FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTES[1]“And I persecuted this way untothedeath.”Actsxxii. 4. The Apostle does not mean any particular sort of death, but death in general: the Definite Article therefore is improperly used. It ought to beunto death, without any Article: agreeably to the Original, αχρι θανατου.“When He the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you intoall Truth.”Johnxvi. 13. That is, according to this Translation, into all Truth whatsoever, into Truth of all kinds: very different from the meaning of the Evangelist, and from the Original, εις πασαν την αληθειαν, intoall the Truth; that is, into all Evangelical Truth.“Truly this wastheSon of God.”Matt.xxvii. 54. andMarkxv. 39. This Translation supposes, that the Roman Centurion had a proper and adequate notion of the character of Jesus, as the Son of God in a peculiar and incommunicable sense: whereas, it is probable, both from the circumstances of the History, and from the expression of the Original, (ὑιος Θεου, a Son of God, not ὁ υιος,theSon) that he only meant to acknowledge him to be an extraordinary person, and more than a mere man; according to his own notion of Sons of Gods in the Pagan Theology. This is also more agreeable to St. Luke’s account of the same confession of the Centurion: “Certainly this was δικαιος, a righteous man;” not ὁ Δικαιος, the Just One. The same may be observed of Nebuchadnezzar’s words,Dan.iii. 25.—“And the form of the fourth is liketheSon of God:” it ought to be by the Indefinite Article, likeaSon of God: ὁμοια ὑιῳ Θεου, as Theodotion very properly renders it: that is, like an Angel; according to Nebuchadnezzar’s own account of it in the 28th verse: “Blessed be God, who hath sent hisAngel, and delivered his servants.” See alsoLukexix. 9.These Remarks may serve to shew the great importance of the proper use of the Article; the near affinity there is between the Greek Article, and the English Definite Article; and the excellence of the English Language in this respect, which by means of its two Articles does most precisely determine the extent of signification of Common Names: whereas the Greek has only one Article, and it has puzzled all the Grammarians to reduce the use of that to any clear and certain rules.[2]“A good character should not be rested in as an end, but employed asa meansof doing still farther good.”Atterbury’sSermons. Ought it not to bea mean?[3]“Aboutaneight days:” that is, a space of eight days.Lukeix. 28. But the expression is obsolete, or at least vulgar; and we may add likewise improper: for the numbereighthas not been reduced by use and convenience into one collective and compact idea, likea hundred, anda thousand; each of which, likea dozen, ora score, we are accustomed equally to consider on certain occasions as a simple Unity.[4]And antiently,eyen,shoen,housen,hosen; so likewise antientlysowen,cowen, now always pronounced and writtenswine,kine.[5]In the German the vowelsa,o,u, of monosyllable Nouns are generally in the Plural changed into diphthongs with ane: as derhand, the hand, diehände; derhut, the hat, diehüte; derknopff, the button, (or knop) dieknöpffe; &c.[6]These are directly from the Saxon:mus,mys;lus,lys;toth,teth;fot,fet;gos,ges.[7]“Lingua Anglorum hodierna avitæ Saxonicæ formam in plerisque orationis partibus etiamnum retinet. Nam quoad particulas casuales, quorundam casuum terminationes, conjugationes verborum, verbum substantivum, formam passivæ vocis, pronomina, participia, conjunctiones, & præpositiones omnes; denique quoad idiomata, phrasiumque maximam partem, etiam nunc Saxonicus est Anglorum sermo.” Hickes. Thesaur. Lingg. Septent. Præf. p. vi. To which may be added the Degrees of comparison, the form of which is the very same in the English as in the Saxon.[8]“Christ hissake,” in our Liturgy, is a mistake, either of the Printers, or of the Compilers.⸺“My paper is theUlysses hisbow, in which every man of wit or learning may try his strength.” Addison, Guardian Nᵒ 98. This is no slip of Mr. Addison’s pen: he gives us his opinion upon this point very explicitly in another place. “The same single letter [s] on many occasions does the office of a whole word, and represents thehisandherof our forefathers.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 135. The latter instance might have shewn him, how groundless this notion is: for it is not easy to conceive, how the lettersadded to a Feminine Noun should represent the wordher; any more than it should the wordtheir, added to a Plural Noun: as, “thechildren’sbread.” But the direct derivation of this Case from the Saxon Genitive Case is sufficient of itself to decide this matter.[9]“At his command th’ uprooted hills retir’dEach tohisplace: they heard his voice and wentObsequious: Heavenhiswonted face renew’d,And with fresh flowrets hill and valley smil’d.”Milton, P. L. B. vi.“Was I deceiv’d, or did a sable CloudTurn forthhersilver lining on the Night?”Milton, Comus.“Go to your Natural Religion: lay beforeherMahomet and his disciples arrayed in armour and in blood:⸺shewherthe cities which he set in flames; the countries which he ravaged:⸺whenshehas viewed him in this scene, carryherinto his retirements; shewherthe Prophet’s chamber, his concubines and his wives:⸺whensheis tired with this prospect, then shewherthe Blessed Jesus.—” See the whole passage in the conclusion of Bp Sherlock’s 9th Sermon, Vol. I.In these beautiful passages, as in the English if you putitanditsinstead ofhis,she,her, you destroy the images, and reduce, what was before highly Poetical and Rhetorical, to mere prose and common discourse; so if you render them into another language, Greek, Latin, French, Italian, or German, in which Hill, Heaven, Cloud, Religion, are constantly Masculine, or Feminine, or Neuter, respectively, you make the images obscure and doubtful, and in proportion diminish their beauty.This excellent remark is Mr. Harris’s, Hermes, p. 58.[10]Some Writers have usedYeas the Objective Case Plural of the Pronoun of the Second Person; very improperly and ungrammatically.“But Tyrants dreadye, lest your just decreeTransfer the pow’r, and set the people free.”Prior.“His wrath, which one day will destroyyeboth.”Milton, P. L. ii. 734.Dr. Bently has corrected this mistake, which is probably an error of the Press, or of the Editor of whom he talks so much. But he has done it, without taking the least notice of the matter, or assuming any merit to himself from an emendation, which is one of the very few that are really such in his whole performance.[11]The Neuter Pronoun of the Third Person had formerly no variation of Cases. Instead of the Possessiveitsthey usedhis, which is now appropriated to the Masculine. “Learning hathhisinfancy, whenitis but beginning, and almost childish; thenhisyouth, whenitis luxuriant and juvenile; thenhisstrength of years, whenitis solid and reduced; and lastlyhisold age, whenitwaxeth dry and exhaust.” Bacon, Essay 58. In this examplehisis evidently used as the Possessive Case ofit: but what shall we say to the following, whereheris applied in the same manner, and seems to make a strange confusion of Gender? “He that pricketh the heart makethitto shewherknowledge.”Ecclus.xxii. 19.“Oft have I seen a timely-parted ghost,Of ashy semblance, meagre, pale, and bloodless,Being all descended to the lab’ring heart,Who, in the conflict thatitholds with death,Attracts the same for aidance ’gainst the enemy.”Shakespear.If the Poet had saidheinstead ofit, he would have avoided a confusion of Genders, and happily compleated the spirited and elegant Prosopopœia, begun by the Personal Relativewho. The Neuter Relativewhichwould have made the sentence more strictly grammatical, but at the same time more prosaic.[12]So the SaxonIchath the Possessive CaseMin;Thu, PossessiveThin;He, PossessiveHis: from which our Possessive Cases of the same Pronouns are taken without alteration. To the Saxon Possessive Caseshire,ure,eower,hira, (that is,her’s,our’s,your’s,their’s) we have added thes, the Characteristic of the Possessive Case of Nouns. Orour’s,your’s, are directly from the Saxonures,eoweres; the Possessive Case of the Pronominal Adjectivesure,eower; that is,our,your.[13]Whoseis by some authors made the Possessive Case ofwhich, and applied to things as well as persons; I think, improperly.“Thequestion,whosesolution I require,Is, what the sex of women most desire.”Dryden.“Is there any otherdoctrine,whosefollowers are punished?” Addison.[14]So the Saxonhwahath the Possessive Casehwæs. Note, that the Saxons rightly placed the Aspirate before thew: as we now pronounce it. This will be evident to any one that shall consider in what manner he pronounces the wordswhat,when; that is,hoo-àt,hoo-èn.[15]Adjectives are very improperly calledNouns; for they are not theNamesof things. The Adjectivesgood,white, are applied to the Nounsman,snow, to express the Qualities belonging to those Subjects; but the Names of those Qualities in the Abstract, (that is, considered in themselves, and without being attributed to any Subject) aregoodness,whiteness; and these are Nouns, or Substantives.[16]The Double Superlativemost highestis a Phrase peculiar to the Old Vulgar Translation of the Psalms, where it acquires a singular propriety from the Subject to which it is applied, the Supreme Being, who ishigher than the highest.[17]“Lesser, says Mr. Johnson, is a barbarous corruption ofLess, formed by the vulgar from the habit of terminating comparisons iner.”“Attend to what alesserMuse indites.”Addis.Worsersounds much more barbarous, only because it has not been so frequently used:“A dreadful quiet felt, andworserfarThan arms, a sullen interval of war.”Dryden.[18]A greater variety of endings to distinguish the Persons in the Verb is not necessary; as the Verb is always attended with the Personal Pronoun, wherever an ambiguity would otherwise arise. For the same reason the Plural termination inen,they loven,they weren, which was formerly in use, hath been long obsolete.[19]Thou, in the Polite, and even in the Familiar Style, is disused, and the PluralYouis employed instead of it: we sayYou have, notThou hast. Tho’ in this case we applyYouto a single Person, yet the Verb too must agree with it in the Plural Number: it must necessarily beYou have, notYou hast.You was, the Second Person Plural of the Pronoun placed in agreement with the First or Third Person Singular of the Verb, is an enormous Solecism: and yet Authors of the first rank have inadvertently fallen into it. “Knowing thatyou wasmy old master’s good friend.” Addison, Spect. No 517. “Would to Godyou waswithin her reach.” Lord Bolingbroke to Swift, Letter 46. “Ifyou washere.” Ditto, Letter 47. “I am just now as well, as whenyou washere.” Pope to Swift, P. S. to Letter 56. On the contrary the Solemn Style admits not ofYoufor a Single Person. This hath led Mr. Pope into a great impropriety in the beginning of his Messiah:“OThoumy voice inspireWhotouch’dIsaiah’s hallow’d lips with fire!”The Solemnity of the Style would not admit ofYouforThouin the Pronoun; nor the measure of the Versetouchedst, ordidst touch, in the Verb; as it indispensably ought to be, in the one, or the other of these two forms:Youwhotouched; orThouwhotouchedst, ordidst touch. Again:“Just ofthyword, in every thought sincere,Whoknewno wish but what the world might hear.”Pope, Epitaph.It ought to beyourin the first line, orknewestin the second.[20]This Participle represents the action as complete and finished; and, being subjoined to the Auxiliaryto have, constitutes the Perfect Time: I call it therefore the Perfect Participle. The same subjoined to the Auxiliaryto be, constitutes the Passive Verb; and in that state, or when used without the Auxiliary in a passive sense, is called the Passive Participle.[21]“Before the sun,Before the heav’ns thouwert.”Milton.“Remember what thouwert.”Dryden.“I knew thouwertnot slow to hear.”Addison.“Thou who of oldwertsent to Israel’s court.”Prior.“All this thouwert.”⸺Pope.Shall we in deference to these great authorities allowwertto be the same withwast, and common to the Indicative and Subjunctive Mode? or rather abide by the practice of our best antient writers; the propriety of the language, which requires, as far as may be, distinct forms for different Modes; and the analogy of formation in each Mode; Iwas, Thouwast; Iwere, Thouwert? all which conspire to makewertpeculiar to the Subjunctive Mode.[22]Note, that the Imperfect and Perfect Times are here put together. And it is to be observed, that in the Subjunctive Mode, the event being spoken of under a condition, or supposition, or in the form of a wish, and therefore as doubtful and contingent, the Verb itself in the Present, and the Auxiliary both of the Present and Past Imperfect Times, often carry with them somewhat of a Future sense: as, “If he come to-morrow, I may speak to him:” ⸺ “If he should, or would, come to-morrow, I might, would, could, or should, speak to him.” Observe also, that the Auxiliaryshouldin the Imperfect Times is used to express the Present, as well as the Past; as, “Itismy desire, that heshould[now] come;” as well as, “Itwasmy desire that heshould[then] come.” So that in this Mode the precise Time of the Verb is very much determined by the nature and drift of the Sentence.[23]⸺“Perdition catch my soulBut Idolove thee!—”⸺“This to meIn dreadful secrecy impart theydid.”Shakespear.“Die he certainlydid.”Sherlock, Vol. 1. Disc. 7.“Yes, Ididlove her:” that is, at that time, or once; intimating a negation, or doubt, of present love.“The Lord called Samuel: and he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I, for thoucalledstme.⸺And the Lord called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I, for thoudidstcall me.” 1 Sam. iii. 4-6.[24]This distinction was not observed formerly as to the wordshall, which was used in the Second and Third Persons to express simply the Event. So likewiseshouldwas used, where we now make use ofwould. See the Vulgar Translation of the Bible.[25]Bishop Wilkins gives the following elegant investigation of the Modes in hisReal Character, Part iii. Chap. 5.“To shew in what manner the Subject is to be joined with his Predicate, the Copula between them is affected with a Particle, which from the use of it is calledModus, the manner orMode.Now the Subject and Predicate may be joined together eitherSimply, or with some kind ofLimitation; and accordingly these Modes are Primary or Secondary.The Primary Modes are called by Grammarians Indicative and Imperative.When the matter is declared to be so, or at least when it seems in the Speaker’s power to have it be so, as the bare union of Subject and Predicate would import, then the Copula is nakedly expressed without any variation: and this manner of expressing it is called the Indicative Mode.When it is neither declared to be so, nor seems immediately in the Speaker’s power to have it so; then he can do no more in words but make out the expression of his will to him that hath the thing in his power; namely tohis{Superior}by{Petition,}{Equal}{Persuasion,}{Inferior}{Command.}And the manner of these affecting the Copula, (Be it so, or, let it be so,) is called the Imperative Mode; of which there are these three varieties very fit to be distinctly provided for. As for that other use of the Imperative Mode, when it signifiesPermission; this may be sufficiently expressed by theSecondary ModeofLiberty; Youmaydo it.The Secondary Modes are such, as, when the Copula is affected with any of them, make the Sentence to be (as the Logicians call it) aModal Proposition.This happens, when the matter in discourse, namely, the being, or doing, or suffering of a thing, is considered, notsimply by itself, butgradually in its causes, from which it proceedscontingently, ornecessarily.Then a thing seems to be leftContingent, when the Speaker expresses only thePossibilityof it, or his ownLibertyto it.1. ThePossibilityof a thing depends upon the power of its cause; and may be expressedwhen{Absolute}by the Particle{Can,{Conditional}{Could.2. TheLibertyof a thing depends upon a freedom from all obstacles either within or without, and is usually expressed in our languagewhen{Absolute}by the Particle{May,{Conditional}{Might.Then a thing seems to be ofNecessity, when the Speaker expresseth the resolution of his ownwill, or some otherobligationupon him from without.3. TheInclination of the Willis expressed,if{Absolute}by the Particle{Will,{Conditional}{Would.4. The Necessity of a thing from someexternal Obligation, whetherNatural, orMoral, which we call Duty, is expressed,if{Absolute}by the Particle{Must,ought,shall;{Conditional}{Must,ought,should.”See alsoHermes, Book I. Chap. viii.[26]I doubt much of the propriety of the following examples: “The rules of our holy Religion, from which weareinfinitelyswerved.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 27. “The whole obligation of that law and covenant, which God made with the Jews,wasalsoceased.” Ib. Vol. II. Serm. 52. “Whose numberwasnowamountedto three hundred.” Swift, Contests and Dissensions, Chap. 3. Neuter Verbs are sometimes employed very improperly as Actives: “I think, it by no means a fit and decent thing tovie Charities, and to erect the reputation of one upon the ruins of another.” Atterbury, Vol. I. Serm. 2.[27]These two have alsobeatenandburstenin the Participle; and in that form they belong to the Third Class of Irregulars.[28]The Verbs marked thus throughout the three Classes of Irregulars, have the Regular as well as the Irregular form in use.[29]This Verb in the Past Time and Participle is pronounced short;read,red,red; likelead,led,led; and perhaps ought to be written in this manner: our antient writers spelt itredde.[30]They follow the Saxon rule: “Verbs which in the Infinitive end indanandtan,” (that is, in English,dandt; for an is only the Characteristic termination of the Saxon Infinitive;) “in the Preterit and Participle Preterit commonly for the sake of better sound throw away the final ed; asbeot,afed, (both in the Preterit and Participle Preterit) forbeoted,afeded; frombeotan,afedan.” Hickes, Grammat. Saxon, cap. 9. So the same Verbs in English,beat,fed, instead ofbeated,feeded.[31]Whenenfollows a Vowel or Liquid theeis dropt: sodrawn,slayn, (orslain,) are instead ofdrawen,slayen; so likewiseknown,born, are forknowen,boren, in the Saxoncnawen,boren: and so of the rest.[32]This Verb is also formed like those ofilong intoishort; Write, writ, written; and by Contractionwritin the Participle, but, I think, improperly.[33]Frequent mistakes are made in the formation of the Participle of this Verb. The analogy plainly requiressitten; which was formerly in use: “The army havingsittenthere so long:”⸺“Which was enough to make him stir, that would not havesittenstill, though Hanibal had been quiet.” Raleigh. “That no Parliament should be dissolved, till it hadsittenfive months.” Hobbes, Hist. of Civil Wars, p. 257. But it is now almost wholly disused, the form of the Past Timesat, having taken its place. Dr. Middleton hath with great propriety restored the true Participle:⸺“To havesittenon the heads of the Apostles:”⸺“to havesittenupon each of them.” Works, Vol. II. p. 30. “Blessed is the man,⸺that hath notsatin the seat of the scornful.” Ps. i. 1. The old Editions havesit; which may be perhaps allowed as a Contraction ofsitten. “And when he wasset, his disciples came unto him:” καθισαντος αυτου. Matt. v. 1.⸺“who isseton the right hand;”⸺“and issetdown at the right hand of the throne of God:” in both places εκαθισεν. Heb. viii. 1. & xii. 2.Setcan be no part of the Verbto sit. If it belongs to the Verbto set, the Translation in these passages is wrong: forto setsignifiesto place, but without any designation of the posture of the person placed; which is a circumstance of importance expressed by the original.[34]This Neuter Verb is frequently confounded with the Verb Activeto lay, [that is,to put, orplace;] which is Regular, and has in the Past Time and Participlelayed, orlaid.[35]“Thus havingchosedeach other.⸺” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 797. 8ᵛᵒ. Improperly.[36]That is, as a bird,volare; whereasto fleesignifiesfugere, as from an enemy. This seems to be the proper distinction betweento fly, andto flee; which in the Present Time are very often confounded. Our Translation of the Bible is not quite free from this mistake. It hathfleeforvolarein perhaps seven or eight places out of a great number; but neverflyforfugere.[37]Essay xxix.[38]The whole number of Verbs in the English language, Regular and Irregular, Simple and Compounded, taken together, is about 4300. See Dr. Ward’s Essays on the English Language; the Catalogue of English Verbs.[39]⸺“He wouldhave spoke.”Milton, P. L. x. 517.“Wordsinterwovewith sighs found out their way.”P. L. i. 621.“And to his faithful servanthathin placeBorewitness gloriously.”—Samson Ag. ℣. 1752.“And envious darkness, ere they could return,Had stolethem from me.”—Comus, ℣. 195.Here it is observable, that the Author’s MS. and the First Edition have itstolne.⸺“And in triumphhad rode.”P. R. iii. 36.⸺“Ihave choseThis perfect man.”⸺P. R. i. 165.⸺“The fragrant brierwas wovebetween.”Dryden, Fables.“Then finish what youhave began,But scribble faster, if you can.”Dryden, Poems, Vol. 2. p. 172.“Have sprang.”Atterbury, Vol. 1. Serm. 4.“Had spake”⸺“had began.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. Hist. p. 40, & 120. “The menbegunto embellish themselves.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 434.“Rapt into future times the bardbegun.”Pope, Messiah.And without the necessity of rhyme:“A second deluge learning thuso’er-run,And the Monks finish’d what the Gothsbegun.”Essay on Criticism.“Repeats you verseswroteon glasses.”Prior.“Mr. Missonhas wrote.”—Addison, Preface to his Travels. “He could only command his voice,brokewith sighs and sobbings, so far as to bid her proceed.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 164.“No civil broilshavesince his deatharose.”Dryden, on O. Cromwell.“Illustrious virtues, who by turnshave rose.”Prior.⸺“Hadnotarose.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. and Battle of Books: and Bolingbroke, Letter to Wyndham, p. 233.⸺“This nimble operator willhave stoleit.” Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. “Some philosophershave mistook.” Ibid. Sect. ix.⸺“SilenceWas tookere she was ware.”Milton, Comus.“Into these common places look,Which from great authors Ihave took.”Prior, Alma.“A free Constitution, when it hasbeen shookby the iniquity of former administrations.” Lord Bolingbroke, Patriot King, p. 111.⸺“Too strong tobe shookby his enemies.” Atterbury. “But therewasnow an accidentfellout.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. p. 292.⸺“Ev’n there he shouldhave fell.”Prior, Solomon.“Sure some disasterhas befell:Speak, Nurse; I hope the Boy is well.”Gay, Fables.[40]“Was theeasilierpersuaded.”—Raleigh. “The thingshighliestimportant to the growing age.” Lord Shaftesbury, Letter to Lord Molesworth. Improperly, formore easily,most highly.[41]The Conjunctionbecauseused to express the motive or end, is either improper or obsolete: as, “The multitude rebuked them,becausethey should hold their peace.” Matt. xx. 31. “It is the case of some, to contrive false periods of business,becausethey may seem men of dispatch.” Bacon, Essay xxv. We should now make use ofthat.[42]“He caused all persons,whomhe knew had, or he thought might have, spoken to him, to be apprehended.” Clarendon, Vol. III. p. 618. 8ᵛᵒ. It ought to bewho, the Nominative Case tohad; notwhom, as if it were the Objective Case governed byknew.“Scotland andTheedid each in other live.”Dryden, Poems, Vol. II. p. 220.It ought to beThou.[43]“ButThoufalse Arcite nevershallobtainThy bad pretence.”⸺Dryden, Fables.“ThatThou mightfortune to thy side engage.”Prior.It ought to beshalt,mightest. The mistake seems to be owing to the confounding ofThouandYouas equivalent in every respect; whereas one is Singular, the other Plural. See above, p. 48. “Greatpains has[have] been taken.” Pope, P. S. to the Odyssey. “I have considered,what have[hath] been said on both sides in this controversy.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 27.[44]“Tell wholoves who; what favours some partake,And who is jilted for another’s sake.”Dryden, Juvenal, Sat. vi.“Those,whohethoughttrue to his party.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. I. p. 667. 8ᵛᵒ. “Whoshould Imeetthe other night, but my old friend?” Spect. Nᵒ 32. “Whoshould Iseein the lid of it, but the Doctor?” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 57. “He knows,whoit is proper toexposeforemost.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Conclusion. It ought in all these places to bewhom.[45]“And restores to hisIslandthat tranquillity and repose, to which they had beenstrangersduring his absence.” Pope, Dissertation prefixed to the Odyssey.Islandis not a Noun of Multitude: it ought to be, hispeople; or,ithad beena stranger. “What reasonhave the Churchof Rome to talk of modesty in this case?” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 49. “All the virtues of mankind are to be counted upon a few fingers, buthisfollies and vices are innumerable.” Swift, Preface to Tale of a Tub. Is notmankindin this place a Noun of Multitude, and such as requires the Pronoun refering to it to be in the Plural Number,their?[46]“Whomdo men say, thatI am?⸺Butwhomsay ye, thatI am?” Matt. xvi. 13, 15. So likewise Mark viii. 27, 29. Luke ix. 18, 20. “Whom think ye, thatI am?” Acts xiii. 25. It ought in all these places to bewho; which is not governed by the Verbsayorthink, but by the Verbam: or agrees in Case with the PronounI. If the Verb were in the Infinitive Mode, it would require the Objective Case of the Relative, agreeing with the Pronounme: “Whomthink ye, or do ye think,me to be?”⸺“To that,whichoncewas thee.”Prior.It ought to be,which was thou; or,which thou wast.[47]On which place says Dr. Bentley, “The Context demands that it be,⸺Himdescending, Illo descendente.” Buthimis not the Ablative Case, for the English knows no such Case; nor doeshimwithout a Preposition on any occasion answer to the Latin Ablativeillo. I might with better reason contend, that it ought to be “hisdescending,” because it is in Greek αυτου καταβαινοντος in the Genitive; and it would be as good Grammar, and as proper English. This comes of forcing the English under the rules of a foreign Language, with which it has little concern: and thisugly and deformed fault, to use his own expression, Bentley has endeavoured to impose upon Milton in several places: see P. L. vii. 15. ix. 829, 883, 1147. x. 267, 1001. On the other hand, where Milton has been really guilty of this fault, he, very inconsistently with himself, corrects him, and sets him right. His Latin Grammar Rules were happily out of his head, and by a kind ofvernacular instinct(so, I imagine, he would call it) he perceived that his Author was wrong.“For only in destroying I find easeTo my relentless thoughts; and,him destroy’d,Or won to what may work his utter loss,For whom all this was made, all this will soonFollow, as to him link’d in weal or woe.”P. L. ix. 129.It ought to be, “hedestroy’d,” that is, “he beingdestroy’d.” Bentley corrects it, “andmandestroy’d.”Archbishop Tillotson has fallen into the same mistake: “Solomon was of this mind; and I make no doubt, but he made as wise and true Proverbs as any body has done since:Himonlyexcepted, who was a much greater and wiser man than Solomon.” Vol. I. Ser. 53.[48]“Toseeso manyto make solittle conscience of so great a sin.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 22. “It cannot but be a delightful spectacle to God and Angels toseea young person, besieged by powerful temptations on either side,to acquithimself gloriously, and resolutelyto holdout against the most violent assaults: tobeholdone in the prime and flower of his age, that is courted by pleasures and honours, by the devil and all the bewitching vanities of the world,to rejectall these, andto cleavestedfastly unto God.” Ib. Serm. 54. The impropriety of the Phrases distinguished by Italic Characters is evident.[49]Το γαρ θελειν παρακειται μοι, το δε κατεργαζεσθαι το καλον ουχ ευρισχω. Rom. vii. 18.[50]Προς το θεαθηναι τοις ανθρωποις. Matt. xxiii. 5. The following sentences seem defective either in the construction, or the order of the words: “Why do ye that,which is not lawful to doon the sabbath days?⸺The shew bread,which is not lawful to eat, but for the priests alone.” Luke vi. 2, 4. The Construction may be rectified by supplyingit; “whichitis not lawful to do; whichitis not lawful to eat:” or the order of the words in this manner; “to do which,to eat which, is not lawful:” where the Infinitiveto do,to eat, does the office of the Nominative Case, and the Relativewhichis in the Objective Case.