OBS. 23.—Dr. Lowth seconds this opinion of Johnson, respecting the phrase, "never so wisely," and says, "It should be, 'ever so wisely;' that is, 'how wisely soever.'" To which he adds an other example somewhat different: "'Besides, a slave would not have been admitted into that society, had he had never such opportunities.' Bentley."—Lowth's Gram., p. 109. This should be, "had he had everso excellent opportunities." But Churchill, mistaking the common explanation of the meaning of everso for the manner of parsing or resolving it, questions the propriety of the term, and thinks it easier to defend the old phrase never so; in which he supposes never to be an adverb of time, and not to relate to so, which is an adverb of degree; saying, "'Be it never so true,' is resolvable into, 'Be it so true, as never any thing was.'[431] 'I have had never so much trouble on this occasion,' may be resolved into, 'I have never had so much trouble, as on this occasion:' while, 'I have had ever so much trouble on this occasion, cannot be resolved, without supplying some very harsh and unprecedented ellipsis indeed."—New Gram., p. 337, Why not? I see no occasion at all for supposing any ellipsis. Ever is here an adverb of degree, and relates to so; or, if we take everso as one word, this too is an adverb of degree, and relates to much: because the meaning is—"everso much trouble." But the other phraseology, even as it stands in Churchill's explanations, is a solecism still; nor can any resolution which supposes never to be here an adverb of time, be otherwise. We cannot call that a grammatical resolution, which makes a different sense from that which the writer intended: as, "A slave would not have been admitted into that society, had he never had such opportunities." This would be Churchill's interpretation, but it is very unlike what Bentley says above. So, 'I have never had so much trouble,' and, 'I have had everso much trouble,' are very different assertions.
OBS. 24.—On the word never, Dr. Johnson remarks thus: "It seems in some phrases to have the sense of an adjective, [meaning,] not any; but in reality it is not ever: [as,] 'He answered him to never a word.' MATTHEW, xxvii, 14."—Quarto Dict. This mode of expression was formerly very common, and a contracted form of it is still frequently heard among the vulgar: as, "Because he'd ne'er an other tub."—Hudibras, p. 102. That is, "Because he had no other tub." "Letter nor line know I never a one."—Scott's Lay of L. M., p. 27. This is what the common people pronounce "ne'er a one," and use in stead of neither or no one. In like manner they contract ever a one into "e'er a one;" by which they mean either or any one. These phrases are the same that somebody—(I believe it is Smith, in his Inductive Grammar—) has ignorantly written "ary one" and "nary one" calling them vulgarisms.[432] Under this mode of spelling, the critic had an undoubted right to think the terms unauthorized! In the compounds of whoever or whoe'er, whichever or whiche'er, whatever or whate'er, the word ever or e'er, which formerly stood separate, appears to be an adjective, rather than an adverb; though, by becoming part of the pronoun, it has now technically ceased to be either.
OBS. 25.—The same may be said of soever or soe'er, which is considered as only a part of an other word even when it is written separately; as, "On which side soever I cast my eyes." In Mark, iii, 28th, wherewithsoever is commonly printed as two words; but Alger, in his Pronouncing Bible, more properly makes it one. Dr. Webster, in his grammars, calls soever a WORD; but, in his dictionaries, he does not define it as such. "The word soever may be interposed between the attribute and the name; 'how clear soever this idea of infinity,'—'how remote soever it may seem.'—LOCKE."—Webster's Philosophical Gram., p. 154; Improved Gram., p. 107. "SOEVER, so and ever, found in compounds, as in whosoever, whatsoever, wheresoever. See these words."—Webster's Dict., 8vo.
OBS. 26.—The word only, (i.e., onely, or onelike,) when it relates to a noun or a pronoun, is a definitive adjective, meaning single, alone, exclusive of others; as, "The only man,"—"The only men,"—"Man only,"—"Men only,"—"He only,"—"They only." When it relates to a verb or a participle, it is an adverb of manner, and means simply, singly, merely, barely; as, "We fancy that we hate flattery, when we only hate the manner of it."—Art of Thinking, p. 38. "A disinterested love of one's country can only subsist in small republics."—Ib., p. 56. When it stands at the head of a clause, it is commonly a connective word, equivalent to but, or except that; in which sense, it must be called a conjunction, or at least a conjunctive adverb, which is nearly the same thing; as, "Only they would that we should remember the poor."—Gal., ii, 10. "For these signs are prepositions, only they are of more constant use than the rest."—Ward's Gram., p. 129.
OBS. 27.—Among our grammarians, the word "only" often passes for an adverb, when it is in fact an adjective. Such a mistake in this single word, has led Churchill to say of the adverb in general, "It's place is for the most part before adjectives, after nouns, and after verbs;" &c.—New Gram., p. 147. But, properly, the placing of adverbs has nothing to do with "nouns," because adverbs do not relate to nouns. In this author's example, "His arm only was bare," there is no adverb; and, where he afterwards speaks of the latitude allowable in the placing of adverbs, alleging, "It is indifferent whether we say, 'He bared his arm only;' or, 'He bared only his arm,'" the word only is an adjective, in one instance, if not in both. With this writer, and some others, the syntax of an adverb centres mainly in the suggestion, that, "It's propriety and force depend on it's position."—Ib., p. 147. Illustration: "Thus people commonly say; 'I only spoke three words:' which properly implies, that I, and no other person, spoke three words: when the intention of the speaker requires: 'I spoke only three words; that is, no more than three words.'"—Ib., p. 327. One might just as well say, "I spoke three words only." But the interpretation above is hypercritical, and contrary to that which the author himself gives in his note on the other example, thus: "Any other situation of the adverb would make a difference. 'He only bared his arm;' would imply, that he did nothing more than bare his arm. 'Only he bared his arm;' must refer to a preceding part of the sentence, stating something, to which the act of baring his arm was an exception; as, 'He did it in the same manner, only he bared his arm.' If only were placed immediately before arm; as, 'He bared his only arm;' it would be an adjective, and signify, that he had but one arm."—Ib., p. 328. Now are not, "I only spoke three words," and, "He only bared his arm," analogous expressions? Is not the former as good English as the latter? Only, in both, is most naturally conceived to belong to the verb; but either may be read in such a manner as to make it an adjective belonging to the pronoun.
OBS. 28.—The term not but is equivalent to two negatives that make an affirmative; as, "Not but that it is a wide place."—Walker's Particles, p. 89. "Non quo non latus locus sit."—Cic. Ac., iv, 12. It has already been stated, that cannot but is equal to must; as, "It is an affection which cannot but be productive of some distress."—Blair's Rhet., p. 461. It seems questionable, whether but is not here an adverb, rather than a conjunction. However this may be, by the customary (but faulty) omission of the negative before but, in some other sentences, that conjunction has acquired the adverbial sense of only; and it may, when used with that signification, be called an adverb. Thus, the text, "He hath not grieved me but in part." (2 Cor., ii, 5,) might drop the negative not, and still convey the same meaning: "He hath grieved me but in part;" i.e., "only in part." In the following examples, too, but appears to be an adverb, like only: "Things but slightly connected should not be crowded into one sentence."—Murray's Octavo Gram., Index. "The assertion, however, serves but to show their ignorance."—Webster's Essays, p. 96.
"Reason itself but gives it edge and power."—Pope.
"Born but to die, and reasoning but to err."—Id.
