Part 295 (1/2)
[303] ”The _rammarians make between the participles, is, that the one points to the continuation of the action, passion, or state denoted by the verb; and the other, to the conifies _iun and not ended: as, 'I anifies action _perfected_, or finished: as, 'I have _written_ a letter'--'The letter is written'”--_Murray's Grammar_, 8vo, p 65 ”The first [participle] expresses a _continuation_; the other, a _completion_”--_W Allen's Gram '_tearing_'] really expresses, is simply that of the _continuance_ of an action in an _inco to time _present_, to time _past_, or to time _future_
The participle which denotes the _completion_ of an action, as _torn_, is called the _perfect_ participle; because it represents the action as _perfect_ or _finished_”--_Barnard's analytic Gram_, p 51 Emmons stealthily copies from my Institutes as many as ten lines in defence of the terations, he calls the participle in _ing_, ”_Present_” This seems inconsistent See his ”_Grammatical Instructer_,” p 61
[304] ”The ancient terlo-Saxon) was _and_; as, 'His _schynand_ sword' Douglas And sometimes _ende_; as, 'She, between the deth and life, _Swounende_ lay full ofte' Gower”--_W Allen's Gram_, p
88 ”The present Participle, in Saxon, was for off the final _e_, it acquired a Substantive signification, and extended the idea to the agent: as, _alysende_, freeing, and _alysend_, a redee or friendly, and _freond_, a lover or a friend”--_Booth's Introd to Dict_, p 75
[305] William B Fowle, a raely than his master Thus: ”How many times or tenses have verbs? _Two_, [the] present and [the] _past_,” To this he immediately adds in a note: ”We _do not believe_ in a _past_ any lish Gram_, p 30 So, between these two authors, our verbs will retain no tenses at all Indeed, by his two tenses, Fowle only lish verb For he says, in an other place, ”We repeat our conviction that no verb in itself expresses time of any sort”--_Ib_, p 69,
[306] ”STONE'-BLIND,” ”STONE'-COLD,” and ”STONE'-DEAD,” are given in Worcester's Dictionary, as compound _adjectives_; and this is perhaps their best classification; but, if I ly on the latter syllable, as on the for spoken rather as two eourney, ”I saw an infant _iven by Frazee under this Note: ”Adjectives so to other adjectives; as, '_red hot_ iron'”--_Improved Gram_, p
141 But Webster himself, from whom this doctrine and the example are borrowed, (see his Rule XIX,) makes ”RED'-HOT” but one word in his Dictionary; and Worcester gives it as one word, in a less proper form, even without a hyphen, ”RED'HOT”
[307] ”OF ENALLAGE--The construction which lish, chiefly appears when one part of speech, is used with the power and effect of another”--_Ward's English Gram_, p 150
[308] _Forsooth_ is _literally_ a word of affir _for truth_, but it is now alentleenerally either a moroseness that persecutes, or a dullness that tires you”--_Ho_, p 24
[309] In most instances, however, the words _hereof, thereof_, and _whereof_, are placed after _nouns_, and have nothing to do with any _verb_ They are therefore not properly _adverbs_, though all our graraphers call them so Nor are they _adjectives_; because they are not used adjectively, but rather in the sense of a pronoun governed by _of_; or, what is nearly the saenitive case Example: ”And the fame _hereof_ went abroad”--_Matt_, ix, 26 That is, ”the fame _of thisobsolete, or worthy to be so, on account of its irregularity
[310] _Seldoh not frequently; as, ”This kind of verse occurs the _seldo the melody”--_Blair's Rhet_, p 385 In former days, this word, as well as its correlative _often_, was sometimes used _adjectively_; as, ”Thine _often_ infirmities”--_1 Tim_, v, 23 ”I hope God's Book hath not been my _seldoularly co the latter L, he speaks of the tip of the tongue as being ”brought a little _forwarder_ to the teeth”--_pron Dict, Principles_, No 55
[311] A few instances of the _regular inflection_ of adverbs ending in _ly_,co _sweetlier_ in the echo”--_The Dial_, Vol i, p 6 ”I res would _safelier_ stand the test”--_Coleridge's Biog Lit_, Vol ii, p 53
[312] De Sacy, in his Principles of General Grammar, calls the relative pronouns ”_Conjunctive Adjectives_” See _Fosdick's Translation_, p 57 He also says, ”The words _hich_, etc are not the only words which connect the function of a Conjunction with another design There are Conjunctive _Nouns_ and _Adverbs_, as well as Adjectives; and a characteristic of these words is, that we can substitute for them another form of expression in which shall be found the words _hich_, etc
Thus, _when, where, what, how, as_, and many others, are Conjunctive words: [as,] 'I shall finish _when_ I please;' that is, 'I shall finish _at the time at which_ I please'--'I know not _where_ I am;' ie 'I know not _the place in which_ I am'”--_Ib_, p 58 In respect to the conjunctive _adverbs_, this is well enough, so far as it goes; but the word _who_ appears to me to be a pronoun, and not an adjective; and of his ”_Conjunctive Nouns_,” he ought to have given us some examples, if he knew of any
[313] ”Now the Definition of a CONJUNCTION is as follows--_a Part of Speech, void of Signification itself, but so fornificant Sentences to be_ ONE _significant Sentence_”--_Harris's Hermes_, 6th Edition, London, p 238
[314] Whether these, or any other conjunctions that coether, is doubtful I aether, that can well be parsed separately Goodenoho defines a phrase to be ”the union of two orthe _nature and construcion [sic--KTH] of a single word_,” finds an immense number of these unions, which he cannot, or does not, analyze As exaives ”_as if_ and ”_as though_”--_Gram_, p
