Part 59 (2/2)
See _Murray's Key_, R 13
OBS 6--The present tense of the subjunctive mood, and that of the indicative when preceded by _as soon as, after, before, till_, or _when_, is generally used with reference to future tiive him a serpent?”--_Matt_, vii, 10 ”If I _will_ that he _tarry_ till I _come_, what is that to thee? Follow thou me”--_John_, xxi, 22 ”When he _arrives_, I will send for you” The imperative ard to the giving of the coh what is commanded, must be done in the future, if done at all So the subjunctive may convey a present supposition of what the will of an other may make uncertain: as, ”If thou _count_ me therefore a partner, _receive_ him as myself”--_St Paul to Philemon_, 17 The perfect indicative, like the present, is sometimes used with reference to tiued before he _has walked_ a ht_ me thy statutes”--_Psal, in the which all that _are_ in the graves, shall hear his voice, and shall coood, unto the resurrection of life; and they that _have done_ evil, unto the resurrection of damnation”--_John_, v, 28
OBS 7--What is called the _present_ infinitive, can scarcely be said to express any particular time[234] It is usually dependent on an other verb, and therefore relative in time It may be connected with any tense of any mood: as, ”I _intend to do_ it; I _intended to do_ it; I _have intended to do_ it; I _had intended to do_ it;” &c For want of a better mode of expression, we often use the infinitive to denote futurity, especially when it seems to be taken adjectively; as, ”The time _to come_,”--”The world _to come_,”--”Rapture yet _to be_” This, sometimes with the aard addition of _about_, is the only substitute we have for the Latin future participle in _rus_, as _venturus, to co to Horne Tooke, (see _Diversions of Purley_, Vol ii, p 457,) is no fitter than that of our ancestors, who for this purpose used the sa_ after it, in lieu of the radical verb, which we choose to employ: as, ”Generacions of eddris, who shewide to you to fle fro wraththe _to coeneration of vipers! who hath warned you to flee froe_, ether abiden we another?”--_Matt_, xi, 3 Common Version: ”Art thou he that _should come_, or do we look for another?” ”Sotheli there the shi+p was _to puttyng out_ the charge”--_Dedis_, xxi, 3 Common Version: ”For there the shi+p was _to unlade_ her burden”--_Acts_, xxi, 3 Churchill, after changing the names of the two infinitive tenses to ”_Future i note: ”The tenses of the infinitive mood are usually termed _present_ and _preterperfect_: but this is certainly improper; for they are so completely future, that what is called the present tense of the infinitive mood is often employed simply to express futurity; as, 'The life _to come_'”--_New Gram_, p 249
OBS 8--The pluperfect tense, when used conditionally, in stead of expressing what actually _had taken place_ at a past time, almost always implies that the action thus supposed _never was perforative forests that the event _had occurred_: as, ”Lord, if thou _hadst been here_, my brother _had not died_”--_John_, xi, 32 ”If I _had not come_ and spoken unto them, they _had not had_ sin; but now they have no cloak for their sin”--_John_, xv, 22 ”If thou _hadst known_, even thou, at least in this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! But now they are hid from thine eyes”--_Luke_, xix, 42 The supposition is sometimes indicated by a mere transposition of the verb and its subject; in which case, the conjunction _if_ is omitted; as, ”_Had ye believed_ Moses, ye would have believed ht_ as wont, one thrust _Had laid_ De Wilton in the dust”--_Scott_
OBS 9--In the language of prophecy we find the past tenses very often substituted for the future, especially when the prediction is remarkably clear and specific Man is a creature of present knowledge only; but it is certain, that He who sees the end fro, has sos deep in futurity Thus the sacred seer who is esteemed the most eloquent of the ancient prophets, more than _seven hundred years_ before the events occurred, spoke of the vicarious sufferings of Christ as of things already past, and even then described they of historical facts: ”Surely he _hath borne_ our griefs, _and carried_ our sorrows: yet we _did esteem_ him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted But he _ounded_ for our transgressions; he _was bruised_ for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace _was_ upon him; and by his stripes we are healed”--_Isaiah_, liii, 4 and 5
Multiplied instances of a similar application of the past tenses to future events, occur in the Bible, especially in the writings of this prophet
PERSONS AND NUMBERS
The person and nurees with its subject or nominative
In each number, there are three persons; and in each person, two nuular_ _Plural_ 1st per I love, 1st per We love, 2d per Thou lovest, 2d per You love, 3d per He loves; 3d per They love
Definitions universally applicable have already been given of all these things; it is therefore unnecessary to define theain in this place
Where the verb is varied, the second person singular is regularly for _st_ or _est_ to the first person; and the third person singular, in like_s_ or _es_: as, I _see_, thou _seest_, he _sees_; I _give_, thou _givest_, he _gives_; I _go_, thou _goest_, he _goes_; I _fly_, thou _fliest_, he _flies_; I _vex_, thou _vexest_, he _vexes_; I _lose_, thou _losest_, he _loses_
Where the verb is not varied to denote its person and number, these properties are inferred from its subject or nominative: as, If I _love_, if thou _love_, if he _love_; if we _love_, if you _love_, if they _love_
OBSERVATIONS
