"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. Caesar.

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 done only by condemning the current usage of nearly all good authors, as well as the common opinion of most grammarians; and the greater is the wonder, because they seem to do it innocently, or to teach it childishly, as not knowing that they cannot justify both sides, when the question lies between opposite and contradictory principles. By this sort of simplicity, which approves of errors, if much practised, and of opposites, or essential contraries, when authorities may be found for them, no work, perhaps, is more strikingly characterized, than the popular School Grammar of W. H. Wells. This author says, "The use of but as a preposition is approved by J. E. Worcester, John Walker, R. C. Smith, Picket, Hiley, Angus, Lynde, Hull, Powers, Spear, Farnum, Fowle, Goldsbury, Perley, Cobb, Badgley, Cooper, Jones, Davis, Beall, Hendrick, Hazen, and Goodenow."—School Gram., 1850, p. 178. But what if all these authors do prefer, "but him," and "save him," where ten times as many would say, "but he," "save he?" Is it therefore difficult to determine which party is right? Or is it proper for a grammarian to name sundry authorities on both sides, excite doubt in the mind of his reader, and leave the matter unsettled? "The use of but as a preposition," he also states, "is discountenanced by G. Brown, Sanborn, Murray, S. Oliver, and several other grammarians. (See also an able article in the Mass. Common School Journal, Vol. ii, p. 19.)"—School Gram., p. 178.

OBS. 16.—Wells passes no censure on the use of nominatives after but and save; does not intimate which case is fittest to follow these words; gives no false syntax under his rule for the regimen of prepositions; but inserts there the following brief remarks and examples:

"REM. 3.—The word save is frequently used to perform the office of a preposition; as, 'And all desisted, all save him alone.'—Wordsworth."

"REM. 4.—But is sometimes employed as a preposition, in the sense of except; as, 'The boy stood on the burning deck, Whence all but him had fled.'—Hemans."—Ib., p. 167.

Now, "BUT," says Worcester, as well as Tooke and others, was "originally bot, contracted from be out;" and, if this notion of its etymology is just, it must certainly be followed by the nominative case, rather than by the objective; for the imperative be or be out governs no case, admits no additional term but a nominative—an obvious and important fact, quite overlooked by those who call but a preposition. According to Allen H. Weld, but and save "are commonly considered prepositions," but "are more commonly termed conjunctions!" This author repeats Wells's examples of "save him," and "but him," as being right; and mixes them with opposite examples of "save he," "but he," "save I," which he thinks to be more right!—Weld's Gram., p. 187.

OBS. 17.—Professor Fowler, too, an other author remarkable for a facility of embracing incompatibles, contraries, or dubieties, not only condemns as "false syntax" the use of save for an exceptive conjunction. (Sec.587. 28,) but cites approvingly from Latham the following very strange absurdity: "One and the same word, in one and the same sentence, may be a Conjunction or [a] Preposition, as the case may be: [as] All fled but John."—Fowler's E. Gram., 8vo, 1850, Sec. 555. This is equivalent to saying, that "one and the same sentence" may be two different sentences; may, without error, be understood in two different senses; may be rightly taken, resolved, and parsed in two different ways! Nay, it is equivalent to a denial of the old logical position, that "It is impossible for a thing to be and not be at the same time;" for it supposes "but," in the instance given, to be at once both a conjunction and not a conjunction, both a preposition and not a preposition, "as the case may be!" It is true, that "one and the same word" may sometimes be differently parsed by different grammarians, and possibly even an adept may doubt who or what is right. But what ambiguity of construction, or what diversity of interpretation, proceeding from the same hand, can these admissions be supposed to warrant? The foregoing citation is a boyish attempt to justify different modes of parsing the same expression, on the ground that the expression itself is equivocal. "All fled but John," is thought to mean equally well, "All fled but he," and, "All fled but him;" while these latter expressions are erroneously presumed to be alike good English, and to have a difference of meaning corresponding to their difference of construction. Now, what is equivocal, or ambiguous, being therefore erroneous, is to be corrected, rather than parsed in any way. But I deny both the ambiguity and the difference of meaning which these critics profess to find among the said phrases. "John fled not, but all the rest fled," is virtually what is told us in each of them; but, in the form, "All fled but him," it is told ungrammatically; in the other two, correctly.

OBS. 18.—In Latin, cum with an ablative, sometimes has, or is supposed to have, the force of the conjunction et with a nominative; as, "Dux cum aliquot principibus capiuntur."—LIVY: W. Allen's Gram., p. 131. In imitation of this construction, some English writers have substituted with for and, and varied the verb accordingly; as, "A long course of time, with a variety of accidents and circumstances, are requisite to produce those revolutions."—HUME: Allen's Gram., p. 131; Ware's, 12; Priestley's, 186. This phraseology, though censured by Allen, was expressly approved by Priestley, who introduced the present example, as his proof text under the following observation: "It is not necessary that the two subjects of an affirmation should stand in the very same construction, to require the verb to be in the plural number. If one of them be made to depend upon the other by a connecting particle, it may, in some cases, have the same force, as if it were independent of it."—Priestley's Gram., p. 186. Lindley Murray, on the contrary, condemns this doctrine, and after citing the same example with others, says: "It is however, proper to observe that these modes of expression do not appear to be warranted by the just principles of construction."— Octavo Gram., p. 150. He then proceeds to prove his point, by alleging that the preposition governs the objective case in English, and the ablative in Latin, and that what is so governed, cannot be the nominative, or any part of it. All this is true enough, but still some men who know it perfectly well, will now and then write as if they did not believe it. And so it was with the writers of Latin and Greek. They sometimes wrote bad syntax; and the grammarians have not always seen and censured their errors as they ought. Since the preposition makes its object only an adjunct of the preceding noun, or of something else, I imagine that any construction which thus assumes two different cases as joint nominatives or joint antecedents, must needs be inherently faulty.

OBS. 19.—Dr. Adam simply remarks, "The plural is sometimes used after the preposition cum put for et; as, Remo cum fratre Quirinus jura dabunt. Virg."—Latin and English Gram., p. 207; Gould's Adam's Latin Gram., p. 204; W. Allen's English Gram., 131. This example is not fairly cited; though many have adopted the perversion, as if they knew no better. Alexander has it in a worse form still: "Quirinus, cum fratre, jura dabunt."—Latin Gram., p. 47. Virgil's words are, "Cana FIDES, et VESTA, Remo cum fratre Quirinus, Jura dabunt."—AEneid, B. i, l. 296. Nor is cum here "put for et," unless we suppose also an antiptosis of Remo fratre for Remus frater; and then what shall the literal meaning be, and how shall the rules of syntax be accommodated to such changes? Fair examples, that bear upon the point, may, however, be adduced from good authors, and in various languages; but the question is, are they correct in syntax? Thus Dr. Robertson: "The palace of Pizarro, together with the houses of several of his adherents, were pillaged by the soldiers."— Hist. of Amer., Vol. ii, p. 133. To me, this appears plainly ungrammatical; and, certainly, there are ways enough in which it may be corrected. First, with the present connective retained, "were" ought to be was. Secondly, if were be retained, "together with" ought to be changed to and, or and also. Thirdly, we may well change both, and say, "The palace of Pizarro, as well as the houses of several of his adherents, was pillaged by the soldiers." Again, in Mark, ix, 4th, we read: "And there appeared unto them Elias, with Moses; and they were talking with Jesus." If this text meant that the three disciples were talking with Jesus, it would be right as it stands; but St. Matthew has it, "And, behold, there appeared unto them Moses and Elias, talking with him;" and our version in Luke is, "And, behold, there talked with him two men, which were Moses and Elias."—Chap. ix, 30. By these corresponding texts, then, we learn, that the pronoun they, which our translators inserted, was meant for "Elias with Moses;" but the Greek verb for "appeared," as used by Mark, is singular, and agrees only with Elias. "[Greek: Kai ophthae autois Aelias sun Mosei, kai haesan syllalountes to Iaesoy.]"—"Et apparuit illis Elias cum Mose, et erant colloquentes Jesu."—Montanus. "Et visus est eis Elias cum Mose, qui colloquebantur cum Jesu."—Beza. This is as discrepant as our version, though not so ambiguous. The French Bible avoids the incongruity: "Et iis virent paroitre Moyse et Elie, qui s'entretenoient avec Jesus." That is, "And there appeared to them Moses and Elias, who were talking with Jesus." Perhaps the closest and best version of the Greek would be, "And there appeared to them Elias, with Moses;[397] and these two were talking with Jesus." There is, in our Bible, an other instance of the construction now in question; but it has no support from the Septuagint, the Vulgate, or the French: to wit, "The second [lot came forth] to Gedaliah, who with his brethren and sons were twelve."—1 Chron., xxv, 9. Better: "and he, his brethren, and his sons, were twelve."

