LECTURE VIII.

From, according to H. Tooke, is the Anglo-Saxon and Gothic nounfrum, beginning, source, author. "He camefrom (beginning) Rochester."Of, he supposes to be a fragment of the Gothic and Saxon nounafora, consequence, offspring, follower. "Solomon, the sonof (offspring) David."Oforoff, in its modern acceptation, signifiesdisjoined, sundered: A pieceof (off) the loaf, is, a piecedisjoined, orseparatedfrom the loaf. The fragranceoforoffthe rose.Forsignifiescause. "I writeforyour satisfaction;" i.e. your satisfaction being thecause. Byorbeis the imperativebyth, of the Saxonbeon, to be.With, the imperative ofwithan, to join; or, when equivalent toby, ofwyr-than, to be. "I will gowithhim." "I,joinhim, will go."Incomes from the Gothic nouninna, the interior of the body; a cave or cell.About, fromboda, the first outward boundary.Amongis the past part. ofgamaengan, to mingle.Throughorthoroughis the Gothic substantivedauro, or the Teutonicthuruh. It meanspassage, gate, door.Before—be-fore, be-hind, be-low, be-side, be-sides, be-neathare formed by combining the imperative,be, with the nounsfore, hind, low, side, neath. Neath—Saxonneothan, neothe, has the same signification asnadir. Be-tween, be-twixt—beandtwain. A dual preposition.Be-yond—be-passed. Beyonda place, means,be passedthat place.Notwithstanding—not-stand-ing-with, not-withstanding. "Any order to the contrary not-withstanding," (this order;) i.e.noteffectuallywithstandingoropposingit.

Forsignifiescause. "I writeforyour satisfaction;" i.e. your satisfaction being thecause. Byorbeis the imperativebyth, of the Saxonbeon, to be.With, the imperative ofwithan, to join; or, when equivalent toby, ofwyr-than, to be. "I will gowithhim." "I,joinhim, will go."Incomes from the Gothic nouninna, the interior of the body; a cave or cell.About, fromboda, the first outward boundary.Amongis the past part. ofgamaengan, to mingle.Throughorthoroughis the Gothic substantivedauro, or the Teutonicthuruh. It meanspassage, gate, door.

Before—be-fore, be-hind, be-low, be-side, be-sides, be-neathare formed by combining the imperative,be, with the nounsfore, hind, low, side, neath. Neath—Saxonneothan, neothe, has the same signification asnadir. Be-tween, be-twixt—beandtwain. A dual preposition.Be-yond—be-passed. Beyonda place, means,be passedthat place.Notwithstanding—not-stand-ing-with, not-withstanding. "Any order to the contrary not-withstanding," (this order;) i.e.noteffectuallywithstandingoropposingit.

A PRONOUN is a word used instead of a noun, and generally to avoid the too frequent repetition of the same word. A pronoun is, likewise, sometimes a substitute for a sentence, or member of a sentence.

The wordpronouncomes from the two Latin words,pro, which meansfor, orinstead of, andnomen, aname, ornoun.Hence you perceive, thatpronounmeansfor a noun, orinstead of a noun.

In the sentence, "The man is happy;heis benevolent;heis useful;" you perceive, that the wordheis used instead of the nounman;consequentlyhemust be apronoun. You observe, too, that, by making use of the pronounhein this sentence, we avoid therepetitionof thenounman, for without the pronoun, the sentence would be rendered thus, "The man is happy;the manis benevolent;the manis useful."

By looking again at the definition, you will notice, that pronouns alwaysstand fornouns, but they do not alwaysavoid the repetitionof nouns.Repetitionmeansrepeatingor mentioning the same thing again. In the sentence, "I come to die for my country," the pronouns,Iandmy, standfor the name of the person who speaks; but they do notavoid the repetitionof that name, because the name or noun for which the pronouns are used, is not mentioned at all. Pronouns of thethirdperson, generally avoid the repetition of the nouns for which they stand; but pronouns of thefirstandsecondperson, sometimes avoid the repetition of nouns, and sometimes they do not.

A little farther illustration of the pronoun will show you its importance, and, also, that its nature is very easily comprehended. If we had no pronouns in our language, we should be obliged to express ourselves in this manner: "A woman went to a man, and told the man that the man was in danger of being murdered by a gang of robbers; as a gang of robbers had made preparations for attacking the man. The man thanked the woman for the woman's kindness, and, as the man was unable to defend the man's self, the man left the man's house, and went to a neighbor's."