[51]“I am not like other men,to envythe talents I cannot reach.” Tale of a Tub, Preface. An improper use of the Infinitive.[52]This Rule arises from the nature and idiom of our Language, and from as plain a principle as any on which it is founded: namely, that a word which has the Article before it, and a Noun, with the Possessive Prepositionof, after it, must be a Noun; and if a Noun, it ought to follow the Construction of a Noun, and not have the Regimen of a Verb. It is the Participial Termination of this sort of words that is apt to deceive us, and make us treat them as if they were of an amphibious species, partly Nouns, and partly Verbs. I believe there are hardly any of our Writers, who have not fallen into this inaccuracy. That it is such, will perhaps more clearly appear, if we examine and resolve one or two examples in this kind.“God, who didst teach the hearts of thy faithful people, bythe sendingto themthe lightof thy Holy Spirit:⸺” Collect, Whitsunday.Sendingis in this place a Noun; for it is accompanied with the Article: nevertheless it is also a Transitive Verb, for it governs the Nounlightin the Objective Case: but this is inconsistent; let it be either the one or the other, and abide by its proper Construction. That these Participial Words are sometimes real Nouns is undeniable; for they have a Plural Number as such: as, “theoutgoingsof the morning.”The Sendingis the same withthe Mission; which necessarily requires the Prepositionofafter it, to mark the relation between it andthe light;the mission of the light; and so,the sending of the light. The Phrase would be proper either way, by keeping to the Construction of the Noun,by the sending of the light; or of the Participle, or Gerund,by sending the light.Again:⸺“Sent to prepare the way of thy Son our Saviour,by preaching of Repentance:⸺” Collect, St. John Baptist. Here the Participle, or Gerund, hath as improperly the Prepositionofafter it; and so is deprived of its Verbal Regimen, by which as a Transitive it would govern the NounRepentancein the Objective Case. Besides, the Phrase is rendered obscure and ambiguous: for the obvious meaning of it in its present form is, “by preaching concerning or on the Subject of Repentance;” whereas the sense intended is, “by publishing the Covenant of Repentance, and declaring Repentance to be a condition of acceptance with God.” The Phrase would have been perfectly right and determinate to this sense either way; by the Noun,by the preaching of repentance; or by the Participle,by preaching repentance.[53]These are the three Primary Modes, or manners of expressing our thoughts concerning the being, doing, or suffering of a thing. If it comes within our knowledge, we explain it, or make a declaration of it; if we are ignorant or doubtful of it, we make an inquiry about it; if it is not immediately in our power, we express our desire or will concerning it. In Theory therefore the Interrogative form seems to have as good a Title to a Mode of its own, as either of the other two; but Practice has determined it otherwise; and has in all the Languages, with which we are most acquainted, supplied the place of an Interrogative Mode, either by Particles of Interrogation, or by a peculiar order of the words in the sentence. If it be true, as I have somewhere read, that the Modes of the Verbs are more numerous in the Lapland Tongue than in any other, possibly the Laplanders may be provided with an Interrogative Mode.[54]“The burning levernot deludeshis pains.”Dryden, Ovid. Metam. B. xii.“I hope, my Lord, said he, Inot offend.”Dryden, Fables.These examples make the impropriety of placing the Adverbnotbefore the Verb very evident.[55]“Didhenot fearthe Lord, andbesoughtthe Lord, and the Lordrepentedhim of the evil, which he had pronounced against them?” Jer. xxvi. 19. Here the Interrogative and Explicative forms are confounded. It ought to be, “Did he notfearthe Lord, andbeseechthe Lord? anddid notthe Lordrepenthim of the evil,⸺?” See likewise Matt. xviii. 12.[56]“For ever in this humble cellLet TheeandI, my fair one, dwell.”Prior.It ought to beMe.[57]It is not easy to give particular rules for the management of the Modes and Times of Verbs with respect to one another, so that they may be proper and consistent: nor would it be of much use; for the best rule that can be given is this very general one, To observe what the sense necessarily requires. But it may be of use to consider one or two examples, that seem faulty in these respects, and to examine where the fault lies.“Some who the depths of eloquencehave found,In that unnavigable Streamwere drown’d.”Dryden, Juv. Sat. x.The event mentioned in the first line is plainly prior in time to that mentioned in the second; this is subsequent to that, and a consequence of it. The first event is mentioned in the Present Perfect Time; it is present and compleated; “theyhave[now]foundthe depths of eloquence.” The second event is expressed in the Past Indefinite Time; it is past and gone, but, when it happened, uncertain: “theywere drown’d.” We observed, that the last mentioned event is subsequent to the first: but how can the Past Time be subsequent to the Present? It therefore ought to be in the second lineare drown’d, in the Present Perfect, which is consistent with the same Time in the first line: or in the first linehad foundin the Past Perfect, which would be consistent with the Past Indefinite in the second line.⸺There seems to be a fault of the like nature in the following passage:“But oh!’twaslittle that her lifeO’er earth and watersbearsthy fame:”⸺Prior.It ought to beborein the second line.Again;“Him portion’d maids, apprentic’d orphansblest,The young wholabour, and the old whorest.”Pope, Moral Ep. iii. 267.The Verb in the first line ought to be in the same Time with those in the last.“Had their records been delivered down in the vulgar tongue,⸺they could not now be understood, unless by Antiquaries, whomadeit their study to expound them.” Swift, Letter, on the English Tongue. Here the latter part of the sentence depends intirely on theSuppositionexpressed in the former, “of their records being delivered down in the vulgar tongue:” thereforemadein the Indicative Mode, which implies no supposition, and in the Past Indefinite Time, is improper: it would be much better in the Past Definite,had made; but indeed ought to be in the Subjunctive Mode, Present or Past Time,should make, orshould have made.[58]“Bythis meansthou shalt have no portion on this side the river.” Ezra, iv. 16. “It renders us careless of approving ourselves to God by religious duties, and bythat meanssecuring the continuance of his goodness.” Atterbury, Sermons. Ought it not to be, bythese means, bythose means? or bythis mean, bythat mean, in the singular number? as it is used by Hooker, Sidney, Shakespear, &c. “I have not weptthisfortyyears.” Dryden. “I am not recommendingthese kindof sufferings to your liking.” Bishop Sherlock, Disc. Vol. II. p. 267. So the Pronoun must agree with its Noun: in which respect let the following example be considered. “It isan unanswerable argument of a very refined age, the wonderfulCivilitiesthat have passed between the nation of authors and those of readers.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. As to these wonderfulCivilities, one might say, that “they arean unanswerable argument, &c.” but as the Sentence stands at present it is not easy to reconcile it to any grammatical propriety. “A person whomall the world allows to be so much yourbetters.” Swift, Battle of Books. And the Phrase which occurs in the following examples, tho’ pretty common and authorised by Custom, yet seems to be somewhat defective in the same way:“’Tis thesethat early taint the female soul.”Pope.“’Tis theythat give the great Atrides’ spoils;’Tis theythat still renew Ulysses’ toils.”Prior.[59]“Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God of his goodness to give you safe deliverance, andhath preservedyou in the great danger of Childbirth:”⸺Liturgy. The Verbhath preservedhath here no Nominative Case; for it cannot be properly supplied by the preceding wordGod, which is in the Objective Case. It ought to be, “and He hath preservedyou;” or rather, “and to preserveyou.” Some of our best Writers have frequently fallen into this, which I take to be no small inaccuracy: I shall therefore add some more examples of it, by way of admonition; inferring in each within Crotchets, the Nominative Case that is deficient, and that must necessarily be supplied to support the proper Construction of the Sentence. “If the calm, in which he was born, and [which] lasted so long, had continued.” Clarendon, Life, p. 43. “The Remonstrance he had lately received from the House of Commons, and [which] was dispersed throughout the Kingdom.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. I. p. 366. 8ᵛᵒ. “These we have extracted from an Historian of undoubted credit, a reverend bishop, the learned Paulus Jovius; and [they] are the same that were practised under the pontificate of Leo X.” Pope, Works, Vol. VI. p. 301. “A cloud gathering in the North; which we have helped to raise, and [which] may quickly break in a storm upon our heads.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. “A man, whose inclinations led him to be corrupt, and [who] had great abilities to manage and multiply and defend his corruptions.” Gulliver, Part I. Chap. vi. “My Master likewise mentioned another quality, which his servants had discovered in many Yahoos, and [which] to him was wholly unaccountable.” Gulliver, Part IV. Chap. vii. “This I filled with the feathers of several birds I had taken with springes made of Yahoos hairs, and [which] were excellent food.” Ibid. Chap. x. “Osyris, whom the Grecians call Dionysius, and [who] is the same with Bacchus.” Swift, Mechan. Oper. of the Spirit, Sect. ii.[60]“Which rule, if it had been observed, a neighbouring Prince would have wanted a great deal of that incense, which hath been offered up to him by his adorers.” Atterbury, Vol. I. Serm. 1. The Pronounitis here the Nominative Case to the Verbobserved; andwhich ruleis left by itself, a Nominative Case without any Verb following it. This manner of expression, however improper, is very common. It ought to be, “Ifthis rulehad been observed, &c.”[61]Adjectives are sometimes employed as Adverbs; improperly, and not agreeably to the Genius of the English Language. As, “extremeelaborate:” Dryden, Essay on Dram. Poet. “marvellousgraceful:” Clarendon, Life, p. 18. “extremeunwilling;” “extremesubject:” Swift, Tale of a Tub, and Battle of Books. “I shall endeavour to live hereaftersuitableto a man in my station.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 530. “Homer describes this riveragreeableto the vulgar reading.” Pope, Note on Iliad, ii. v. 1032. Soexceeding, forexceedingly, however improper, occurs frequently in the Vulgar Translation of the Bible, and has obtained in common discourse. “We should live soberly, righteously, andgodlyin this present world.” Tit. ii. 12.“O Liberty, Thou Goddessheavenlybright.”Addison.On the other hand an Adverb is improperly used as an Adjective in the following passage: “We may cast in such seeds and principles, as we judge most likely to takesoonestand deepest root.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 52.[62]“How much soeverthe Reformation of this corrupt and degenerate Age isalmost utterlyto be despaired of, we may yet have a more comfortable prospect of future times.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Pref. to Serm. 49. The first part of this Sentence abounds with Adverbs, and those such as are hardly consistent with one another.[63]“We are still much at a loss,whocivil power belongsto.” Locke. It ought to bewhom.[64]Pope, Preface to his Poems.[65]Within composition retains the signification, which it hath among others in the Saxon, offromandagainst: as towithhold, towithstand. So also for has a negative signification from the Saxon: as, toforbid,forbeodan; toforget,forgitan.[66]Examples of impropriety in the use of the Preposition in Phrases of this kind: “Your character, which I, or any other writer, may now value ourselvesby[upon] drawing.” Swift, Letter on the English Tongue. “You have bestowed your favoursto[upon] the most deserving persons.” Ibid. “Upon such occasions as fellinto[under] their cognisance,” Swift, Contests and Dissensions &c. Chap. 3. “That variety of factionsinto[in] which we are still engaged.” Ibid. Chap. 5. “The utmost extent of power pretended [to] by the Commons.” Ibid. Chap. 3.⸺“Accused the ministersfor[of] betraying the Dutch.” Swift, Four last years of the Queen, Book ii. “Ovid, whom you accusefor[of] luxuriancy of verse.” Dryden, on Dram. Poesy. “Neither the one nor the other shall make me swerveout of[from] the path, which I have traced to myself.” Bolingbroke, Letter to Wyndham, p. 252. “They are now reconciled by a zeal for their cause to what they could not be prompted [to] by a concern for their beauty.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 81. “If policy can prevailupon[over] force.” Addison, Travels, p. 62. “Ye blind guides, which strainata gnat, and swallow a camel.” Matt. xxiii. 24. διυλιζοντες, “which strainout, or take a gnatoutof the liquor by straining it:” the impropriety of the Preposition has wholly destroyed the meaning of the Phrase. Observe also, that the Noun generally requires after it the same Preposition as the Verb from which it is formed: “It was perfectly in complianceto[with] some persons, for whose opinion I have great deference.” Swift, Pref. to Temple’s Memoirs. “Not from any personal hatred to them, but in justificationto[of] the best of Queens.” Swift, Examiner, Nᵒ 23. In the last example, the Verb being Transitive and requiring the Objective Case, the Noun formed from it seems to require the Possessive Case, or its Preposition, after it. Or perhaps he meant to say, “injusticeto the best of Queens.” “No discouragement for the authors to proceed.” Tale of a Tub, Preface. “A strict observanceaftertimes and fashions.” Ibid. Sect. ii. So the NounAversion, (that is, a turning away,) requires the Prepositionfromafter it; and does not properly admit ofto,for, ortowards, which are often used with it.[67]These are much disused in common discourse, and are retained only in the Solemn, or Formulary Style. “They [our Authors] have of late, ’tis true, reformed in some measure the gouty joints and darning-work ofwhereunto’s,whereby’s,thereof’s,therewith’s, and the rest of this kind; by which complicated periods are so curiously strung, or hook’d on, one to another, after the long-spun manner of the bar or pulpit.” Lord Shaftesbury, Miscel. V.[68]Or in these and the like Phrases, may notme,thee,him,her,us, which in Saxon are the Dative Cases of their respective Pronouns, be considered as still continuing such in the English, and including in their very form the force of the Prepositionstoandfor? There are certainly some other Phrases, which are to be resolved in this manner: “Wo isme!” The Phrase is pure Saxon; “wa is me:”meis the Dative Case; in English, with the Prepositionto me. So, “methinks;” Saxon, “me thincth,” εμοι δοκει. “O well isthee!” Psal. cxxviii. 2. “Wel ishimthat ther mai be.” Anglo-Saxon Poem in Hickes’s Thesaur. Vol. I. p. 231. “Well ishim, that dwelleth with a wife of understanding.”⸺“Well ishim, that hath found prudence.” Ecclus. xxv. 8, 9. The Translator thought to correct his phrase afterward, and so hath made it neither Saxon nor English: “Well ishe, that is defended from it.” Ecclus. xxviii. 19. “Wo worth the day!” Ezek. xxx. 2. that is, Wo betothe day. The wordworthis not the Adjective, but the Saxon Verbweorthan, orworthan,fieri,to be,to become; which is often used by Chaucer, and is still retained as an Auxiliary Verb in the German Language.[69]Thathas been used in the same manner, as including the Relativewhich; but it is either improper, or obsolete: as, “To consider advisedly ofthatis moved.” Bacon, Essay xxii. “She appeared not to wishthatwithout doubt she would have been very glad of.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 363. 8ᵛᵒ. “We speakthatwe do know, and testifythatwe have seen.” John iii. 11.[70]“Who, instead of going about doing good,theyare perpetually intent upon doing mischief.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 18. The Nominative Casetheyin this sentence is superfluous; it was expressed before in the Relativewho.[71]“I amthe Lord, that makethall things;that stretchethforth the heavens alone:”⸺Isaiah xliv. 24. Thus far is right:the Lordin the third Person is the Antecedent, and the Verb agrees with the Relative in the third Person: “I am the Lord,which Lord, orHe that, makethall things.” It would have been equally right, ifIhad been made the Antecedent, and the Relative and the Verb had agreed with it in the First Person: “Iam the Lord,that makeall things.” But when it follows, “that spreadethabroad the heavens bymyself;” there arises a confusion of Persons, and a manifest Solecism.“Thougreat first Cause, least understood!Whoall my senseconfin’dTo know but this, thatThou artgood,And that myself am blind:Yetgaveme in this dark estate,” &c.Pope, Universal Prayer.It ought to beconfinedst, ordidst confine;gavest, ordidst give; &c. in the second Person. See above, p. 48. Note.[72]“Abuse on all he lov’d, or lov’d him, spread.”Pope, Epist. to Arbuthnot.That is, “allwhomhe lov’d, orwholov’d him:” or to make it more easy by supplying a Relative that has no variation of Cases, “allthathe lov’d, orthatlov’d him.” The Construction is hazardous, and hardly justifiable, even in Poetry. “In the temper of mind he was then.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 549. “In the posture I lay.” Swift, Gulliver, Part 1. Chap. 1. In these and the like Phrases, which are very common, there is an Ellipsis both of the Relative and the Preposition; which were much better supplied: “In the temper of mindin whichhe was then:” “In the posturein whichI lay.” In general, the omission of the Relative seems to be too much indulged in the familiar style; it is ungraceful in the serious; and of whatever kind the style be, it is apt to be attended with obscurity and ambiguity.[73]The Connective parts of Sentences are of all others the most important, and require the most care and attention: 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; and on the right use of these the perspicuity, that is, the first and greatest beauty, of style principally depends. Relatives and Conjunctions are the instruments of Connection in discourse: it may be of use to point out some of the most common inaccuracies, that writers are apt to fall into with respect to them; and a few examples of faults may perhaps be more instructive, than any rules of propriety that can be given. Here therefore shall be added some further examples of inaccuracies in the use of Relatives.The Relative placed before the Antecedent: Example; “The bodies, which we daily handle, make us perceive, that whilst they remain betweenthem, they do by an insurmountable force hinder the approach of ourhandsthat press them.” Locke, Essay, B. 2. C. 4. §. 1. Here the sense is suspended, and the sentence is unintelligible, till you get to the end of it: there is no Antecedent, to which the Relativethemcan be referred, butbodies; but, “whilst the bodies remain between the bodies,” makes no sense at all. When you get tohands, the difficulty is cleared up, the sense helping out the Construction: yet there still remains an ambiguity in the Relativesthey,them, which in number and gender are equally applicable tobodiesorhands; this, tho’ it may not here be the occasion of much obscurity, which is commonly the effect of it, yet is always disagreeable and inelegant: as in the following examples.“Men look with an evil eye upon the good that is in others; and think, thattheirreputation obscuresthem; and thattheircommendable qualities do stand intheirlight: and thereforetheydo whattheycan to cast a cloud overthem, that the bright shining oftheirvirtues may not obscurethem.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 42.“The Earl of Falmouth and Mr. Coventry were rivalswhoshould have most influence with the Duke,wholoved the Earl best, but thought the other the wiser man,whosupported Pen,whodisobliged all the Courtiers, even against the Earl,whocontemned Pen as a fellow of no sense.” Clarendon, Cont. p. 264.But the following Sentence cannot possibly be understood without a careful recollection of circumstances through some pages preceding.“All which, with the King’s and Queen’s so ample promises tohim[the Treasurer] so few hours before the conferring the place on another, and the Duke of York’s manner of receivinghim[the Treasurer,] afterhe[the Chancellor] had been shut up withhim[the Duke,] ashe[the Treasurer] was informed, might very well excusehim[the Treasurer] for thinkinghe[the Chancellor] had some share in the affronthe[the Treasurer] had undergone.” Clarendon, Cont. p. 296.“Breaking a Constitution by the very same errors,thatso many have beenbrokebefore.” Swift, Contests and Dissensions, &c. Chap. 5. Here the Relative is employed not only to represent the Antecedent Nounthe errors, but likewise the Prepositionbyprefixed to it. It ought to be, “the same errors,by whichso many have beenbrokenbefore.”Again: “⸺An Undertaking;which, although it has failed, (partly &c, and partly &c,) is no objection at all to an Enterprize so well concerted, and with such fair probability of success.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. That is, “Which Undertaking is no objection to an Enterprize so well concerted;” that is, “to itself:” he means, “the failing of whichis no objection at all to it.”[74]In the following instances the Conjunctionthatseems to be improperly accompanied with the Subjunctive Mode: “I cannot but bewail,thatno famous modernhaveever yet attempted⸺.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. v.“So much she fears for William’s life,ThatMary’s fate shedarenot mourn.”Prior.[75]“You are a much greater loser thanmeby his death.” Swift to Pope, Letter 63.“And tho’ by heav’n’s severe decreeShe suffers hourly more thanme.”Swift to Stella.“We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to the same proportion more thanus.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies.“King Charles, and more thanhim, the Duke, and the Popish Faction, were at liberty to form new schemes.” Lord Bolingbroke, Diss. on Parties, Letter 3.“A Poem, which is good in itself, cannot lose any thing of its real value, though it should appear not to be the work of so eminent an author, ashim, to whom it was first imputed.” Congreve, Pref. to Homer’s Hymn to Venus.“If the King give us leave, you or I may as lawfully preach, asthemthat do.” Hobbes, Hist. of Civil Wars, p. 62.“The sun upon the calmest seaAppears not half so bright asThee.”Prior.“Then finish dear Chloe this Pastoral war,And let us like Horace and Lydia agree:For thou art a Girl as much brighter thanher,As he was a Poet sublimer thanme.”Prior.In these passages it ought to be,I,We,He,They,Thou,She, reflectively. Perhaps the following example may admit of a doubt, whether it be properly expressed or not:“The Lover got a woman of greater fortune thanherhe had miss’d.” Addison, Guardian Nᵒ 9. Let us try it by the Rule given above; and see, whether some correction will not be necessary, when the parts of the Sentence, which are understood, come to be supplied: “The lover got a woman of a greater fortune, thanShe[was,whom] he had miss’d.”“Nor hope to be myself less miserableBy what I seek, but others to make suchAsI.”Milton, P. L. ix. 126.“The Syntax, says Dr. Bentley, requires, make such asme.” On the contrary, the Syntax necessarily requires, “make such asI:” for it is not, “I hope to make others such, as to makeme:” the Pronoun is not governed by the Verbmake, but is the Nominative Case to the Verbamunderstood: “to make others such asI am.”[76]“But it is reason, the memory of their virtues remaine to their posterity.” Bacon, Essay xiv. In this, and many the like Phrases, the Conjunction were much better inserted: “thatthe memory, &c.”[77]Never so⸺This Phrase, says Mr. Johnson, is justly accused of Solecism. It should be,everso wisely; that is,howwiselysoever.[78]I have been the more particular in noting the proper uses of these Conjunctions, because they occur very frequently, and, as it was observed before of Connective words in general, are of great importance with respect to the clearness and beauty of style. I may add too, because mistakes in the use of them are very common; as it will appear by the following Examples.Neitheris sometimes supposed to be included in its correspondentnor:“Simois,norXanthus shall be wanting there.”Dryden.⸺ “That all the application he could make,northe King’s own interposition, could prevail with Her Majesty.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 179. Sometimes to be supplied by a subsequent Negative: “His rule holdeth still, that nature,northe engagement of words, arenotso forcible as custom.” Bacon, Essay xxxix. “The Kingnorthe Queen werenotat all deceived.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 363. These forms of expression seem both of them equally improper.So⸺,as, was used by the Writers of the last Century, to express a Consequence, instead ofSo⸺,that: Examples; “The relations aresouncertain,as[that] they require a great deal of examination.” Bacon, Nat. Hist. “So as[that] it is a hard calumny to affirm, ⸺.” Temple. “This computation beingsoeasy and trivial,as[that] it is a shame to mention it.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. “That the Spaniards weresoviolently affected to the House of Austria,as[that] the whole kingdom would revolt.” Ibid. Swift, I believe, is the last of our good Writers, who has frequently used this manner of expression: it seems improper, and is deservedly grown obsolete.Asinstead ofthat, in another manner: “If a man have that penetration of judgement,as[that] he can discern what things are to be laid open.” Bacon, Essay vi. “It is the nature of extreme self-lovers,as[that] they will set an house on fire,andit were but to roast their eggs.” Id. Essay xxiii. “They would have given him such satisfaction in other particulars,as[that] a full and happy peace must have ensued.” Clarendon, Vol. III. p. 214. “We should sufficiently weigh the objects of our hope; whether they be such,as[that] we may reasonably expect from them what they propose in their fruition; and whether they are such, as we are pretty sure of attaining.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 535. “France was then disposed to conclude a peace upon such conditions,as[that] it was not worth the life of a granadier to refuse them.” Swift, Four last years of the Queen, B. ii.Asinstead of the Relativethat, orwhich: “The Duke had not behaved with that loyalty,as[which] he ought to have done.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 460. “⸺ With those thoughtsas[which] might contribute to their honour.” Ibid. p. 565. “In the order,asthey lie in his Preface.” Middleton, Works Vol. III p. 8. It ought to be, either, “in order, as they lie;” or, “in the order,in whichthey lie.” “Securing to yourselves a succession of able and worthy men,as[which] may adorn this place.” Atterbury, Sermons, Vol. IV. 12.The Relativethatinstead ofas: “Such sharp replies,that[as] cost him his life in few months after.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 179.The Relativewho⸺, instead ofas: “There was no mansosanguine,who did not apprehendsome ill consequence from the late change.” Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. It ought to be, either, “sosanguine,as not to apprehend, ⸺” or, “There was no man,howsanguinesoever,whodid not apprehend.”Asimproperly omitted: “They aresobold [as] to pronounce ⸺.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. vii.Too⸺,that, improperly used as Correspondent Conjunctions: “Whose Characters aretooprofligate,thatthe managing of them should be of any consequence.” Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. And,too⸺,than: “You that are a step higher than a Philosopher, a Divine; yet havetoomuch grace and witthanto be a Bishop.” Pope to Swift, Letter 80.So⸺,but: “If the appointing and apportioning of penalties to crimes be notsoproperly a consideration of justice,but rather[as] of prudence in the Lawgiver.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 35. And to conclude with an example, in which, whatever may be thought of the accuracy of the expression, the justness of the observation will be acknowledged; which may serve also as an apology for this and many of the preceding Notes: “No errors aresotrivial,butthey deserve to be mended.” Pope to Steele, Letter 6.[79]“Ah me!” seems to be a phrase of the same nature with “Wo is me!”; for the resolution of which see abovep. 132. Note.