OBS. 29.—In some constructions of the word but, there is a remarkable ambiguity; as, "There cannot be but one capital musical pause in a line."—Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 92. "A line admits but one capital pause."—Ibid. Thus does a great critic, in the same paragraph, palpably contradict himself, and not perceive it. Both expressions are equivocal. He ought rather to have said: "A line admits no more than one capital pause."—"There cannot be more than one capital musical pause in a line." Some would say—"admits only one"—"there can be only one." But here, too, is some ambiguity; because only may relate either to one, or to the preceding verb. The use of only for but or except that, is not noticed by our lexicographers; nor is it, in my opinion, a practice much to be commended, though often adopted by men that pretend to write grammatically: as, "Interrogative pronouns are the same as relative, ONLY their antecedents cannot be determined till the answer is given to the question."—Comly's Gram., p. 16. "A diphthong is always long; as, Aurum, Cæsar, &c. ONLY præ, in composition before a vowel is commonly short."—Adam's Gram., p. 254; Gould's, 246.
OBS. 30.—It is said by some grammarians, that, "The adverb there is often used as an expletive, or as a word that adds nothing to the sense; in which case, it precedes the verb and the nominative; as, 'There is a person at the door.'"—Murray's Gram., p. 197; Ingersoll's, 205; Greenleaf's, 33; Nixon's Parser, p. 53. It is true, that in our language the word there is thus used idiomatically, as an introductory term, when we tell what is taking, or has taken, place; but still it is a regular adverb of place, and relates to the verb agreeably to the common rule for adverbs. In some instances it is even repeated in the same sentence, because, in its introductory sense, it is always unemphatical; as, "Because there was pasture there for their flocks."—1 Chron., iv, 41. "If there be indistinctness or disorder there, we can have no success."—Blair's Rhet., p. 271. "There, there are schools adapted to every age."—Woodbridge, Lit. Conv., p. 78. The import of the word is more definite, when emphasis is laid upon it; but this is no good reason for saying, with Dr. Webster, that it is "without signification," when it is without emphasis; or, with Dr. Priestley, that it "seems to have no meaning whatever, except it be thought to give a small degree of emphasis."—Rudiments of E. Gram., p. 135.
OBS. 31.—The noun place itself is just as loose and variable in its meaning as the adverb there. For example; "There is never any difference;" i.e., "No difference ever takes place." Shall we say that "place," in this sense, is not a noun of place? To take place, is, to occur somewhere, or anywhere; and the unemphatic word there is but as indefinite in respect to place, as these other adverbs of place, or as the noun itself. S. B. Goodenow accounts it a great error, to say that there is an adverb of place, when it is thus indefinite; and he chooses to call it an "indefinite pronoun," as, "'What is there here?'—'There is no peace.'—'What need was there of it?'" See his Gram., p. 3 and p. 11. In treating of the various classes of adverbs, I have admitted and shown, that here, there, and where, have sometimes the nature of pronouns, especially in such compounds as hereof, thereof, whereof; but in this instance, I see not what advantage there is in calling there a "pronoun:" we have just as much reason to call here and where pronouns—and that, perhaps, on all occasions. Barnard says, "In the sentence, 'There is one glory of the sun,' &c., the adverb there qualifies the verb is, and seems to have the force of an affirmation, like truly"—Analytical Gram., p. 234. But an adverb of the latter kind may be used with the word there, and I perceive no particular similarity between them: as, "Verily there is a reward for the righteous."—Psal., lviii, 11. "Truly there is a glory of the sun."
OBS. 32.—There is a vulgar error of substituting the adverb most for almost, as in the phrases, "most all,"—"most anywhere,"—"most every day,"—which we sometimes hear for "almost all,"—"almost anywhere,"—"almost every day." The fault is gross, and chiefly colloquial, but it is sometimes met with in books; as, "But thinking he had replied most too rashly, he said, 'I won't answer your question.'"—Wagstaff's History of Friends, Vol. i, p. 207.
NOTES TO RULE XXI.
NOTE I.—Adverbs must be placed in that position which will render the sentence the most perspicuous and agreeable. Example of error: "We are in no hazard of mistaking the sense of the author, though every word which he uses be not precise and exact."—Blair's Rhet., p. 95; Jamieson's, 66. Murray says,—"though every word which he uses is not precise and exact."—Octavo Gram., p. 302. Better:—"though not every word which he uses, is precise and exact."
NOTE II.—Adverbs should not be needlessly used for adjectives; nor should they be employed when quality is to be expressed, and not manner: as, "That the now copies of the original text are entire."—S. Fisher. Say, "the present copies," or, "the existing copies." "The arrows of calumny fall harmlessly at the feet of virtue."—Murray's Key, p. 167; Merchant's Gram., 186; Ingersoll's, 10; Kirkham's, 24. Say, "fall harmless;" as in this example: "The impending black cloud, which is regarded with so much dread, may pass by harmless."—Murray's Key, 8vo, p. 262.
NOTE III.—With a verb of motion, most grammarians prefer hither, thither, and whither, to here, there, and where, which are in common use, and perhaps allowable, though not so good; as, "Come hither, Charles,"—or, "Come here."
NOTE IV.—"To the adverbs hence, thence, and whence, the preposition from is frequently (though not with strict propriety) prefixed; as, from hence, from whence."—See W. Allen's Gram., p. 174. Some critics, however, think this construction allowable, notwithstanding the former word is implied in the latter. See Priestley's Gram., p. 134; and L. Murray's, p. 198. It is seldom elegant to use any word needlessly.
NOTE V.—The adverb how should not be used before the conjunction that, nor in stead of it; as, "He said how he would go."—"Ye see how that not many wise men are called." Expunge how. This is a vulgar error. Somewhat similar is the use of how for lest or that not; as, "Be cautious how you offend him, i.e., that you do not offend him."—W. Allen's Gram., p. 175.
NOTE VI.—The adverb when, while, or where, is not fit to follow the verb is in a definition, or to introduce a clause taken substantively; because it expresses identity, not of being, but of time or place: as, "Concord, is when one word agrees with another in some accidents."—Adam's Gram., p. 151; Gould's, 155. Say, "Concord is the agreement of one word with an other in some accident or accidents."
NOTE VII.—The adverb no should not be used with reference to a verb or a participle. Such expressions as, "Tell me whether you will go or no," are therefore improper: no should be not; because the verb go is understood after it. The meaning is, "Tell me whether you will go or will not go;" but nobody would think of saying, "Whether you will go or no go."
NOTE VIII.—A negation, in English, admits but one negative word; because two negatives in the same clause, usually contradict each other, and make the meaning affirmative. The following example is therefore ungrammatical: "For my part, I love him not, nor hate him not."—Beauties of Shakspeare, p. 16. Expunge the last not, or else change nor to and.
NOTE IX.—The words ever and never should be carefully distinguished according to their sense, and not confounded with each other in their application. Example: "The Lord reigneth, be the earth never so unquiet."—Experience of St. Paul, p. 195. Here, I suppose, the sense to require everso, an adverb of degree: "Be the earth everso unquiet." That is,—"unquiet in whatever degree."
NOTE X.—Adverbs that end in ly, are in general preferable to those forms which, for want of this distinction, may seem like adjectives misapplied. Example: "There would be scarce any such thing in nature as a folio."—Addison. Better:—"scarcely."
IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.
FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XXI.
EXAMPLES UNDER NOTE I.—THE PLACING OF ADVERBS.
"All that is favoured by good use, is not proper to be retained."—Murray's Gram., ii, p. 296.
[FORMULE.—Not proper, because the adverb not is not put in the most suitable place. But, according to Note 1st under Rule 21st, "Adverbs must be placed in that position which will render the sentence the most perspicuous and agreeable." The sentence will be improved by placing not before all; thus, "Not all that is favoured by good use, is proper to be retained."]
