Part 287 (1/2)
Bullions encu with such a series of etyical questions and answers as cannot but est, and most tireso any word syntactically, ”_should be requested to assign a reason for every thing contained in his statement!_”--_Principles of E Grammar_, p 131 And the teacher is to ask questions as nu of a text-book which has been pronounced ”superior to any other, for use in our coe, and _available for every purpose_ for which Mr
Brown's can possibly be used”--_Ralph K Finch's Report_, p, 12
[63] There are er, who seem not to have observed the import of _after_ and _before_ in connexion with the tenses Dr Bullions, on page 139th of his English Gra example from Lennie, who took it frorammarians of more than ordinary tact, have been obviously misled by the false criticism above cited One of Hiley's Rules of Syntax, with its illustration, stands thus: ”In _the use of the different tenses_, we must particularly _observe to use that tense_ which clearly and properly conveys the sense intended; thus, instead of saying, 'After I _visited_ Europe, I returned to America;' we should say, 'After I _had visited_ Europe, I returned to Aht it needful to comment thus: ”'After I _visited_ Europe, I returned to Aht to be _had visited_, because the action _implied_ by the verb _visited_ WAS COMPLETED _before_ the other past action _returned_”--_Ib_, p 91 See nearly the sa in _Wells's School Grammar, 1st Edition_, p 151; but his later editions are wisely altered Since ”_visited_ and _was cou, proves the fore needless, or perhaps worse than needless ”I _visited_ Europe _before_ I _returned_ to America,” or, ”I _visited_ Europe, _and afterwards returned_ to Ae of tense; yet here too we see the _visiting_ ”_was completed before_” the return, or HAD BEEN COMPLETED _at the time_ of the return I say, ”The Pluperfect Tense is that which expresses what _had taken_ place _at_ some past time mentioned: as, 'I _had seen_ him, _when_ I met you'” Murray says, ”The Pluperfect Tense represents a _thing_ not only as past, but also as prior to some _other point of time_ specified in the sentence: as, I _had finished_ my letter _before_ he arrived” Hiley says, ”The _Past-Perfect_ expresses an action or event which _was past before_ some _other past action or event_ mentioned in the sentence, _and to which_ it refers; as, I _had finished_ my lessons _before_ he ca similar It seems to me, that these last two definitions, and their example too, are bad; because by the help of _before_ or _after_, ”_the past before the past_” _may_ be clearly expressed by the _simple past tense_: as, ”I _finished_ my letter _before_ he _arrived_”--”I _finished_ my lessons _before_ he _came_” ”He _arrived_ soon _after_ I _finished_ the letter”--”Soon _after_ it _was corammar is briefly described in the third chapter of this introduction, boldly lays the blae itself_; and even conceives, that a ritten and faultless graood one, because it will not accord with that reasonless juently he laboured to perfect his work, and hat zeal for truth and accuracy,citation: ”The truth is, after all _which_ can be done to render the definitions and rules of grammar comprehensive and accurate, they will still be found, when critically exa and science, _more_ or _less_ exceptionable _These exceptions and imperfections_ are the unavoidable consequence of the _ie as well as every thing else _of human invention_, will always be _irara writes it for a perfect language; and a perfect language will not be constructed, until _sorammatical principles and systems which are not _perfect_ are _exceptionable_”--_Kirkhae remarks, and the palliation they afford to the multitudinous defects of the book which contains theement of the reader
[65] The phrase _complex ideas_, or _compound ideas_, has been used for the notions which we have of things consisting of different parts, or having various properties, so as to embrace some sort of plurality: thus our ideas of _all bodies_ and _classes of things_ are said to be complex or compound
_Simple ideas_ are those in which the mind discovers no parts or plurality: such are the ideas of _heat, cold, blueness, redness, pleasure, pain, volition_, &c But some writers have contended, that the _composition of ideas_ is a fiction; and that all the coeneral term_ in lieu of many particular ones Locke is on one side of this debate, Horne Tooke, on the other