OBS. 20.—Cobbett, who, though he wrote several grammars, was but a very superficial grammarian, seems never to have doubted the propriety of putting with for and; and yet he was confessedly not a little puzzled to find out when to use a singular, and when a plural verb, after a nominative with such "a sort of addition made to it." The 246th paragraph of his English Grammar is a long and fruitless attempt to fix a rule for the guidance of the learner in this matter. After dashing off a culpable example, "Sidmouth, with Oliver the spye, have brought Brandreth to the block;" or, as his late editions have it, "The Tyrant, with the Spy, have brought Peter to the block." He adds: "We hesitate which to employ, the singular or the plural verb; that is to say, has or have. The meaning must be our guide. If we mean, that the act has been done by the Tyrant himself, and that the spy has been a mere involuntary agent, then we ought to use the singular; but if we believe that the spy has been a co-operator, an associate, an accomplice, then we must use the plural verb." Ay, truly; but must we not also, in the latter case, use and, and not with? After some further illustrations, he says: "When with means along with, together with, in Company with, and the like, it is nearly the same as and; and then the plural verb must be used: [as,] 'He, with his brothers, are able to do much.' Not, 'is able to do much.' If the pronoun be used instead of brothers, it will be in the objective case: 'He, with them, are able to do much.' But this is no impediment to the including of the noun (represented by them) in the nominative." I wonder what would be an impediment to the absurdities of such a dogmatist! The following is his last example: "'Zeal, with discretion, do much;' and not 'does much;' for we mean, on the contrary, that it does nothing. It is the meaning that must determine which of the numbers we ought to employ." This author's examples are all fictions of his own, and such of them as here have a plural verb, are wrong. His rule is also wrong, and contrary to the best authority. St. Paul says to Timothy, "Godliness with contentment is great gain:"—1 Tim., vi, 6. This text is right; but Cobbett's principle would go to prove it erroneous. Is he the only man who has ever had a right notion of its meaning? or is he not rather at fault in his interpretations?

OBS. 21.—There is one other apparent exception to Rule 16th, (or perhaps a real one,) in which there is either an ellipsis of the preposition with, or else the verb is made singular because the first noun only is its true subject, and the others are explanatory nominatives to which the same verb must be understood in the plural number; as, "A torch, snuff and all, goes out in a moment, when dipped in the vapour."—ADDISON: in Johnson's Dict., w. All. "Down comes the tree, nest, eagles, and all."—See All, ibidem. Here goes and comes are necessarily made singular, the former agreeing with torch and the latter with tree; and, if the other nouns, which are like an explanatory parenthesis, are nominatives, as they appear to me to be, they must be subjects of go and come understood. Cobbett teaches us to say, "The bag, with the guineas and dollars in it, were stolen," and not, was stolen. "For," says he, "if we say was stolen, it is possible for us to mean, that the bag only was stolen,"—English Gram., 246. And I suppose he would say, "The bag, guineas, dollars, and all, were stolen," and not, "was stolen;" for here a rule of syntax might be urged, in addition to his false argument from the sense. But the meaning of the former sentence is, "The bag was stolen, with the guineas and dollars in it;" and the meaning of the latter is, "The bag was stolen, guineas, dollars, and all." Nor can there be any doubt about the meaning, place the words which way you will; and whatever, in either case, may be the true construction of the words in the parenthetical or explanatory phrase, they should not, I think, prevent the verb from agreeing with the first noun only. But if the other nouns intervene without affecting this concord, and without a preposition to govern them, it may be well to distinguish them in the punctuation; as, "The bag, (guineas, dollars, and all,) was stolen."

NOTES TO RULE XVI.

NOTE I.—When the conjunction and between two nominatives appears to require a plural verb, but such form of the verb is not agreeable, it is better to reject or change the connective, that the verb may stand correctly in the singular number; as, "There is a peculiar force and beauty in this figure."—Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 224. Better: "There is a peculiar force, as well as a peculiar beauty, in this figure." "What means this restless stir and commotion of mind?"—Murray's Key, 8vo, p. 242. Better: "What means this restless stir, this commotion of mind?"

NOTE II.—When two subjects or antecedents are connected, one of which is taken affirmatively, and the other negatively, they belong to different propositions; and the verb or pronoun must agree with the affirmative subject, and be understood to the other: as "Diligent industry, and not mean savings, produces honourable competence."—"Not a loud voice but strong proofs bring conviction."—"My poverty, but not my will, consents."—Shakespeare.

NOTE III.—When two subjects or antecedents are connected by as well as, but, or save, they belong to different propositions; and, (unless one of them is preceded by the adverb not,) the verb and pronoun must agree with the former and be understood to the latter: as, "Veracity, as well as justice, is to be our rule of life."—Butler's Analogy, p. 283. "The lowest mechanic, as well as the richest citizen, may boast that thousands of his fellow-creatures are employed for him."—Percival's Tales, ii, 177. "These principles, as well as every just rule of criticism, are founded upon the sensitive part of our nature."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. xxvi. "Nothing but wailings was heard."—"None but thou can aid us."—"No mortal man, save he," &c., "had e'er survived to say he saw."—Sir W. Scott.

NOTE IV.—When two or more subjects or antecedents are preceded by the adjective each, every, or no, they are taken separately; and, (except no be followed by a plural noun,) they require the verb and pronoun to be in the singular number: as, "No rank, no honour, no fortune, no condition in life, makes the guilty mind happy."—"Every phrase and every figure which he uses, tends to render the picture more lively and complete."—Blair's Rhet., p. 179.

"And every sense, and every heart, is joy."—Thomson.

"Each beast, each insect, happy in its own."—Pope.

NOTE V.—When any words or terms are to be taken conjointly as subjects or antecedents, the conjunction and, (in preference to with, or, nor, or any thing else,) must connect them. The following sentence is therefore inaccurate; with should be and; or else were should be was: "One of them, [the] wife of Thomas Cole, with her husband, were shot down, the others escaped."—Hutchinson's Hist., Vol. ii, p. 86. So, in the following couplet, or should be and, or else engines should be engine:

"What if the head, the eye, or ear repined, To serve mere engines to the ruling mind?"—Pope.

NOTE VI.—Improper omissions must be supplied; but when there occurs a true ellipsis in the construction of joint nominatives or joint antecedents, the verb or pronoun must agree with them in the plural, just as if all the words were expressed: as, "The second and the third Epistle of John are each but one short chapter."—"The metaphorical and the literal meaning are improperly mixed."—Murray's Gram., p. 339. "The Doctrine of Words, separately consider'd, and in a Sentence, are Things distinct enough."—Brightland's Gram., Pref., p. iv. Better perhaps: "The doctrine of words separately considered, and that of words in a sentence, are things distinct enough."

"The Curii's and the Camilli's little field, To vast extended territories yield."—Rowe's Lucan, B. i, l. 320.

NOTE VII.—Two or more distinct subject phrases connected by and, require a plural verb, and generally a plural noun too, if a nominative follow the verb; as, "To be wise in our own eyes, to be wise in the opinion of the world, and to be wise in the sight of our Creator, are three things so very different, as rarely to coincide."—Blair. "'This picture of my friend,' and 'This picture of my friend's,' suggest very different ideas."—Priestley's Gram., p. 71; Murray's, i, 178.

"Read of this burgess—on the stone appear, How worthy he! how virtuous! and how dear!"—Crabbe.

IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.

FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XVI.

UNDER THE RULE ITSELF.—THE VERB AFTER JOINT NOMINATIVES.

"So much ability and merit is seldom found."—Murray's Key, 12mo, p. 18; Merchant's School Gram., p. 190.

[FORMULE.—Not proper, because the verb is is in the singular number, and does not correctly agree with its two nominatives, ability and merit, which are connected by and, and taken conjointly. But, according to Rule 16th, "When a verb has two or more nominatives connected by and, it must agree with them jointly in the plural, because they are taken together." Therefore, is should be are; thus, "So much ability and merit are seldom found." Or: "So much ability and so much merit are seldom found."]