"Every thing favoured by good use, [is] not on that account worthy to be retained."—Ib., i, 369; Campbell's Rhet., p. 179. "Most men dream, but all do not."—Beattie's Moral Science, i, 72. "By hasty composition, we shall acquire certainly a very bad style."—Blair's Rhet., p. 191. "The comparisons are short, touching on one point only of resemblance."—Ib., p. 416. "Having had once some considerable object set before us."—Ib., p. 116. "The positive seems improperly to be called a degree."—Adam's Gram., p. 69; Gould's, 68. "In some phrases the genitive is only used."—Adam, 159; Gould, 161. "This blunder is said actually to have occurred."—Smith's Inductive Gram., p. 5. "But every man is not called James, nor every woman Mary."—Buchanan's Gram., p. 15. "Crotchets are employed for the same purpose nearly as the parenthesis."—Churchill's Gram., p. 167. "There is still a greater impropriety in a double comparative."—Priestley's Gram., p. 78. "We have often occasion to speak of time."—Lowth's Gram., p. 39. "The following sentence cannot be possibly understood."—Ib., p. 104. "The words must be generally separated from the context."—Comly's Gram., p. 155. "Words ending in ator have the accent generally on the penultimate."—Murray's Gram., i, 239. "The learned languages, with respect to voices, moods, and tenses, are, in general, differently constructed from the English tongue."—Ib., i, 101. "Adverbs seem originally to have been contrived to express compendiously in one word, what must otherwise have required two or more."—Ib., i, 114. "But it is only so, when the expression can be converted into the regular form of the possessive case."—Ib., i, 174. "Enter, (says he) boldly, for here too there are gods."—Harris's Hermes, p. 8. "For none work for ever so little a pittance that some cannot be found to work for less."—Sedgwick's Economy, p. 190. "For sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again."—Luke, vi, 34. "They must be viewed exactly in the same light."—Murray's Gram., ii, 24. "If he does but speak to display his abilities, he is unworthy of attention."—Ib., Key, ii, 207.
UNDER NOTE II.—ADVERBS FOR ADJECTIVES.
"Motion upwards is commonly more agreeable than motion downwards."—Blair's Rhet., p. 48. "There are but two ways possibly of justification before God."—Dr. Cox, on Quakerism, p. 413. "This construction sounds rather harshly."—Murray's Gram., i, 194; Ingersoll's, 199. "A clear conception in the mind of the learner, of regularly and well-formed letters."—Com. School Journal, i, 66. "He was a great hearer of * * * Attalus, Sotion, Papirius, Fabianus, of whom he makes often mention."—Seneca's Morals, p. 11. "It is only the Often doing of a thing that makes it a Custom."—Divine Right of Tythes, p. 72. "Because W. R. takes oft occasion to insinuate his jealousies of persons and things."—Barclay's Works, i, 570. "Yet often touching will wear gold."—Beauties of Shak., p. 18. "Uneducated persons frequently use an adjective, when they ought to use an adverb: as, 'The country looks beautiful;' instead of beautifully."—Bucke's Gram., p. 84. "The adjective is put absolutely, or without its substantive."—Ash's Gram., p. 57. "A noun or pronoun in the second person, may be put absolutely in the nominative case."—Harrison's Gram., p. 45. "A noun or pronoun, when put absolutely with a participle," &c.—Ib., p. 44; Jaudon's Gram., 108. "A verb in the infinitive mood absolute, stands independently of the remaining part of the sentence."—Wilbur and Livingston's Gram., p. 24. "At my return lately into England, I met a book intituled: 'The Iron Age.'"—Cowley's Preface, p. v. "But he can discover no better foundation for any of them, than the practice merely of Homer and Virgil."—Kames, El. of Criticism, Introd., p. xxv.
UNDER NOTE III—HERE FOR HITHER, &c.
"It is reported that the governour will come here to-morrow."—Kirkham's Gram., p. 196. "It has been reported that the governour will come here to-morrow."—Ib., Key, p. 227. "To catch a prospect of that lovely land where his steps are tending."—Maturin's Sermons, p. 244. "Plautus makes one of his characters ask another where he is going with that Vulcan shut up in a horn; that is, with a lanthorn in his hand."—Adams's Rhet. ii, 331. "When we left Cambridge, we intended to return there in a few days."—Anonym. "Duncan comes here to-night."—Shak., Macbeth. "They talked of returning here last week."—J. M. Putnam's Gram., p. 116.
UNDER NOTE IV.—FROM HENCE, &c.
"From hence he concludes that no inference can be drawn from the meaning of the word, that a constitution has a higher authority than a law or statute."—Webster's Essays, p. 67. "From whence we may likewise date the period of this event."—Murray's Key, ii, p. 202. "From hence it becomes evident, that LANGUAGE, taken in the most comprehensive view, implies certain Sounds, having certain Meanings."—Harris's Hermes, p. 315. "They returned to the city from whence they came out."—Alex. Murray's Gram., p. 135. "Respecting ellipses, some grammarians differ strangely in their ideas; and from thence has arisen a very whimsical diversity in their systems of grammar."—Author. "What am I and from whence? i.e. what am I, and from whence am I?"—Jaudon's Gram., p. 171.
UNDER NOTE V.—THE ADVERB HOW.
"It is strange how a writer, so accurate as Dean Swift, should have stumbled on so improper an application of this particle."—Blair's Rhet., p. 112. "Ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us," &c.—Acts, xv, 7. "Let us take care how we sin; i.e. that we do not sin."—Priestley's Gram., p. 135. "We see by these instances, how prepositions may be necessary to connect those words, which in their signification are not naturally connected."—Murray's Gram., p. 118. "Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?"—2 Cor., xiii, 5. "That thou mayest know how that the earth is the Lord's."—Exod., ix, 29.
UNDER NOTE VI.—WHEN, WHILE, OR WHERE.
"Ellipsis is when one or more words are wanting, to complete the sense."—Adam's Gram., p. 235; Gould's, p. 229; B. F. Fisk's Greek Gram.. 184. "Pleonasm is when a word more is added than is absolutely necessary to express the sense."—Same works. "Hyst~eron prot~eron is when that is put in the former part of the sentence, which, according to the sense, should be in the latter."—Adam, p. 237; Gould, 230. "Hysteron proteron, n. A rhetorical figure when that is said last which was done first."—Webster's Dict. "A Barbarism is when a foreign or strange word is made use of."—Adam's Gram., p. 242; Gould's, 234. "A Solecism is when the rules of Syntax are transgressed."—Iidem, ib. "An Idiotism is when the manner of expression peculiar to one language is used in another."—Iid., ib. "Tautology is when we either uselessly repeat the same words, or repeat the same sense in different words."—Adam, p. 243; Gould, 238. "Bombast is when high sounding words are used without meaning, or upon a trifling occasion."—Iid., ib. "Amphibology is when, by the ambiguity of the construction, the meaning may be taken in two different senses."—Iid., ib. "Irony is when one means the contrary of what is said."—Adam, p. 247; Gould, 237. "The Periphrasis, or Circumlocution, is when several words are employed to express what might be expressed in fewer."—Iid., ib. "Hyperbole is when a thing is magnified above the truth,"—Adam, p. 249; Gould, 240. "Personification is when we ascribe life, sentiments, or actions, to inanimate beings, or to abstract qualities."—Iid., ib. "Apostrophe, or Address, is when the speaker breaks off from the series of his discourse, and addresses himself to some person present or absent, living or dead, or to inanimate nature, as if endowed with sense and reason."—Iid., ib. "A Simile or Comparison is when the resemblance between two objects, whether real or imaginary, is expressed in form."—Kirkham's Gram., p. 223. "Simile, or Comparison, is when one thing is illustrated or heightened by comparing it to another."—Adam's Gram., p. 250; Gould's, 240. "Antithesis, or Opposition, is when things contrary or different are contrasted, to make them appear in the more striking light."—Iid., ib. "Description, or Imagery, [is] when any thing is painted in a lively manner, as if done before our eyes."—Adam's Gram., p. 250. "Emphasis is when a particular stress is laid on some word in a sentence."—Ib. "Epanorthosis, or Correction, is when the speaker either recalls or corrects what he had last said."—Ib. "Paralepsis, or Omission, is when one pretends to omit or pass by, what he at the same time declares."—Ib. "Incrementum, or Climax in sense, is when one member rises above another to the highest."—Ib., p. 251. "A Metonymy is where the cause is put for the effect, or the effect for the cause; the container for the thing contained; or the sign for the thing signified."—Kirkham's Gram., p. 223. "Agreement is when one word is like another in number, case, gender, or person."—Frost's Gram., p. 43; Greenleaf's, 32. "Government is when one word causes another to be in some particular number, person, or case."—Webster's Imp. Gram., p. 89; Greenleaf's, 32; Frost's, 43. "Fusion is while some solid substance is converted into a fluid by heat."—B. "A Proper Diphthong is where both the Vowels are sounded together; as, oi in Voice, ou in House."— Fisher's Gram., p. 10. "An Improper Diphthong is where the Sound of but one of the two Vowels is heard; as e in People."—Ib., p. 11.