OBS 1--It is considered a principle of Universal Graree with its subject or nominative in person and number Upon this principle, we ascribe to every such verb the person and number of the nominative word, whether the verb itself be literally modified by the relation or not The doctrine e in which the verbs have _any variations_ of this kind But suppose an instance, of a language in which all the verbs were entirely destitute of such inflections; the principle, as regards that language, must drop Finite verbs, in such a case, would still relate to their subjects, or noreeably to the sense; but they would certainly be rendered incapable of adding to this relation any agree to adjectives and participles in Latin and Greek, are rejected in English, and there re but a si to the sense And by the fashi+onable substitution of _you_ for _thou_, the concord of English verbs with their nominatives, is made to depend, in cole terminational _s_, which is used to mark one person of one number of one tense of oneus to the dropping of what is yet called a universal principle of graes, there are in each tense, through all the uish the different persons and numbers This will be well understood by every one who has ever glanced at the verbs as exhibited in any Latin, Greek, French, Spanish, or Italian graiven: (with the remark, that the Latin pronouns, here inserted, are seldoo amo_, I love; _Tu amas_, Thou lovest; _Ille amat_, He loves; _Nos amamus_, We love; _Vos amatis_, You love; _Illi amant_, They love” Hence it lish verb, is a very striking peculiarity of our language Whether we are gainers or losers by this simplicity, is a question for learned idleness to discuss The colish, have far less inclination to add new endings to our verbs, than to drop or avoid all the remains of the old Lowth and Murray tell us, ”This scanty provision of terminations _is sufficient_ for all the purposes of discourse;” and that, ”_For this reason_, the plural termination _en_, (they _loven_, they _weren_,) for been obsolete”--_Lowth's Grae, especially in common conversation, evidently inclines to drop or shun all unnecessary suffixes and inflections, still it is true, that the English verb in soree with, the different persons and nue is, however, principally confined to the second and third persons singular of the present tense of the indicative mood, and to the auxiliaries _hast_ and _has_ of the perfect In the ancient biblical style, now used only on soleuished through all the tenses of the indicative and potential moods
And as the use of the pronoun _thou_ is now mostly confined to the solemn style, the terminations of that style are retained in connexion with it, through all the following exaation of verbs In the plural nu, to denote the different persons; and the verb in the three persons plural, (with the two exceptions _are_ and _were_, froular Nor does the use of _you_ for the singular, warrant its connexion with any other than the plural fore and needless confusion of the nue it, a practical inconvenience It would doubtless have been much better, had _thou_ and _you_ still kept their respective places--the one, noular--the other, objective plural--as they appear in the Bible But as the English verb is always attended by a noun or a pronoun, expressing the subject of the affiruity arises frouish the different persons and nue, in its ordinary use, exhibits the verbs in such forether, but a very sie on earth, in which it would be so difficult for a learned grammarian to fix, settle, and exhibit, to the satisfaction of hims, rules, and exceptions, which are necessary for a full and just exhibition of this part of speech This difficulty is owing, partly to incompatibilities or unsettled boundaries between the solemn and the familiar style; partly to differences in the sae andclaims of new and old forms of the preterit and the perfect participle; partly to the conflicting notions of different gra the subjunctive mood; and partly to the blind tenacity hich ed derivatives, and prefer unutterable contractions to syamester, (1) ”_You dwell_ in a house which _you_ neither _planned_ nor _built_” A member of the Society of Friends would say, (2) ”_Thou dwellst_ in a house which _thou_ neither _planned_ nor _built_” Or, if not a scholar, as likely as not, (3) ”_Thee dwells_ in a house which _thee_ neither _planned_ nor _built_” The old or solemn style would b3, (4) ”_Thou dwellest_ in a house which _thou_ neither _plannedst_ nor _buildedst_” Sorammatical poet will have it, (5) ”_Thou dwell'st_ in halls _thou_ neither _plann'dst_ nor _build'dst_” The doctrine of Murray's Grammar, and of most others, would require, (6) ”_Thou dwellest_ in a house which _thou_ neither _plannedst_ nor _builtest_” Or, (according to this author'sunpleasant sounds,) the more complex form, (7) ”_Thou dost dwell_ in a house which _thou_ neither _didst plan_ nor _didst build_” Out of these an other poet will make the line, (8) ”_Dost dwell_ in halls which _thou_ nor _plann'dst_ nor _built'st_” An other, more tastefully, would drop the _st_ of the preterit, and contract the present, as in the second instance above: thus,
(9) ”_Thou dwellst_ in halls _thou_ neither _planned_ nor _built_, And _revelst_ there in riches won by guilt”
OBS 5--Now let all these nine different for, by the same verbs, in the same mood, and the same two tenses, be considered Let it also be noticed, that for these same verbs within these limits, there are yet other forms, of a co_;” used in lieu of, ”_Thou dost dwell_,” or, ”_Thou art dwelling_:” so, ”_You did plan_,” or, ”_You were planning_;” used in lieu of, ”_Thou didst plan_,” or, ”_Thou wast planning_” Take into the account the opinion of Dr Webster and others, that, ”_You was planning_,”
or, ”_You was building_,” is a still better forular nue, both here and in England”--_Improved Gram_, p 25 Add the less inaccurate practice of some, who use _was_ and _did_ fa, did thou build?_” Multiply all this variety tenfold, with a view to the other moods and tenses of these three verbs, _dwell, plan_, and _build_; then extend the product, whatever it is, frolish language You will thus begin to have so observation
But this is only a part of it; for all these things relate only to the second person singular of the verb The double question is, Which of these forht for that person and nuht to be censured and rejected as bad English? This question is perhaps as irammar With a few candid observations by way of illustration, it will be left to the judge_ and _thoutheeing_ appears to be this
Persons in high stations, being usually surrounded by attendants, it becao, a species of court flattery, to address individuals of this class, in the plural nu reatness was agreeably _an to think themselves insulted whenever they were addressed with any other than the plural pronoun[236] Huh fear of offence; and the practice extended, in time, to all ranks of society: so that at present the customary ether plural; both the verb and the pronoun being used in that form[237] This practice, which confounds one of the e, affords a striking instance of the power of fashi+on It has made propriety itself _seem_ improper But shall it be allowed, in the present state of things, to confound our conjugations and overturn our graular, that ment by it that multiplicity of other forms, which must either take this same place or be utterly rejected?