FOOTNOTES

[1]“And I persecuted this way untothedeath.”Actsxxii. 4. The Apostle does not mean any particular sort of death, but death in general: the Definite Article therefore is improperly used. It ought to beunto death, without any Article: agreeably to the Original, αχρι θανατου.“When He the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you intoall Truth.”Johnxvi. 13. That is, according to this Translation, into all Truth whatsoever, into Truth of all kinds: very different from the meaning of the Evangelist, and from the Original, εις πασαν την αληθειαν, intoall the Truth; that is, into all Evangelical Truth.“Truly this wastheSon of God.”Matt.xxvii. 54. andMarkxv. 39. This Translation supposes, that the Roman Centurion had a proper and adequate notion of the character of Jesus, as the Son of God in a peculiar and incommunicable sense: whereas, it is probable, both from the circumstances of the History, and from the expression of the Original, (ὑιος Θεου, a Son of God, not ὁ υιος,theSon) that he only meant to acknowledge him to be an extraordinary person, and more than a mere man; according to his own notion of Sons of Gods in the Pagan Theology. This is also more agreeable to St. Luke’s account of the same confession of the Centurion: “Certainly this was δικαιος, a righteous man;” not ὁ Δικαιος, the Just One. The same may be observed of Nebuchadnezzar’s words,Dan.iii. 25.—“And the form of the fourth is liketheSon of God:” it ought to be by the Indefinite Article, likeaSon of God: ὁμοια ὑιῳ Θεου, as Theodotion very properly renders it: that is, like an Angel; according to Nebuchadnezzar’s own account of it in the 28th verse: “Blessed be God, who hath sent hisAngel, and delivered his servants.” See alsoLukexix. 9.These Remarks may serve to shew the great importance of the proper use of the Article; the near affinity there is between the Greek Article, and the English Definite Article; and the excellence of the English Language in this respect, which by means of its two Articles does most precisely determine the extent of signification of Common Names: whereas the Greek has only one Article, and it has puzzled all the Grammarians to reduce the use of that to any clear and certain rules.