UNDER NOTE VII.—THE ADVERB NO FOR NOT.
"An adverb is joined to a verb to show how, or whether or no, or when, or where one is, does, or suffers."—Buchanan's Syntax, p. 62. "We must be immortal, whether we will or no."—Maturin's Sermons, p. 33. "He cares not whether the world was made for Cæsar or no."—American Quarterly Review. "I do not know whether they are out or no."—Byron's Letters. "Whether it can be proved or no, is not the thing."—Butler's Analogy, p. 84. "Whether or no he makes use of the means commanded by God."—Ib.,, p. 164. "Whether it pleases the world or no, the care is taken."— L'Estrange's Seneca, p. 5. "How comes this to be never heard of nor in the least questioned, whether the Law was undoubtedly of Moses's writing or no?"—Bp. Tomline's Evidences, p. 44. "Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not."—John, ix, 25. "Can I make men live, whether they will or no?"—Shak.
"Can hearts, not free, be try'd whether they serve
Willing or no, who will but what they must?"—Milton, P. L.
UNDER NOTE VIII.—OF DOUBLE NEGATIVES.
"We need not, nor do not, confine the purposes of God."—Bentley. "I cannot by no means allow him that."—Idem. "We must try whether or no we cannot increase the Attention by the Help of the Senses."—Brightland's Gram., p. 263. "There is nothing more admirable nor more useful."—Horne Tooke, Vol. i, p. 20. "And what in no time to come he can never be said to have done, he can never be supposed to do."—Johnson's Gram. Com., p. 345. "No skill could obviate, nor no remedy dispel, the terrible infection."—Goldsmith's Greece, i, 114. "Prudery cannot be an indication neither of sense nor of taste."—Spurzheim, on Education, p. 21. "But that scripture, nor no other, speaks not of imperfect faith."—Barclay's Works, i, 172. "But this scripture, nor none other, proves not that faith was or is always accompanied with doubting."—Ibid. "The light of Christ is not nor cannot be darkness."—Ib., p. 252. "Doth not the Scripture, which cannot lie, give none of the saints this testimony?"—Ib., p. 379. "Which do not continue, nor are not binding."—Ib., Vol. iii. p. 79. "It not being perceived directly no more than the air."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 331. "Let's be no Stoics, nor no stocks, I pray."—Shak., Shrew. "Where there is no marked nor peculiar character in the style."—Blair's Rhet., p. 175. "There can be no rules laid down, nor no manner recommended."—Sheridan's Lect., p. 163.
"Bates. 'He hath not told his thought to the king?' K. Henry. 'No; nor it is not meet he should.'"—Shak.
UNDER NOTE IX.—EVER AND NEVER.
"The prayer of Christ is more than sufficient both to strengthen us, be we never so weak; and to overthrow all adversary power, be it never so strong."—Hooker. "He is like to have no share in it, or to be ever the better for it."—Law and Grace, p. 23. "In some parts of Chili, it seldom or ever rains."—Willetts's Geog. "If Pompey shall but never so little seem to like it."—Walker's Particles, p. 346. "Latin: 'Si Pompeius paulum modò ostenderit sibi placere.' Cic. i, 5."—Ib. "Though never such a power of dogs and hunters pursue him."—Walker, ib. "Latin: 'Quamlibet magnâ canum et venantium urgente vi.' Plin. l. 18, c. 16."—Ib. "Though you be never so excellent."—Walker, ib. "Latin: 'Quantumvis licet excellas.' Cic. de Amic."—Ib. "If you do amiss never so little."—Walker, ib. "Latin: 'Si tantillum peccâssis.' Plaut. Rud. 4, 4"—Ib. "If we cast our eyes never so little down."—Walker, ib. "Latin: 'Si tantulum oculos dejecerimus.' Cic. 7. Ver."—Ib. "A wise man scorneth nothing, be it never so small or homely."—Book of Thoughts, p. 37. "Because they have seldom or ever an opportunity of learning them at all."—Clarkson's Prize-Essay, p. 170. "We seldom or ever see those forsaken who trust in God."—Atterbury.
"Where, playing with him at bo-peep,
He solved all problems, ne'er so deep."—Hudibras.
UNDER NOTE X.—OF THE FORM OF ADVERBS.
"One can scarce think that Pope was capable of epic or tragic poetry; but within a certain limited region, he has been outdone by no poet."—Blair's Rhet., p. 403. "I, who now read, have near finished this chapter."—Harris's Hermes, p. 82. "And yet, to refine our taste with respect to beauties of art or of nature, is scarce endeavoured in any seminary of learning."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. viii. "By the Numbers being confounded, and the Possessives wrong applied, the Passage is neither English nor Grammar."—Buchanan's Syntax, p. 123. "The letter G is wrong named jee."—Creighton's Dict., p. viii. "Last; Remember that in science, as in morals, authority cannot make right, what, in itself, is wrong."—O. B. Peirce's Gram., p. 194. "They regulate our taste even where we are scarce sensible of them."—Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 96. "Slow action, for example, is imitated by words pronounced slow."—Ib., ii, 257. "Sure, if it be to profit withal, it must be in order to save."—Barclay's Works, i, 366. "Which is scarce possible at best."—Sheridan's Elocution, p. 67. "Our wealth being near finished."—HARRIS: Priestley's Gram., p. 80.
CHAPTER IX.—CONJUNCTIONS.
The syntax of Conjunctions consists, not (as L. Murray and others erroneously teach) in "their power of determining the mood of verbs," or the "cases of nouns and pronouns," but in the simple fact, that they link together such and such terms, and thus "mark the connexions of human thought."—Beattie.
RULE XXII.—CONJUNCTIONS.
Conjunctions connect words, sentences, or parts of sentences: as, "Let there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we are brethren."—Gen., xiii, 8.
"Ah! if she lend not arms as well as rules.
What can she more than tell us we are fools?"—Pope.
EXCEPTION FIRST.
The conjunction that sometimes serves merely to introduce a sentence which is made the subject or the object of a finite verb;[433] as, "That mind is not matter, is certain."