"The syntax and etymology of the language is thus spread before the learner."—Bullions's English Gram., 2d Edition, Rec., p. iii. "Dr. Johnson tells us, that in English poetry the accent and the quantity of syllables is the same thing."—J. Q. Adams's Rhet., ii, 213. "Their general scope and tendency, having never been clearly apprehended, is not remembered at all."—Murray's Gram., i, p. 126. "The soil and sovereignty was not purchased of the natives."—Knapp's Lect. on Amer. Lit., p. 55. "The boldness, freedom, and variety of our blank verse, is infinitely more favourable than rhyme, to all kinds of sublime poetry."—Blair's Rhet., p. 40. "The vivacity and sensibility of the Greeks seems to have been much greater than ours."—Ib., p. 253. "For sometimes the Mood and Tense is signified by the Verb, sometimes they are signified of the Verb by something else.'"—Johnson's Gram. Com., p. 254. "The Verb and the Noun making a complete Sense, which the Participle and the Noun does not."—Ib., p. 255. "The growth and decay of passions and emotions, traced through all their mazes, is a subject too extensive for an undertaking like the present."—Kames El. of Crit., i, 108. "The true meaning and etymology of some of his words was lost."—Knight, on the Greek Alph., p. 37. "When the force and direction of personal satire is no longer understood."—Junius, p. 5. "The frame and condition of man admits of no other principle."—Brown's Estimate, ii, 54. "Some considerable time and care was necessary."—Ib., ii 150. "In consequence of this idea, much ridicule and censure has been thrown upon Milton."—Blair's Rhet., p. 428. "With rational beings, nature and reason is the same thing."—Collier's Antoninus, p. 111. "And the flax and the barley was smitten."—Exod., ix, 31. "The colon, and semicolon, divides a period, this with, and that without a connective."—J. Ware's Gram., p. 27. "Consequently wherever space and time is found, there God must also be."—Sir Isaac Newton. "As the past tense and perfect participle of love ends in ed, it is regular."—Chandler's Gram., p. 40; New Edition, p. 66. "But the usual arrangement and nomenclature prevents this from being readily seen."—Butler's Practical Gram., p. 3. "Do and did simply implies opposition or emphasis."—Alex. Murray's Gram., p. 41. "I and another make we, plural: Thou and another is as much as ye: He, she, or it and another make they"—Ib., p. 124. "I and another, is as much as (we) the first Person Plural; Thou and another, is as much as (ye) the second Person Plural; He, she, or it, and another, is as much as (they) the third Person Plural."—British Gram., p. 193; Buchanan's Syntax, p. 76. "God and thou art two, and thou and thy neighbour are two."—The Love Conquest, p. 25. "Just as an and a has arisen out of the numeral one."—Fowler's E. Gram., 8vo. 1850, Sec.200. "The tone and style of each of them, particularly the first and the last, is very different."—Blair's Rhet., p. 246. "Even as the roebuck and the hart is eaten."—Deut., xiii, 22. "Then I may conclude that two and three makes not five."—Barclay's Works, iii, 354. "Which at sundry times thou and thy brethren hast received from us."—Ib., i, 165. "Two and two is four, and one is five."—POPE: Lives of the Poets, p. 490. "Humility and knowledge with poor apparel, excels pride and ignorance under costly array."—Day's Gram., Parsing Lesson, p. 100. "A page and a half has been added to the section on composition."—Bullions's E. Gram., 5th Ed., Pref., p. vii. "Accuracy and expertness in this exercise is an important acquisition."—Ib., p. 71.

"Woods and groves are of thy dressing, Hill and dale doth boast thy blessing."—Milton's Poems, p. 139.

UNDER THE RULE ITSELF.—THE VERB BEFORE JOINT NOMINATIVES.

"There is a good and a bad, a right and a wrong in taste, as in other things."—Blair's Rhet., p. 21. "Whence has arisen much stiffness and affectation."—Ib., p. 133. "To this error is owing, in a great measure, that intricacy and harshness, in his figurative language, which I before remarked."—Ib., p. 150; Jamieson's Rhet., 157. "Hence, in his Night Thoughts, there prevails an obscurity and hardness in his style."—Blair's Rhet., p. 150. "There is, however, in that work much good sense, and excellent criticism."—Ib., p. 401. "There is too much low wit and scurrility in Plautus."—Ib., p. 481. "There is too much reasoning and refinement; too much pomp and studied beauty in them."—Ib., p. 468. "Hence arises the structure and characteristic expression of exclamation."—Rush on the Voice, p. 229. "And such pilots is he and his brethren, according to their own confession."—Barclay's Works, iii, 314. "Of whom is Hymeneus and Philetus: who concerning the truth have erred."—2 Tim., ii, 17. "Of whom is Hymeneus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan."—1 Tim., i, 20. "And so was James and John, the sons of Zebedee."—Luke, v, 10. "Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing."—James, iii, 10. "Out of the mouth of the Most High proceedeth not evil and good."—Lam., iii, 38. "In which there is most plainly a right and a wrong."—Butler's Analogy, p. 215. "In this sentence there is both an actor and an object."—Smith's Inductive Gram., p. 14. "In the breast-plate was placed the mysterious Urim and Thummim."—Milman's Jews, i, 88. "What is the gender, number, and person of those in the first?"—Smith's Productive Gram., p. 19. "There seems to be a familiarity and want of dignity in it."—Priestley's Gram., p. 150. "It has been often asked, what is Latin and Greek?"—Literary Convention, p. 209. "For where does beauty and high wit But in your constellation meet?"—Hudibras, p. 134. "Thence to the land where flows Ganges and Indus."—Paradise Lost, B. ix, l. 81. "On these foundations seems to rest the midnight riot and dissipation of modern assemblies."—Brown's Estimate, ii, 46. "But what has disease, deformity, and filth, upon which the thoughts can be allured to dwell?"—Johnson's Life of Swift, p. 492. "How is the gender and number of the relative known?"—Bullions, Practical Lessons, p. 32.

"High rides the sun, thick rolls the dust, And feebler speeds the blow and thrust."—Sir W. Scott.

UNDER NOTE I.—CHANGE THE CONNECTIVE.

"In every language there prevails a certain structure and analogy of parts, which is understood to give foundation to the most reputable usage."—Blair's Rhet., p. 90. "There runs through his whole manner, a stiffness and affectation, which renders him very unfit to be considered a general model."—Ib., p. 102. "But where declamation and improvement in speech is the sole aim"—Ib., p. 257. "For it is by these chiefly, that the train of thought, the course of reasoning, and the whole progress of the mind, in continued discourse of all kinds, is laid open."—Lowth's Gram., p. 103. "In all writing and discourse, the proper composition and structure of sentnences is of the highest importance."—Blair's Rhet., p. 101. "Here the wishful look and expectation of the beggar naturally leads to a vivid conception of that which was the object of his thoughts."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 386. "Who say, that the outward naming of Christ, and signing of the cross, puts away devils."—Barclay's Works, i, 146. "By which an oath and penalty was to be imposed upon the members."—Junius, p. 6. "Light and knowledge, in what manner soever afforded us, is equally from God."—Butler's Analogy, p. 264. "For instance, sickness and untimely death is the consequence of intemperance."—Ib., p. 78. "When grief, and blood ill-tempered vexeth him."—Beauties of Shakspeare, p. 256. "Does continuity and connexion create sympathy and relation in the parts of the body?"—Collier's Antoninus, p. 111. "His greatest concern, and highest enjoyment, was to be approved in the sight of his Creator."—Murray's Key, p. 224. "Know ye not that there is a prince and a great man fallen this day in Israel?"—2 Sam, iii, 38. "What is vice and wickedness? No rarity, you may depend on it."—Collier's Antoninus, p. 107. "There is also the fear and apprehension of it."—Butler's Analogy, p. 87. "The apostrophe and s, ('s,) is an abbreviation for is, the termination of the old English genitive."—Bullions, E. Gram., p. 17. "Ti, ce, and ci, when followed by a vowel, usually has the sound of sh; as in partial, special, ocean."—Weld's Gram., p. 15.

"Bitter constraint and sad occasion dear Compels me to disturb your season due."—Milton's Lycidas.

"Debauches and excess, though with less noise, As great a portion of mankind destroys."—Waller, p. 55.

UNDER NOTE II.—AFFIRMATION WITH NEGATION.

"Wisdom, and not wealth, procure esteem."—Brown's Inst., p. 156. "Prudence, and not pomp, are the basis of his fame."—Ib. "Not fear, but labour have overcome him."—Ib. "The decency, and not the abstinence, make the difference."—Ib. "Not her beauty, but her talents attracts attention."—Ib. "It is her talents, and not her beauty, that attracts attention."—Ib. "It is her beauty, and not her talents that attract attention."—Ib.

"His belly, not his brains, this impulse give: He'll grow immortal; for he cannot live."—Young, to Pope.

UNDER NOTE III.—AS WELL AS, BUT, OR SAVE.

