Part 135 (1/2)
OBS 10--Of the verb LET By rammarians this verb has been erroneously called an _auxiliary_ of the optative n_ of the _optative_ h none deny, that it is sometimes also a principal verb It is, in fact, always a principal verb; because, asapply it, it is always transitive It cooverns an objective noun or pronoun, and also an infinitive without the sign _to_; as, ”Rise up, _let us go_”--_Mark_ ”Thou _shalt let it rest_”--_Exodus_
But sometimes the infinitive coalesces with it more nearly than the objective, so that the latter is placed after both verbs; as, ”The solution _lets go_ the _ood _part_ of that duration”--_Locke_ ”Back! on _your_ lives; _let_ be, said he, o_, is soo your hold_; and _let be_, for _let him be, let it be_, &c In such instances, therefore, the verb _let_ is not really intransitive This verb, even in the passive form, may have the infinitive after it without the preposition to; as, ”Nothing _is let slip_”--_Walker's English Particles_, p 165 ”They _were let go_ in peace”--_Acts_, xv, 33 ”The stage was never empty, nor the curtain _let fall_”--_Blair's Rhet_, p
459 ”The pye's question isely _let fall_ without a reply”--_L'Estrange_ With respect to other passives, Murray and Fisk appear to be right; and sometimes the preposition is used after this one: as, ”There's a letter for you, sir, if your name be Horatio, as I _am let to know_ it is”--_Shakspeare_ _Let_, when used intransitively, required the preposition _to_ before the following infinitive; as, ”He would not _let_ [i e _forbear_] _to counsel_ the king”--_Bacon_ But this use of _let_ is now obsolete
OBS 11--Of the verb MAKE This verb, like overns an infinitive, unless it also governs a noun or a pronoun which is the immediate _subject_ of such infinitive; as, ”You _h_”--_Webster's Spelling-Book_ ”Which soon _ _chap hasten_ down”--_Ib_ But in very many instances it is quite proper to insert the preposition where this verb is transitive; as, ”He _maketh_ both the deaf _to_ hear, and the dumb _to_ speak”--_Mark_, vii, 37 ”He _s”--_Blair's Rhet_, p 122; _Jamieson's_, 124 ”It is this that _makes_ the observance of the dramatic unities _to_ be of consequence”--_Blair's Rhet_, p 464 ”In _lish verb _to_ consist of principal and auxiliary”--_Murray's Gram_, p 76 ”When _ word after it, besides the sign of the infinitive; as,--I think he _will make out_ to pay his debts” Forovern the infinitive after _make_ or _made_; as, ”Lest I _make_ my brother _to_ offend”--_1 Cor_, viii, 13 ”He _made_text, it is omitted, even where the verb is meant to be _passive_: ”And it was lifted up from the earth, and _made stand_ upon the feet as a man”--_Dan_, vii, 4 This construction is iuity; because _stand_it There , where the insertion of the preposition leaves none in the construction; for _nify either _created_ or _compelled_, and the infinitive after it, may denote either the _purpose_ of creation, or the _effect_ of any temporary compulsion: as, ”We are _made to be serviceable_ to others”--_Murray's Key_, 8vo, p 167 ”Man _was made to mourn_”--_Burns_ ”Taste _was never made to cater_ for vanity”--_Blair_ The primitive word _make_ seldom, if ever, produces a construction that is thus equivocal The infinitive following it without _to_, always denotes the effect of the , and not the purpose of the maker; as, ”He _”--_North
Antiq_, p 81 But the sa may be conveyed when the _to_ is used; as,
”The fear of God is freedom, joy, and peace; And _makes_ all ills that vex us here _to_ cease”--_Waller_, p 56
OBS 12--Of the verb NEED I incline to think, that the word _need_, whenever it is rightly followed by the infinitive without _to_, is, in reality an _auxiliary_ of the potential mood; and that, like _may, can_, and _must_, it may properly be used, in both the present and the perfect tense, without personal inflection: as, ”He _need_ not _go_, He _need_ not _have gone_;” where, if _need_ is a principal verb, and governs the infinitive without _to_, the expressions o_, or, He _has_ not _needed go_” But none of these three forreeable; and the last two are never used Wherefore, in stead of placing in my code of false syntax the numerous exarammarians and critics has furnished me, I have exhibited hth and ninth observations on the Conjugation of Verbs; in which observations, the readerthe word _need_ to be sometimes an auxiliary and sometimes a principal verb Because no other author has yet intentionally recognized the propriety of this distinction, I have gone no farther than to shohat grounds, and hat authority froed If we adopt this distinction, perhaps it will be found that the regular or principal verb _need_ always requires, or, at least, always ad infinitive; as, ”They _need_ not _to_ be specially indicated”--_Adams's Rhet_, i, 302 ”We _need_ only _to_ re man _needed_ only _to_ ask himself,” &c--_Ib_, i, 117