"That you have wronged me, doth appear in this."—Shak.
"That time is mine, O Mead! to thee, I owe."—Young.
EXCEPTION SECOND.
When two corresponding conjunctions occur, in their usual order, the former should generally be parsed as referring to the latter, which is more properly the connecting word; as, "Neither sun nor stars in many days appeared."—Acts, xxvii, 20. "Whether that evidence has been afforded [or not,] is a matter of investigation."—Keith's Evidences, p. 18.
EXCEPTION THIRD. Either, corresponding to or, and neither, corresponding to nor or not, are sometimes transposed, so as to repeat the disjunction or negation at the end of the sentence; as, "Where then was their capacity of standing, or his either?"—Barclay's Works, iii, 359. "It is not dangerous neither."—Bolingbroke, on Hist., p. 135. "He is very tall, but not too tall neither."—Spect., No. 475.
OBSERVATIONS ON RULE XXII.
OBS. 1.—Conjunctions that connect particular words, generally join similar parts of speech in a common dependence on some other term. Hence, if the words connected be such as have cases, they will of course be in the same case; as, "For me and thee"—Matt., xvii, 27. "Honour thy father and thy mother."—Ib., xviii, 19. Here the latter noun or pronoun is connected by and to the former, and governed by the same preposition or verb. Conjunctions themselves have no government, unless the questionable phrase "than whom" may be reckoned an exception. See Obs. 17th below, and others that follow it.
OBS. 2.—Those conjunctions which connect sentences or clauses, commonly unite one sentence or clause to an other, either as an additional assertion, or as a condition, a cause, or an end, of what is asserted. The conjunction is placed between the terms which it connects, except there is a transposition, and then it stands before the dependent term, and consequently at the beginning of the whole sentence: as, "He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."—Heb., x, 9. "That he may establish the second, he taketh away the first."
OBS. 3.—The term that follows a conjunction, is in some instances a phrase of several words, yet not therefore a whole clause or member, unless we suppose it elliptical, and supply what will make it such: as, "And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, AS to the Lord, AND not unto men"—Col., iii, 23. If we say, this means, "as doing it to the Lord, and not as doing it unto men," the terms are still mere phrases; but if we say, the sense is, "as if ye did it to the Lord, and not as if ye did it unto men," they are clauses, or sentences. Churchill says, "The office of the conjunction is, to connect one word with an other, or one phrase with an other."—New Gram., p. 152. But he uses the term phrase in a more extended sense than I suppose it will strictly bear: he means by it, a clause, or member; that is, a sentence which forms a part of a greater sentence.
OBS. 4.—What is the office of this part of speech, according to Lennie, Bullions, Brace, Hart, Hiley, Smith, M'Culloch, Webster, Wells, and others, who say that it "joins words and sentences together," (see Errors on p. 434 of this work,) it is scarcely possible to conceive. If they imagine it to connect "words" on the one side, to "sentences" on the other; this is plainly absurd, and contrary to facts. If they suppose it to join sentence to sentence, by merely connecting word to word, in a joint relation; this also is absurd, and self-contradictory. Again, if they mean, that the conjunction sometimes connects word with word, and sometimes, sentence with sentence; this sense they have not expressed, but have severally puzzled their readers by an ungrammatical use of the word "and." One of the best among them says, "In the sentence, 'He and I must go,' the word and unites two sentences, and thus avoids an unnecessary repetition; thus instead of saying, 'He must go,' 'I must go,' we connect the words He, I, as the same thing is affirmed of both, namely, must go."—Hiley's Gram., p. 53. Here is the incongruous suggestion, that by connecting words only, the conjunction in fact connects sentences; and the stranger blunder concerning those words, that "the same thing is affirmed of both, namely, [that they] must go." Whereas it is plain, that nothing is affirmed of either: for "He and I must go," only affirms of him and me, that "we must go." And again it is plain, that and here connects nothing but the two pronouns; for no one will say, that, "He and I must go together" is a compound sentence, capable of being resolved into two simple sentences; and if, "He and I must go," is compound because it is equivalent to, "He must go, and I must go;" so is, "We must go," for the same reason, though it has but one nominative and one verb. "He and I were present," is rightly given by Hiley as an example of two pronouns connected together by and. (See his Gram., p. 105.) But, of verbs connected to each other, he absurdly supposes the following to be examples: "He spake, and it was done."—"I know it, and I can prove it."—"Do you say so, and can you prove it?"—Ib. Here and connects sentences, and not particular words.
OBS. 5.—Two or three conjunctions sometimes come together; as, "What rests, but that the mortal sentence pass?"—Milton. "Nor yet that he should offer himself often."—Heb., ix, 25. These may be severally parsed as "connecting what precedes and what follows," and the observant reader will not fail to notice, that such combinations of connecting particles are sometimes required by the sense; but, since nothing that is needless, is really proper, conjunctions should not be unnecessarily accumulated: as, "But AND if that evil servant say in his heart," &c.—Matt., xxiv, 48. Greek, "[Greek: Ean de eipæ o kakos donlos ekeinos,]" &c. Here is no and. "But AND if she depart."—1 Cor., vii, 11. This is almost a literal rendering of the Greek, "[Greek: Ean de kai choristhæ.]"—yet either but or and is certainly useless. "In several cases," says Priestley, "we content ourselves, now, with fewer conjunctive particles than our ancestors did [say used]. Example: 'So AS that his doctrines were embraced by great numbers.' Universal Hist., Vol. 29, p. 501. So that would have been much easier, and better."—Priestley's Gram., p. 139. Some of the poets have often used the word that as an expletive, to fill the measure of their verse; as,
"When that the poor have cried, Cæsar hath wept."—Shakspeare.
"If that he be a dog, beware his fangs."—Id.
"That made him pine away and moulder,
As though that he had been no soldier."—Butler's Poems, p. 164.
OBS. 6.—W. Allen remarks, that, "And is sometimes introduced to engage our attention to a following word or phrase; as, 'Part pays, and justly, the deserving steer.' [Pope.] 'I see thee fall, and by Achilles' hand.' [Id.]"—Allen's E. Gram., p. 184. The like idiom, he says, occurs in these passages of Latin: "'Forsan et hæc olim meminisse juvabit.' Virg. 'Mors et fugacem persequitur virum.' Hor."—Allen's Gram., p. 184. But it seems to me, that and and et are here regular connectives. The former implies a repetition of the preceding verb: as, "Part pays, and justly pays, the deserving steer."—"I see thee fall, and fall by Achilles' hand." The latter refers back to what was said before: thus, "Perhaps it will also hereafter delight you to recount these evils."—"And death pursues the man that flees." In the following text, the conjunction is more like an expletive; but even here it suggests an extension of the discourse then in progress: "Lord, and what shall this man do?"—John, xxi, 21. "[Greek: Kurie, outos de ti;]"—"Domine, hic autem quid?"—Beza.