[66] Dilworth appears to have had a true _idea_ of the thing, but he does not express it as a definition; ”Q Is _an_ Unit of one, a Number? A _An_ Unit is a number, _because it may properly answer the question how many!_”--_Schoolmaster's assistant_, p 2 A nuras The _plural_ number, as _men_ or _horses_, does not tell _how ular_ rammar says it does The _plural_ nuular_ ”The _Productive Systeular_ mean? It means _one_”--S that so great a rammarians could have been so blindly misled, as they have been, in this ood definition of a Letter was both published and republished, about the time at which Lowth's first appeared: viz, ”What is a letter? A Letter is the Sign, Mark, or Character of a simple or uncompounded Sound Are Letters Sounds? No Letters are only the Signs or Symbols of Sounds, not the Sounds themselves”--_The British Grae of _Buchanan's ”English Syntax_,” a hich was published as early as 1767
[68] In Murray's octavo Grammar, this word is _the_ in the first chapter, and _their_ in the second; in the duodecimo, it is _their_ in both places
[69] ”The _definitions_ and the _rules_ throughout the Grammar, are expressed with neatness and perspicuity They are as short and comprehensive as the nature of the subject would ad and thepersons”--_Life of L Murray_, p 245 ”It e in every part of the work, is simple, correct, and perspicuous”--_Ib_, p 246
[70] For this definition, see _Murray's Graer's_, 18; _Bacon's_, 15; _Frost's_, 8, _Ingersoll's_, 17; _A Teacher's_, 8; _Maltby's_, 14; _T H Miller's_, 20; _Pond's_, 18; _S Putnam's_, 15; _Russell's_, 11; _Merchant's Murray_, 25; and _Worcester's Univ and Crit Dictionary_ Many other grammarians have attempted to define number; hat success a few examples will show: (1) ”Number is the distinction of one from many”--_W Allen's Gram_, p
40; _Merchant's School Gra's_, 17; _Picket's_, 19; _D Adams's_, 31 (2) ”Number is the distinction of one from more”--_Fisher's Gram_, 51; _Alden's_, 7 (3) ”Number is the distinction of one from several or many”--_Coar's Gram_, p 24 (4) ”Number is the distinction of one from more than one”--_Sanborn's Gram_, p 24; _J Flint's_, 27; _Wells's, 52_ (5) ”Number is the distinction of one from more than one, or many”--_Grant's Latin Gram_, p 7 (6) ”What is number? Number is the Distinction of one, from two, or many”--_British Gram_, p 89; _Buchanan's_, 16 (7) ”You inquire, 'What is number?'
Merely this: _the distinction_ of one from two, or many Greek substantives have _three_ numbers”--_Bucke's Classical Gralish, ”there are _two nu to their explanations, then, we have _two ”distinctions of one fro a dual number, have _three_! Which, then, of the two or three modifications or forms, do they mean, when they say, ”Number is _the distinction_” &c? Or, if none of thein in an old Latin one, which, although it is soic in its application: ”NUMERUS est, unius et ularis et Pluralis”-- _Ruddiman's Gram_, p 21 This means: (8) ”Number is a distinction of one and ular and the Plural”
But we have yet other examples: as, (9) ”Number is the distinction of _objects_, as one or more”--_Kirkham's Gram_, p 39 ”The _distinction_ of _objects_ as _one_,” is very much like ”_the consideration_ of _an object_ as _uishes _objects_ as _one_ or more”--_Cooper's Murray_, p 21; _Practical Gram_, p 18 That is, nuular for distinction's sake! (11) ”Nuard to the _objects_ signified, _as one_ or ard” to the saross error, its ”distinction” is confined to ”_nouns_” only! (12) ”Number is _that property_ of a _noun_ by which it expresses _one_ or _more_ than one”--_Bullions's E Graain number is in of two, or either of two, incompatible ideas! (13) ”Number shows _how many_ are meant, whether one or more”--_Smith's new Gram_, p 45 This is not a _definition_, but a false assertion, in which Srammar! _Wheat_ and _oats_ are of different numbers; but neither of these numbers ”means _a sum that may be counted_,” or really ”shows _how eneral, &c”--_Brightland's Gram_, p 77 (14) ”Number is _the difference_ in a _noun or pronoun_, to denote either a single thing or more than one”--_Davenport's Gram_, p 14 This excludes the nuular and the plural to be essentially one thing (15) ”Nu as the thing spoken of is represented, as, _one_ or _ard to number”--_Burn's Gram_, p 32 This also has many faults, which I leave to the discernment of the reader (16) ”What is number? Number _shows the distinction_ of one from many”--_Wilcox's Gram_, p 6 This is no answer to the question asked; besides, it is obviously worse than the first form, which has ”_is_,” for ”_shows_” (17) ”What is Number? It is _the_ representation of _objects_ with respect to singleness, or plurality”