25 But when he comes to speak of _ellipsis_, he says: ”After the conjunctions _than, as, but_, &c, soenerally understood; as, 'We have more than [_that is which_] will suffice;' 'He acted _as_ [_he would act_] _if_ he were nant to the other
[315] Of the construction noticed in this observation, the Rev Matt
Harrison cites a good example; pronounces it elliptical; and scarcely forbears to conde sentence, the relative pronoun is three times omitted:--'Is there a God to swear _by_, and is there none to believe _in_, none to trust _to_?'--_Letters and Essays, Anonymous_ _By, in_, and _to_, as prepositions, stand alone, _denuded of the relatives_ to which they apply The sentence presents no attractions worthy of imitation It exhibits a license carried to the extree_, p 196
[316] ”An ellipsis of _from_ after the adverb _off_ has caused the latter word so the prepositions Ex
'off (from) his horse'”--_Hart's Gram_, p 96 _Off_ and _on_ are opposites; and, in a sentence like the following, I see no”_from_” after the former, than _to_ after the latter: ”Thou shalt not cos_, i, 16
[317] ”_Who consequently_ reduced the _greatest_ part of the island TO their oer”--_Swift, on the English Tongue_ ”We can say, that _one nation reduces another_ TO _subjection_ But when _dominion_ or _power_ is used, ays, _as_ [so] far as I know, say, _reduce_ UNDER _their power_” [or _dominion_]--_Blair's Rhet_, p 229
[318] ”_O foy_, don't misapprehend me; I don't say so”--DOUBLE DEALER: _Ka to Walker and Webster, _la_ is pronounced _law_; and, if they are right in this, the latter is only a falseBut I set down both, because both are found in books, and because I incline to think the former is from the French _la_, which is pronounced _lah_
Johnson and Webster_lo_ from the Saxon _la_, and _la_ either from _lo_ or from the French _la_ ”_Law_, how you joke, cousin”--_Coluhosts are colad to see you!”--_Ibid_
”_La_ you! If you speak ill of the devil, How he takes it at heart!”--SHAKESPEARE: _Joh Dict, w La_
[320] The interjection of interrogating, being placed independently, either after a question, or after so which it converts into a question, is usually marked with its own separate eroteme; as, ”But this is even so: eh?”--_Newspaper_ ”Is't not drown'd i' the last rain? Ha?”--_Shakespeare_
”Does Bridget paint still, Poal? so I think”--_Yankee Schoolmaster_ So question; as, ”What dost thou think of this doctrine, Friend Gurth, ha?”--SCOTT'S IVANHOE: _Fowler's E Grah _oh_ and _ah_ arepassions, it must be confessed that they are sometimes employed by reputable writers, as marks of cheerfulness or exultation; as, ”_Ah_, pleasant proof,” &c--_Cowper's Task_, p 179 ”Merrily _oh!_ _ ”Cheerily _oh!_ cheerily _oh!_”--_Ib_ But even if this usage be supposed to be right, there is still some difference between these words and the interjection _O_: if there were not, we ht dispense with the latter, and substitute one of the fore the import of many an invocation
[322] This position is denied by sorammarians One recent author says, ”The _object_ cannot properly be called one of the principal parts of a sentence; as it belongs only to some sentences, and then is dependent on the verb, which it modifies or explains”--_Goodenow's Grah with the notion, that, ”An infinitive, with or without a substantive, may be _the object of a transitive verb_; as, 'I wish _to ride_;' 'I wish _you to ride_'”--_Ib_, p 37 Or, with the _contrary_ notion, that, ”An infinitive may be _the object of a_ _preposition_, expressed or understood; as, 'I wish _for you to ride_'”--_Ibid_ But if the object governed by the verb, is always aadjunct, a mere ”explanation of the attribute,” (_Ib_, p 28,) how differs it from an adverb? ”Adverbs are words _added to verbs_, and so”--_Ib_, p 23 And if infinitives and other mere _adjuncts_ may be the objects which make verbs transitive, how shall a transitive verb be known? The fact is, that the _true_ object of the transitive verb _is one of the principal_ _parts_ of the sentence, and that the infinitive mood cannot properly be reckoned such an object
[323] So of _three_ kinds, _simple_, and _coeneral been taken to discriminate between complex sentences and compound
A late author states the difference thus: ”A sentence containing but one proposition is _si two propositions, one of whichtwo propositions which in no way modify each other, is _compound_”--_Greene's analysis_, p 3 The term _compound_, as applied to sentences, is not _usually_ so restricted An other, using the same terms for a very different division, explains them thus: ”A _Simple Sentence_ contains but one subject and one attribute; as, 'The _sun shi+nes_' A _Complex Sentence_ contains two or more subjects of the same attribute, or two or more attributes of the same subject; as, 'The _sun_ and the _stars_ shi+ne' 'The sun _rises_ and _sets_' 'The _sun_ and the _stars rise_ and _set_' A _Compound Sentence_ is composed of two or more simple or complex sentences united; as, 'The _sun shi+nes_, and the _stars twinkle_' 'The _sun rises_ and _sets_, as the _earth revolves_'”--_Pinneo's English Teacher_, p 10; _analytical Gram_, pp 128, 142, and 146 This notion of a _complex sentence_ is not more common than Greene's; nor is it yet apparent, that the usual division of sentences into two kinds ought to give place to any tripartite distribution