OBS. 7.—The conjunction as often unites words that are in apposition, or in the same case; as, "He offered himself AS a journeyman."—"I assume it AS a fact."—Webster's Essays, p. 94. "In an other example of the same kind, the earth, AS a common mother, is animated to give refuge against a father's unkindness."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol ii, p. 168. "And then to offer himself up AS a sacrifice and propitiation for them."—Scougal, p. 99. So, likewise, when an intransitive verb takes the same case after as before it, by Rule 6th; as, "Johnson soon after engaged AS usher in a school."—L. Murray. "He was employed AS usher." In all these examples, the case that follows as, is determined by that which precedes. If after the verb "engaged" we supply himself, usher becomes objective, and is in apposition with the pronoun, and not in agreement with Johnson: "He engaged himself as usher." One late writer, ignorant or regardless of the analogy of General Grammar, imagines this case to be an "objective governed by the conjunction as," according to the following rule: "The conjunction as, when it takes the meaning of for, or in the character of, governs the objective case; as, Addison, as a writer of prose, is highly distinguished."—J. M. Putnam's Gram., p. 113. S. W. Clark, in his grammar published in 1848, sets as in his list of prepositions, with this example: "'That England can spare from her service such men as HIM.'—Lord Brougham."—Clark's Practical Gram., p. 92. And again: "When the second term of a Comparison of equality is a Noun, or Pronoun, the Preposition AS is commonly used. Example—'He hath died to redeem such a rebel as ME.'—Wesley." Undoubtedly, Wesley and Brougham here erroneously supposed the as to connect words only, and consequently to require them to be in the same case, agreeably to OBS. 1st, above; but a moment's reflection on the sense, should convince any one, that the construction requires the nominative forms he and I, with the verbs is and am understood.
OBS. 8.—The conjunction as may also be used between an adjective or a participle and the noun to which the adjective or participle relates; as, "It does not appear that brutes have the least reflex sense of actions AS distinguished from events; or that will and design, which constitute the very nature of actions AS such, are at all an object of their perception."—Butler's Analogy, p. 277.
OBS. 9.—As frequently has the force of a relative pronoun, and when it evidently sustains the relation of a case, it ought to be called, and generally is called, a pronoun, rather than a conjunction; as, "Avoid such as are vicious,"—Anon. "But as many as received him," &c.—John, i, 12. "We have reduced the terms into as small a number as was consistent with perspicuity and distinction."—Brightland's Gram., p. ix. Here as represents a noun, and while it serves to connect the two parts of the sentence, it is also the subject of a verb. These being the true characteristics of a relative pronoun, it is proper to refer the word to that class. But when a clause or a sentence is the antecedent, it is better to consider the as a conjunction, and to supply the pronoun it, if the writer has not used it; as, "He is angry, as [it] appears by this letter." Horne Tooke says, "The truth is, that AS is also an article; and (however and whenever used in English) means the same as It, or That, or Which."—Diversions of Purley, Vol. i, p. 223. But what definition he would give to "an article," does not appear.
OBS. 10.—In some examples, it seems questionable whether as ought to be reckoned a pronoun, or ought rather to be parsed as a conjunction after which a nominative is understood; as, "He then read the conditions as follow."—"The conditions are as follow."—Nutting's Gram., p. 106. "The principal evidences on which this assertion is grounded, are as follow."—Gurney's Essays, p. 166. "The Quiescent verbs are as follow."—Pike's Heb. Lex., p. 184. "The other numbers are duplications of these, and proceed as follow"—Dr. Murray's Hist. of Lang., Vol. ii, p. 35. "The most eminent of the kennel are bloodhounds, which lead the van, and are as follow."—Steele, Tattler, No. 62. "His words are as follow."—Spect., No. 62. "The words are as follow."—Addison, Spect., No. 513. "The objections that are raised against it as a tragedy, are as follow."—Gay, Pref. to What d' ye call it. "The particulars are as follow."—Bucke's Gram., p. 93. "The principal interjections in English are as follow."—Ward's Gram., p. 81. In all these instances, one may suppose the final clause to mean, "as they here follow;"—or, supposing as to be a pronoun, one may conceive it to mean, "such as follow." But some critical writers, it appears, prefer the singular verb, "as follows" Hear Campbell: "When a verb is used impersonally, it ought undoubtedly to be in the singular number, whether the neuter pronoun be expressed or understood: and when no nominative in the sentence can regularly be construed with the verb, it ought to be considered as impersonal. For this reason, analogy as well as usage favour [say favours] this mode of expression, 'The conditions of the agreement were as follows;' and not 'as follow.' A few late writers have inconsiderately adopted this last form through a mistake of the construction. For the same reason we ought to say, 'I shall consider his censures so far only as concerns my friend's conduct;' and not 'so far as concern.'"—Philosophy of Rhet., p. 229. It is too much to say, at least of one of these sentences, that there is no nominative with which the plural verb can be regularly construed. In the former, the word as may be said to be a plural nominative; or, if we will have this to be a conjunction, the pronoun they, representing conditions, may be regularly supplied, as above. In the latter, indeed, as is not a pronoun; because it refers to "so far," which is not a noun. But the sentence is bad English; because the verb concern or concerns is improperly left without a nominative. Say therefore, 'I shall consider his censures so far only as they concern my friend's conduct;'—or, 'so far only as my friend's conduct is concerned.' The following is an other example which I conceive to be wrong; because, with an adverb for its antecedent, as is made a nominative: "They ought therefore to be uttered as quickly as is consistent with distinct articulation."—Sheridan's Elocution, p. 76. Say rather, "They ought therefore to be uttered with as much rapidity as is consistent with distinct articulation."
OBS. 11.—Lindley Murray was so much puzzled with Tooke's notion of as, and Campbell's doctrine of the impersonal verb, that he has expressly left his pupils to hesitate and doubt, like himself, whether one ought to say "as follows" or "as follow," when the preceding noun is plural; or—to furnish an alternative, (if they choose it,) he shows them at last how they may dodge the question, by adopting some other phraseology. He begins thus: "Grammarians differ in opinion, respecting the propriety of the following modes of expression: 'The arguments advanced were nearly as follows;' 'the positions were, as appears, incontrovertible.'"— Murray's Gram., 8vo, p. 146. Then follows a detail of suggestions from Campbell and others, all the quotations being anonymous, or at least without definite references. Omitting these, I would here say of the two examples given, that they are not parallel instances. For, "as follows," refers to what the arguments were,—to the things themselves, considered plurally, and immediately to be exhibited; wherefore the expression ought rather to have been, "as follow," or, "as they here follow." But, "as appears" means "as it appears," or "as the case now appears;" and one of these plain modes of expression would have been much preferable, because the as is here evidently nothing but a conjunction.
OBS. 12.—"The diversity of sentiment on this subject," says L. Murray, "and the respectability of the different opponents, will naturally induce the readers to pause and reflect, before they decide."—Octavo Gram., p. 147. The equivalent expressions by means of which he proposes to evade at last the dilemma, are the following: "The arguments advanced were nearly such as follow;"—"The arguments advanced were nearly of the following nature;"—"The following are nearly the arguments which were advanced;"— "The arguments advanced were nearly those which follow:"—"These, or nearly these, were the arguments advanced;"—"The positions were such as appear incontrovertible;"—"It appears that the positions were incontrovertible;" —"That the positions were incontrovertible, is apparent;"—"The positions were apparently incontrovertible;"—"In appearance, the positions were incontrovertible."—Ibid. If to shun the expression will serve our turn, surely here are ways enough! But to those who "pause and reflect" with the intention to decide, I would commend the following example: "Reconciliation was offered, on conditions as moderate as were consistent with a permanent union."—Murray's Key, under Rule 1. Here Murray supposes "was" to be wrong, and accordingly changes it to "were," by the Rule, "A verb must agree with its nominative case in number and person." But the amendment is a pointed rejection of Campbell's "impersonal verb," or verb which "has no nominative;" and if the singular is not right here, the rhetorician's respectable authority vouches only for a catalogue of errors. Again, if this verb must be were in order to agree with its nominative, it is still not clear that as, is, or ought to be, the nominative; because the meaning may perhaps be better expressed thus:—"on conditions as moderate as any that were consistent with a permanent union."
