive form, which, with some show of truth, is accused of not having always precisely the same meaning as the progressive used passively,—that is, of not always denoting continuance in the state of receiving continued action,—and which is, for that remarkable reason, judged worthy of rejection, is nevertheless admitted to have, in very many instances, a conformity to this idea, and therefore to "belong [thus far] to the present tense."—P. 103. This contradicts to an indefinite extent, the proposition for its rejection. It is observable also, that the same examples, 'I am loved' and 'I am smitten,'—the same "tolerated, but erroneous forms," (so called on page 103,) that are given as specimens of what he would reject,—though at first pronounced "equivalent in grammatical construction," censured for the same pretended error, and proposed to be changed alike to "the true form" by the insertion of "being,"—are subsequently declared to "belong to" different classes and different tenses. "I am loved," is referred to that "numerous" class of verbs, which "detail ACTION of prior, but retained, endured, and continued existence; and therefore, in this sense, belong to the present tense." But "I am smitten," is idly reckoned of an opposite class, (said by Dr. Bullions to be "perhaps the greater number,") whose "ACTIONS described are neither continuous in their nature, nor progressive in their duration; but, on the contrary, completed and perfected; and [which] are consequently descriptive of passed time and ACTION."—Wright's Gram., p. 103. Again: "In what instance soever this latter form and signification can be introduced, their import should be, and, indeed, ought to be, supplied by the perfect tense construction:—for example, 'I am smitten,' [should] be, 'I have been smitten.'"—Ib. Here is self-contradiction indefinitely extended in an other way. Many a good phrase, if not every one, that the author's first suggestion would turn to the unco-passive form, his present "remedy" would about as absurdly convert into "the perfect tense."
OBS. 14.—But Wright's inconsistency, about this matter, ends not here: it runs through all he says of it; for, in this instance, error and inconsistency constitute his whole story. In one place, he anticipates and answers a question thus: "To what tense do the constructions, 'I am pleased;' 'He is expected;' 'I am smitten;' 'He is bound;' belong?" "We answer:—So far as these and like constructions are applicable to the delineation of continuous and retained ACTION, they express present time; and must be treated accordingly."—P. 103. This seems to intimate that even, "I am smitten," and its likes, as they stand, may have some good claim to be of the present tense; which suggestion is contrary to several others made by the author. To expound this, or any other passive term, passively, never enters his mind: with him, as with sundry others, "ACTION," "finished ACTION," or "progressive ACTION," is all any passive verb or participle ever means! No marvel, that awkward perversions of the forms of utterance and the principles of grammar should follow such interpretation. In Wright's syntax a very queer distinction is apparently made between a passive verb, and the participle chiefly constituting it; and here, too, through a fancied ellipsis of "being" before the latter, most, if not all, of his other positions concerning passives, are again disastrously overthrown by something worse—a word "imperceptibly understood." "'I am smitten;' 'I was smitten;' &c., are," he says, "the universally acknowledged forms of the VERBS in these tenses, in the passive voice:—not of the PARTICIPLE. In all verbal constructions of the character of which we have hitherto treated, (see page 103) and, where the ACTIONS described are continuous in their operations,—the participle BEING is imperceptibly omitted, by ellipsis."—P. 144.
OBS. 15.—Dr. Bullions has stated, that, "The present participle active, and the present participle passive, are not counterparts to each other in signification; [,] the one signifying the present doing, and the other the present suffering of an action, [;] for the latter always intimates the present being of an ACT, not in progress, but completed."—Prin. of Eng. Gram., p. 58. In this, he errs no less grossly than in his idea of the "action or the suffering" expressed by "a perfect participle," as cited in OBS. 5th above; namely, that it must have ceased. Worse interpretation, or balder absurdity, is scarcely to be met with; and yet the reverend Doctor, great linguist as he should be, was here only trying to think and tell the common import of a very common sort of English participles; such as, "being loved" and "being seen." In grammar, "an act," that has "present being," can be nothing else than an act now doing, or "in progress;" and if, "the present being of an ACT not in progress," were here a possible thought, it surely could not be intimated by any such participle. In Acts, i, 3 and 4, it is stated, that our Saviour showed himself to the apostles, "alive after his passion, by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God; and, being assembled together with them commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem." Now, of these misnamed "present participles," we have here one "active," one "passive," and two others—(one in each form—) that are neuter; but no present time, except what is in the indefinite date of "pertaining." The events are past, and were so in the days of St. Luke. Yet each of the participles denotes continuance: not, indeed, in or to the present time, but for a time. "Being seen" means continuing to be seen; and, in this instance, the period of the continuance was "forty days" of time past. But, according to the above-cited "principle of English Grammar," so long and so widely inculcated by "the Rev. Peter Bullions, D. D., Professor of Languages," &c.,—a central principle of interpretation, presumed by him to hold "always"—this participle must intimate "the present being of an act, not in progress, but completed;"—that is, "the present being of" the apostles' act in formerly seeing the risen Saviour!