This would be a laborious style indeed; but, by the help of pronouns, we can express the same ideas with far greater ease and conciseness: "A woman went to a man, and toldhim, thathewas in great danger of being murdered by a gang of robbers,whohad made preparations for attackinghim. Hethankedherforherkindness, and, ashewas unable to defendhimself,helefthishouse and went to a neighbor's."

If you look at these examples a few moments, you cannot be at a loss to tell which words are pronouns; and you will observe too, that they all stand for nouns.

Pronouns are generally divided into three kinds, thePersonal, theAdjective, and theRelativepronouns. They are all known by thelists.1. OFPERSONAL PRONOUNS.Personal Pronouns are distinguished from the relative, by their denoting thepersonof the nouns for which they stand. There are five of them;I,thou, he, she, it; with their plurals,We, yeoryou, they.To pronouns belong gender, person, number, and case.

Pronouns are generally divided into three kinds, thePersonal, theAdjective, and theRelativepronouns. They are all known by thelists.

Personal Pronouns are distinguished from the relative, by their denoting thepersonof the nouns for which they stand. There are five of them;I,thou, he, she, it; with their plurals,We, yeoryou, they.

To pronouns belong gender, person, number, and case.

GENDER. When we speak of aman, we say,he, his, him; when we speak of awoman, we say,she, hers, her; and when we speak of athing, we sayit. Hence you perceive, that gender belongs to pronouns as well as to nouns. Example; "The general, in gratitude to the lady, offeredher hishand; butshe, not knowinghim, declined acceptingit." The pronounshisandhim, in this sentence, personate or represent the noungeneral; they are, therefore, of the masculine gender:herandshepersonate thelady; therefore, they are feminine: anditrepresentshand; for which reason it is of the neuter gender. This illustration shows you, then, that pronouns must be of the same gender as the nouns are for which they stand. But, as it relates to the variation of the pronouns to express the sex,

Gender has respect only to the third person singular of the pronouns,he, she, it. Heis masculine;sheis feminine;itis neuter.

You may naturally inquire, why pronouns of the first and second persons are not varied to denote the gender of their nouns, as well as of the third. The reason is obvious. The first person, that is, the person speaking, and the second person, or the person spoken to, being at the same time the subjects of the discourse, are supposed to be present; from which, and other circumstances, their sex is commonly known, and, therefore, the pronouns that represent these persons, need not be marked by a distinction of gender; but the third person, that is, the person or thing spoken of, being absent, and in many respects unknown, necessarily requires the pronoun that stands for it, to be marked by a distinction of gender.

In parsing, we sometimes apply gender to pronouns of the first and second person, and also to the plural number of the third person; but these have no peculiar form to denote their gender; therefore they have no agreement, in this respect, with the nouns which they represent.

PERSON. Pronouns have three persons in each number.

This account of persons will be very intelligible, when you reflect, that there are three persons who may be the subject of any discourse: first, the person who speaks, may speak of himself; secondly, he may speak of the person to whom he addresses himself; thirdly, he may speak of some other person; and as the speakers, the persons spoken to, and the persons spoken of, may be many, so each of these persons must have a plural number.

Pronouns of the second and third person, always agree, in person with the nouns they represent; but pronouns of the first person, do not. Whenever a pronoun of the first person is used, it represents a noun; but nouns areneverof the first person, therefore these pronouns cannot agree in person with their nouns.

NUMBER. Pronouns, like nouns, have two numbers, the singular and the plural; as,I, thou, he;we, yeoryou, they.CASE. Pronouns have three cases, the nominative, the possessive, and the objective.

NUMBER. Pronouns, like nouns, have two numbers, the singular and the plural; as,I, thou, he;we, yeoryou, they.

CASE. Pronouns have three cases, the nominative, the possessive, and the objective.

In the next place I will present to you thedeclensionof the personal pronouns, which declension you must commit to memory before you proceed any farther.

The advantages resulting from the committing of the following declension, are so great and diversified, that you cannot be too particular in your attention to it. You recollect, that it is sometimes very difficult to distinguish the nominative case of a noun from the objective, because these cases of nouns are not marked by a difference in termination; but this difficulty is removed in regard to the personal pronouns, for their cases are always known by their termination. By studying the declension you will learn, not only the cases of the pronouns, but, also, their genders, persons, and numbers.