OBS. 13.—A late writer expresses his decision of the foregoing question thus: "Of all the different opinions on a grammatical subject, which have arisen in the literary world, there scarcely appears one more indefensible than that of supposing as follows to be an impersonal verb, and to be correctly used in such sentences as this. 'The conditions were as follows.' Nay, we are told that, "A few late writers have adopted this form, 'The conditions were as follow,' inconsiderately;" and, to prove this charge of inconsiderateness, the following sentence is brought forward: 'I shall consider his censure [censures is the word used by Campbell and by Murray] so far only as concern my friend's conduct.' which should be, it is added, 'as concerns, and not as concern.' If analogy, simplicity, or syntactical authority, is of any value in our resolution of the sentence, 'The conditions were as follows,' the word as is as evident a relative as language can afford. It is undoubtedly equivalent to that or which, and relates to its antecedent those or such understood, and should have been the nominative to the verb follow; the sentence, in its present form, being inaccurate. The second sentence is by no means a parallel one. The word as is a conjunction; and though it has, as a relative, a reference to its antecedent so, yet in its capacity of a mere conjunction, it cannot possibly be the nominative case to any verb. It should be, 'it concerns.' Whenever as relates to an adverbial antecedent; as in the sentence, 'So far as it concerns me,' it is merely a conjunction; but when it refers to an adjective antecedent; as in the sentence, 'The business is such as concerns me;' it must be a relative, and susceptible of case, whether its antecedent is expressed or understood; being, in fact, the nominative to the verb concerns."—Nixon's Parser, p. 145. It will be perceived by the preceding remarks, that I do not cite what is here said, as believing it to be in all respects well said, though it is mainly so. In regard to the point at issue, I shall add but one critical authority more: "'The circumstances were as follows.' Several grammarians and critics have approved this phraseology: I am inclined, however, to concur with those who prefer 'as follow.'"—Crombie, on Etym. and Synt., p. 388.
OBS. 14.—The conjunction that is frequently understood; as, "It is seldom [that] their counsels are listened to."—Robertson's Amer., i, 316. "The truth is, [that] grammar is very much neglected among us."—Lowth's Gram., Pref., p. vi. "The Sportsman believes [that] there is Good in his Chace [chase.]"—Harris's Hermes, p. 296.
"Thou warnst me [that] I have done amiss;
I should have earlier looked to this."—Scott.
OBS. 15.—After than or as, connecting the terms of a comparison, there is usually an ellipsis of some word or words. The construction of the words employed may be seen, when the ellipsis is supplied; as, "They are stronger than we" [are.]—Numb., xiii. 31. "Wisdom is better than weapons of war" [are.]—Eccl., ix, 18. "He does nothing who endeavours to do more than [what] is allowed to humanity."—Dr. Johnson. "My punishment is greater than [what] I can bear."—Gen., iv, 13. "Ralph gave him more than I" [gave him.]—Churchill's Gram., p. 351. "Ralph gave him more than [he gave] me."—Ibid. "Revelation, surely, was never intended for such as he" [is.]—Campbell's Four Gospels, p. iv. "Let such as him sneer if they will."—Liberator, Vol. ix, p. 182. Here him ought to be he, according to Rule 2d, because the text speaks of such as he is or was. "'You were as innocent of it as me:' 'He did it as well as me.' In both places it ought to be I: that is, as I was, as I did."—Churchill's Gram., p. 352.
"Rather let such poor souls as you and I
Say that the holidays are drawing nigh."—Swift.
OBS. 16.—The doctrine above stated, of ellipses after than and as, proceeds on the supposition that these words are conjunctions, and that they connect, not particular words merely, but sentences, or clauses. It is the common doctrine of nearly all our grammarians, and is doubtless liable to fewer objections than any other theory that ever has been, or ever can be, devised in lieu of it. Yet as is not always a conjunction; nor, when it is a conjunction, does it always connect sentences; nor, when it connects sentences, is there always an ellipsis; nor, when there is an ellipsis, is it always quite certain what that ellipsis is. All these facts have been made plain, by observations that have already been bestowed on the word: and, according to some grammarians, the same things may severally be affirmed of the word than. But most authors consider than to be always a conjunction, and generally, if not always, to connect sentences. Johnson and Webster, in their dictionaries, mark it for an adverb; and the latter says of it, "This word signifies also then, both in English and Dutch."—Webster's Amer. Dict., 8vo, w. Than. But what he means by "also," I know not; and surely, in no English of this age, is than equivalent to then, or then to than. The ancient practice of putting then for than, is now entirely obsolete;[434] and, as we have no other term of the same import, most of our expositors merely explain than as "a particle used in comparison."—Johnson, Worcester, Maunder. Some absurdly define it thus: "THAN, adv. Placed in comparison."—Walker, (Rhym. Dict.,) Jones, Scott. According to this definition, than would be a participle! But, since an express comparison necessarily implies a connexion between different terms, it cannot well be denied that than is a connective word; wherefore, not to detain the reader with any profitless controversy, I shall take it for granted that this word is always a conjunction. That it always connects sentences, I do not affirm; because there are instances in which it is difficult to suppose it to connect anything more than particular words: as, "Less judgement than wit is more sail than ballast."—Penn's Maxims. "With no less eloquence than freedom. 'Pari eloquentiâ ac libertate.' Tacitus."—Walker's Particles, p. 200. "Any comparison between these two classes of writers, cannot be other than vague and loose."—Blair's Rhet., p. 347. "This far more than compensates all those little negligences."—Ib., p. 200.
"Remember Handel? Who that was not born
Deaf as the dead to harmony, forgets,
Or can, the more than Homer of his age?"—Cowper.
OBS. 17.—When any two declinable words are connected by than or as, they are almost always, according to the true idiom of our language, to be put in the same case, whether we suppose an ellipsis in the construction of the latter, or not; as, "My Father is greater than I."—Bible. "What do ye more than others?"—Matt., v, 47. "More men than women were there."—Murray's Gram., p. 114. "Entreat him as a father, and the younger men as brethren."—1 Tim., v, 1. "I would that all men were even as I myself."—1 Cor., vii, 7. "Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?"—John, xxi, 15. This last text is manifestly ambiguous; so that some readers will doubt whether it means—"more than thou lovest these," or—"more than these love me." Is not this because there is an ellipsis in the sentence, and such a one as may be variously conceived and supplied? The original too is ambiguous, but not for the same reason: "[Greek: Simon Iona, agapas me pleion touton];"—And so is the Latin of the Vulgate and of Montanus: "Simon Jona, diligis me plus his?" Wherefore Beza expressed it differently: "Simon fili Jonæ, diligis me plus quâm hi?" The French Bible has it: "Simon, fils de Jona, m'aimes-tu plus que ne font ceux-ci?" And the expression in English should rather have been, "Lovest thou me more than do these?"
OBS. 18.—The comparative degree, in Greek, is said to govern the genitive case; in Latin, the ablative: that is, the genitive or the ablative is sometimes put after this degree without any connecting particle corresponding to than, and without producing a compound sentence. We have examples in the phrases, "[Greek: pleion touton]" and "plus his," above. Of such a construction our language admits no real example; that is, no exact parallel. But we have an imitation of it in the phrase than whom, as in this hackneyed example from Milton:
"Which, when Beëlzebub perceived, than whom,
Satan except, none higher sat," &c.—Paradise Lost, B. ii, l. 300.
