Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

life, and effaces the sense of religion and of God;" It ought to be, “obkterate,” and “ efface.”

1. When the nouns are nearly related, or scarcely distinguishable in sense, and sometimes even when they are very different, some authors have thought it allowable to put the verbs, nouns, and pronouns, in the singular number: as, "Tranquillity and peace dwells there ;” « Ignorance and negligence has produced the effect;" "The discomfiture and slaughter was very great." But it is evidently contrary to the first principles of grammar, to consider two distinct ideas as one, however nice may be their shades of difference : and if there be no difference one of them must be superfluous, and ought to be rejected.

To suppport the above construction, it is said, that the verb may be understood as applied to each of the preceding terms; as in the following example. "Sand, and salt, and a mass of iron, is easier to bear than a man without understanding." But besides the confusion, and the latitude of application which such a construction would introduce, it appears to be more proper and analogical, in cases where the verb is intended to be applied to any one of the terms, to make use of the disjunctive conjunction, which grammatically refers the verb to one or other of the preceding terms in a separate view. To preserve the distinctive uses of the copulative and disjunctive conjunctions, would render the rules precise, consistent, and intelligible. Dr. Blair very justly observes, that "two or more substantives, joined by a copulative, must always require the verb or pronoun to which they refer, to be placed in the plural number."

2. In many complex sentences, it is difficult for learners to determine, whether one or more of the clauses are to be considered as the nominative case; and consequently, whether the verb should be in the singular or the plural number. We shall, therefore, set down a number of varied examples of this nature, which may serve as some govern

pos

ment to the scholar, with respect to sentences of a similar construction. "Prosperity, with humility, renders its sessor truly amiable." "The ship with all her furniture, was destroyed." "Not only his estate, his reputation too has suffered by his misconduct." "The general also, in conjunction with the officers, has applied for redress." "He cannot be justified; for it is true, that the prince, as well as the people, was blameworthy." "The king, with his life-guard, has just passed through the village." "In the mutual influence of body and soul, there is a wisdom, a wonderful art, which we cannot fathom." "Virtue, honour, nay, even self-interest, conspire to recommend the measure. "Patriotism, morality, every public and private consideration, demand our submission to just and lawful government." "Nothing delights me so much as the works of nature."

[ocr errors]

" A

In support of such forms of expression as the following, we see the authority of Hume, Priestley, and other writers ; and we annex them for the reader's consideration. long course of time, with a variety of accidents and circumstances, are requisite to produce those revolutions." "The king, with the lord's and commons, form an excellent frame of government." "The side A, with the sides B and C, compose the triangle." "The fire communicated itself to the bed, which, with the furniture of the room, and a valuable library, were all entirely consumed." It is, however, proper to observe, that these modes of expression do not appear to be warranted by the just principles of construction. The words, "A long course of time," "The king," "The side A," and "which," are the true nominatives to the respective verbs. In the last example, the word all should be expunged. As the preposition with governs the objective case of a pronoun, in English; and, if translated into Latin, would govern the ablative case, it is manifest, from analogy, that the clauses following with, in the preceding sentences, cannot form any part of the nominative case. The following sentence appears to be

N

unexceptionable; and may serve to explain the others. "The lords and commons are essential branches of the British constitution: the king, with them, forms an excellent frame of government."

3. If the singular nouns and pronouns, which are joined together by a copulative conjunction, be of several persons, in making the plural pronoun agree with them in person, the second person takes place of the third, and the first of both: as, "James, and thou, and I, are attached to our country." ""Thou and he shared it between you."

RULE III.

The conjunction disjunctive has an effect contrary to that of the conjunction copulative; for as the verb, noun, or pronoun, is referred to the preceding terms taken separately, it must be in the singular number: as, "Ignorance or negligence has caused this mistake;" "John, James, or Joseph, intends to accompany me;" "There is, in many minds, neither knowledge nor understanding."

The following sentences are variations from this rule: "A man may see a metaphor or an allegory in a picture, as well as read them in a description ;" " read it," " Neither character nor dialogue were yet understood;" "was yet." "It must indeed be confessed that a lampoon or a satire do not carry in them robbery or murder;" "does not carry in it.” "Death, or some worse misfortune, soon divide them." It ought to be " divides.”

1. When singular pronouns 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." 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 pro noun, when it can conveniently be done, should be placed. next to the verb.

RULE IV.

A noun of multitude, or signifying many, may have a verb or pronoun agreeing with it, either of the singular or plural number; yet not without regard to the import of the word, as conveying unity or plurality of idea: as, "The meeting was large;" "The parliament is dissolved;" The nation is powerful;" "My people do not consider they have not known me;" "The multitude eagerly pursue pleasure, as their chief good;" "The council were divided in their sentiments."

We ought to consider whether the term will immediately suggest the idea of the number it represents, or whether it exhibits to the mind the idea of the whole as one thing. In the former case, the verb ought to be plural; in the latter it ought to be singular. Thus, it seems improper to say, "The peasantry goes barefoot, and the middle sort makes use of wooden shoes." It would be better to say, "The peasantry go barefoot, and the middle sort make use," &c. because the idea in both these cases, is that of a number. On the contrary, there is a harshness in the following sentences, in which nouns of number have verbs plural; because the ideas they represent seem not to be sufficiently divided in the mind. "The court of Rome were not without solicitude." "The house of commons were of small weight." "The house of lords were so much influenced by these reasons.” "Stephen's party

were entirely broken up by the captivity of their leader." "An army of twenty-four thousand were assembled." "What reason have the church of Rome for proceeding in this manner ?" "There is indeed no constitution so tame and careless of their own defence." "All the virtues of mankind are to be counted upon a few fingers, but his follies and vices are innumerable." Is not mankind in this place a noun of multitude, and such as requires the pronoun referring to it to be in the plural number, their ?

RULE V.

Pronouns must always agree with their antecedents, and the nouns for which they stand, in gender and number: as, "This is the friend whom I love ;""That is the vice which I hate ;" "The king and the queen had put on their robes;" "The moon appears, and she shines, but the light is not her own."

The relative is of the same person with the antecedent, and the verb agrees with it accordingly:as, "Thou who lovest wisdom;" "I who speak from experience."

Of this rule there are many violations to be met with ; a few of which may be sufficient to put the learner on his guard. "Each of the sexes should keep within its particular bounds, and content themselves with the advantages of their particular districts:" better thus : "The sexes

should keep within their particular bounds," &c. "Can any one, on their entrance into the world, be fully secure that they shall not be deceived?" " on his entrance," and that he shall." "One should not think too favourably of ourselves ;" "of one's self." "He had one acquaintance which poisoned his principles ;"" who poisoned.",

Every relative must have an antecedent to which it refers, either expressed or implied: as, "Who is fatal to

« AnteriorContinuar »