”Nor is it conceivable toof a Des of a semiquaver”--_Ib_, ii, 226 ”But these people _need to_ be informed”--_Campbell's Rhet_, p 220 ”No man _needed_ less _to_ be informed”--_Ib_, p 175 ”We _need_ only _to_ mention the difficulty that arises”--_Kames, El of Crit_, ii, 362
”_Can_ there _need to_ be argument to prove so plain a point?”--_Graham's Lect_ ”Moral instruction _needs to_ have a more prominent place”--_Dr
Weeks_ ”Pride, ambition, and selfishness, _need to_ be restrained”--_Id_ ”Articles are sometimes omitted, where they _need to_ be used”--_Sanborn's Gram_, p 197 ”Whose power _needs_ not _to_ be dreaded”--_Wilson's Hebrew Gram_, p 93 ”A workman that _needeth_ not _to_ be ashamed”--_2 Tied according to the school syste variety consistent, _needs_ not _to_ disturb hient proof _needs_ not _to_ be introduced”--_Wright's Gram_, p 66 ”No person _needs to_ be inforle person”--_Wilcox's Gram_, p 19 ”I hope I _need_ not _to_ advise you further”--_Shak, All's Well_
”Nor me, nor other God, thou _needst to_ fear, For thou to all the heavenly host art dear”--_Congreve_
OBS 13--If _need_ is ever an auxiliary, the essential difference between an auxiliary and a principal verb, will very well account for the otherwise puzzling fact, that good writers sometimes inflect this verb, and sometimes do not; and that they sometimes use _to_ after it, and sorareat nue for the better On this principle, such examples as, ”He _need_ not _proceed_,” and ”He _needs_ not _to_ proceed,” h Murray, Croersoll, Smith, C Ada; and unanie,) prefer, ”He _needs_ not _proceed_”--_Murray's Key_, 8vo, p 180
OBS 14--On questions of graht, than the _dogrammarians_; but it is often difficult to decide well by either; because errors and contradictions abound in both
For exa of the persons represented by _I_ and _thou_,) ”Their sex _needs_ not _be_ es the work, and says, ”_needs_ not _to_ be marked”--_Gram of Rhet_, p 28 Dr Lowth also says, ”_needs_ not _be_ es the work, and says, ”_needs_ not _to_ be marked”--_New Gram_, p 72 Lindley Murray copies Lowth, and says, ”_needs_ not _be_ marked”--_Gram_, 12mo, 2d Ed, p 39; 23d Ed, p 51; and perhaps all other editions He afterwards enlarges his oork, and says, ”_needs_ not _to_ beto Greenleaf they all express the idea ungra, ”Their sex _need_ not _be marked_” See _Gram Simplified_, p 48
In the two places in which the etyy and the syntax of this verb are examined, I have cited from proper sources more than twenty examples in which _to_ is used after it, and more than twenty others in which the verb is not inflected in the third person singular In the latter, _need_ is treated as an auxiliary; in the forular construction If the principal verb _need_ can also govern the infinitive without _to_, as all our grammarians have supposed, then there is a third form which is unobjectionable, and my pupils may take their choice of the three But still there is a fourth forreat ure of thought _need_ not _to_ detort the words from their literal sense”--_J Q Adams's Lectures_, Vol ii, p 254
”Which a s immediately to evince”--_Clarkson's Prize-Essay on Slavery_, p 106
OBS 15--Webster and Greenleaf seem inclined to justify the use of _dare_, as well as of _need_, for the third person singular Their doctrine is this: ”In _popular practice_ it is used in the third person, without the personal ter, 'He _dares_ not do it;' WE _generally_ say, 'He _dare_ not do it' In like ular in its inflections; as, 'A man _needs_ more prudence' But _when intransitive_, it drops the personal terminations in the present tense, and is followed by a verb without the prefix _to_; as, 'A man _need_ not _be_ uneasy'”--_Greenleaf s Grammar Simplified_, p 38; _Webster's Philosophical Gram_, p 178; _Improved Gram_, 127 Each part of this explanation appears to me erroneous In _popular practice_, one shall oftener hear, ”He _dares n't_ do it,” or even, ”_You dares n't_ do it,” than, ”_He dare not_ do it” But it is only in the trained practice of the schools, that he shall ever hear, ”He _needs n't_ do it,” or, ”He _needs not_ do it” If _need_ is sometimes used without inflection, this peculiarity, or the disuse of _to_ before the subsequent infinitive, is not a necessary result of its ”_intransitive_” character And as to their latent _nominative_, ”whereof there _is_ no _account_,” or, ”whereof there _needs_ no _account_;” their _fact_, of which ”there _is_ no _evidence_,”