"Common sense as well as piety tell us these are proper."—Family Commentary, p. 64. "For without it the critic, as well as the undertaker, ignorant of any rule, have nothing left but to abandon themselves to chance."—Kames, El. of Crit., i, 42. "And accordingly hatred as well as love are extinguished by long absence."—Ib., i, 113. "But at every turn the richest melody as well as the sublimest sentiments are conspicuous."—Ib., ii, 121. "But it, as well as the lines immediately subsequent, defy all translation."—Coleridge's Introduction, p. 96. "But their religion, as well as their customs, and manners, were strangely misrepresented."—BOLINGBROKE, ON HISTORY, p. 123; Priestley's Gram., p. 192; Murray's Exercises, p. 47. "But his jealous policy, as well as the fatal antipathy of Fonseca, were conspicuous."—Robertson's America, i, 191. "When their extent as well as their value were unknown."—Ib., ii, 138. "The Etymology, as well as the Syntax, of the more difficult parts of speech are reserved for his attention [at a later period]."—Parker and Fox's E. Gram., Part i, p. 3. "What I myself owe to him, no one but myself know."—See Wright's Athens, p. 96. "None, but thou, O mighty prince! canst avert the blow."—Inst., p. 156. "Nothing, but frivolous amusements, please the indolent."—Ib.

"Nought, save the gurglings of the rill, were heard."—G. B.

"All songsters, save the hooting owl, was mute."—G. B.

UNDER NOTE IV.—EACH, EVERY, OR NO.

"Give every word, and every member, their due weight and force."—Blair's Rhet., p. 110. "And to one of these belong every noun, and every third person of every verb."—Wilson's Essay on Gram., p. 74. "No law, no restraint, no regulation, are required to keep him in bounds."—Literary Convention, p. 260. "By that time, every window and every door in the street were full of heads."—N. Y. Observer, No. 503. "Every system of religion, and every school of philosophy, stand back from this field, and leave Jesus Christ alone, the solitary example"—The Corner Stone, p. 17. "Each day, and each hour, bring their portion of duty."—Inst., p. 156. "And every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him."—1 Sam., xxii, 2. "Every private Christian and member of the church ought to read and peruse the Scriptures, that they may know their faith and belief founded upon them."—Barclay's Works, i, 340. "And every mountain and island were moved out of their places."—Rev., vi, 14.

"No bandit fierce, no tyrant mad with pride, No cavern'd hermit rest self-satisfied."

UNDER NOTE V.—WITH, OR, &c. FOR AND.

"The side A, with the sides B and C, compose the triangle."—Tobitt's Gram., p. 48; Felch's, 69; Ware's, 12. "The stream, the rock, or the tree, must each of them stand forth, so as to make a figure in the imagination."—Blair's Rhet., p. 390. "While this, with euphony, constitute, finally, the whole."—O. B. Peirce's Gram., p. 293. "The bag, with the guineas and dollars in it, were stolen."—Cobbett's E. Gram., 246. "Sobriety, with great industry and talent, enable a man to perform great deeds."—Ib., 245. "The it, together with the verb to be, express states of being."—Ib., 190. "Where Leonidas the Spartan king, with his chosen band, fighting for their country, were cut off to the last man."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. 203. "And Leah also, with her children, came near and bowed themselves."—Gen., xxxiii, 7. "The First or Second will, either of them, by themselves coalesce with the Third, but not with each other."—Harris's Hermes, p. 74. "The whole must centre in the query, whether Tragedy or Comedy are hurtful and dangerous representations?"—Formey's Belles-Lettres, p. 215. "Grief as well as joy are infectious: the emotions they raise in the spectator resemble them perfectly."—Kames, El. of Crit., i, 157. "But in all other words the Qu are both sounded."—Ensell's Gram., p. 16. "Qu (which are always together) have the sound of ku or k, as in queen, opaque."— Goodenow's Gram., p. 45. "In this selection the ai form distinct syllables."—Walker's Key, p. 290. "And a considerable village, with gardens, fields, &c., extend around on each side of the square."— Liberator, Vol. ix, p. 140. "Affection, or interest, guide our notions and behaviour in the affairs of life; imagination and passion affect the sentiments that we entertain in matters of taste."—Jamieson's Rhet., p. 171. "She heard none of those intimations of her defects, which envy, petulance, or anger, produce among children."—Rambler, No. 189. "The King, with the Lords and Commons, constitute an excellent form of government."—Crombie's Treatise, p. 242. "If we say, 'I am the man, who commands you,' the relative clause, with the antecedent man, form the predicate."—Ib., p. 266.

"The spacious firmament on high, With all the blue ethereal sky, And spangled heav'ns, a shining frame, Their great Original proclaim." —ADDISON. Murray's Key, p. 174; Day's Gram., p. 92; Farnum's, 106.

UNDER NOTE VI.—ELLIPTICAL CONSTRUCTIONS.

"There is a reputable and a disreputable practice."—Adams's Rhet., Vol. i, p. 350. "This and this man was born in her."—Milton's Psalms, lxxxvii. "This and that man was born in her."—Psal. lxxxvii, 5. "This and that man was born there."—Hendrick's Gram., p. 94. "Thus le in l~ego and l~egi seem to be sounded equally long."—Adam's Gram., p. 253; Gould's, 243. "A distinct and an accurate articulation forms the groundwork of good delivery."—Kirkham's Elocution, p. 25. "How is vocal and written language understood?"—C. W. Sanders, Spelling-Book, p. 7. "The good, the wise, and the learned man is an ornament to human society."—Bartlett's Reader. "On some points, the expression of song and speech is identical."—Rush, on the Voice, p. 425. "To every room there was an open and secret passage."—Johnson's Rasselas, p. 13. "There iz such a thing az tru and false taste, and the latter az often directs fashion, az the former."—Webster's Essays, p. 401. "There is such a thing as a prudent and imprudent institution of life, with regard to our health and our affairs"—Butler's Analogy, p. 210. "The lot of the outcasts of Israel and the dispersed of Judah, however different in one respect, have in another corresponded with wonderful exactness."—Hope of Israel, p. 301. "On these final syllables the radical and vanishing movement is performed."—Rush, on the Voice, p. 64. "To be young or old, good, just, or the contrary, are physical or moral events."—SPURZHEIM: Felch's Comp. Gram., p. 29. "The eloquence of George Whitfield and of John Wesley was of a very different character each from the other."—Dr. Sharp. "The affinity of m for the series b, and of n for the series t, give occasion for other Euphonic changes."—Fowler's E. Gram., Sec.77.

"Pylades' soul and mad Orestes', was In these, if we believe Pythagoras"—Cowley's Poems, p. 3.

UNDER NOTE VII.—DISTINCT SUBJECT PHRASES.

"To be moderate in our views, and to proceed temperately in the pursuit of them, is the best way to ensure success."—Murray's Key, 8vo, p. 206. "To be of any species, and to have a right to the name of that species, is all one."—Locke's Essay, p. 300. "With whom to will and to do is the same."—Jamieson's Sacred History, Vol. ii, p. 22. "To profess, and to possess, is very different things."—Inst., p. 156. "To do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with God, is duties of universal obligation."—Ib. "To be round or square, to be solid or fluid, to be large or small, and to be moved swiftly or slowly, is all equally alien from the nature of thought."—Ib. "The resolving of a sentence into its elements or parts of speech and stating the Accidents which belong to these, is called PARSING."—Bullion's Pract. Lessons, p. 9. "To spin and to weave, to knit and to sew, was once a girl's employment; but now to dress and catch a beau, is all she calls enjoyment."—Lynn News, Vol. 8, No. 1.



RULE XVII.—FINITE VERBS.

When a Verb has two or more nominatives connected by or or nor, it must agree with them singly, and not as if taken together: as, "Fear or jealousy affects him."—W. Allen's Gram., p. 133. "Nor eye, nor listening ear, an object finds: creation sleeps."—Young. "Neither character nor dialogue was yet understood."—L. Murray's Gram., p. 151.

"The wife, where danger or dishonour lurks, Safest and seemliest by her husband stays."—Milton, P. L., ix, 267.

OBSERVATIONS ON RULE XVII.

OBS. 1.—To this rule, so far as its application is practicable, there are properly no exceptions; for, or and nor being disjunctive conjunctions, the nominatives are of course to assume the verb separately, and as agreeing with each. Such agreement seems to be positively required by the alternativeness of the expression. Yet the ancient grammarians seldom, if at all, insisted on it. In Latin and Greek, a plural verb is often employed with singular nominatives thus connected; as,

"Tunc nec mens mini, nec color Certa sede manent."—HORACE. See W. Allen's Gram., p. 133.

[Greek: "Ean de adelphos ae adelphae lumnoi huparchosi, kai leipomenoi osi taes ephaemerou trophaes."]—James, ii. 15. And the best scholars have sometimes improperly imitated this construction in English; as, "Neither Virgil nor Homer were deficient in any of the former beauties."—DRYDEN'S PREFACE: Brit. Poets, Vol. iii, p. 168. "Neither Saxon nor Roman have availed to add any idea to his [Plato's] categories."—R. W. EMERSON: Liberator, No. 996.

"He comes—nor want nor cold his course delay: Hide, blushing Glory! hide Pultowa's day."—Dr. Johnson.

"No monstrous height, or breadth, or length, appear; The whole at once is bold and regular."—Pope, on Crit., l. 250.

