The Grammar of English Grammars by Goold Brown (free ebook reader .txt) 📕

by any means, so fixed."—Blair's Rhet., p. 124. This principle, like the preceding one, persuades me again to dissent from Murray, who corrects or perverts the following sentence, by changing originates to originate: "All that makes a figure on the great theatre of the world; the employments of the busy, the enterprises of the ambitious, and the exploits of the warlike; the virtues which form the happiness, and the crimes which occasion the misery of mankind; originates in that silent and secret recess of thought, which is hidden from every human eye."—See Murray's Octavo Gram., Vol. ii, p. 181; or his Duodecimo Key, p. 21. The true subject of this proposition is the noun all, which is singular; and the other nominatives are subordinate to this, and merely explanatory of it.

OBS. 7.—Dr. Webster says, "Enumeration and addition of numbers are usually expressed in the singular number; [as,] two and two is four; seven and nine is sixteen; that is, the sum of seven and nine is sixteen. But modern usage inclines to reject the use of the verb in the singular number, in these and similar phrases."—Improved Gram., p. 106. Among its many faults, this passage exhibits a virtual contradiction. For what "modern usage inclines to reject," can hardly be the fashion in which any ideas "are usually expressed." Besides, I may safely aver, that this is a kind of phraseology which all correct usage always did reject. It is not only a gross vulgarism, but a plain and palpable violation of the foregoing rule of syntax; and, as such it must be reputed, if the rule has any propriety at all. What "enumeration" has to do with it, is more than I can tell. But Dr. Webster once admired and commended this mode of speech, as one of the "wonderful proofs of ingenuity in the framers of language;" and laboured to defend it as being "correct upon principle;" that is, upon the principle that "the sum of" is understood to be the subject of the affirmation, when one says, "Two and two is four," in stead of, "Two and two are four."—See Webster's Philosophical Gram., p. 153. This seems to me a "wonderful proof" of ignorance in a very learned man. OBS. 8.—In Greek and Latin, the verb frequently agrees with the nearest nominative, and is understood to the rest; and this construction is sometimes imitated in English, especially if the nouns follow the verb: as, "[Greek: Nuni do MENEI pistis, elpis agape, ta tria tanta]."—"Nunc vero manet fides, spes, charitas; tria hæc."—"Now abideth faith, hope, charity; these three."—1 Cor., xiii, 13. "And now abideth confession, prayer, and praise, these three; but the greatest of these is praise."—ATTERBURY: Blair's Rhet., p. 300. The propriety of this usage, so far as our language is concerned, I doubt. It seems to open a door for numerous deviations from the foregoing rule, and deviations of such a sort, that if they are to be considered exceptions, one can hardly tell why. The practice, however, is not uncommon, especially if there are more nouns than two, and each is emphatic; as, "Wonderful was the patience, fortitude, self-denial, and bravery of our ancestors."—Webster's Hist. of U. S., p. 118. "It is the very thing I would have you make out: for therein consists the form, and use, and nature of language."—Berkley's Alciphron, p. 161. "There is the proper noun, and the common noun. There is the singular noun, and the plural noun."—Emmons's Gram., p. 11. "From him proceeds power, sanctification, truth, grace, and every other blessing we can conceive."—Calvin's Institutes, B. i, Ch. 13. "To what purpose cometh there to me incense from Sheba, and the sweet cane from a far country?"—Jer., vi, 20. "For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever."—Matt., vi, 13. In all these instances, the plural verb might have been used; and yet perhaps the singular may be justified on the ground that there is a distinct and emphatic enumeration of the nouns. Thus, it would be proper to say, "Thine are the kingdom, the power, and the glory;" but this construction seems less emphatic than the preceding, which means, "For thine is the kingdom, thine is the power, and thine is the glory, forever;" and this repetition is still more emphatic, and perhaps more proper, than the elliptical form. The repetition of the conjunction "and," in the original text as above, adds time and emphasis to the reading, and makes the singular verb more proper than it would otherwise be; for which reason, the following form, in which the Rev. Dr. Bullions has set the sentence down for bad English, is in some sort a perversion of the Scripture: "Thine is the kingdom, the power, and the glory."—Bullions's E. Gram., p. 141.

OBS. 9.—When the nominatives are of different persons, the verb agrees with the first person in preference to the second, and with the second in preference to the third; for thou and I, or he, thou, and I, are equivalent to we; and thou and he are equivalent to you: as, "Why speakest thou any more of thy matters? I have said, thou and Ziba divide the land."—2 Sam., xix. 29. That is, "divide ye the land." "And live thou and thy children of the rest."—2 Kings, iv, 7. "That I and thy people have found grace in thy sight."—Exodus, xxxiii, 16. "I and my kingdom are guiltless."—2 Sam., iii, 28. "I, and you, and Piso perhaps too, are in a state of dissatisfaction."—Zenobia, i, 114.

   "Then I, and you, and all of us, fell down,
    Whilst bloody treason flourish'd over us."—Shak., J. Cæsar.