--_O B Peirce's Gram_, p 34 If there are two numbers, they are neither of them properly described in this definition, or in any of the preceding ones There is a grosseach or either of them to be an alternate representation of two inco confined to the present subject; it runs through a vast nurammars (18) ”_Number_ is _the inflection_ of a _noun_, to indicate _one object or more than one_ Or, _Number_ is _the expression_ of unity or of more than unity”--_Hiley's Gram_, p 14 How hard this author laboured to _think what number is_, and could not! (19) ”Number is the distinction of _unity and plurality_”--_Hart's E Gram_, p 40, Why say, ”_distinction_;” the nu two? (20) ”Number is _the capacity of nouns_ to represent either one or more than one object”--_Barrett's Revised Gram_, p 40 (21) ”Number is _a property_ of _the noun which_ denotes _one_ or _more_ than one”--_Weld's Gram_, 2d Ed, p 55 (22) ”Number is _a property_ of the _noun or pronoun_ [,] _by which it_ denotes _one, or ed Ed_, p 49 (23) ”Nuuishes _one from more_ than one”--_Weld's Gram, Improved Ed_, p 60 This, of course, excludes the plural (24) ”Number is _a modification of nouns_ to denote whether one object is meant, or more than one”--_Butler's Gram_, p 19 (25) ”Nuuishes one from more than one”--_Spencer's Gram_, p 26 Now, it is plain, that not one of these twenty-five definitions coular is one number and the plural an other! Not one of theht or of expression! Many of the grammarians have not atteh they speak of both the singular and the plural, and perhaps sometimes apply the term _number_ to _the distinction_ which is _in each_: for it is the property of the singular nuuish unity frouish plurality fro the authors who are thus silent, are Lily, Colet, Brightland, Harris, Lowth, Ash, Priestly, Bicknell, Adam, Gould, Harrison, Comly, Jaudon, Webster, Webber, Churchill, Staniford, Lennie, Dalton, Blair, Cobbett, Cobb, A Flint, Felch, Guy, Hall, and S W Clark Ada the properties of _verbs_, say: ”_Number_ marks _how many_ we suppose to be, to act, or to suffer”--_A_, 80; _G_, 78
[71] These are the parts of speech in sorammars; as, Barrett's, of 1854, Butler's, Covell's, Day's, Frazee's, Fowle's New, Spear's, Weld's, Wells's, and the Well-wishers' In Frost's Practical Grae are said to be ”divided into _eight_ classes,” and the naiven thus: ”_Noun, Article, pronoun, Verb, Adverb, Preposition, Conjunction, and Interjection_”--P 29 But the author afterwards treats of the _Adjective_, between the _Article_ and the _pronoun_, just as if he had forgotten to name it, and could not count nine with accuracy! In Perley's Graht: namely, ”_Nouns, Adjectives, Verbs, Adverbs, Prepositions, Conjunctions, Interjections_, and _Particles_!”--P 8 S W Clark has Priestley's classes, but calls Interjections ”Exclamations”
[72] Felton, who is confessedly a modifier of Murray, claims as a merit, ”_the rejection of several useless parts of speech_” yet acknowledges ”_nine_,” and treats of _ten_; ”viz, _Nouns, pronouns, Verbs, Participles, Prepositions, Adjectives_, [Articles,] _Adverbs, Conjunctions, Exclamations_”--_O C Felton's Gram_ p 5, and p 9
[73] Quintilian is at fault here; for, in sonized _four_ parts of speech; namely, verbs, nouns, conjunctions, and articles See _Aristot de Poetica_, Cap xx
[74] ”As there are ten different characters or figures in arithmetic to represent all possible quantities, there are also ten kinds of words or parts of speech to represent all possible sentences: viz: article, noun, adjective, pronoun, verb, participle, adverb, preposition, conjunction, interjection”--_Chauvier's Punctuation_, p 104
[75] _The Friend_, 1829, Vol ii, p 117
[76] _The Friend_, Vol ii, p 105
[77] See the Preface to lish Grae_, Vol i, p 8
[78] Sorammar; but to suppose him the sole author, hardly comports with its dedication to the Queen, by her ”most Obedient and Dutiful _Subjects_, the _Authors_;” or with thelines, by the laureate:
”Then say what Thanks, what Praises must attend _The Gen'rous Wits_, who thus could condescend!
Skill, that to Art's sublimest Orb can reach, Employ'd its humble Elements to Teach!
Yet worthily Esteem'd, because we know To raise _Their_ Country's Fame _they_ stoop'd so low”--TATE
[79] Dr Cae 158th, e: cites it as an instance of the ra to have been, ”of grammar in the abstract, _an_ universal archetype by which the particular graulated” And adds, ”If this was his ht or in the wrong, in this accusation