“When He the Spirit of Truth is come, he will guide you intoall Truth.”Johnxvi. 13. That is, according to this Translation, into all Truth whatsoever, into Truth of all kinds: very different from the meaning of the Evangelist, and from the Original, εις πασαν την αληθειαν, intoall the Truth; that is, into all Evangelical Truth.

“Truly this wastheSon of God.”Matt.xxvii. 54. andMarkxv. 39. This Translation supposes, that the Roman Centurion had a proper and adequate notion of the character of Jesus, as the Son of God in a peculiar and incommunicable sense: whereas, it is probable, both from the circumstances of the History, and from the expression of the Original, (ὑιος Θεου, a Son of God, not ὁ υιος,theSon) that he only meant to acknowledge him to be an extraordinary person, and more than a mere man; according to his own notion of Sons of Gods in the Pagan Theology. This is also more agreeable to St. Luke’s account of the same confession of the Centurion: “Certainly this was δικαιος, a righteous man;” not ὁ Δικαιος, the Just One. The same may be observed of Nebuchadnezzar’s words,Dan.iii. 25.—“And the form of the fourth is liketheSon of God:” it ought to be by the Indefinite Article, likeaSon of God: ὁμοια ὑιῳ Θεου, as Theodotion very properly renders it: that is, like an Angel; according to Nebuchadnezzar’s own account of it in the 28th verse: “Blessed be God, who hath sent hisAngel, and delivered his servants.” See alsoLukexix. 9.

These Remarks may serve to shew the great importance of the proper use of the Article; the near affinity there is between the Greek Article, and the English Definite Article; and the excellence of the English Language in this respect, which by means of its two Articles does most precisely determine the extent of signification of Common Names: whereas the Greek has only one Article, and it has puzzled all the Grammarians to reduce the use of that to any clear and certain rules.

[2]“A good character should not be rested in as an end, but employed asa meansof doing still farther good.”Atterbury’sSermons. Ought it not to bea mean?

[3]“Aboutaneight days:” that is, a space of eight days.Lukeix. 28. But the expression is obsolete, or at least vulgar; and we may add likewise improper: for the numbereighthas not been reduced by use and convenience into one collective and compact idea, likea hundred, anda thousand; each of which, likea dozen, ora score, we are accustomed equally to consider on certain occasions as a simple Unity.

[4]And antiently,eyen,shoen,housen,hosen; so likewise antientlysowen,cowen, now always pronounced and writtenswine,kine.

[5]In the German the vowelsa,o,u, of monosyllable Nouns are generally in the Plural changed into diphthongs with ane: as derhand, the hand, diehände; derhut, the hat, diehüte; derknopff, the button, (or knop) dieknöpffe; &c.

[6]These are directly from the Saxon:mus,mys;lus,lys;toth,teth;fot,fet;gos,ges.

[7]“Lingua Anglorum hodierna avitæ Saxonicæ formam in plerisque orationis partibus etiamnum retinet. Nam quoad particulas casuales, quorundam casuum terminationes, conjugationes verborum, verbum substantivum, formam passivæ vocis, pronomina, participia, conjunctiones, & præpositiones omnes; denique quoad idiomata, phrasiumque maximam partem, etiam nunc Saxonicus est Anglorum sermo.” Hickes. Thesaur. Lingg. Septent. Præf. p. vi. To which may be added the Degrees of comparison, the form of which is the very same in the English as in the Saxon.

[8]“Christ hissake,” in our Liturgy, is a mistake, either of the Printers, or of the Compilers.⸺“My paper is theUlysses hisbow, in which every man of wit or learning may try his strength.” Addison, Guardian Nᵒ 98. This is no slip of Mr. Addison’s pen: he gives us his opinion upon this point very explicitly in another place. “The same single letter [s] on many occasions does the office of a whole word, and represents thehisandherof our forefathers.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 135. The latter instance might have shewn him, how groundless this notion is: for it is not easy to conceive, how the lettersadded to a Feminine Noun should represent the wordher; any more than it should the wordtheir, added to a Plural Noun: as, “thechildren’sbread.” But the direct derivation of this Case from the Saxon Genitive Case is sufficient of itself to decide this matter.

[9]“At his command th’ uprooted hills retir’dEach tohisplace: they heard his voice and wentObsequious: Heavenhiswonted face renew’d,And with fresh flowrets hill and valley smil’d.”Milton, P. L. B. vi.“Was I deceiv’d, or did a sable CloudTurn forthhersilver lining on the Night?”Milton, Comus.“Go to your Natural Religion: lay beforeherMahomet and his disciples arrayed in armour and in blood:⸺shewherthe cities which he set in flames; the countries which he ravaged:⸺whenshehas viewed him in this scene, carryherinto his retirements; shewherthe Prophet’s chamber, his concubines and his wives:⸺whensheis tired with this prospect, then shewherthe Blessed Jesus.—” See the whole passage in the conclusion of Bp Sherlock’s 9th Sermon, Vol. I.In these beautiful passages, as in the English if you putitanditsinstead ofhis,she,her, you destroy the images, and reduce, what was before highly Poetical and Rhetorical, to mere prose and common discourse; so if you render them into another language, Greek, Latin, French, Italian, or German, in which Hill, Heaven, Cloud, Religion, are constantly Masculine, or Feminine, or Neuter, respectively, you make the images obscure and doubtful, and in proportion diminish their beauty.This excellent remark is Mr. Harris’s, Hermes, p. 58.

[9]

“At his command th’ uprooted hills retir’dEach tohisplace: they heard his voice and wentObsequious: Heavenhiswonted face renew’d,And with fresh flowrets hill and valley smil’d.”Milton, P. L. B. vi.

“At his command th’ uprooted hills retir’dEach tohisplace: they heard his voice and wentObsequious: Heavenhiswonted face renew’d,And with fresh flowrets hill and valley smil’d.”

“At his command th’ uprooted hills retir’d

Each tohisplace: they heard his voice and went

Obsequious: Heavenhiswonted face renew’d,

And with fresh flowrets hill and valley smil’d.”

Milton, P. L. B. vi.

“Was I deceiv’d, or did a sable CloudTurn forthhersilver lining on the Night?”Milton, Comus.

“Was I deceiv’d, or did a sable CloudTurn forthhersilver lining on the Night?”

“Was I deceiv’d, or did a sable Cloud

Turn forthhersilver lining on the Night?”

Milton, Comus.

“Go to your Natural Religion: lay beforeherMahomet and his disciples arrayed in armour and in blood:⸺shewherthe cities which he set in flames; the countries which he ravaged:⸺whenshehas viewed him in this scene, carryherinto his retirements; shewherthe Prophet’s chamber, his concubines and his wives:⸺whensheis tired with this prospect, then shewherthe Blessed Jesus.—” See the whole passage in the conclusion of Bp Sherlock’s 9th Sermon, Vol. I.

In these beautiful passages, as in the English if you putitanditsinstead ofhis,she,her, you destroy the images, and reduce, what was before highly Poetical and Rhetorical, to mere prose and common discourse; so if you render them into another language, Greek, Latin, French, Italian, or German, in which Hill, Heaven, Cloud, Religion, are constantly Masculine, or Feminine, or Neuter, respectively, you make the images obscure and doubtful, and in proportion diminish their beauty.

This excellent remark is Mr. Harris’s, Hermes, p. 58.

[10]Some Writers have usedYeas the Objective Case Plural of the Pronoun of the Second Person; very improperly and ungrammatically.“But Tyrants dreadye, lest your just decreeTransfer the pow’r, and set the people free.”Prior.“His wrath, which one day will destroyyeboth.”Milton, P. L. ii. 734.Dr. Bently has corrected this mistake, which is probably an error of the Press, or of the Editor of whom he talks so much. But he has done it, without taking the least notice of the matter, or assuming any merit to himself from an emendation, which is one of the very few that are really such in his whole performance.

[10]Some Writers have usedYeas the Objective Case Plural of the Pronoun of the Second Person; very improperly and ungrammatically.

“But Tyrants dreadye, lest your just decreeTransfer the pow’r, and set the people free.”Prior.

“But Tyrants dreadye, lest your just decreeTransfer the pow’r, and set the people free.”

“But Tyrants dreadye, lest your just decree

Transfer the pow’r, and set the people free.”

Prior.

“His wrath, which one day will destroyyeboth.”Milton, P. L. ii. 734.

“His wrath, which one day will destroyyeboth.”

Milton, P. L. ii. 734.

Dr. Bently has corrected this mistake, which is probably an error of the Press, or of the Editor of whom he talks so much. But he has done it, without taking the least notice of the matter, or assuming any merit to himself from an emendation, which is one of the very few that are really such in his whole performance.

[11]The Neuter Pronoun of the Third Person had formerly no variation of Cases. Instead of the Possessiveitsthey usedhis, which is now appropriated to the Masculine. “Learning hathhisinfancy, whenitis but beginning, and almost childish; thenhisyouth, whenitis luxuriant and juvenile; thenhisstrength of years, whenitis solid and reduced; and lastlyhisold age, whenitwaxeth dry and exhaust.” Bacon, Essay 58. In this examplehisis evidently used as the Possessive Case ofit: but what shall we say to the following, whereheris applied in the same manner, and seems to make a strange confusion of Gender? “He that pricketh the heart makethitto shewherknowledge.”Ecclus.xxii. 19.“Oft have I seen a timely-parted ghost,Of ashy semblance, meagre, pale, and bloodless,Being all descended to the lab’ring heart,Who, in the conflict thatitholds with death,Attracts the same for aidance ’gainst the enemy.”Shakespear.If the Poet had saidheinstead ofit, he would have avoided a confusion of Genders, and happily compleated the spirited and elegant Prosopopœia, begun by the Personal Relativewho. The Neuter Relativewhichwould have made the sentence more strictly grammatical, but at the same time more prosaic.

“Oft have I seen a timely-parted ghost,Of ashy semblance, meagre, pale, and bloodless,Being all descended to the lab’ring heart,Who, in the conflict thatitholds with death,Attracts the same for aidance ’gainst the enemy.”Shakespear.

“Oft have I seen a timely-parted ghost,

Of ashy semblance, meagre, pale, and bloodless,

Being all descended to the lab’ring heart,

Who, in the conflict thatitholds with death,

Attracts the same for aidance ’gainst the enemy.”

Shakespear.

If the Poet had saidheinstead ofit, he would have avoided a confusion of Genders, and happily compleated the spirited and elegant Prosopopœia, begun by the Personal Relativewho. The Neuter Relativewhichwould have made the sentence more strictly grammatical, but at the same time more prosaic.

[12]So the SaxonIchath the Possessive CaseMin;Thu, PossessiveThin;He, PossessiveHis: from which our Possessive Cases of the same Pronouns are taken without alteration. To the Saxon Possessive Caseshire,ure,eower,hira, (that is,her’s,our’s,your’s,their’s) we have added thes, the Characteristic of the Possessive Case of Nouns. Orour’s,your’s, are directly from the Saxonures,eoweres; the Possessive Case of the Pronominal Adjectivesure,eower; that is,our,your.

[13]Whoseis by some authors made the Possessive Case ofwhich, and applied to things as well as persons; I think, improperly.“Thequestion,whosesolution I require,Is, what the sex of women most desire.”Dryden.“Is there any otherdoctrine,whosefollowers are punished?” Addison.

[13]Whoseis by some authors made the Possessive Case ofwhich, and applied to things as well as persons; I think, improperly.

“Thequestion,whosesolution I require,Is, what the sex of women most desire.”Dryden.

“Thequestion,whosesolution I require,Is, what the sex of women most desire.”

“Thequestion,whosesolution I require,

Is, what the sex of women most desire.”

Dryden.

“Is there any otherdoctrine,whosefollowers are punished?” Addison.

[14]So the Saxonhwahath the Possessive Casehwæs. Note, that the Saxons rightly placed the Aspirate before thew: as we now pronounce it. This will be evident to any one that shall consider in what manner he pronounces the wordswhat,when; that is,hoo-àt,hoo-èn.

[15]Adjectives are very improperly calledNouns; for they are not theNamesof things. The Adjectivesgood,white, are applied to the Nounsman,snow, to express the Qualities belonging to those Subjects; but the Names of those Qualities in the Abstract, (that is, considered in themselves, and without being attributed to any Subject) aregoodness,whiteness; and these are Nouns, or Substantives.

[16]The Double Superlativemost highestis a Phrase peculiar to the Old Vulgar Translation of the Psalms, where it acquires a singular propriety from the Subject to which it is applied, the Supreme Being, who ishigher than the highest.

[17]“Lesser, says Mr. Johnson, is a barbarous corruption ofLess, formed by the vulgar from the habit of terminating comparisons iner.”“Attend to what alesserMuse indites.”Addis.Worsersounds much more barbarous, only because it has not been so frequently used:“A dreadful quiet felt, andworserfarThan arms, a sullen interval of war.”Dryden.

[17]“Lesser, says Mr. Johnson, is a barbarous corruption ofLess, formed by the vulgar from the habit of terminating comparisons iner.”

“Attend to what alesserMuse indites.”Addis.

“Attend to what alesserMuse indites.”

Addis.

Worsersounds much more barbarous, only because it has not been so frequently used:

“A dreadful quiet felt, andworserfarThan arms, a sullen interval of war.”Dryden.

“A dreadful quiet felt, andworserfarThan arms, a sullen interval of war.”

“A dreadful quiet felt, andworserfar

Than arms, a sullen interval of war.”

Dryden.

[18]A greater variety of endings to distinguish the Persons in the Verb is not necessary; as the Verb is always attended with the Personal Pronoun, wherever an ambiguity would otherwise arise. For the same reason the Plural termination inen,they loven,they weren, which was formerly in use, hath been long obsolete.

[19]Thou, in the Polite, and even in the Familiar Style, is disused, and the PluralYouis employed instead of it: we sayYou have, notThou hast. Tho’ in this case we applyYouto a single Person, yet the Verb too must agree with it in the Plural Number: it must necessarily beYou have, notYou hast.You was, the Second Person Plural of the Pronoun placed in agreement with the First or Third Person Singular of the Verb, is an enormous Solecism: and yet Authors of the first rank have inadvertently fallen into it. “Knowing thatyou wasmy old master’s good friend.” Addison, Spect. No 517. “Would to Godyou waswithin her reach.” Lord Bolingbroke to Swift, Letter 46. “Ifyou washere.” Ditto, Letter 47. “I am just now as well, as whenyou washere.” Pope to Swift, P. S. to Letter 56. On the contrary the Solemn Style admits not ofYoufor a Single Person. This hath led Mr. Pope into a great impropriety in the beginning of his Messiah:“OThoumy voice inspireWhotouch’dIsaiah’s hallow’d lips with fire!”The Solemnity of the Style would not admit ofYouforThouin the Pronoun; nor the measure of the Versetouchedst, ordidst touch, in the Verb; as it indispensably ought to be, in the one, or the other of these two forms:Youwhotouched; orThouwhotouchedst, ordidst touch. Again:“Just ofthyword, in every thought sincere,Whoknewno wish but what the world might hear.”Pope, Epitaph.It ought to beyourin the first line, orknewestin the second.