OBS. 10.—When two or more nominatives connected by and are of the same form but distinguished by adjectives or possessives, one or more of them may be omitted by ellipsis, but the verb must be plural, and agree with them all; as, "A literary, a scientific, a wealthy, and a poor man, were assembled in one room."—Peirce's Gram., p. 263. Here four different men are clearly spoken of. "Else the rising and the falling emphasis are the same."—Knowles's Elocutionist, p. 33. Here the noun emphasis is understood after rising. "The singular and [the] plural form seem to be confounded."—Lowth's Gram., p. 22. Here the noun form is presented to the mind twice; and therefore the article should have been repeated. See Obs. 15th on Rule 1st. "My farm and William's are adjacent to each other."—Peirce's Gram., p. 220. Here the noun farm is understood after the possessive William's, though the author of the sentence foolishly attempts to explain it otherwise. "Seth's, Richard's and Edmund's farms are those which their fathers left them."—Ib., p. 257. Here the noun farms is understood after Seth's, and again after Richard's; so that the sentence is written wrong, unless each man has more than one farm. "Was not Demosthenes's style, and his master Plato's, perfectly Attic; and yet none more lofty?"—Milnes's Greek Gram., p. 241. Here style is understood after Plato's; wherefore was should rather be were, or else and should be changed to as well as. But the text, as it stands, is not much unlike some of the exceptions noticed above. "The character of a fop, and of a rough warrior, are no where more successfully contrasted."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. 236. Here the ellipsis is not very proper. Say, "the character of a fop, and that of a rough warrior," &c. Again: "We may observe, that the eloquence of the bar, of the legislature, and of public assemblies, are seldom or ever found united to high perfection in the same person."—J. Q. Adams's Rhet., Vol. i, p. 256. Here the ellipsis cannot so well be avoided by means of the pronominal adjective that, and therefore it may be thought more excusable; but I should prefer a repetition of the nominative: as, "We may observe, that the eloquence of the bar, the eloquence of the legislature, and the eloquence of public assemblies, are seldom if ever found united, in any high degree, in the same person."

OBS. 11.—The conjunction as, when it connects nominatives that are in apposition, or significant of the same person or thing, is commonly placed at the beginning of a sentence, so that the verb agrees with its proper nominative following the explanatory word: thus, "As a poet, he holds a high rank."—Murray's Sequel, p. 355. "As a poet, Addison claims a high praise."—Ib., p. 304. "As a model of English prose, his writings merit the greatest praise."—Ib., p. 305. But when this conjunction denotes a comparison between different persons or things signified by two nominatives, there must be two verbs expressed or understood, each agreeing with its own subject; as, "Such writers as he [is,] have no reputation worth any man's envy." [396]

   "Such men as he [is] be never at heart's ease
    Whiles they behold a greater than themselves."—Shakspeare.

OBS. 12.—When two nominatives are connected by as well as, but, or save, they must in fact have two verbs, though in most instances only one is expressed; as, "Such is the mutual dependence of words in sentences, that several others, as well as [is] the adjective, are not to be used alone."—Dr. Wilson's Essay, p. 99. "The Constitution was to be the one fundamental law of the land, to which all, as well States as people, should submit."—W. I. BOWDITCH: Liberator, No. 984. "As well those which history, as those which experience offers to our reflection."— Bolingbroke, on History, p. 85. Here the words "offers to our reflection" are understood after "history." "None but He who discerns futurity, could have foretold and described all these things."—Keith's Evidences, p. 62. "That there was in those times no other writer, of any degree of eminence, save he himself."—Pope's Works, Vol. iii, p. 43.

   "I do entreat you not a man depart,
    Save I alone, till Antony have spoke."—Shak., J. Cæsar.

OBS. 13.—Some grammarians say, that but and save, when they denote exception, should govern the objective case as prepositions. But this idea is, without doubt, contrary to the current usage of the best authors, either ancient or modern. Wherefore I think it evident that these grammarians err. The objective case of nouns being like the nominative, the point can be proved only by the pronouns; as, "There is none but he alone."—Perkins's Theology, 1608. "There is none other but he."—Mark, xii, 32. (This text is good authority as regards the case, though it is incorrect in an other respect: it should have been, "There is none but he," or else, "There is no other than he.") "No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven."—John, iii, 13. "Not that any man hath seen the father, save he which is of God."—John, vi, 46. "Few can, save he and I."—Byron's Werner. "There is none justified, but he that is in measure sanctified."—Isaac Penington. Save, as a conjunction, is nearly obsolete.

OBS. 14.—In Rev., ii, 17th, we read, "Which no man knoweth, saving he that receiveth it;" and again, xiii, 17th, "That no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark." The following text is inaccurate, but not in the construction of the nominative they: "All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given."—Matt., xix, 11. The version ought to have been, "Not all men can receive this saying, but they only to whom it is given:" i.e., "they only can receive it, to whom there is given power to receive it." Of but with a nominative, examples may be multiplied indefinitely. The following are as good as any: "There is no God but He."—Sale's Koran, p. 27. "The former none but He could execute."—Maturin's Sermons, p. 317. "There was nobody at home but I."—Walker's Particles, p. 95. "A fact, of which as none but he could be conscious, [so] none but he could be the publisher of it."—Pope's Works, Vol. iii, p. 117. "Few but they who are involved in the vices, are involved in the irreligion of the times."—Brown's Estimate, i, 101.

   "I claim my right. No Grecian prince but I
    Has power this bow to grant, or to deny."
        —Pope, Odys., B. xxi, l. 272.

    "Thus she, and none but she, the insulting rage
    Of heretics oppos'd from age to age."
        —Dryden's Poems, p. 98.

In opposition to all these authorities, and many more that might be added, we have, with now and then a text of false syntax, the absurd opinion of perhaps a score or two of our grammarians; one of whom imagines he has found in the following couplet from Swift, an example to the purpose; but he forgets that the verb let governs the objective case:

   "Let none but him who rules the thunder,
    Attempt to part these twain asunder."
        —Perley's Gram., p. 62.

OBS. 15.—It is truly a wonder, that so many professed critics should not see the absurdity of taking but and save for "prepositions," when this can be