1. Whenselfis added to the personal pronouns, as himself, myself, itself, themselves, &c. they are calledcompound personal pronouns, and are used in the nominative or objective case, but not in the possessive.2. In order to avoid the disagreeable harshness of sound, occasioned by the frequent recurrence of the terminationsest, edst, in the adaptation of our verbs to the nominativethou, a modern innovation which substitutesyouforthou, in familiar style, has generally been adopted. This innovation contributes greatly to the harmony of our colloquial style.Youwas formerly restricted to the plural number; but now it is employed to represent either a singular or a plural noun. It ought to be recollected, however, that when used as the representative of a singular noun, this word retains its originalplural form; and, therefore, the verb connected with it, should always be plural. Inattention to this peculiarity, has betrayed some writers into the erroneous conclusion, that, becauseyouimplies unity when it represents a singular noun, it ought, when thus employed, to be followed by a singular verb; as, "Whenwas youthere?" "How farwas youfrom the parties?" Such a construction, however, is not supported bygoodusage, nor by analogy. It is as manifest a solecism as to say, Weam, or weis. Were it, in any case, admissible to connect a singular verb withyou, the use ofwaswould still be ungrammatical, for this form of the verb is confined to the first and third persons, andyouis second person.Wastbeing second person, it would approximate nearer to correctness to say, youwast. We never use the singular of the present tense with you:—youart, youis; youwalkest, youwalks. Why, then, should any attempt be made to force a usage so unnatural and gratuitous as the connecting of the singular verb in the past tense with this pronoun? In every point of view, the construction, "Whenwereyou there?" "How farwereyou from the parties?" is preferable to the other.3. The wordsmy, thy, his, her, our, your, their, are, by many, denominatedpossessive adjective pronouns; but they alwaysstand fornouns in the possessive case. They ought, therefore, to be classed with thepersonalpronouns. That principle of classification which ranks them with the adjective pronouns, would also throw all nouns in the possessive case among the adjectives. Example: "The lady gave the gentlemanherwatch forhishorse." In this sentenceherpersonates, or stands for, the noun "lady," andhisrepresents "gentleman." This fact is clearly shown by rendering the sentence thus, "The lady gave the gentleman thelady'swatch for thegentleman'shorse." Iflady'sandgentleman'sare nouns,herandhismust be personal pronouns. The same remarks apply tomy, thy, our, your, theirandits. This view of these words may be objected to by those who speculate and refine upon the principles of grammar until they prove their non-existence, but it is believed, nevertheless, to be based on sound reason and common sense.4.Mine, thine, his, hers, ours, yours, theirs, have, by many respectable grammarians, been considered merely the possessive cases of personal pronouns, whilst, by others, they have been denominated pronouns or nouns in the nominative or objective case. It is believed, however, that a little attention to the meaning and office of these words, will clearly show the impropriety of both these classifications. Those who pursue the former arrangement, allege, that, in the examples, "You may imagine what kind of faiththeirswas; My pleasures are past;hersandyoursare to come; they applauded his conduct, but condemnedhersandyours," the wordstheirs, hers, andyours, are personal pronouns in the possessive case, and governed by their respective nouns understood. To prove this, they construct the sentence thus, "You may imagine what kind of faiththeir faithwas;—her pleasuresandyour pleasuresare to come;—but condemnedher conductandyour conduct;" or thus, "You may imagine what kind of faith the faith of them was;—the pleasures of her and the pleasures of you, are to come;— but condemned the conduct of her and the conduct of you." But these constructions, (both of which are correct,) prove too much for their purpose; for, as soon as we supply the nouns after these words, they are resolved into personal pronouns of kindred meaning, and the nouns which we supply: thus,theirsbecomes, their faith:hers, her pleasures; andyours, your pleasures. This evidently gives us two words instead of, and altogether distinct from, the first; so that, in parsing,their faith, we are not, in reality, analyzingtheirs, but two other words of whichtheirsis the proper representative. These remarks also prove, with equal force, the impropriety of calling these words merely simple pronouns or nouns in the nominative or objective case. Without attempting to develop the original or intrinsic meaning of these pluralizing adjuncts,neands, which were, no doubt, formerly detached from the pronouns with which they now coalesce, for all practical purposes, it is sufficient for us to know, that, in the present application of these pronouns, they invariably stand for, not only the person possessing, but, also the thing possessed, which gives them acompoundcharacter. They may, therefore, be properly denominated COMPOUND PERSONAL PRONOUNS; and, as they always perform a double office in a sentence by representing two other words, and, consequently, including two cases, they should, like the compound relativewhat, be parsed as two words. Thus, in the example, "You may imagine what kind of faith theirs was,"theirsis a compound personal pronoun, equivalent totheir faith. Theiris a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun; personal, it personates the persons spoken of, understood; third pers. plur. numb., &c.—and in the possessive case, and governed by "faith," according to Rule 12.Faithis a noun, the name of a thing, &c. &c.—and in the nominative case to "was," and governs it; Rule 3. Or, if we render the sentence thus, "You may imagine what kind of faiththe faith ofthem[4]was,"faithwould be in the nominative case to "was," andthemwould be in the objective case, and governed by "of:" Rule31.Objections to this method of treating these pronouns, will doubtlessbe preferred by those who assert, that a noun is understood afterthese words, and not represented by them. But this is assertionwithout proof; for, if a noun were understood, it might be supplied.If the question be put, whose book? and the answer be,mine, ours, hers, ortheirs, the word book is included in such answer. Were it not included, we might supply it, thus, minebook, oursbook, hersbook, and so on. This, however, we cannot do, for it would be giving adoubleanswer: but when the question is answered by anoun in the possessive case, the word book is not included, butimplied; as, Whose book? John's, Richard's; that is, John'sbook; Richard'sbook.This view of the subject, without a parallel, except in thecompoundswhat, whoever, andothers, is respectfully submittedto the public; believing, that those who approve of a criticalanalysis of words, will coincide with me. Should any still bedisposed to treat these words so superficially as to rank them amongthe simple pronouns, let them answer the following interrogatory: Ifwhat, when compound, should be parsed as two words, why notmine, thine, his, hers, ours, yours, andtheirs?5.Mineandthine, instead ofmyandthy, are used in solemn style, before a word beginning with a vowel or silenth; as, "Blot out allmineiniquities;" and when thus used, they are not compound.Hisalways has the same form, whether simple or compound; as, "Give Johnhisbook; That desk ishis." Her, when placed before a noun, is in the possessive case; as, Takeherhat:when standing alone, it is in the objective case; as, Give the hattoher.