“OThoumy voice inspireWhotouch’dIsaiah’s hallow’d lips with fire!”

“OThoumy voice inspire

Whotouch’dIsaiah’s hallow’d lips with fire!”

The Solemnity of the Style would not admit ofYouforThouin the Pronoun; nor the measure of the Versetouchedst, ordidst touch, in the Verb; as it indispensably ought to be, in the one, or the other of these two forms:Youwhotouched; orThouwhotouchedst, ordidst touch. Again:

“Just ofthyword, in every thought sincere,Whoknewno wish but what the world might hear.”Pope, Epitaph.

“Just ofthyword, in every thought sincere,Whoknewno wish but what the world might hear.”

“Just ofthyword, in every thought sincere,

Whoknewno wish but what the world might hear.”

Pope, Epitaph.

It ought to beyourin the first line, orknewestin the second.

[20]This Participle represents the action as complete and finished; and, being subjoined to the Auxiliaryto have, constitutes the Perfect Time: I call it therefore the Perfect Participle. The same subjoined to the Auxiliaryto be, constitutes the Passive Verb; and in that state, or when used without the Auxiliary in a passive sense, is called the Passive Participle.

[21]“Before the sun,Before the heav’ns thouwert.”Milton.“Remember what thouwert.”Dryden.“I knew thouwertnot slow to hear.”Addison.“Thou who of oldwertsent to Israel’s court.”Prior.“All this thouwert.”⸺Pope.Shall we in deference to these great authorities allowwertto be the same withwast, and common to the Indicative and Subjunctive Mode? or rather abide by the practice of our best antient writers; the propriety of the language, which requires, as far as may be, distinct forms for different Modes; and the analogy of formation in each Mode; Iwas, Thouwast; Iwere, Thouwert? all which conspire to makewertpeculiar to the Subjunctive Mode.

[21]

“Before the sun,Before the heav’ns thouwert.”Milton.

“Before the sun,Before the heav’ns thouwert.”

“Before the sun,

Before the heav’ns thouwert.”

Milton.

“Remember what thouwert.”Dryden.

“Remember what thouwert.”

Dryden.

“I knew thouwertnot slow to hear.”Addison.

“I knew thouwertnot slow to hear.”

Addison.

“Thou who of oldwertsent to Israel’s court.”Prior.

“Thou who of oldwertsent to Israel’s court.”

Prior.

“All this thouwert.”⸺Pope.

“All this thouwert.”⸺

Pope.

Shall we in deference to these great authorities allowwertto be the same withwast, and common to the Indicative and Subjunctive Mode? or rather abide by the practice of our best antient writers; the propriety of the language, which requires, as far as may be, distinct forms for different Modes; and the analogy of formation in each Mode; Iwas, Thouwast; Iwere, Thouwert? all which conspire to makewertpeculiar to the Subjunctive Mode.

[22]Note, that the Imperfect and Perfect Times are here put together. And it is to be observed, that in the Subjunctive Mode, the event being spoken of under a condition, or supposition, or in the form of a wish, and therefore as doubtful and contingent, the Verb itself in the Present, and the Auxiliary both of the Present and Past Imperfect Times, often carry with them somewhat of a Future sense: as, “If he come to-morrow, I may speak to him:” ⸺ “If he should, or would, come to-morrow, I might, would, could, or should, speak to him.” Observe also, that the Auxiliaryshouldin the Imperfect Times is used to express the Present, as well as the Past; as, “Itismy desire, that heshould[now] come;” as well as, “Itwasmy desire that heshould[then] come.” So that in this Mode the precise Time of the Verb is very much determined by the nature and drift of the Sentence.

[23]⸺“Perdition catch my soulBut Idolove thee!—”⸺“This to meIn dreadful secrecy impart theydid.”Shakespear.“Die he certainlydid.”Sherlock, Vol. 1. Disc. 7.“Yes, Ididlove her:” that is, at that time, or once; intimating a negation, or doubt, of present love.“The Lord called Samuel: and he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I, for thoucalledstme.⸺And the Lord called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I, for thoudidstcall me.” 1 Sam. iii. 4-6.

[23]

⸺“Perdition catch my soulBut Idolove thee!—”⸺“This to meIn dreadful secrecy impart theydid.”Shakespear.

⸺“Perdition catch my soulBut Idolove thee!—”

⸺“Perdition catch my soul

But Idolove thee!—”

⸺“This to meIn dreadful secrecy impart theydid.”

⸺“This to me

In dreadful secrecy impart theydid.”

Shakespear.

“Die he certainlydid.”Sherlock, Vol. 1. Disc. 7.

“Die he certainlydid.”

Sherlock, Vol. 1. Disc. 7.

“Yes, Ididlove her:” that is, at that time, or once; intimating a negation, or doubt, of present love.

“The Lord called Samuel: and he ran unto Eli, and said, Here am I, for thoucalledstme.⸺And the Lord called yet again, Samuel. And Samuel arose and went to Eli, and said, Here am I, for thoudidstcall me.” 1 Sam. iii. 4-6.

[24]This distinction was not observed formerly as to the wordshall, which was used in the Second and Third Persons to express simply the Event. So likewiseshouldwas used, where we now make use ofwould. See the Vulgar Translation of the Bible.

[25]Bishop Wilkins gives the following elegant investigation of the Modes in hisReal Character, Part iii. Chap. 5.“To shew in what manner the Subject is to be joined with his Predicate, the Copula between them is affected with a Particle, which from the use of it is calledModus, the manner orMode.Now the Subject and Predicate may be joined together eitherSimply, or with some kind ofLimitation; and accordingly these Modes are Primary or Secondary.The Primary Modes are called by Grammarians Indicative and Imperative.When the matter is declared to be so, or at least when it seems in the Speaker’s power to have it be so, as the bare union of Subject and Predicate would import, then the Copula is nakedly expressed without any variation: and this manner of expressing it is called the Indicative Mode.When it is neither declared to be so, nor seems immediately in the Speaker’s power to have it so; then he can do no more in words but make out the expression of his will to him that hath the thing in his power; namely tohis{Superior}by{Petition,}{Equal}{Persuasion,}{Inferior}{Command.}And the manner of these affecting the Copula, (Be it so, or, let it be so,) is called the Imperative Mode; of which there are these three varieties very fit to be distinctly provided for. As for that other use of the Imperative Mode, when it signifiesPermission; this may be sufficiently expressed by theSecondary ModeofLiberty; Youmaydo it.The Secondary Modes are such, as, when the Copula is affected with any of them, make the Sentence to be (as the Logicians call it) aModal Proposition.This happens, when the matter in discourse, namely, the being, or doing, or suffering of a thing, is considered, notsimply by itself, butgradually in its causes, from which it proceedscontingently, ornecessarily.Then a thing seems to be leftContingent, when the Speaker expresses only thePossibilityof it, or his ownLibertyto it.1. ThePossibilityof a thing depends upon the power of its cause; and may be expressedwhen{Absolute}by the Particle{Can,{Conditional}{Could.2. TheLibertyof a thing depends upon a freedom from all obstacles either within or without, and is usually expressed in our languagewhen{Absolute}by the Particle{May,{Conditional}{Might.Then a thing seems to be ofNecessity, when the Speaker expresseth the resolution of his ownwill, or some otherobligationupon him from without.3. TheInclination of the Willis expressed,if{Absolute}by the Particle{Will,{Conditional}{Would.4. The Necessity of a thing from someexternal Obligation, whetherNatural, orMoral, which we call Duty, is expressed,if{Absolute}by the Particle{Must,ought,shall;{Conditional}{Must,ought,should.”See alsoHermes, Book I. Chap. viii.

[25]Bishop Wilkins gives the following elegant investigation of the Modes in hisReal Character, Part iii. Chap. 5.

“To shew in what manner the Subject is to be joined with his Predicate, the Copula between them is affected with a Particle, which from the use of it is calledModus, the manner orMode.

Now the Subject and Predicate may be joined together eitherSimply, or with some kind ofLimitation; and accordingly these Modes are Primary or Secondary.

The Primary Modes are called by Grammarians Indicative and Imperative.

When the matter is declared to be so, or at least when it seems in the Speaker’s power to have it be so, as the bare union of Subject and Predicate would import, then the Copula is nakedly expressed without any variation: and this manner of expressing it is called the Indicative Mode.

When it is neither declared to be so, nor seems immediately in the Speaker’s power to have it so; then he can do no more in words but make out the expression of his will to him that hath the thing in his power; namely to

And the manner of these affecting the Copula, (Be it so, or, let it be so,) is called the Imperative Mode; of which there are these three varieties very fit to be distinctly provided for. As for that other use of the Imperative Mode, when it signifiesPermission; this may be sufficiently expressed by theSecondary ModeofLiberty; Youmaydo it.

The Secondary Modes are such, as, when the Copula is affected with any of them, make the Sentence to be (as the Logicians call it) aModal Proposition.

This happens, when the matter in discourse, namely, the being, or doing, or suffering of a thing, is considered, notsimply by itself, butgradually in its causes, from which it proceedscontingently, ornecessarily.

Then a thing seems to be leftContingent, when the Speaker expresses only thePossibilityof it, or his ownLibertyto it.

1. ThePossibilityof a thing depends upon the power of its cause; and may be expressed

2. TheLibertyof a thing depends upon a freedom from all obstacles either within or without, and is usually expressed in our language

Then a thing seems to be ofNecessity, when the Speaker expresseth the resolution of his ownwill, or some otherobligationupon him from without.

3. TheInclination of the Willis expressed,

4. The Necessity of a thing from someexternal Obligation, whetherNatural, orMoral, which we call Duty, is expressed,

See alsoHermes, Book I. Chap. viii.

[26]I doubt much of the propriety of the following examples: “The rules of our holy Religion, from which weareinfinitelyswerved.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 27. “The whole obligation of that law and covenant, which God made with the Jews,wasalsoceased.” Ib. Vol. II. Serm. 52. “Whose numberwasnowamountedto three hundred.” Swift, Contests and Dissensions, Chap. 3. Neuter Verbs are sometimes employed very improperly as Actives: “I think, it by no means a fit and decent thing tovie Charities, and to erect the reputation of one upon the ruins of another.” Atterbury, Vol. I. Serm. 2.

[27]These two have alsobeatenandburstenin the Participle; and in that form they belong to the Third Class of Irregulars.

[28]The Verbs marked thus throughout the three Classes of Irregulars, have the Regular as well as the Irregular form in use.

[29]This Verb in the Past Time and Participle is pronounced short;read,red,red; likelead,led,led; and perhaps ought to be written in this manner: our antient writers spelt itredde.

[30]They follow the Saxon rule: “Verbs which in the Infinitive end indanandtan,” (that is, in English,dandt; for an is only the Characteristic termination of the Saxon Infinitive;) “in the Preterit and Participle Preterit commonly for the sake of better sound throw away the final ed; asbeot,afed, (both in the Preterit and Participle Preterit) forbeoted,afeded; frombeotan,afedan.” Hickes, Grammat. Saxon, cap. 9. So the same Verbs in English,beat,fed, instead ofbeated,feeded.

[31]Whenenfollows a Vowel or Liquid theeis dropt: sodrawn,slayn, (orslain,) are instead ofdrawen,slayen; so likewiseknown,born, are forknowen,boren, in the Saxoncnawen,boren: and so of the rest.

[32]This Verb is also formed like those ofilong intoishort; Write, writ, written; and by Contractionwritin the Participle, but, I think, improperly.

[33]Frequent mistakes are made in the formation of the Participle of this Verb. The analogy plainly requiressitten; which was formerly in use: “The army havingsittenthere so long:”⸺“Which was enough to make him stir, that would not havesittenstill, though Hanibal had been quiet.” Raleigh. “That no Parliament should be dissolved, till it hadsittenfive months.” Hobbes, Hist. of Civil Wars, p. 257. But it is now almost wholly disused, the form of the Past Timesat, having taken its place. Dr. Middleton hath with great propriety restored the true Participle:⸺“To havesittenon the heads of the Apostles:”⸺“to havesittenupon each of them.” Works, Vol. II. p. 30. “Blessed is the man,⸺that hath notsatin the seat of the scornful.” Ps. i. 1. The old Editions havesit; which may be perhaps allowed as a Contraction ofsitten. “And when he wasset, his disciples came unto him:” καθισαντος αυτου. Matt. v. 1.⸺“who isseton the right hand;”⸺“and issetdown at the right hand of the throne of God:” in both places εκαθισεν. Heb. viii. 1. & xii. 2.Setcan be no part of the Verbto sit. If it belongs to the Verbto set, the Translation in these passages is wrong: forto setsignifiesto place, but without any designation of the posture of the person placed; which is a circumstance of importance expressed by the original.

[34]This Neuter Verb is frequently confounded with the Verb Activeto lay, [that is,to put, orplace;] which is Regular, and has in the Past Time and Participlelayed, orlaid.

[35]“Thus havingchosedeach other.⸺” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 797. 8ᵛᵒ. Improperly.

[36]That is, as a bird,volare; whereasto fleesignifiesfugere, as from an enemy. This seems to be the proper distinction betweento fly, andto flee; which in the Present Time are very often confounded. Our Translation of the Bible is not quite free from this mistake. It hathfleeforvolarein perhaps seven or eight places out of a great number; but neverflyforfugere.

[37]Essay xxix.

[38]The whole number of Verbs in the English language, Regular and Irregular, Simple and Compounded, taken together, is about 4300. See Dr. Ward’s Essays on the English Language; the Catalogue of English Verbs.

[39]⸺“He wouldhave spoke.”Milton, P. L. x. 517.“Wordsinterwovewith sighs found out their way.”P. L. i. 621.“And to his faithful servanthathin placeBorewitness gloriously.”—Samson Ag. ℣. 1752.“And envious darkness, ere they could return,Had stolethem from me.”—Comus, ℣. 195.Here it is observable, that the Author’s MS. and the First Edition have itstolne.⸺“And in triumphhad rode.”P. R. iii. 36.⸺“Ihave choseThis perfect man.”⸺P. R. i. 165.⸺“The fragrant brierwas wovebetween.”Dryden, Fables.“Then finish what youhave began,But scribble faster, if you can.”Dryden, Poems, Vol. 2. p. 172.“Have sprang.”Atterbury, Vol. 1. Serm. 4.“Had spake”⸺“had began.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. Hist. p. 40, & 120. “The menbegunto embellish themselves.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 434.“Rapt into future times the bardbegun.”Pope, Messiah.And without the necessity of rhyme:“A second deluge learning thuso’er-run,And the Monks finish’d what the Gothsbegun.”Essay on Criticism.“Repeats you verseswroteon glasses.”Prior.“Mr. Missonhas wrote.”—Addison, Preface to his Travels. “He could only command his voice,brokewith sighs and sobbings, so far as to bid her proceed.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 164.“No civil broilshavesince his deatharose.”Dryden, on O. Cromwell.“Illustrious virtues, who by turnshave rose.”Prior.⸺“Hadnotarose.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. and Battle of Books: and Bolingbroke, Letter to Wyndham, p. 233.⸺“This nimble operator willhave stoleit.” Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. “Some philosophershave mistook.” Ibid. Sect. ix.⸺“SilenceWas tookere she was ware.”Milton, Comus.“Into these common places look,Which from great authors Ihave took.”Prior, Alma.“A free Constitution, when it hasbeen shookby the iniquity of former administrations.” Lord Bolingbroke, Patriot King, p. 111.⸺“Too strong tobe shookby his enemies.” Atterbury. “But therewasnow an accidentfellout.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. p. 292.⸺“Ev’n there he shouldhave fell.”Prior, Solomon.“Sure some disasterhas befell:Speak, Nurse; I hope the Boy is well.”Gay, Fables.

[39]

⸺“He wouldhave spoke.”Milton, P. L. x. 517.

⸺“He wouldhave spoke.”

Milton, P. L. x. 517.

“Wordsinterwovewith sighs found out their way.”P. L. i. 621.

“Wordsinterwovewith sighs found out their way.”

P. L. i. 621.

“And to his faithful servanthathin placeBorewitness gloriously.”—Samson Ag. ℣. 1752.

“And to his faithful servanthathin place

Borewitness gloriously.”—Samson Ag. ℣. 1752.

“And envious darkness, ere they could return,Had stolethem from me.”—Comus, ℣. 195.

“And envious darkness, ere they could return,

Had stolethem from me.”—Comus, ℣. 195.

Here it is observable, that the Author’s MS. and the First Edition have itstolne.

⸺“And in triumphhad rode.”P. R. iii. 36.

⸺“And in triumphhad rode.”

P. R. iii. 36.

⸺“Ihave choseThis perfect man.”⸺P. R. i. 165.

⸺“Ihave choseThis perfect man.”⸺

⸺“Ihave chose

This perfect man.”⸺

P. R. i. 165.

⸺“The fragrant brierwas wovebetween.”Dryden, Fables.

⸺“The fragrant brierwas wovebetween.”

Dryden, Fables.

“Then finish what youhave began,But scribble faster, if you can.”Dryden, Poems, Vol. 2. p. 172.

“Then finish what youhave began,But scribble faster, if you can.”

“Then finish what youhave began,

But scribble faster, if you can.”

Dryden, Poems, Vol. 2. p. 172.

“Have sprang.”Atterbury, Vol. 1. Serm. 4.

“Have sprang.”

Atterbury, Vol. 1. Serm. 4.

“Had spake”⸺“had began.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. Hist. p. 40, & 120. “The menbegunto embellish themselves.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 434.

“Rapt into future times the bardbegun.”Pope, Messiah.