OBS. 2.—When two collective nouns of the singular form are connected by or or nor, the verb may agree with them in the plural number, because such agreement is adapted to each of them, according to Rule 15th; as, "Why mankind, or such a part of mankind, are placed in this condition."—Butler's Analogy, p. 213. "But neither the Board of Control nor the Court of Directors have any scruples about sanctioning the abuses of which I have spoken."—Glory and Shame of England, Vol. ii, p. 70.

OBS. 3.—When a verb has nominatives of different persons or numbers, connected by or or nor, an explicit concord with each is impossible; because the verb cannot be of different persons or numbers at the same time; nor is it so, even when its form is made the same in all the persons and numbers: thus, "I, thou, [or] he, may affirm; we, ye, or they, may affirm."—Beattie's Moral Science, p. 36. Respecting the proper management of the verb when its nominatives thus disagree, the views of our grammarians are not exactly coincident. Few however are ignorant enough, or rash enough, to deny that there may be an implicit or implied concord in such cases,—a zeugma of the verb in English, as well as of the verb or of the adjective in Latin or Greek. Of this, the following is a brief example: "But he nor I feel more."—Dr. Young, Night iii, p. 35. And I shall by-and-by add others—enough, I hope, to confute those false critics who condemn all such phraseology.

OBS. 4.—W. Allen's rule is this: "If the nominatives are of different numbers or persons, the verb agrees with the last; as, he or his brothers were there; neither you nor I am concerned."—English Gram., p. 133. Lindley Murray, and others, say: (1.) "When singular pronouns, or a noun and pronoun, of different persons, are disjunctively connected, the verb must agree with that person which is placed nearest to it: as, 'I or thou art to blame;' 'Thou or I am in fault;' 'I, or thou, or he, is the author of it;' 'George or I am the person.' But it would be better to say; 'Either I am to blame, or thou art,' &c. (2.) When a disjunctive occurs between a singular noun, or pronoun, and a plural one, the verb is made to agree with the plural noun and pronoun: as, 'Neither poverty nor riches were injurious to him;' 'I or they were offended by it.' But in this case, the plural noun or pronoun, when it can conveniently be done, should be placed next to the verb."—Murray's Gram., 8vo, p. 151; Smith's New Gram., 128; Alger's Gram., 54; Comly's, 78 and 79; Merchant's, 86; Picket's, 175; and many more. There are other grammarians who teach, that the verb must agree with the nominative which is placed next to it, whether this be singular or plural; as, "Neither the servants nor the master is respected;"—"Neither the master nor the servants are respected."—Alexander Murray's Gram., p. 65. "But if neither the writings nor the author is in existence, the Imperfect should be used."—Sanborn's Gram., p. 107.

OBS. 5.—On this point, a new author has just given us the following precept and criticism: "Never connect by or, or nor, two or more names or substitutes that have the same asserter [i.e. verb] depending on them for sense, if when taken separately, they require different forms of the asserters. Examples. 'Neither you nor I am concerned. Either he or thou wast there. Either they or he is faulty.' These examples are as erroneous as it would be to say, 'Neither you am concerned, nor am I.' 'Either he wast there, or thou wast.' 'Either they is faulty, or he is.' The sentences should stand thus—'Neither of us is concerned,' or, 'neither are you concerned, nor am I.' 'Either he was there, or thou wast.' 'Either they are faulty, or he is. They are, however, in all their impropriety, writen [sic—KTH] according to the principles of Goold Brown's grammar! and the theories of most of the former writers."—Oliver B. Peirce's Gram., p. 252. We shall see by-and-by who is right.

OBS. 6.—Cobbett also—while he approves of such English as, "He, with them, are able to do much," for, "He and they are able to do much"—condemns expressly every possible example in which the verb has not a full and explicit concord with each of its nominatives, if they are connected by or or nor. His doctrine is this: "If nominatives of different numbers present themselves, we must not give them a verb which disagrees with either the one or the other. We must not say: 'Neither the halter nor the bayonets are sufficient to prevent us from obtaining our rights.' We must avoid this bad grammar by using a different form of words: as, 'We are to be prevented from obtaining our rights by neither the halter nor the bayonets.' And, why should we wish to write bad grammar, if we can express our meaning in good grammar?"—Cobbett's E. Gram., 242. This question would have more force, if the correction here offered did not convey a meaning widely different from that of the sentence corrected. But he goes on: "We cannot say, 'They or I am in fault; I, or they, or he, is the author of it; George or I am the person.' Mr. Lindley Murray says, that we may use these phrases; and that we have only to take care that the verb agree with that person which is placed nearest to it; but, he says also, that it would be better to avoid such phrases by giving a different turn to our words. I do not like to leave any thing to chance or to discretion, when we have a clear principle for our guide."—Ib., 243. This author's "clear principle" is merely his own confident assumption, that every form of figurative or implied agreement, every thing which the old grammarians denominated zeugma, is at once to be condemned as a solecism. He is however supported by an other late writer of much greater merit. See Churchill's New Gram., pp. 142 and 312.

OBS. 7.—If, in lieu of their fictitious examples, our grammarians would give us actual quotations from reputable authors, their instructions would doubtless gain something in accuracy, and still more in authority. "I or they were offended by it," and, "I, or thou, or he, is the author of it," are expressions that I shall not defend. They imply an egotistical speaker, who either does not know, or will not tell, whether he is offended or not,—whether he is the author or not! Again, there are expressions that are unobjectionable, and yet not conformable to any of the rules just quoted. That nominatives may be correctly connected by or or nor without an express agreement of the verb with each of them, is a point which can be proved to as full certainty as almost any other in grammar; Churchill, Cobbett, and Peirce to the contrary notwithstanding. But with which of the nominatives the verb shall expressly agree, or to which of them it may most properly be understood, is a matter not easy to be settled by any sure general rule. Nor is the lack of such a rule a very important defect, though the inculcation of a false or imperfect one may be. So judged at least the ancient grammarians, who noticed and named almost every possible form of the zeugma, without censuring any as being ungrammatical. In the Institutes of English Grammar, I noted first the usual form of this concord, and then the allowable exceptions; but a few late writers, we see, denounce every form of it, exceptions and all: and, standing alone in their notions of the figure, value their own authority more than that of all other critics together.

OBS. 8.—In English, as in other languages, when a verb has discordant nominatives connected disjunctively, it most commonly agrees expressly with that which is nearest, and only by implication, with the more remote; as, "When some word or words are dependent on the attribute."—Webster's Philos. Gram., p. 153. "To the first of these qualities, dulness or refinements are dangerous enemies."—Brown's Estimate, Vol. ii, p. 15. "He hazards his own life with that of his enemy, and one or both are very honorably murdered."—Webster's Essays, p. 235. "The consequence is, that they frown upon everyone whose faults or negligence interrupts or retards their lessons."—W. C. Woodbridge: Lit. Conv., p. 114. "Good intentions, or at least sincerity of purpose, was never denied her."—West's Letters, p. 43. "Yet this proves not that either he or we judge them to be the rule."—Barclay's Works, i, 157. "First clear yourselves of popery before you or thou dost throw it upon us."—Ib., i, 169. "Is the gospel or glad tidings of this salvation brought nigh unto all?"—Ib., i, 362. "Being persuaded, that either they, or their cause, is naught."—Ib., i, 504. "And the reader may judge whether he or I do most fully acknowledge man's fall."—Ib., iii, 332. "To do justice to the Ministry, they have not yet pretended that any one, or any two, of the three Estates, have power to make a new law, without the concurrence of the third."—Junius, Letter xvii. "The forest, or hunting-grounds, are deemed the property of the tribe."—Robertson's America, i, 313. "Birth or titles confer no preeminence."—Ib., ii, 184. "Neither tobacco nor hides were imported from Caraccas into Spain."—Ib., ii, 507. "The keys or seed-vessel of the maple has two large side-wings."—The Friend, vii, 97. "An example or two are sufficient to illustrate the general observation."—Dr. Murray's Hist. of Lang., i, 58.

"Not thou, nor those thy factious arts engage, Shall reap that harvest of rebellious rage."—Dryden, p. 60.

OBS. 9.—But when the remoter nominative is the principal word, and the nearer one is expressed parenthetically, the verb agrees literally with the former, and only by implication, with the latter; as, "One example, (or ten,) says nothing against it."—Leigh Hunt. "And we, (or future ages,) may possibly have a proof of it."—Bp. Butler. So, when the alternative is merely in the words, not in the thought, the former term is sometimes considered the principal one, and is therefore allowed to control the verb; but there is always a harshness in this mixture of different numbers, and, to render such a construction tolerable, it is necessary to read the latter term like a parenthesis, and make the former emphatic: as, "A parenthesis, or brackets, consists of two angular strokes, or hooks, enclosing one or more words."—Whiting's Reader, p. 28. "To show us that our own schemes, or prudence, have no share in our advancements."—Addison. "The Mexican figures, or picture-writing, represent things, not words; they exhibit images to the eye, not ideas to the understanding."—Murray's Gram., p. 243; English Reader, p. xiii. "At Travancore, Koprah, or dried cocoa-nut kernels, is monopolized by government."—Maunder's Gram., p. 12. "The Scriptures, or Bible, are the only authentic source."—Bp. Tomline's Evidences.