With due deference to those grammarians who have adopted one or the other of these methods, the author of this work answers all these questions decidedly in the negative It is not to be denied, that the use of the plural _for the singular_ is now so common as to form the _customary mode_ of address to individuals of every rank The Society of Friends, or Quakers, however, continue to eular number in familiar discourse; and custom, which has now destroyed the compliment of the plural, has reular, and placed it on an equality with the plural in point of respect The singular is universally eenerally preferred in poetry It is the language of Scripture, and of the Prayer-Book; and is consistently retained in nearly all our grah not always, perhaps, consistently treated
OBS 7--Whatever is fashi+onable in speech, the mere disciples of fashi+on will always approve; and, probably, they will think it justifiable to despise or neglect all that is otherwise These may be contented with the sole use of such forms of address as, ”_You, you, sir_;”--”_You, you, lect all the services of religion, as to forget that these are yet conducted in English independently of all this fashi+onable youyouing, s to their own justification, either as graents A fashi+on by virtue of which norance of that forue, is most appropriate to poetry, and alone adapted to prayer, is perhaps not quite so light a ine It is at least so far fro that forrammar, that indeed no better needs be offered for tenaciously retaining it Many children may thus learn at school what all should know, and what there is little chance for them to learn elsewhere Not all that presuion, are well acquainted hat is called the solerammars, do knohat it is A late work, which boasted the patronage of De Witt Clinton, and through the influence of false praise cah to be imposed by a law of New York on all the co subsequently sold in Philadelphia for a great price, was there republished under the na account of this part of graular, in both the above tenses, is thou; and the second person plural, is ye, _or you_ The verb, to agree with the second person singular, changes its ter Pres Tense, Thou walkest, _or Thou walketh_ Iular, _in the above styles_, the verb has sometimes _a different_ termination; as, Present Tense, He, she, or _it walks_ or walketh The _above form of inflection_ may be applied _to all verbs_ used in the solemn _or_ poetic _styles_; but for ordinary purposes, I have supposed it proper to employ the form of the verb, adopted in co minds”--_Bartlett's Common School Manual_, Part ii, p 114 What can be hoped froh to think ”_Thou walketh_” is good English? or from one who tells us, that ”_It walks_” is of the solemn style? or from one who does not know that _you_ is never a _nominative_ in the style of the Bible?
OBS 8--Nowhere on earth is fashi+on es of society, than in France Though the common French Bible still retains the fore is shorter and perhaps smoother than the plural; yet even that sacred book, or at least the New Testament, and that by different persons, has been translated into more fashi+onable French, and printed at Paris, and also at New York, with the form of address everywhere plural; as, ”Jesus anticipated his of the earth take taxes and tribute?'”--_Matt_, xvii, 24 ”And, going to prayers, they said, '0 Lord, _you who know_ the hearts of all men, shohich of these two _you have chosen_'”--_Acts_, i, 24 This is one step further in the progress of politeness, than has yet been taken in English
The French grammarians, however, as far as I can perceive, have never yet disturbed the ancient order of their conjugations and declensions, by inserting the plural verb and pronoun in place of the singular; and, in the familiarity of friendshi+p, or of domestic life, the practice which is deno_, is far land Also, in the prayers of the French, the second person singular appears to be yet generally preserved, as it is in those of the English and the Americans The less frequent use of it in the fa to the general impression, that it cannot be used with propriety, except in the solemn style Of this matter, those who have laid it aside thee for those who have not; or, if they ht to lay it aside The following lines are a sort of translation from Horace; and I submit it to the reader, whether it is comely for a Christian divine to be less reverent toward God, than a heathen poet; and whether the plural language here used, does not lack the reverence of the original, which is singular:--