“Rapt into future times the bardbegun.”

Pope, Messiah.

And without the necessity of rhyme:

“A second deluge learning thuso’er-run,And the Monks finish’d what the Gothsbegun.”Essay on Criticism.

“A second deluge learning thuso’er-run,And the Monks finish’d what the Gothsbegun.”

“A second deluge learning thuso’er-run,

And the Monks finish’d what the Gothsbegun.”

Essay on Criticism.

“Repeats you verseswroteon glasses.”Prior.

“Repeats you verseswroteon glasses.”

Prior.

“Mr. Missonhas wrote.”—Addison, Preface to his Travels. “He could only command his voice,brokewith sighs and sobbings, so far as to bid her proceed.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 164.

“No civil broilshavesince his deatharose.”Dryden, on O. Cromwell.

“No civil broilshavesince his deatharose.”

Dryden, on O. Cromwell.

“Illustrious virtues, who by turnshave rose.”Prior.

“Illustrious virtues, who by turnshave rose.”

Prior.

⸺“Hadnotarose.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. and Battle of Books: and Bolingbroke, Letter to Wyndham, p. 233.⸺“This nimble operator willhave stoleit.” Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. “Some philosophershave mistook.” Ibid. Sect. ix.

⸺“SilenceWas tookere she was ware.”Milton, Comus.

⸺“SilenceWas tookere she was ware.”

⸺“Silence

Was tookere she was ware.”

Milton, Comus.

“Into these common places look,Which from great authors Ihave took.”Prior, Alma.

“Into these common places look,Which from great authors Ihave took.”

“Into these common places look,

Which from great authors Ihave took.”

Prior, Alma.

“A free Constitution, when it hasbeen shookby the iniquity of former administrations.” Lord Bolingbroke, Patriot King, p. 111.⸺“Too strong tobe shookby his enemies.” Atterbury. “But therewasnow an accidentfellout.”⸺Clarendon, Contin. p. 292.

⸺“Ev’n there he shouldhave fell.”Prior, Solomon.

⸺“Ev’n there he shouldhave fell.”

Prior, Solomon.

“Sure some disasterhas befell:Speak, Nurse; I hope the Boy is well.”Gay, Fables.

“Sure some disasterhas befell:Speak, Nurse; I hope the Boy is well.”

“Sure some disasterhas befell:

Speak, Nurse; I hope the Boy is well.”

Gay, Fables.

[40]“Was theeasilierpersuaded.”—Raleigh. “The thingshighliestimportant to the growing age.” Lord Shaftesbury, Letter to Lord Molesworth. Improperly, formore easily,most highly.

[41]The Conjunctionbecauseused to express the motive or end, is either improper or obsolete: as, “The multitude rebuked them,becausethey should hold their peace.” Matt. xx. 31. “It is the case of some, to contrive false periods of business,becausethey may seem men of dispatch.” Bacon, Essay xxv. We should now make use ofthat.

[42]“He caused all persons,whomhe knew had, or he thought might have, spoken to him, to be apprehended.” Clarendon, Vol. III. p. 618. 8ᵛᵒ. It ought to bewho, the Nominative Case tohad; notwhom, as if it were the Objective Case governed byknew.“Scotland andTheedid each in other live.”Dryden, Poems, Vol. II. p. 220.It ought to beThou.

“Scotland andTheedid each in other live.”Dryden, Poems, Vol. II. p. 220.

“Scotland andTheedid each in other live.”

Dryden, Poems, Vol. II. p. 220.

It ought to beThou.

[43]“ButThoufalse Arcite nevershallobtainThy bad pretence.”⸺Dryden, Fables.“ThatThou mightfortune to thy side engage.”Prior.It ought to beshalt,mightest. The mistake seems to be owing to the confounding ofThouandYouas equivalent in every respect; whereas one is Singular, the other Plural. See above, p. 48. “Greatpains has[have] been taken.” Pope, P. S. to the Odyssey. “I have considered,what have[hath] been said on both sides in this controversy.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 27.

[43]

“ButThoufalse Arcite nevershallobtainThy bad pretence.”⸺Dryden, Fables.

“ButThoufalse Arcite nevershallobtainThy bad pretence.”⸺

“ButThoufalse Arcite nevershallobtain

Thy bad pretence.”⸺

Dryden, Fables.

“ThatThou mightfortune to thy side engage.”Prior.

“ThatThou mightfortune to thy side engage.”

Prior.

It ought to beshalt,mightest. The mistake seems to be owing to the confounding ofThouandYouas equivalent in every respect; whereas one is Singular, the other Plural. See above, p. 48. “Greatpains has[have] been taken.” Pope, P. S. to the Odyssey. “I have considered,what have[hath] been said on both sides in this controversy.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 27.

[44]“Tell wholoves who; what favours some partake,And who is jilted for another’s sake.”Dryden, Juvenal, Sat. vi.“Those,whohethoughttrue to his party.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. I. p. 667. 8ᵛᵒ. “Whoshould Imeetthe other night, but my old friend?” Spect. Nᵒ 32. “Whoshould Iseein the lid of it, but the Doctor?” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 57. “He knows,whoit is proper toexposeforemost.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Conclusion. It ought in all these places to bewhom.

[44]

“Tell wholoves who; what favours some partake,And who is jilted for another’s sake.”Dryden, Juvenal, Sat. vi.

“Tell wholoves who; what favours some partake,And who is jilted for another’s sake.”

“Tell wholoves who; what favours some partake,

And who is jilted for another’s sake.”

Dryden, Juvenal, Sat. vi.

“Those,whohethoughttrue to his party.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. I. p. 667. 8ᵛᵒ. “Whoshould Imeetthe other night, but my old friend?” Spect. Nᵒ 32. “Whoshould Iseein the lid of it, but the Doctor?” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 57. “He knows,whoit is proper toexposeforemost.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Conclusion. It ought in all these places to bewhom.

[45]“And restores to hisIslandthat tranquillity and repose, to which they had beenstrangersduring his absence.” Pope, Dissertation prefixed to the Odyssey.Islandis not a Noun of Multitude: it ought to be, hispeople; or,ithad beena stranger. “What reasonhave the Churchof Rome to talk of modesty in this case?” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 49. “All the virtues of mankind are to be counted upon a few fingers, buthisfollies and vices are innumerable.” Swift, Preface to Tale of a Tub. Is notmankindin this place a Noun of Multitude, and such as requires the Pronoun refering to it to be in the Plural Number,their?

[46]“Whomdo men say, thatI am?⸺Butwhomsay ye, thatI am?” Matt. xvi. 13, 15. So likewise Mark viii. 27, 29. Luke ix. 18, 20. “Whom think ye, thatI am?” Acts xiii. 25. It ought in all these places to bewho; which is not governed by the Verbsayorthink, but by the Verbam: or agrees in Case with the PronounI. If the Verb were in the Infinitive Mode, it would require the Objective Case of the Relative, agreeing with the Pronounme: “Whomthink ye, or do ye think,me to be?”⸺“To that,whichoncewas thee.”Prior.It ought to be,which was thou; or,which thou wast.

⸺“To that,whichoncewas thee.”Prior.

⸺“To that,whichoncewas thee.”

Prior.

It ought to be,which was thou; or,which thou wast.

[47]On which place says Dr. Bentley, “The Context demands that it be,⸺Himdescending, Illo descendente.” Buthimis not the Ablative Case, for the English knows no such Case; nor doeshimwithout a Preposition on any occasion answer to the Latin Ablativeillo. I might with better reason contend, that it ought to be “hisdescending,” because it is in Greek αυτου καταβαινοντος in the Genitive; and it would be as good Grammar, and as proper English. This comes of forcing the English under the rules of a foreign Language, with which it has little concern: and thisugly and deformed fault, to use his own expression, Bentley has endeavoured to impose upon Milton in several places: see P. L. vii. 15. ix. 829, 883, 1147. x. 267, 1001. On the other hand, where Milton has been really guilty of this fault, he, very inconsistently with himself, corrects him, and sets him right. His Latin Grammar Rules were happily out of his head, and by a kind ofvernacular instinct(so, I imagine, he would call it) he perceived that his Author was wrong.“For only in destroying I find easeTo my relentless thoughts; and,him destroy’d,Or won to what may work his utter loss,For whom all this was made, all this will soonFollow, as to him link’d in weal or woe.”P. L. ix. 129.It ought to be, “hedestroy’d,” that is, “he beingdestroy’d.” Bentley corrects it, “andmandestroy’d.”Archbishop Tillotson has fallen into the same mistake: “Solomon was of this mind; and I make no doubt, but he made as wise and true Proverbs as any body has done since:Himonlyexcepted, who was a much greater and wiser man than Solomon.” Vol. I. Ser. 53.

“For only in destroying I find easeTo my relentless thoughts; and,him destroy’d,Or won to what may work his utter loss,For whom all this was made, all this will soonFollow, as to him link’d in weal or woe.”P. L. ix. 129.

“For only in destroying I find ease

To my relentless thoughts; and,him destroy’d,

Or won to what may work his utter loss,

For whom all this was made, all this will soon

Follow, as to him link’d in weal or woe.”

P. L. ix. 129.

It ought to be, “hedestroy’d,” that is, “he beingdestroy’d.” Bentley corrects it, “andmandestroy’d.”

Archbishop Tillotson has fallen into the same mistake: “Solomon was of this mind; and I make no doubt, but he made as wise and true Proverbs as any body has done since:Himonlyexcepted, who was a much greater and wiser man than Solomon.” Vol. I. Ser. 53.

[48]“Toseeso manyto make solittle conscience of so great a sin.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 22. “It cannot but be a delightful spectacle to God and Angels toseea young person, besieged by powerful temptations on either side,to acquithimself gloriously, and resolutelyto holdout against the most violent assaults: tobeholdone in the prime and flower of his age, that is courted by pleasures and honours, by the devil and all the bewitching vanities of the world,to rejectall these, andto cleavestedfastly unto God.” Ib. Serm. 54. The impropriety of the Phrases distinguished by Italic Characters is evident.

[49]Το γαρ θελειν παρακειται μοι, το δε κατεργαζεσθαι το καλον ουχ ευρισχω. Rom. vii. 18.

[50]Προς το θεαθηναι τοις ανθρωποις. Matt. xxiii. 5. The following sentences seem defective either in the construction, or the order of the words: “Why do ye that,which is not lawful to doon the sabbath days?⸺The shew bread,which is not lawful to eat, but for the priests alone.” Luke vi. 2, 4. The Construction may be rectified by supplyingit; “whichitis not lawful to do; whichitis not lawful to eat:” or the order of the words in this manner; “to do which,to eat which, is not lawful:” where the Infinitiveto do,to eat, does the office of the Nominative Case, and the Relativewhichis in the Objective Case.

[51]“I am not like other men,to envythe talents I cannot reach.” Tale of a Tub, Preface. An improper use of the Infinitive.

[52]This Rule arises from the nature and idiom of our Language, and from as plain a principle as any on which it is founded: namely, that a word which has the Article before it, and a Noun, with the Possessive Prepositionof, after it, must be a Noun; and if a Noun, it ought to follow the Construction of a Noun, and not have the Regimen of a Verb. It is the Participial Termination of this sort of words that is apt to deceive us, and make us treat them as if they were of an amphibious species, partly Nouns, and partly Verbs. I believe there are hardly any of our Writers, who have not fallen into this inaccuracy. That it is such, will perhaps more clearly appear, if we examine and resolve one or two examples in this kind.“God, who didst teach the hearts of thy faithful people, bythe sendingto themthe lightof thy Holy Spirit:⸺” Collect, Whitsunday.Sendingis in this place a Noun; for it is accompanied with the Article: nevertheless it is also a Transitive Verb, for it governs the Nounlightin the Objective Case: but this is inconsistent; let it be either the one or the other, and abide by its proper Construction. That these Participial Words are sometimes real Nouns is undeniable; for they have a Plural Number as such: as, “theoutgoingsof the morning.”The Sendingis the same withthe Mission; which necessarily requires the Prepositionofafter it, to mark the relation between it andthe light;the mission of the light; and so,the sending of the light. The Phrase would be proper either way, by keeping to the Construction of the Noun,by the sending of the light; or of the Participle, or Gerund,by sending the light.Again:⸺“Sent to prepare the way of thy Son our Saviour,by preaching of Repentance:⸺” Collect, St. John Baptist. Here the Participle, or Gerund, hath as improperly the Prepositionofafter it; and so is deprived of its Verbal Regimen, by which as a Transitive it would govern the NounRepentancein the Objective Case. Besides, the Phrase is rendered obscure and ambiguous: for the obvious meaning of it in its present form is, “by preaching concerning or on the Subject of Repentance;” whereas the sense intended is, “by publishing the Covenant of Repentance, and declaring Repentance to be a condition of acceptance with God.” The Phrase would have been perfectly right and determinate to this sense either way; by the Noun,by the preaching of repentance; or by the Participle,by preaching repentance.

“God, who didst teach the hearts of thy faithful people, bythe sendingto themthe lightof thy Holy Spirit:⸺” Collect, Whitsunday.Sendingis in this place a Noun; for it is accompanied with the Article: nevertheless it is also a Transitive Verb, for it governs the Nounlightin the Objective Case: but this is inconsistent; let it be either the one or the other, and abide by its proper Construction. That these Participial Words are sometimes real Nouns is undeniable; for they have a Plural Number as such: as, “theoutgoingsof the morning.”The Sendingis the same withthe Mission; which necessarily requires the Prepositionofafter it, to mark the relation between it andthe light;the mission of the light; and so,the sending of the light. The Phrase would be proper either way, by keeping to the Construction of the Noun,by the sending of the light; or of the Participle, or Gerund,by sending the light.

Again:⸺“Sent to prepare the way of thy Son our Saviour,by preaching of Repentance:⸺” Collect, St. John Baptist. Here the Participle, or Gerund, hath as improperly the Prepositionofafter it; and so is deprived of its Verbal Regimen, by which as a Transitive it would govern the NounRepentancein the Objective Case. Besides, the Phrase is rendered obscure and ambiguous: for the obvious meaning of it in its present form is, “by preaching concerning or on the Subject of Repentance;” whereas the sense intended is, “by publishing the Covenant of Repentance, and declaring Repentance to be a condition of acceptance with God.” The Phrase would have been perfectly right and determinate to this sense either way; by the Noun,by the preaching of repentance; or by the Participle,by preaching repentance.

[53]These are the three Primary Modes, or manners of expressing our thoughts concerning the being, doing, or suffering of a thing. If it comes within our knowledge, we explain it, or make a declaration of it; if we are ignorant or doubtful of it, we make an inquiry about it; if it is not immediately in our power, we express our desire or will concerning it. In Theory therefore the Interrogative form seems to have as good a Title to a Mode of its own, as either of the other two; but Practice has determined it otherwise; and has in all the Languages, with which we are most acquainted, supplied the place of an Interrogative Mode, either by Particles of Interrogation, or by a peculiar order of the words in the sentence. If it be true, as I have somewhere read, that the Modes of the Verbs are more numerous in the Lapland Tongue than in any other, possibly the Laplanders may be provided with an Interrogative Mode.

[54]“The burning levernot deludeshis pains.”Dryden, Ovid. Metam. B. xii.“I hope, my Lord, said he, Inot offend.”Dryden, Fables.These examples make the impropriety of placing the Adverbnotbefore the Verb very evident.

[54]

“The burning levernot deludeshis pains.”Dryden, Ovid. Metam. B. xii.

“The burning levernot deludeshis pains.”

Dryden, Ovid. Metam. B. xii.

“I hope, my Lord, said he, Inot offend.”Dryden, Fables.

“I hope, my Lord, said he, Inot offend.”

Dryden, Fables.

These examples make the impropriety of placing the Adverbnotbefore the Verb very evident.

[55]“Didhenot fearthe Lord, andbesoughtthe Lord, and the Lordrepentedhim of the evil, which he had pronounced against them?” Jer. xxvi. 19. Here the Interrogative and Explicative forms are confounded. It ought to be, “Did he notfearthe Lord, andbeseechthe Lord? anddid notthe Lordrepenthim of the evil,⸺?” See likewise Matt. xviii. 12.

[56]“For ever in this humble cellLet TheeandI, my fair one, dwell.”Prior.It ought to beMe.

[56]

“For ever in this humble cellLet TheeandI, my fair one, dwell.”Prior.

“For ever in this humble cellLet TheeandI, my fair one, dwell.”

“For ever in this humble cell

Let TheeandI, my fair one, dwell.”

Prior.

It ought to beMe.

[57]It is not easy to give particular rules for the management of the Modes and Times of Verbs with respect to one another, so that they may be proper and consistent: nor would it be of much use; for the best rule that can be given is this very general one, To observe what the sense necessarily requires. But it may be of use to consider one or two examples, that seem faulty in these respects, and to examine where the fault lies.“Some who the depths of eloquencehave found,In that unnavigable Streamwere drown’d.”Dryden, Juv. Sat. x.The event mentioned in the first line is plainly prior in time to that mentioned in the second; this is subsequent to that, and a consequence of it. The first event is mentioned in the Present Perfect Time; it is present and compleated; “theyhave[now]foundthe depths of eloquence.” The second event is expressed in the Past Indefinite Time; it is past and gone, but, when it happened, uncertain: “theywere drown’d.” We observed, that the last mentioned event is subsequent to the first: but how can the Past Time be subsequent to the Present? It therefore ought to be in the second lineare drown’d, in the Present Perfect, which is consistent with the same Time in the first line: or in the first linehad foundin the Past Perfect, which would be consistent with the Past Indefinite in the second line.⸺There seems to be a fault of the like nature in the following passage:“But oh!’twaslittle that her lifeO’er earth and watersbearsthy fame:”⸺Prior.It ought to beborein the second line.Again;“Him portion’d maids, apprentic’d orphansblest,The young wholabour, and the old whorest.”Pope, Moral Ep. iii. 267.The Verb in the first line ought to be in the same Time with those in the last.“Had their records been delivered down in the vulgar tongue,⸺they could not now be understood, unless by Antiquaries, whomadeit their study to expound them.” Swift, Letter, on the English Tongue. Here the latter part of the sentence depends intirely on theSuppositionexpressed in the former, “of their records being delivered down in the vulgar tongue:” thereforemadein the Indicative Mode, which implies no supposition, and in the Past Indefinite Time, is improper: it would be much better in the Past Definite,had made; but indeed ought to be in the Subjunctive Mode, Present or Past Time,should make, orshould have made.