or of which ”there _needs_ no _evidence_;” I judge it a reh pretensions, could find, in these _transpositions_, a noinal note under Rule 14th, at p 570
OBS 16--Of the verb SEE This verb, whenever it governs the infinitive without _to_, governs also an objective noun or pronoun; as, ”_See me do_ it”--”I _saw him do_ it”--_Murray_ Whenever it is intransitive, the following infinitive overned by _to_; as, ”I _will see to have_ it done”--_Comly's Gram_, p 98; _Greenleaf's_, 38 ”How _could_ he _see to do_ the text, _see_ is transitive, and governs the infinitive; but the two verbs are put so far apart, that it requires some skill in the reader to make their relation apparent: ”When ye therefore _shall see_ the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, _stand_ in the holy place,” &c--_Matt_, xxiv, 15 An other scripturist uses the _participle_, and says--”_standing_ where it ought not,” &c--_Mark_, xiii, 14 The Greek word is the sa with the noun for _abomination_
Sometimes the preposition _to_ seems to be admitted on purpose to protract the expression: as,
”Tranio, I _saw_ her coral lips _to move_, And with her breath she did perfume the air”--_Shak_
OBS 17--A few other verbs, besides the eight which arerule and remarks, sometimes have the infinitive after theenerally_ oht others; namely, ”_find, have, help, an_, for _began_; and _sometimes_ after _behold_ and _know_”--_Elements of Gram_, p 167 Perhaps he may have found _some instances_ of the omission of the preposition after all these, but in ives a very unwarrantable extension to this ”irregularity,” as Murray calls it The usage belongs only to particular verbs, and to them not in all their applications Other verbs of the saeneral admit the same idiom But, by a license for the most part peculiar to the poets, the preposition _to_ is occasionally omitted, especially after verbs equivalent to those which exclude it; as, ”And _force_ them _sit_”--_Cowper's Task_, p 46 That is, ”And _ht_ or _cause_ in this manner, is a Scotticism: [as,] 'Won't you _cause_ theht_ not _walk_' SHAK”--_New Gram_, p 317 The verbs, _behold, view, observe, mark, watch_, and _spy_, are only other words for _see_; as, ”There ht you _behold_ one joy _crown_ an other”--_Shak_ ”There I sat, _viewing_ the silver strealide_ silently towards the te _fall_ from heaven”--_Luke_, x, 18
”Thy drowsy nurse hath sworn she did the to the room where thou didst lie”--_Milton_
------”Nor with less dread the loud Ethereal truan blow_”--_Id, P L_, vi, 60
OBS 18--After _have, help_, and _find_, the infinitive sometimes occurs without the preposition _to_, butobjects which ish to _have appear_ distinct”--_Kirkham's Gram_, p 222 ”Certainly, it is heaven upon earth, to _have_ a man's mind _move_ in charity, _rest_ in Providence, and _turn_ upon the poles of truth”--_Ld Bacon_ ”What wilt thou _have_ me _to_ do?”--_Acts_, ix, 6
”He will _have_ us _to_ acknowledge hial_, p 102 ”I _had to walk_ all the way”--_Lennie's Grao_ then? No”--_Walker's Particles_, p 248 According to Allen's rule, this question is auous; but the learned author explains it in Latin thus: ”Placet igitur eos _dimitti_? Minime” That is, ”Would you have them _dismissed_ then? No” Had he o then?” he would doubtless have said so Kirkha _help_ to Murray's list, enun of the infinitive; as, ”_Help_ ood writers sometimes use the particle _to_ after this verb; as, ”And Danby's matchless impudence _helped to_ support the knave”--DRYDEN: _Joh Dict, w Help_ Dr Priestley says, ”Itto the _Scotch_ idiom that Mrs Macaulay omits it after the verb _help_: 'To _help carry_ on the new measures of the court' _History_, Vol iv, p
150”--_Priestley's Gram_, p 133 ”You will _find_ the difficulty _disappear_ in a short tilish Gram_, -- 16 ”We shall always _find_ this distinction _obtain_”--_Blair's Rhet_, p 245 Here the preposition _to_ ht have been inserted with propriety Without it, a plural noun will render the construction equivocal The sentence, ”You will find the _difficulties disappear_ in a short time,” will probably be understood to mean, ”You will find _that_ the difficulties disappear in a short time” ”I do not _find_ him _reject_ his authority”--_Johnson's Graht as well have been inserted But, as this use of the infinitive is a sort of Latinism, some critics would choose to say, ”I do not find _that he rejects_ his authority” ”Cyrus was extreion”--_Rollin_, ii, 117 Here the infinitive may be varied either by the participle or by the indicative; as, ”to find _the_,” or, ”to find _they had_” Of the three expressions, the last, I think, is rather the best