The objective, whom, is here preferred to the nominative, who, because the Latin ablative is commonly rendered by the former case, rather than by the latter: but this phrase is no more explicable according to the usual principles of English grammar, than the error of putting the objective case for a version of the ablative absolute. If the imitation is to be judged allowable, it is to us a figure of syntax—an obvious example of Enallagè, and of that form of Enallagè, which is commonly called Antiptosis, or the putting of one case for an other.
OBS. 19.—This use of whom after than has greatly puzzled and misled our grammarians; many of whom have thence concluded that than must needs be, at least in this instance, a preposition,[435] and some have extended the principle beyond this, so as to include than which, than whose with its following noun, and other nominatives which they will have to be objectives; as, "I should seem guilty of ingratitude, than which nothing is more shameful." See Russell's Gram., p. 104. "Washington, than whose fame naught earthly can be purer."—Peirce's Gram., p. 204. "You have given him more than I. You have sent her as much as he."—Buchanan's Eng. Syntax, p. 116. These last two sentences are erroneously called by their author, "false syntax;" not indeed with a notion that than and as are prepositions, but on the false supposition that the preposition to must necessarily be understood between them and the pronouns, as it is between the preceding verbs and the pronouns him and her. But, in fact, "You have given him more than I," is perfectly good English; the last clause of which plainly means—"more than I have given him." And, "You have sent her as much as he," will of course be understood to mean—"as much as he has sent her;" but here, because the auxiliary implied is different from the one expressed, it might have been as well to have inserted it: thus, "You have sent her as much as he has." "She reviles you as much as he," is also good English, though found, with the foregoing, among Buchanan's examples of "false syntax."
OBS. 20.—Murray's twentieth Rule of syntax avers, that, "When the qualities of different things are compared, the latter noun or pronoun is not governed by the conjunction than or as, but agrees with the verb," &c.—Octavo Gram., p. 214; Russell's Gram., 103; Bacon's, 51; Alger's, 71; Smith's, 179; Fisk's, 138. To this rule, the great Compiler and most of his followers say, that than whom "is an exception." or "seems to form an exception;" to which they add, that, "the phrase is, however, avoided by the best modern writers."—Murray, i, 215. This latter assertion Russell conceives to be untrue: the former he adopts; and, calling than whom "an exception to the general rule," says of it, (with no great consistency,) "Here the conjunction than has certainly the force of a preposition, and supplies its place by governing the relative."—Russell's Abridgement of Murray's Gram., p. 104. But this is hardly an instance to which one would apply the maxim elsewhere adopted by Murray: "Exceptio probat regulam."—Octavo Gram., p. 205. To ascribe to a conjunction the governing power of a preposition, is a very wide step, and quite too much like straddling the line which separates these parts of speech one from the other.
OBS. 21.—Churchill says, "If there be no ellipsis to supply, as sometimes happens when a pronoun relative occurs after than; the relative is to be put in the objective case absolute: as, 'Alfred, than whom a greater king never reigned, deserves to be held up as a model to all future sovereigns.'"—New Gram., p. 153. Among his Notes, he has one with reference to this "objective case absolute," as follows: "It is not governed by the conjunction, for on no other occasion does a conjunction govern any case; or by any word understood, for we can insert no word, or words, that will reconcile the phrase with any other rule of grammar: and if we employ a pronoun personal instead of the relative, as he, which will admit of being resolved elliptically, it must be put in the nominative case."—Ib., p. 352. Against this gentleman's doctrine, one may very well argue, as he himself does against that of Murray, Russell, and others; that on no other occasion do we speak of putting "the objective case absolute;" and if, agreeably to the analogy of our own tongue, our distinguished authors would condescend to say than who,[436] surely nobody would think of calling this an instance of the nominative case absolute,—except perhaps one swaggering new theorist, that most pedantic of all scoffers, Oliver B. Peirce.
OBS. 22.—The sum of the matter is this: the phrase, than who, is a more regular and more analogical expression than than whom; but both are of questionable propriety, and the former is seldom if ever found, except in some few grammars; while the latter, which is in some sort a Latinism, may be quoted from many of our most distinguished writers. And, since that which is irregular cannot be parsed by rule, if out of respect to authority we judge it allowable, it must be set down among the figures of grammar; which are, all of them, intentional deviations from the ordinary use of words. One late author treats the point pretty well, in this short hint: "After the conjunction than, contrary to analogy, whom is used in stead of who."—Nutting's Gram., p. 106. An other gives his opinion in the following note: "When who immediately follows than, it is used improperly in the objective case; as, 'Alfred, than whom a greater king never reigned;'—than whom is not grammatical. It ought to be, than who; because who is the nominative to was understood.—Than whom is as bad a phrase as 'he is taller than him.' It is true that some of our best writers have used than whom; but it is also true, that they have used other phrases which we have rejected as ungrammatical; then why not reject this too?"—Lennie's Grammar, Edition of 1830, p. 105.
OBS. 23.—On this point. Bullions and Brace, two American copyists and plagiarists of Lennie, adopt opposite notions. The latter copies the foregoing note, without the last sentence; that is, without admitting that "than whom" has ever been used by good writers. See Brace's Gram., p. 90. The former says, "The relative usually follows than in the objective case, even when the nominative goes before; as, 'Alfred, than whom a greater king never reigned.' This anomaly it is difficult to explain. Most probably, than, at first had the force of a preposition, which it now retains only when followed by the relative."—Bullions, E. Gram., of 1843, p. 112. Again: "A relative after than is put in the objective case; as, 'Satan, than whom none higher sat.' This anomaly has not been satisfactorily explained. In this case, some regard than as a preposition. It is probably only a case of simple enallagé"—Bullions, Analyt. and Pract. Gram., of 1849, p. 191. Prof. Fowler, in his great publication, of 1850, says of this example, "The expression should be, Satan, than who None higher sat."—Fowler's E. Gram., §482, Note 2. Thus, by one single form of antiptosis, have our grammarians been as much divided and perplexed, as were the Latin grammarians by a vast number of such changes; and, since there were some among the latter, who insisted on a total rejection of the figure, there is no great presumption in discarding, if we please, the very little that remains of it in English.
OBS. 24.—Peirce's new theory of grammar rests mainly on the assumption, that no correct sentence ever is, or can be, in any wise, elliptical. This is one of the "Two GRAND PRINCIPLES" on which the author says his "work is based."—The Grammar, p. 10. The other is, that grammar cannot possibly be taught without a thorough reformation of its nomenclature, a reformation involving a change of most of the names and technical terms heretofore used for its elucidation. I do not give precisely his own words, for one half of this author's system is expressed in such language as needs to be translated into English in order to be generally understood; but this is precisely his meaning, and in words more intelligible. In what estimation he holds these two positions, may be judged from the following assertion: "Without these grand points, no work, whatever may be its pretensions, can be A GRAMMAR of the LANGUAGE."—Ib. It follows that no man who does not despise every other book that is called a grammar, can entertain any favourable opinion of Peirce's. The author however is tolerably consistent. He not only scorns to appeal, for the confirmation of his own assertions and rules, to the judgement or practice of any other writer, but counsels the learner to "spurn the idea of quoting, either as proof or for defence, the authority of any man." See p. 13. The notable results of these important premises are too numerous for detail even in this general pandect. But it is to be mentioned here, that, according to this theory, a nominative coming after than or as, is in general to be accounted a nominative absolute; that is, a nominative which is independent of any verb; or, (as the ingenious author himself expresses it,) "A word in the subjective case following another subjective, and immediately preceded by than, as, or not, may be used without an ASSERTER immediately depending on it for sense."—Peirce's Gram., p. 195. See also his "Grammatical Chart, Rule I, Part 2."