“Some who the depths of eloquencehave found,In that unnavigable Streamwere drown’d.”Dryden, Juv. Sat. x.

“Some who the depths of eloquencehave found,In that unnavigable Streamwere drown’d.”

“Some who the depths of eloquencehave found,

In that unnavigable Streamwere drown’d.”

Dryden, Juv. Sat. x.

The event mentioned in the first line is plainly prior in time to that mentioned in the second; this is subsequent to that, and a consequence of it. The first event is mentioned in the Present Perfect Time; it is present and compleated; “theyhave[now]foundthe depths of eloquence.” The second event is expressed in the Past Indefinite Time; it is past and gone, but, when it happened, uncertain: “theywere drown’d.” We observed, that the last mentioned event is subsequent to the first: but how can the Past Time be subsequent to the Present? It therefore ought to be in the second lineare drown’d, in the Present Perfect, which is consistent with the same Time in the first line: or in the first linehad foundin the Past Perfect, which would be consistent with the Past Indefinite in the second line.⸺There seems to be a fault of the like nature in the following passage:

“But oh!’twaslittle that her lifeO’er earth and watersbearsthy fame:”⸺Prior.

“But oh!’twaslittle that her lifeO’er earth and watersbearsthy fame:”⸺

“But oh!’twaslittle that her life

O’er earth and watersbearsthy fame:”⸺

Prior.

It ought to beborein the second line.

Again;

“Him portion’d maids, apprentic’d orphansblest,The young wholabour, and the old whorest.”Pope, Moral Ep. iii. 267.

“Him portion’d maids, apprentic’d orphansblest,The young wholabour, and the old whorest.”

“Him portion’d maids, apprentic’d orphansblest,

The young wholabour, and the old whorest.”

Pope, Moral Ep. iii. 267.

The Verb in the first line ought to be in the same Time with those in the last.

“Had their records been delivered down in the vulgar tongue,⸺they could not now be understood, unless by Antiquaries, whomadeit their study to expound them.” Swift, Letter, on the English Tongue. Here the latter part of the sentence depends intirely on theSuppositionexpressed in the former, “of their records being delivered down in the vulgar tongue:” thereforemadein the Indicative Mode, which implies no supposition, and in the Past Indefinite Time, is improper: it would be much better in the Past Definite,had made; but indeed ought to be in the Subjunctive Mode, Present or Past Time,should make, orshould have made.

[58]“Bythis meansthou shalt have no portion on this side the river.” Ezra, iv. 16. “It renders us careless of approving ourselves to God by religious duties, and bythat meanssecuring the continuance of his goodness.” Atterbury, Sermons. Ought it not to be, bythese means, bythose means? or bythis mean, bythat mean, in the singular number? as it is used by Hooker, Sidney, Shakespear, &c. “I have not weptthisfortyyears.” Dryden. “I am not recommendingthese kindof sufferings to your liking.” Bishop Sherlock, Disc. Vol. II. p. 267. So the Pronoun must agree with its Noun: in which respect let the following example be considered. “It isan unanswerable argument of a very refined age, the wonderfulCivilitiesthat have passed between the nation of authors and those of readers.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. x. As to these wonderfulCivilities, one might say, that “they arean unanswerable argument, &c.” but as the Sentence stands at present it is not easy to reconcile it to any grammatical propriety. “A person whomall the world allows to be so much yourbetters.” Swift, Battle of Books. And the Phrase which occurs in the following examples, tho’ pretty common and authorised by Custom, yet seems to be somewhat defective in the same way:“’Tis thesethat early taint the female soul.”Pope.“’Tis theythat give the great Atrides’ spoils;’Tis theythat still renew Ulysses’ toils.”Prior.

“’Tis thesethat early taint the female soul.”Pope.

“’Tis thesethat early taint the female soul.”

Pope.

“’Tis theythat give the great Atrides’ spoils;’Tis theythat still renew Ulysses’ toils.”Prior.

“’Tis theythat give the great Atrides’ spoils;’Tis theythat still renew Ulysses’ toils.”

“’Tis theythat give the great Atrides’ spoils;

’Tis theythat still renew Ulysses’ toils.”

Prior.

[59]“Forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God of his goodness to give you safe deliverance, andhath preservedyou in the great danger of Childbirth:”⸺Liturgy. The Verbhath preservedhath here no Nominative Case; for it cannot be properly supplied by the preceding wordGod, which is in the Objective Case. It ought to be, “and He hath preservedyou;” or rather, “and to preserveyou.” Some of our best Writers have frequently fallen into this, which I take to be no small inaccuracy: I shall therefore add some more examples of it, by way of admonition; inferring in each within Crotchets, the Nominative Case that is deficient, and that must necessarily be supplied to support the proper Construction of the Sentence. “If the calm, in which he was born, and [which] lasted so long, had continued.” Clarendon, Life, p. 43. “The Remonstrance he had lately received from the House of Commons, and [which] was dispersed throughout the Kingdom.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. I. p. 366. 8ᵛᵒ. “These we have extracted from an Historian of undoubted credit, a reverend bishop, the learned Paulus Jovius; and [they] are the same that were practised under the pontificate of Leo X.” Pope, Works, Vol. VI. p. 301. “A cloud gathering in the North; which we have helped to raise, and [which] may quickly break in a storm upon our heads.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. “A man, whose inclinations led him to be corrupt, and [who] had great abilities to manage and multiply and defend his corruptions.” Gulliver, Part I. Chap. vi. “My Master likewise mentioned another quality, which his servants had discovered in many Yahoos, and [which] to him was wholly unaccountable.” Gulliver, Part IV. Chap. vii. “This I filled with the feathers of several birds I had taken with springes made of Yahoos hairs, and [which] were excellent food.” Ibid. Chap. x. “Osyris, whom the Grecians call Dionysius, and [who] is the same with Bacchus.” Swift, Mechan. Oper. of the Spirit, Sect. ii.

[60]“Which rule, if it had been observed, a neighbouring Prince would have wanted a great deal of that incense, which hath been offered up to him by his adorers.” Atterbury, Vol. I. Serm. 1. The Pronounitis here the Nominative Case to the Verbobserved; andwhich ruleis left by itself, a Nominative Case without any Verb following it. This manner of expression, however improper, is very common. It ought to be, “Ifthis rulehad been observed, &c.”

[61]Adjectives are sometimes employed as Adverbs; improperly, and not agreeably to the Genius of the English Language. As, “extremeelaborate:” Dryden, Essay on Dram. Poet. “marvellousgraceful:” Clarendon, Life, p. 18. “extremeunwilling;” “extremesubject:” Swift, Tale of a Tub, and Battle of Books. “I shall endeavour to live hereaftersuitableto a man in my station.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 530. “Homer describes this riveragreeableto the vulgar reading.” Pope, Note on Iliad, ii. v. 1032. Soexceeding, forexceedingly, however improper, occurs frequently in the Vulgar Translation of the Bible, and has obtained in common discourse. “We should live soberly, righteously, andgodlyin this present world.” Tit. ii. 12.“O Liberty, Thou Goddessheavenlybright.”Addison.On the other hand an Adverb is improperly used as an Adjective in the following passage: “We may cast in such seeds and principles, as we judge most likely to takesoonestand deepest root.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 52.

“O Liberty, Thou Goddessheavenlybright.”Addison.

“O Liberty, Thou Goddessheavenlybright.”

Addison.

On the other hand an Adverb is improperly used as an Adjective in the following passage: “We may cast in such seeds and principles, as we judge most likely to takesoonestand deepest root.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 52.

[62]“How much soeverthe Reformation of this corrupt and degenerate Age isalmost utterlyto be despaired of, we may yet have a more comfortable prospect of future times.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Pref. to Serm. 49. The first part of this Sentence abounds with Adverbs, and those such as are hardly consistent with one another.

[63]“We are still much at a loss,whocivil power belongsto.” Locke. It ought to bewhom.

[64]Pope, Preface to his Poems.

[65]Within composition retains the signification, which it hath among others in the Saxon, offromandagainst: as towithhold, towithstand. So also for has a negative signification from the Saxon: as, toforbid,forbeodan; toforget,forgitan.

[66]Examples of impropriety in the use of the Preposition in Phrases of this kind: “Your character, which I, or any other writer, may now value ourselvesby[upon] drawing.” Swift, Letter on the English Tongue. “You have bestowed your favoursto[upon] the most deserving persons.” Ibid. “Upon such occasions as fellinto[under] their cognisance,” Swift, Contests and Dissensions &c. Chap. 3. “That variety of factionsinto[in] which we are still engaged.” Ibid. Chap. 5. “The utmost extent of power pretended [to] by the Commons.” Ibid. Chap. 3.⸺“Accused the ministersfor[of] betraying the Dutch.” Swift, Four last years of the Queen, Book ii. “Ovid, whom you accusefor[of] luxuriancy of verse.” Dryden, on Dram. Poesy. “Neither the one nor the other shall make me swerveout of[from] the path, which I have traced to myself.” Bolingbroke, Letter to Wyndham, p. 252. “They are now reconciled by a zeal for their cause to what they could not be prompted [to] by a concern for their beauty.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 81. “If policy can prevailupon[over] force.” Addison, Travels, p. 62. “Ye blind guides, which strainata gnat, and swallow a camel.” Matt. xxiii. 24. διυλιζοντες, “which strainout, or take a gnatoutof the liquor by straining it:” the impropriety of the Preposition has wholly destroyed the meaning of the Phrase. Observe also, that the Noun generally requires after it the same Preposition as the Verb from which it is formed: “It was perfectly in complianceto[with] some persons, for whose opinion I have great deference.” Swift, Pref. to Temple’s Memoirs. “Not from any personal hatred to them, but in justificationto[of] the best of Queens.” Swift, Examiner, Nᵒ 23. In the last example, the Verb being Transitive and requiring the Objective Case, the Noun formed from it seems to require the Possessive Case, or its Preposition, after it. Or perhaps he meant to say, “injusticeto the best of Queens.” “No discouragement for the authors to proceed.” Tale of a Tub, Preface. “A strict observanceaftertimes and fashions.” Ibid. Sect. ii. So the NounAversion, (that is, a turning away,) requires the Prepositionfromafter it; and does not properly admit ofto,for, ortowards, which are often used with it.

[67]These are much disused in common discourse, and are retained only in the Solemn, or Formulary Style. “They [our Authors] have of late, ’tis true, reformed in some measure the gouty joints and darning-work ofwhereunto’s,whereby’s,thereof’s,therewith’s, and the rest of this kind; by which complicated periods are so curiously strung, or hook’d on, one to another, after the long-spun manner of the bar or pulpit.” Lord Shaftesbury, Miscel. V.

[68]Or in these and the like Phrases, may notme,thee,him,her,us, which in Saxon are the Dative Cases of their respective Pronouns, be considered as still continuing such in the English, and including in their very form the force of the Prepositionstoandfor? There are certainly some other Phrases, which are to be resolved in this manner: “Wo isme!” The Phrase is pure Saxon; “wa is me:”meis the Dative Case; in English, with the Prepositionto me. So, “methinks;” Saxon, “me thincth,” εμοι δοκει. “O well isthee!” Psal. cxxviii. 2. “Wel ishimthat ther mai be.” Anglo-Saxon Poem in Hickes’s Thesaur. Vol. I. p. 231. “Well ishim, that dwelleth with a wife of understanding.”⸺“Well ishim, that hath found prudence.” Ecclus. xxv. 8, 9. The Translator thought to correct his phrase afterward, and so hath made it neither Saxon nor English: “Well ishe, that is defended from it.” Ecclus. xxviii. 19. “Wo worth the day!” Ezek. xxx. 2. that is, Wo betothe day. The wordworthis not the Adjective, but the Saxon Verbweorthan, orworthan,fieri,to be,to become; which is often used by Chaucer, and is still retained as an Auxiliary Verb in the German Language.

[69]Thathas been used in the same manner, as including the Relativewhich; but it is either improper, or obsolete: as, “To consider advisedly ofthatis moved.” Bacon, Essay xxii. “She appeared not to wishthatwithout doubt she would have been very glad of.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 363. 8ᵛᵒ. “We speakthatwe do know, and testifythatwe have seen.” John iii. 11.

[70]“Who, instead of going about doing good,theyare perpetually intent upon doing mischief.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 18. The Nominative Casetheyin this sentence is superfluous; it was expressed before in the Relativewho.

[71]“I amthe Lord, that makethall things;that stretchethforth the heavens alone:”⸺Isaiah xliv. 24. Thus far is right:the Lordin the third Person is the Antecedent, and the Verb agrees with the Relative in the third Person: “I am the Lord,which Lord, orHe that, makethall things.” It would have been equally right, ifIhad been made the Antecedent, and the Relative and the Verb had agreed with it in the First Person: “Iam the Lord,that makeall things.” But when it follows, “that spreadethabroad the heavens bymyself;” there arises a confusion of Persons, and a manifest Solecism.“Thougreat first Cause, least understood!Whoall my senseconfin’dTo know but this, thatThou artgood,And that myself am blind:Yetgaveme in this dark estate,” &c.Pope, Universal Prayer.It ought to beconfinedst, ordidst confine;gavest, ordidst give; &c. in the second Person. See above, p. 48. Note.

“Thougreat first Cause, least understood!Whoall my senseconfin’dTo know but this, thatThou artgood,And that myself am blind:Yetgaveme in this dark estate,” &c.Pope, Universal Prayer.

“Thougreat first Cause, least understood!Whoall my senseconfin’dTo know but this, thatThou artgood,And that myself am blind:Yetgaveme in this dark estate,” &c.

“Thougreat first Cause, least understood!

Whoall my senseconfin’d

To know but this, thatThou artgood,

And that myself am blind:

Yetgaveme in this dark estate,” &c.

Pope, Universal Prayer.

It ought to beconfinedst, ordidst confine;gavest, ordidst give; &c. in the second Person. See above, p. 48. Note.

[72]“Abuse on all he lov’d, or lov’d him, spread.”Pope, Epist. to Arbuthnot.That is, “allwhomhe lov’d, orwholov’d him:” or to make it more easy by supplying a Relative that has no variation of Cases, “allthathe lov’d, orthatlov’d him.” The Construction is hazardous, and hardly justifiable, even in Poetry. “In the temper of mind he was then.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 549. “In the posture I lay.” Swift, Gulliver, Part 1. Chap. 1. In these and the like Phrases, which are very common, there is an Ellipsis both of the Relative and the Preposition; which were much better supplied: “In the temper of mindin whichhe was then:” “In the posturein whichI lay.” In general, the omission of the Relative seems to be too much indulged in the familiar style; it is ungraceful in the serious; and of whatever kind the style be, it is apt to be attended with obscurity and ambiguity.

[72]

“Abuse on all he lov’d, or lov’d him, spread.”Pope, Epist. to Arbuthnot.

“Abuse on all he lov’d, or lov’d him, spread.”

Pope, Epist. to Arbuthnot.

That is, “allwhomhe lov’d, orwholov’d him:” or to make it more easy by supplying a Relative that has no variation of Cases, “allthathe lov’d, orthatlov’d him.” The Construction is hazardous, and hardly justifiable, even in Poetry. “In the temper of mind he was then.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 549. “In the posture I lay.” Swift, Gulliver, Part 1. Chap. 1. In these and the like Phrases, which are very common, there is an Ellipsis both of the Relative and the Preposition; which were much better supplied: “In the temper of mindin whichhe was then:” “In the posturein whichI lay.” In general, the omission of the Relative seems to be too much indulged in the familiar style; it is ungraceful in the serious; and of whatever kind the style be, it is apt to be attended with obscurity and ambiguity.

