Part 303 (1/2)

[521] Section OBS--This naint, is _Pharao Nechao_, with two capitals and no hyphen Walker gives the tords separately in his Key, and spells the latter _Necho_, and not _Nechoh_ See the saraphy in _Jer_, xlvi, 2 In our common Bibles, many such names are needlessly, if not improperly, compounded; sometimes with one capital, and so Scripture naood men and biblical critics

[522] ”[Marcus] Terentius Varro, vir Romanorum eruditissimus”--QUINTILIAN

Lib x, Cap 1, p 577

[523] NOTE--By this ae is still very faulty What Murray here calls ”_phrases_,” are properly _sentences_; and, in his second clause, he deserts the ter in ”_my_,” ”_our_,” and also ”_&c_,” which seem to be out of place there--G BROWN

[524] _An other_ is a phrase of tords, which ought to be written separately The transferring of the n to the latter word, is a gross vulgarism Separate the words, and it will be avoided

[525] _Mys-ter-y_, according to Scott and Cobb; _ to Walker and Worcester

[526] Kirkham borrowed this doctrine of ”Tonics, Subtonics, and Atonies,”

from Rush: and dressed it up in his oorse bombast See Obs 13 and 14, on the Powers of the Letters--GB

[527] There is, in lish dictionaries, a contracted form of this phrase, written _prithee_, or _I prithee_; but Dr Johnson censures it as ”a familiar _corruption_, which some writers have _injudiciously_ used;”

and, as the abbreviation a of one vowel sound into an other, it has now, I think, very deservedly become obsolete--G BROWN

[528] This is the doctrine of Murray, and his hundred copyists; but it is by no enerally true It is true of adverbs, only when they are connected by conjunctions; and seldom applies to _tords, unless the conjunction which may be said to connect them, be suppressed and understood--G BROWN

[529] Exaans_, as froood ones”--_Porter's analysis_ Here _ones_ represents _organs_, and prevents unpleasant repetition--G BROWN

[530] From the force of habit, or to prevent the possibility of a false pronunciation, these ocular contractions are still so poetry; but they are not very iard the short poetical exauish them from prose All needful contractions however will be preserved, and sometimes also a capital letter, to shohere the author commenced a line

[531] The word ”_imperfect_” is not really necessary here; for the declaration is true of _any phrase_, as this name is commonly applied--G

BROWN

[532] A _part of speech_ is a _sort of words_, and not _one word only_ We cannot say, that every pronoun, or every verb, is _a part of speech_, because the parts of speech are _only ten_ But every pronoun, verb, or other word, is _a word_; and, if ill refer to this genus, there is no difficulty in defining all the parts of speech in the singular, with _an_ or _a_: as, ”A _pronoun_ is _a word_ put for _a noun_” Murray and others say, ”_An Adverb_ is _a part of speech_,” &c, ”A _Conjunction_ is _a part of speech_,” &c, which is the same as to say, ”_One adverb_ is _a sort of words_,” &c This is a palpable absurdity--G BROWN

[533] The propriety of this conjunction, ”_nor_,” is soate and the Septuagint is--”_they, and_ their wives, _and_ their sons, _and_ their daughters”

[534] All our lexicographers, and all accurate authors, spell this ith an _o_; but the gentleman who has furnished us with the last set of _new terrammar, writes it with an _e_, and applies it to the _verb_ and the _participle_ With him, every verb or participle is an ”_asserter_;” except when he forgets his creed, as he did in writing the preceding exaes the names of all the parts of speech, and denounces the entire technology of grammar, perhaps his innovation would have been sufficiently broad, had he for THE VERB, the most important class of all, adopted some name which he kne to spell--G B

[535] It would be better to oht forth froypt” The phrase, ”_forth out of_,” is neither a very common nor a very terse one--G BROWN

[536] This _doctrine_, that participles divide and specify time, I have elsewhere shown to be erroneous--G BROWN

[537] Perhaps it would be as well or better, in correcting these two exaeneration” But the article _a_, as well as the literal forn of unity; and a complete uniforh the pronoun _thou_ is not ras to it _when it is so used_, as it is for him to determine what form is adapted to any other pronoun, when a difference of style affects the question

[539] ”_Forgavest_,” as the reading is in our co; because the relative _that_ and its antecedent _God_ are of the third person, and not of the second

[540] All the corrections under this head are directly contrary to the teaching of William S Cardell Oliver B Peirce, and perhaps sorammar; and some of them are contrary also to Murray's late editions But I am confident that these authors teach erroneously; that their use of indicative forms for mere suppositions that are contrary to the facts, is positively ungraant, in such instances, than the simple subjunctive, which they reject or distort