"Nor foes nor fortune take this power away; And is my Abelard less kind than they?"—Pope, p. 334.

OBS. 10.—The English adjective being indeclinable, we have no examples of some of the forms of zeugma which occur in Latin and Greek. But adjectives differing in number, are sometimes connected without a repetition of the noun; and, in the agreement of the verb, the noun which is understood, is less apt to be regarded than that which is expressed, though the latter be more remote; as, "There are one or two small irregularities to be noted."—Lowth's Gram., p. 63. "There are one or two persons, and but one or two."—Hazlitt's Lectures. "There are one or two others."—Crombie's Treatise, p. 206. "There are one or two."—Blair's Rhet., p. 319. "There are one or more seminaries in every province."—H. E. Dwight: Lit. Conv., p. 133. "Whether one or more of the clauses are to be considered the nominative case."—Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 150. "So that, I believe, there is not more than one genuine example extant."—Knight, on the Greek Alphabet, p. 10. "There is, properly, no more than one pause or rest in the sentence."—Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 329; Blair's Rhet., p. 125. "Sometimes a small letter or two is added to the capital."—Adam's Lat. Gram., p. 223; Gould's, 283. Among the examples in the seventh paragraph above, there is one like this last, but with a plural verb; and if either is objectionable, is should here be are. The preceding example, too, is such as I would not imitate. To L. Murray, the following sentence seemed false syntax, because one does not agree with persons: "He saw one or more persons enter the garden."—Murray's Exercises, Rule 8th, p. 54. In his Key, he has it thus: "He saw one person, or more than one, enter the garden."—Oct. Gram., Vol. ii, p. 189. To me, this stiff correction, which many later grammarians have copied, seems worse than none. And the effect of the principle may be noticed in Murray's style elsewhere; as, "When a semicolon, or more than one, have preceded."—Octavo Gram., i, p. 277; Ingersoll's Gram., p. 288. Here a ready writer would be very apt to prefer one of the following phrases: "When a semicolon or two have preceded,"—"When one or two semicolons have preceded,"—"When one or more semicolons have preceded." It is better to write by guess, than to become systematically awkward in expression.

OBS. 11.—In Greek and Latin, the pronoun of the first person, according to our critics, is generally[398] placed first; as, "[Greek: Ego kai su ta dikaia poiaesomen]. Xen."—Milnes's Gr. Gram., p. 120. That is, "Ego et tu justa faciemus." Again: "Ego et Cicero valemus. Cic."—Buchanan's Pref., p. x; Adam's Gram., 206; Gould's, 203. "I and Cicero are well."—Ib. But, in English, a modest speaker usually gives to others the precedence, and mentions himself last; as, "He, or thou, or I, must go."—"Thou and I will do what is right."—"Cicero and I are well."—Dr. Adam.[399] Yet, in speaking of himself and his dependants, a person most commonly takes rank before them; as, "Your inestimable letters supported myself, my wife, and children, in adversity."—Lucien Bonaparte, Charlemagne, p. v. "And I shall be destroyed, I and my house."—Gen., xxxiv, 30. And in acknowledging a fault, misfortune, or censure, any speaker may assume the first place; as, "Both I and thou are in the fault."—Adam's Gram., p. 207. "Both I and you are in fault."—Buchanan's Syntax, p. ix. "Trusty did not do it; I and Robert did it."—Edgeworth's Stories.

"With critic scales, weighs out the partial wit, What I, or you, or he, or no one writ." —Lloyd's Poems, p. 162.

OBS. 12.—According to the theory of this work, verbs themselves are not unfrequently connected, one to an other, by and, or, or nor; so that two or more of them, being properly in the same construction, may be parsed as agreeing with the same nominative: as, "So that the blind and dumb [man] both spake and saw."—Matt., xii, 22. "That no one might buy or sell."—Rev., xiii, 17. "Which see not, nor hear, nor know."—Dan., v, 23. We have certainly very many examples like these, in which it is neither convenient nor necessary to suppose an ellipsis of the nominative before the latter verb, or before all but the first, as most of our grammarians do, whenever they find two or more finite verbs connected in this manner. It is true, the nominative may, in most instances, be repeated without injury to the sense; but this fact is no proof of such an ellipsis; because many a sentence which is not incomplete, may possibly take additional words without change of meaning. But these authors, (as I have already suggested under the head of conjunctions,) have not been very careful of their own consistency. If they teach, that, "Every finite verb has its own separate nominative, either expressed or implied," which idea Murray and others seem to have gathered from Lowth; or if they say, that, "Conjunctions really unite sentences, when they appear to unite only words," which notion they may have acquired from Harris; what room is there for that common assertion, that, "Conjunctions connect the same moods and tenses of verbs," which is a part of Murray's eighteenth rule, and found in most of our grammars? For no agreement is usually required between verbs that have separate nominatives; and if we supply a nominative wherever we do not find one for each verb, then in fact no two verbs will ever be connected by any conjunction.

OBS. 13.—What agreement there must be, between verbs that are in the same construction, it is not easy to determine with certainty. Some of the Latin grammarians tell us, that certain conjunctions connect "sometimes similar moods and tenses, and sometimes similar moods but different tenses." See Prat's Grammatica Latina, Octavo, Part ii, p. 95. Ruddiman, Adam, and Grant, omit the concord of tenses, and enumerate certain conjunctions which "couple like cases and moods." But all of them acknowledge some exceptions to their rules. The instructions of Lindley Murray and others, on this point, may be summed up in the following canon: "When verbs are connected by a conjunction, they must either agree in mood, tense, and form, or have separate nominatives expressed." This rule, (with a considerable exception to it, which other authors had not noticed.) was adopted by myself in the Institutes of English Grammar, and also retained in the Brief Abstract of that work, entitled, The First Lines of English Grammar. It there stands as the thirteenth in the series of principal rules; but, as there is no occasion to refer to it in the exercise of parsing, I now think, a less prominent place may suit it as well or better. The principle may be considered as being less certain and less important than most of the usual rules of syntax: I shall therefore both modify the expression of it, and place it among the notes of the present code. See Notes 5th and 6th below.

OBS. 14.—By the agreement of verbs with each other in form, it is meant, that the simple form and the compound, the familiar form and the solemn, the affirmative form and the negative, or the active form and the passive, are not to be connected without a repetition of the nominative. With respect to our language, this part of the rule is doubtless as important, and as true, as any other. A thorough agreement, then, in mood, tense, and form, is generally required, when verbs are connected by and, or, or nor; and, under each part of this concord, there may be cited certain errors which ought to be avoided, as will by-and-by be shown. But, at the same time, there seem to be many allowable violations of the rule, some or other of which may perhaps form exceptions to every part of it. For example, the tense may be varied, as it often is in Latin; thus, "As the general state of religion has been, is, or shall be, affected by them."—Butlers Analogy, p. 241. "Thou art righteous, O Lord, which art, and wast, and shall be, because thou hast judged thus."—Rev., xvi, 5. In the former of these examples, a repetition of the nominative would not be agreeable; in the latter, it would perhaps be an improvement: as, "who art, and who wast, and who shalt be." (I here change the pronoun, because the relative which is not now applied as above.) "This dedication may serve for almost any book, that has been, or shall be published."—Campbell's Rhet. p. 207; Murray's Gram., p. 222. "It ought to be, 'has been, is, or shall be, published.'"—Crombie's Treatise, p. 383. "Truth and good sense are firm, and will establish themselves."—Blair's Rhet. p. 286. "Whereas Milton followed a different plan, and has given a tragic conclusion to a poem otherwise epic in its form."—Ib., p. 428. "I am certain, that such are not, nor ever were, the tenets of the church of England."—West's Letters, p. 148. "They deserve, and will meet with, no regard."—Blair's Rhet., p. 109.

"Whoever thinks a faultless piece to see, Thinks what ne'er was, nor is, nor e'er shall be." —Pope, on Crit.

OBS. 15.—So verbs differing in mood or form may sometimes agree with the same nominative, if the simplest verb be placed first—rarely, I think, if the words stand in any other order: as, "One may be free from affectation and not have merit"—Blair's Rhet., p. 189. "There is, and can be, no other person."—Murray's Key. 8vo. p. 224. "To see what is, and is allowed to be, the plain natural rule."—Butler's Analogy, p. 284. "This great experiment has worked, and is working, well, every way well"—BRADBURN: Liberator, ix. 162. "This edition of Mr. Murray's works on English Grammar, deserves a place in Libraries, and will not fail to obtain it."—BRITISH CRITIC: Murray's Gram., 8vo, ii, 299.