[73]The Connective parts of Sentences are of all others the most important, and require the most care and attention: 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; and on the right use of these the perspicuity, that is, the first and greatest beauty, of style principally depends. Relatives and Conjunctions are the instruments of Connection in discourse: it may be of use to point out some of the most common inaccuracies, that writers are apt to fall into with respect to them; and a few examples of faults may perhaps be more instructive, than any rules of propriety that can be given. Here therefore shall be added some further examples of inaccuracies in the use of Relatives.The Relative placed before the Antecedent: Example; “The bodies, which we daily handle, make us perceive, that whilst they remain betweenthem, they do by an insurmountable force hinder the approach of ourhandsthat press them.” Locke, Essay, B. 2. C. 4. §. 1. Here the sense is suspended, and the sentence is unintelligible, till you get to the end of it: there is no Antecedent, to which the Relativethemcan be referred, butbodies; but, “whilst the bodies remain between the bodies,” makes no sense at all. When you get tohands, the difficulty is cleared up, the sense helping out the Construction: yet there still remains an ambiguity in the Relativesthey,them, which in number and gender are equally applicable tobodiesorhands; this, tho’ it may not here be the occasion of much obscurity, which is commonly the effect of it, yet is always disagreeable and inelegant: as in the following examples.“Men look with an evil eye upon the good that is in others; and think, thattheirreputation obscuresthem; and thattheircommendable qualities do stand intheirlight: and thereforetheydo whattheycan to cast a cloud overthem, that the bright shining oftheirvirtues may not obscurethem.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 42.“The Earl of Falmouth and Mr. Coventry were rivalswhoshould have most influence with the Duke,wholoved the Earl best, but thought the other the wiser man,whosupported Pen,whodisobliged all the Courtiers, even against the Earl,whocontemned Pen as a fellow of no sense.” Clarendon, Cont. p. 264.But the following Sentence cannot possibly be understood without a careful recollection of circumstances through some pages preceding.“All which, with the King’s and Queen’s so ample promises tohim[the Treasurer] so few hours before the conferring the place on another, and the Duke of York’s manner of receivinghim[the Treasurer,] afterhe[the Chancellor] had been shut up withhim[the Duke,] ashe[the Treasurer] was informed, might very well excusehim[the Treasurer] for thinkinghe[the Chancellor] had some share in the affronthe[the Treasurer] had undergone.” Clarendon, Cont. p. 296.“Breaking a Constitution by the very same errors,thatso many have beenbrokebefore.” Swift, Contests and Dissensions, &c. Chap. 5. Here the Relative is employed not only to represent the Antecedent Nounthe errors, but likewise the Prepositionbyprefixed to it. It ought to be, “the same errors,by whichso many have beenbrokenbefore.”Again: “⸺An Undertaking;which, although it has failed, (partly &c, and partly &c,) is no objection at all to an Enterprize so well concerted, and with such fair probability of success.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. That is, “Which Undertaking is no objection to an Enterprize so well concerted;” that is, “to itself:” he means, “the failing of whichis no objection at all to it.”

The Relative placed before the Antecedent: Example; “The bodies, which we daily handle, make us perceive, that whilst they remain betweenthem, they do by an insurmountable force hinder the approach of ourhandsthat press them.” Locke, Essay, B. 2. C. 4. §. 1. Here the sense is suspended, and the sentence is unintelligible, till you get to the end of it: there is no Antecedent, to which the Relativethemcan be referred, butbodies; but, “whilst the bodies remain between the bodies,” makes no sense at all. When you get tohands, the difficulty is cleared up, the sense helping out the Construction: yet there still remains an ambiguity in the Relativesthey,them, which in number and gender are equally applicable tobodiesorhands; this, tho’ it may not here be the occasion of much obscurity, which is commonly the effect of it, yet is always disagreeable and inelegant: as in the following examples.

“Men look with an evil eye upon the good that is in others; and think, thattheirreputation obscuresthem; and thattheircommendable qualities do stand intheirlight: and thereforetheydo whattheycan to cast a cloud overthem, that the bright shining oftheirvirtues may not obscurethem.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 42.

“The Earl of Falmouth and Mr. Coventry were rivalswhoshould have most influence with the Duke,wholoved the Earl best, but thought the other the wiser man,whosupported Pen,whodisobliged all the Courtiers, even against the Earl,whocontemned Pen as a fellow of no sense.” Clarendon, Cont. p. 264.

But the following Sentence cannot possibly be understood without a careful recollection of circumstances through some pages preceding.

“All which, with the King’s and Queen’s so ample promises tohim[the Treasurer] so few hours before the conferring the place on another, and the Duke of York’s manner of receivinghim[the Treasurer,] afterhe[the Chancellor] had been shut up withhim[the Duke,] ashe[the Treasurer] was informed, might very well excusehim[the Treasurer] for thinkinghe[the Chancellor] had some share in the affronthe[the Treasurer] had undergone.” Clarendon, Cont. p. 296.

“Breaking a Constitution by the very same errors,thatso many have beenbrokebefore.” Swift, Contests and Dissensions, &c. Chap. 5. Here the Relative is employed not only to represent the Antecedent Nounthe errors, but likewise the Prepositionbyprefixed to it. It ought to be, “the same errors,by whichso many have beenbrokenbefore.”

Again: “⸺An Undertaking;which, although it has failed, (partly &c, and partly &c,) is no objection at all to an Enterprize so well concerted, and with such fair probability of success.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. That is, “Which Undertaking is no objection to an Enterprize so well concerted;” that is, “to itself:” he means, “the failing of whichis no objection at all to it.”

[74]In the following instances the Conjunctionthatseems to be improperly accompanied with the Subjunctive Mode: “I cannot but bewail,thatno famous modernhaveever yet attempted⸺.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. v.“So much she fears for William’s life,ThatMary’s fate shedarenot mourn.”Prior.

“So much she fears for William’s life,ThatMary’s fate shedarenot mourn.”Prior.

“So much she fears for William’s life,ThatMary’s fate shedarenot mourn.”

“So much she fears for William’s life,

ThatMary’s fate shedarenot mourn.”

Prior.

[75]“You are a much greater loser thanmeby his death.” Swift to Pope, Letter 63.“And tho’ by heav’n’s severe decreeShe suffers hourly more thanme.”Swift to Stella.“We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to the same proportion more thanus.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies.“King Charles, and more thanhim, the Duke, and the Popish Faction, were at liberty to form new schemes.” Lord Bolingbroke, Diss. on Parties, Letter 3.“A Poem, which is good in itself, cannot lose any thing of its real value, though it should appear not to be the work of so eminent an author, ashim, to whom it was first imputed.” Congreve, Pref. to Homer’s Hymn to Venus.“If the King give us leave, you or I may as lawfully preach, asthemthat do.” Hobbes, Hist. of Civil Wars, p. 62.“The sun upon the calmest seaAppears not half so bright asThee.”Prior.“Then finish dear Chloe this Pastoral war,And let us like Horace and Lydia agree:For thou art a Girl as much brighter thanher,As he was a Poet sublimer thanme.”Prior.In these passages it ought to be,I,We,He,They,Thou,She, reflectively. Perhaps the following example may admit of a doubt, whether it be properly expressed or not:“The Lover got a woman of greater fortune thanherhe had miss’d.” Addison, Guardian Nᵒ 9. Let us try it by the Rule given above; and see, whether some correction will not be necessary, when the parts of the Sentence, which are understood, come to be supplied: “The lover got a woman of a greater fortune, thanShe[was,whom] he had miss’d.”“Nor hope to be myself less miserableBy what I seek, but others to make suchAsI.”Milton, P. L. ix. 126.“The Syntax, says Dr. Bentley, requires, make such asme.” On the contrary, the Syntax necessarily requires, “make such asI:” for it is not, “I hope to make others such, as to makeme:” the Pronoun is not governed by the Verbmake, but is the Nominative Case to the Verbamunderstood: “to make others such asI am.”

[75]“You are a much greater loser thanmeby his death.” Swift to Pope, Letter 63.

“And tho’ by heav’n’s severe decreeShe suffers hourly more thanme.”Swift to Stella.

“And tho’ by heav’n’s severe decreeShe suffers hourly more thanme.”

“And tho’ by heav’n’s severe decree

She suffers hourly more thanme.”

Swift to Stella.

“We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to the same proportion more thanus.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies.

“King Charles, and more thanhim, the Duke, and the Popish Faction, were at liberty to form new schemes.” Lord Bolingbroke, Diss. on Parties, Letter 3.

“A Poem, which is good in itself, cannot lose any thing of its real value, though it should appear not to be the work of so eminent an author, ashim, to whom it was first imputed.” Congreve, Pref. to Homer’s Hymn to Venus.

“If the King give us leave, you or I may as lawfully preach, asthemthat do.” Hobbes, Hist. of Civil Wars, p. 62.

“The sun upon the calmest seaAppears not half so bright asThee.”Prior.

“The sun upon the calmest seaAppears not half so bright asThee.”

“The sun upon the calmest sea

Appears not half so bright asThee.”

Prior.

“Then finish dear Chloe this Pastoral war,And let us like Horace and Lydia agree:For thou art a Girl as much brighter thanher,As he was a Poet sublimer thanme.”Prior.

“Then finish dear Chloe this Pastoral war,And let us like Horace and Lydia agree:For thou art a Girl as much brighter thanher,As he was a Poet sublimer thanme.”

“Then finish dear Chloe this Pastoral war,

And let us like Horace and Lydia agree:

For thou art a Girl as much brighter thanher,

As he was a Poet sublimer thanme.”

Prior.

In these passages it ought to be,I,We,He,They,Thou,She, reflectively. Perhaps the following example may admit of a doubt, whether it be properly expressed or not:

“The Lover got a woman of greater fortune thanherhe had miss’d.” Addison, Guardian Nᵒ 9. Let us try it by the Rule given above; and see, whether some correction will not be necessary, when the parts of the Sentence, which are understood, come to be supplied: “The lover got a woman of a greater fortune, thanShe[was,whom] he had miss’d.”

“Nor hope to be myself less miserableBy what I seek, but others to make suchAsI.”Milton, P. L. ix. 126.

“Nor hope to be myself less miserableBy what I seek, but others to make suchAsI.”

“Nor hope to be myself less miserable

By what I seek, but others to make such

AsI.”

Milton, P. L. ix. 126.

“The Syntax, says Dr. Bentley, requires, make such asme.” On the contrary, the Syntax necessarily requires, “make such asI:” for it is not, “I hope to make others such, as to makeme:” the Pronoun is not governed by the Verbmake, but is the Nominative Case to the Verbamunderstood: “to make others such asI am.”

[76]“But it is reason, the memory of their virtues remaine to their posterity.” Bacon, Essay xiv. In this, and many the like Phrases, the Conjunction were much better inserted: “thatthe memory, &c.”

[77]Never so⸺This Phrase, says Mr. Johnson, is justly accused of Solecism. It should be,everso wisely; that is,howwiselysoever.

[78]I have been the more particular in noting the proper uses of these Conjunctions, because they occur very frequently, and, as it was observed before of Connective words in general, are of great importance with respect to the clearness and beauty of style. I may add too, because mistakes in the use of them are very common; as it will appear by the following Examples.Neitheris sometimes supposed to be included in its correspondentnor:“Simois,norXanthus shall be wanting there.”Dryden.⸺ “That all the application he could make,northe King’s own interposition, could prevail with Her Majesty.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 179. Sometimes to be supplied by a subsequent Negative: “His rule holdeth still, that nature,northe engagement of words, arenotso forcible as custom.” Bacon, Essay xxxix. “The Kingnorthe Queen werenotat all deceived.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 363. These forms of expression seem both of them equally improper.So⸺,as, was used by the Writers of the last Century, to express a Consequence, instead ofSo⸺,that: Examples; “The relations aresouncertain,as[that] they require a great deal of examination.” Bacon, Nat. Hist. “So as[that] it is a hard calumny to affirm, ⸺.” Temple. “This computation beingsoeasy and trivial,as[that] it is a shame to mention it.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. “That the Spaniards weresoviolently affected to the House of Austria,as[that] the whole kingdom would revolt.” Ibid. Swift, I believe, is the last of our good Writers, who has frequently used this manner of expression: it seems improper, and is deservedly grown obsolete.Asinstead ofthat, in another manner: “If a man have that penetration of judgement,as[that] he can discern what things are to be laid open.” Bacon, Essay vi. “It is the nature of extreme self-lovers,as[that] they will set an house on fire,andit were but to roast their eggs.” Id. Essay xxiii. “They would have given him such satisfaction in other particulars,as[that] a full and happy peace must have ensued.” Clarendon, Vol. III. p. 214. “We should sufficiently weigh the objects of our hope; whether they be such,as[that] we may reasonably expect from them what they propose in their fruition; and whether they are such, as we are pretty sure of attaining.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 535. “France was then disposed to conclude a peace upon such conditions,as[that] it was not worth the life of a granadier to refuse them.” Swift, Four last years of the Queen, B. ii.Asinstead of the Relativethat, orwhich: “The Duke had not behaved with that loyalty,as[which] he ought to have done.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 460. “⸺ With those thoughtsas[which] might contribute to their honour.” Ibid. p. 565. “In the order,asthey lie in his Preface.” Middleton, Works Vol. III p. 8. It ought to be, either, “in order, as they lie;” or, “in the order,in whichthey lie.” “Securing to yourselves a succession of able and worthy men,as[which] may adorn this place.” Atterbury, Sermons, Vol. IV. 12.The Relativethatinstead ofas: “Such sharp replies,that[as] cost him his life in few months after.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 179.The Relativewho⸺, instead ofas: “There was no mansosanguine,who did not apprehendsome ill consequence from the late change.” Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. It ought to be, either, “sosanguine,as not to apprehend, ⸺” or, “There was no man,howsanguinesoever,whodid not apprehend.”Asimproperly omitted: “They aresobold [as] to pronounce ⸺.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. vii.Too⸺,that, improperly used as Correspondent Conjunctions: “Whose Characters aretooprofligate,thatthe managing of them should be of any consequence.” Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. And,too⸺,than: “You that are a step higher than a Philosopher, a Divine; yet havetoomuch grace and witthanto be a Bishop.” Pope to Swift, Letter 80.So⸺,but: “If the appointing and apportioning of penalties to crimes be notsoproperly a consideration of justice,but rather[as] of prudence in the Lawgiver.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 35. And to conclude with an example, in which, whatever may be thought of the accuracy of the expression, the justness of the observation will be acknowledged; which may serve also as an apology for this and many of the preceding Notes: “No errors aresotrivial,butthey deserve to be mended.” Pope to Steele, Letter 6.

Neitheris sometimes supposed to be included in its correspondentnor:

“Simois,norXanthus shall be wanting there.”Dryden.

“Simois,norXanthus shall be wanting there.”

Dryden.

⸺ “That all the application he could make,northe King’s own interposition, could prevail with Her Majesty.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 179. Sometimes to be supplied by a subsequent Negative: “His rule holdeth still, that nature,northe engagement of words, arenotso forcible as custom.” Bacon, Essay xxxix. “The Kingnorthe Queen werenotat all deceived.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 363. These forms of expression seem both of them equally improper.

So⸺,as, was used by the Writers of the last Century, to express a Consequence, instead ofSo⸺,that: Examples; “The relations aresouncertain,as[that] they require a great deal of examination.” Bacon, Nat. Hist. “So as[that] it is a hard calumny to affirm, ⸺.” Temple. “This computation beingsoeasy and trivial,as[that] it is a shame to mention it.” Swift, Conduct of the Allies. “That the Spaniards weresoviolently affected to the House of Austria,as[that] the whole kingdom would revolt.” Ibid. Swift, I believe, is the last of our good Writers, who has frequently used this manner of expression: it seems improper, and is deservedly grown obsolete.

Asinstead ofthat, in another manner: “If a man have that penetration of judgement,as[that] he can discern what things are to be laid open.” Bacon, Essay vi. “It is the nature of extreme self-lovers,as[that] they will set an house on fire,andit were but to roast their eggs.” Id. Essay xxiii. “They would have given him such satisfaction in other particulars,as[that] a full and happy peace must have ensued.” Clarendon, Vol. III. p. 214. “We should sufficiently weigh the objects of our hope; whether they be such,as[that] we may reasonably expect from them what they propose in their fruition; and whether they are such, as we are pretty sure of attaining.” Addison, Spect. Nᵒ 535. “France was then disposed to conclude a peace upon such conditions,as[that] it was not worth the life of a granadier to refuse them.” Swift, Four last years of the Queen, B. ii.

Asinstead of the Relativethat, orwhich: “The Duke had not behaved with that loyalty,as[which] he ought to have done.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. II. p. 460. “⸺ With those thoughtsas[which] might contribute to their honour.” Ibid. p. 565. “In the order,asthey lie in his Preface.” Middleton, Works Vol. III p. 8. It ought to be, either, “in order, as they lie;” or, “in the order,in whichthey lie.” “Securing to yourselves a succession of able and worthy men,as[which] may adorn this place.” Atterbury, Sermons, Vol. IV. 12.

The Relativethatinstead ofas: “Such sharp replies,that[as] cost him his life in few months after.” Clarendon, Hist. Vol. III. p. 179.

The Relativewho⸺, instead ofas: “There was no mansosanguine,who did not apprehendsome ill consequence from the late change.” Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. It ought to be, either, “sosanguine,as not to apprehend, ⸺” or, “There was no man,howsanguinesoever,whodid not apprehend.”

Asimproperly omitted: “They aresobold [as] to pronounce ⸺.” Swift, Tale of a Tub, Sect. vii.

Too⸺,that, improperly used as Correspondent Conjunctions: “Whose Characters aretooprofligate,thatthe managing of them should be of any consequence.” Swift, Examiner Nᵒ 24. And,too⸺,than: “You that are a step higher than a Philosopher, a Divine; yet havetoomuch grace and witthanto be a Bishop.” Pope to Swift, Letter 80.So⸺,but: “If the appointing and apportioning of penalties to crimes be notsoproperly a consideration of justice,but rather[as] of prudence in the Lawgiver.” Tillotson, Vol. I. Serm. 35. And to conclude with an example, in which, whatever may be thought of the accuracy of the expression, the justness of the observation will be acknowledged; which may serve also as an apology for this and many of the preceding Notes: “No errors aresotrivial,butthey deserve to be mended.” Pope to Steele, Letter 6.

[79]“Ah me!” seems to be a phrase of the same nature with “Wo is me!”; for the resolution of which see abovep. 132. Note.

Back to Index Next