"What nothing earthly gives, or can destroy."—Pope.

"Some are, and must be, greater than the rest."—Id.

OBS. 16.—Since most of the tenses of an English verb are composed of two or more words, to prevent a needless or disagreeable repetition of auxiliaries, participles, and principal verbs, those parts which are common to two or more verbs in the same sentence, are generally expressed to the first, and understood to the rest; or reserved, and put last, as the common supplement of each; as, "To which they do or can extend."—Butler's Analogy, p. 77. "He may, as any one may, if he will, incur an infamous execution from the hands of civil justice."—Ib., p. 82. "All that has usurped the name of virtue, and [has] deceived us by its semblance, must be a mockery and a delusion."—Dr. Chalmers. "Human praise, and human eloquence, may acknowledge it, but the Discerner of the heart never will" [acknowledge it].—Id. "We use thee not so hardly, as prouder livers do" [use thee].—Shak. "Which they might have foreseen and [might have] avoided."—Butler. "Every sincere endeavour to amend, shall be assisted, [shall be] accepted, and [shall be] rewarded."—Carter. "Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and [will] stand and [will] call on the name of the Lord his God, and [will] strike his hand over the place, and [will] recover the leper."—2 Kings, v, 11. "They mean to, and will, hear patiently."—Salem Register. That is, "They mean to hear patiently, and they will hear patiently." "He can create, and he destroy."—Bible. That is,—"and he can destroy."

"Virtue may be assail'd, but never hurt, Surpris'd by unjust force, but not inthrall'd."—Milton.

"Mortals whose pleasures are their only care, First wish to be imposed on, and then are."—Cowper.

OBS. 17.—From the foregoing examples, it may be seen, that the complex and divisible structure of the English moods and tenses, produces, when verbs are connected together, a striking peculiarity of construction in our language, as compared with the nearest corresponding construction in Latin or Greek. For we can connect different auxiliaries, participles, or principal verbs, without repeating, and apparently without connecting, the other parts of the mood or tense. And although it is commonly supposed that these parts are necessarily understood wherever they are not repeated, there are sentences, and those not a few, in which we cannot express them, without inserting also an additional nominative, and producing distinct clauses; as, "Should it not be taken up and pursued?"—Dr. Chalmers. "Where thieves do not break through nor steal."—Matt., vi, 20. "None present could either read or explain the writing-."—Wood's Dict., Vol. i, p. 159. Thus we sometimes make a single auxiliary an index to the mood and tense of more than one verb.

OBS. 18.—The verb do, which is sometimes an auxiliary and sometimes a principal verb, is thought by some grammarians to be also fitly made a substitute for other verbs, as a pronoun is for nouns; but this doctrine has not been taught with accuracy, and the practice under it will in many instances be found to involve a solecism. In this kind of substitution, there must either be a true ellipsis of the principal verb, so that do is only an auxiliary; or else the verb do, with its object or adverb, if it need one, must exactly correspond to an action described before; so that to speak of doing this or thus, is merely the shortest way of repeating the idea: as, "He loves not plays, as thou dost. Antony."—Shak. That is, "as thou dost love plays." "This fellow is wise enough to play the fool; and, to do that well, craves a kind of wit."—Id. Here, "to do that," is, "to play the fool." "I will not do it, if I find thirty there."—Gen., xviii, 30. Do what? Destroy the city, as had been threatened. Where do is an auxiliary, there is no real substitution; and, in the other instances, it is not properly the verb do, that is the substitute, but rather the word that follows it—or perhaps, both. For, since every action consists in doing something or in doing somehow, this general verb do, with this, that, it, thus, or so, to identify the action, may assume the import of many a longer phrase. But care must be taken not to substitute this verb for any term to which it is not equivalent; as, "The a is certainly to be sounded as the English do."—Walker's Dict., w. A. Say, "as the English sound it;" for do is here absurd, and grossly solecistical. "The duke had not behaved with that loyalty with which he ought to have done."—Lowth's Gram., p. 111; Murray's, i, 212; Churchill's, 355; Fisk's, 137; Ingersoll's, 269. Say, "with which he ought to have behaved;" for, to have done with loyalty is not what was meant—far from it. Clarendon wrote the text thus: "The Duke had not behaved with that loyalty, as he ought to have done." This should have been corrected, not by changing "as" to "with which", but by saying—"with that loyalty which he ought to have observed;" or, "which would have become him".

OBS. 19.—It is little to the credit of our grammarians, to find so many of them thus concurring in the same obvious error, and even making bad English worse. The very examples which have hitherto been given to prove that do may be a substitute for other verbs, are none of them in point, and all of them have been constantly and shamefully misinterpreted. Thus: "They [do and did] sometimes also supply the place of another verb, and make the repetition of it, in the same or a subsequent sentence, unnecessary: as, 'You attend not to your studies as he does;' (i. e. as he attends, &c.) 'I shall come if I can; but if I do not, please to excuse me;' (i. e. if I come not.)"—L. Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 88; R. C. Smith's, 88; Ingersoll's, 135; Fisk's, 78; A. Flint's, 41; Hiley's, 30. This remark, but not the examples, was taken from Lowths Gram., p. 41. Churchill varies it thus, and retains Lowth's example: "It [i. e., do] is used also, to supply the place of another verb, in order to avoid the repetition of it: as, 'He loves not plays, As thou dost, Antony.' SHAKS."—New Gram., p. 96. Greenleaf says, "To prevent the repetition of one or more verbs, in the same, or [a] following sentence, we frequently make use of do AND did; as, 'Jack learns the English language as fast as Henry does;' that is, 'as fast as Henry learns.' 'I shall come if I can; but if I do not, please to excuse me;' that is, 'if I come not.'"—Gram. Simplified, p. 27. Sanborn says, "Do is also used instead of another verb, and not unfrequently instead of both the verb and its object; as, 'he loves work as well as you do;' that is, as well as you love work."—Analyt. Gram., p. 112. Now all these interpretations are wrong; the word do, dost, or does, being simply an auxiliary, after which the principal verb (with its object where it has one) is understood. But the first example is bad English, and its explanation is still worse. For, "As he attends, &c.," means, "As he attends to your studies!" And what good sense is there in this? The sentence ought to have been, "You do not attend to your studies, as he does to his." That is—"as he does attend to his studies." This plainly shows that there is, in the text, no real substitution of does for attends. So of all other examples exhibited in our grammars, under this head: there is nothing to the purpose, in any of them; the common principle of ellipsis resolves them all. Yet, strange to say, in the latest and most learned of this sort of text-books, we find the same sham example, fictitious and solecistical as it is, still blindly repeated, to show that "does" is not in its own place, as an auxiliary, but "supplies the place of another verb."—Fowler's E. Gram., 8vo. 1850. p. 265.

NOTES TO RULE XVII.

NOTE I.—When a verb has nominatives of different persons or numbers,[400] connected by or or nor, it must agree with the nearest, (unless an other be the principal term,) and must be understood to the rest, in the person and number required; as, "Neither you nor I am concerned."—W. Allen. "That neither they nor ye also die."—Numb., xviii, 3.

"But neither god, nor shrine, nor mystic rite, Their city, nor her walls, his soul delight." —Rowe's Lucan, B. x, l. 26.

NOTE II.—But, since all nominatives that require different forms of the verb, virtually produce separate clauses or propositions, it is better to complete the concord whenever we conveniently can, by expressing the verb or its auxiliary in connexion with each of them; as, "Either thou art to blame, or I am."—Comly's Gram., p. 78. "Neither were their numbers, nor was their destination, known."—W. Allen's Gram., p. 134. So in clauses connected by and: as, "But declamation is idle, and murmurs fruitless."—Webster's Essays, p. 82. Say,—"and murmurs are fruitless."

NOTE III.—In English, the speaker should always mention himself last; unless his own superior dignity, or the confessional nature of the expression, warrant him in taking the precedence: as, "Thou or I must go."—"He then addressed his discourse to my father and me."—"Ellen and I will seek, apart, the refuge of some forest cell."—Scott. See Obs. 11th above.

NOTE IV.—Two or more distinct subject phrases connected by or or nor, require a singular verb; and, if a nominative come after the verb, that must be singular also: as, "That a drunkard should be poor, or that a fop should be ignorant, is not strange."—"To give an affront, or to take one tamely, is no mark of a great mind." So, when the phrases are unconnected: as, "To spread suspicion, to invent calumnies, to propagate scandal, requires neither labour nor courage."—Rambler, No. 183.

NOTE V.—In general, when verbs are connected by and, or, or nor, they must either agree in mood, tense, and form, or the simplest in form must be placed first; as, "So Sennacherib king of Assyria departed, and went and returned, and dwelt at Nineveh."—Isaiah, xxxvii, 37. "For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die."—Acts, xxv, 11.

NOTE VI.—In stead of conjoining discordant verbs, it is in general better to repeat the nominative or insert a new one; as, "He was greatly heated, and [he] drank with avidity."—Murray's Key, 8vo, p. 201. "A person may be great or rich by chance; but cannot be wise or good, without taking pains for it."—Ib., p. 200. Say,—"but no one can be wise or good, without taking pains for it."

NOTE VII.—A mixture of the forms of the solemn style and the familiar, is inelegant, whether the verbs refer to the same nominative or have different ones expressed; as, "What appears tottering and in hazard of tumbling, produceth in the spectator the painful emotion of fear."—Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 356. "And the milkmaid singeth blithe, And the mower whets his sithe."—Milton's Allegro, l. 65 and 66.

NOTE VIII.—To use different moods under precisely the same circumstances, is improper, even if the verbs have separate nominatives; as, "Bating that one speak and an other answers, it is quite the same."—Blair's Rhet., p. 368. Say,—"that one speaks;" for both the speaking and the answering are assumed as facts.

NOTE IX.—When two terms are connected, which involve different forms of the same verb, such parts of the compound tenses as are not common to both forms, should be inserted in full: except sometimes after the auxiliary do; as, "And then he falls, as I do."—Shak. That is, "as I do fall." The following sentences are therefore faulty: "I think myself highly obliged to make his fortune, as he has mine."—Spect., No. 474. Say,—"as he has made mine." "Every attempt to remove them, has, and likely will prove unsuccessful."—Gay's Prosodical Gram., p. 4. Say,—"has proved, and likely will prove, unsuccessful."

NOTE X.—The verb do must never be substituted for any term to which its own meaning is not adapted; nor is there any use in putting it for a preceding verb that is equally short: as, "When we see how confidently men rest on groundless surmises in reference to their own souls, we cannot wonder that they do it in reference to others."—Simeon. Better:—"that they so rest in reference to the souls of others;" for this repeats the idea with more exactness. NOTE XI.—The preterit should not be employed to form the compound tenses of the verb; nor should the perfect participle be used for the preterit or confounded with the present. Thus: say, "To have gone," not, "To have went;" and, "I did so," not, "I done so;" or, "He saw them," not, "He seen them." Again: say not, "It was lift or hoist up;" but, "It was lifted or hoisted up."

NOTE XII.—Care should be taken, to give every verb or participle its appropriate form, and not to confound those which resemble each other; as, to flee and to fly, to lay and to lie, to sit and to set, to fall and to fell, &c. Thus: say, "He lay by the fire;" not, "He laid by the fire;"—"He has become rich;" not, "He is become rich;"—"I would rather stay;" not, "I had rather stay."

NOTE XIII.—In the syntax of words that express time, whether they be verbs, adverbs, or nouns, the order and fitness of time should be observed, that the tenses may be used according to their import. Thus: in stead of, "I have seen him last week;" say, "I saw him last week;"—and, in stead of, "I saw him this week;" say, "I have seen him this week." So, in stead of, "I told you already;" or, "I have told you before;" say, "I have told you already;"—"I told you before."

NOTE XIV.—Verbs of commanding, desiring, expecting, hoping, intending, permitting, and some others, in all their tenses, refer to actions or events, relatively present or future: one should therefore say, "I hoped you would come;" not, "I hoped you would have come;"—and, "I intended to do it;" not, "I intended to have done it;"—&c.

NOTE XV.—Propositions that are as true now as they ever were or will be, should generally be expressed in the present tense: as, "He seemed hardly to know, that two and two make four;" not, "made."—Blair's Gram., p. 65. "He will tell you, that whatever is, is right." Sometimes the present tense is improper with the conjunction that, though it would be quite proper without it; as, "Others said, That it is Elias. And others said, That it is a prophet."—Mark, vi, 15. Here That should be omitted, or else is should be was. The capital T is also improper.

IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.

FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XVII.

UNDER THE RULE ITSELF.—NOMINATIVES CONNECTED BY OR.

"We do not know in what either reason or instinct consist."—Rambler, No. 41.

[FORMULE.—Not proper, because the verb consist is of the plural number, and does not correctly agree with its two nominatives, reason and instinct, which are connected by or, and taken disjunctively. But, according to Rule 17th, "When a verb has two or more nominatives connected by or or nor, it must agree with them singly, and not as if taken together." Therefore, consist should be consists; thus, "We do not know in what either reason or instinct consists."]

"A noun or a pronoun joined with a participle, constitute a nominative case absolute."—Bicknell's Gram., Part ii, p. 50. "The relative will be of that case, which the verb or noun following, or the preposition going before, use to govern."—Dr. Adam's Gram., p. 203. "Which the verb or noun following, or the preposition going before, usually govern."—Gould's Adam's Gram., p. 200.[401] "In the different modes of pronunciation which habit or caprice give rise to."—Knight, on the Greek Alphabet, p. 14. "By which he, or his deputy, were authorized to cut down any trees in Whittlebury forest."—Junius, p. 251. "Wherever objects were to be named, in which sound, noise, or motion were concerned, the imitation by words was abundantly obvious."—Blair's Rhet., p. 55. "The pleasure or pain resulting from a train of perceptions in different circumstances, are a beautiful contrivance of nature for valuable purposes."—Kames, El. of Crit., i, 262. "Because their foolish vanity or their criminal ambition represent the principles by which they are influenced, as absolutely perfect."—Life of Madame De Stael, p. 2. "Hence naturally arise indifference or aversion between the parties."—Brown's Estimate, ii, 37. "A penitent unbeliever, or an impenitent believer, are characters no where to be found."—Tract, No. 183. "Copying whatever is peculiar in the talk of all those whose birth or fortune entitle them to imitation."—Rambler, No. 194. "Where love, hatred, fear, or contempt, are often of decisive influence."—Duncan's Cicero, p. 119. "A lucky anecdote, or an enlivening tale relieve the folio page."—D'Israeli's Curiosities, Vol. i, p. 15. "For outward matter or event, fashion not the character within."—Book of Thoughts, p. 37. "Yet sometimes we have seen that wine, or chance, have warmed cold brains."—Dryden's Poems, p. 76. "Motion is a Genus; Flight, a Species; this Flight or that Flight are Individuals."—Harris's Hermes, p. 38. "When et, aut, vel, sine, or nec, are joined to different members of the same sentence."—Adam's Lat. and Eng. Gram., p. 206; Gould's Lat. Gram., 203; Grant's, 266. "Wisdom or folly govern us."—Fisk's English Gram., 84. "A or an are styled indefinite articles."—Folker's Gram., p. 4. "A rusty nail, or a crooked pin, shoot up into prodigies."—Spectator, No. 7. "Are either the subject or the predicate in the second sentence modified?"—Fowler's E. Gram., 8vo, 1850, p. 578, Sec.589.

"Praise from a friend, or censure from a foe, Are lost on hearers that our merits know." —Pope, Iliad, B. x, l. 293.

UNDER THE RULE ITSELF.—NOMINATIVES CONNECTED BY NOR.

"Neither he nor she have spoken to him."—Perrin's Gram., p. 237. "For want of a process of events, neither knowledge nor elegance preserve the reader from weariness."—JOHNSON: in Crabb's Syn., p. 511. "Neither history nor tradition furnish such information."—Robertson's Amer., Vol. i, p. 2. "Neither the form nor power of the liquids have varied materially."—Knight, on the Greek Alph., p. 16. "Where neither noise nor motion are concerned."—Blair's Rhet., p. 55. "Neither Charles nor his brother were qualified to support such a system."—Junius, p. 250. "When, therefore, neither the liveliness of representation, nor the warmth of passion, serve, as it were, to cover the trespass, it is not safe to leave the beaten track."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 381. "In many countries called Christian, neither Christianity, nor its evidence, are fairly laid before men."—Butler's Analogy, p. 269. "Neither the intellect nor the heart are capable of being driven."—Abbott's Teacher, p. 20. "Throughout this hymn, neither Apollo nor Diana are in any way connected with the Sun or Moon."—Coleridge's Introd., p. 199. "Of which, neither he, nor this Grammar, take any notice."—Johnson's Gram. Com., p. 346. "Neither their solicitude nor their foresight extend so far."—Robertson's Amer., Vol. i, p. 287. "Neither Gomara, nor Oviedo, nor Herrera, consider Ojeda, or his companion Vespucci, as the first discoverers of the continent of America."—Ib., Vol. i, p. 471. "Neither the general situation of our colonies, nor that particular distress which forced the inhabitants of Boston to take up arms, have been thought worthy of a moment's consideration."—Junius, p. 174.