2. In order to avoid the disagreeable harshness of sound, occasioned by the frequent recurrence of the terminationsest, edst, in the adaptation of our verbs to the nominativethou, a modern innovation which substitutesyouforthou, in familiar style, has generally been adopted. This innovation contributes greatly to the harmony of our colloquial style.Youwas formerly restricted to the plural number; but now it is employed to represent either a singular or a plural noun. It ought to be recollected, however, that when used as the representative of a singular noun, this word retains its originalplural form; and, therefore, the verb connected with it, should always be plural. Inattention to this peculiarity, has betrayed some writers into the erroneous conclusion, that, becauseyouimplies unity when it represents a singular noun, it ought, when thus employed, to be followed by a singular verb; as, "Whenwas youthere?" "How farwas youfrom the parties?" Such a construction, however, is not supported bygoodusage, nor by analogy. It is as manifest a solecism as to say, Weam, or weis. Were it, in any case, admissible to connect a singular verb withyou, the use ofwaswould still be ungrammatical, for this form of the verb is confined to the first and third persons, andyouis second person.Wastbeing second person, it would approximate nearer to correctness to say, youwast. We never use the singular of the present tense with you:—youart, youis; youwalkest, youwalks. Why, then, should any attempt be made to force a usage so unnatural and gratuitous as the connecting of the singular verb in the past tense with this pronoun? In every point of view, the construction, "Whenwereyou there?" "How farwereyou from the parties?" is preferable to the other.

3. The wordsmy, thy, his, her, our, your, their, are, by many, denominatedpossessive adjective pronouns; but they alwaysstand fornouns in the possessive case. They ought, therefore, to be classed with thepersonalpronouns. That principle of classification which ranks them with the adjective pronouns, would also throw all nouns in the possessive case among the adjectives. Example: "The lady gave the gentlemanherwatch forhishorse." In this sentenceherpersonates, or stands for, the noun "lady," andhisrepresents "gentleman." This fact is clearly shown by rendering the sentence thus, "The lady gave the gentleman thelady'swatch for thegentleman'shorse." Iflady'sandgentleman'sare nouns,herandhismust be personal pronouns. The same remarks apply tomy, thy, our, your, theirandits. This view of these words may be objected to by those who speculate and refine upon the principles of grammar until they prove their non-existence, but it is believed, nevertheless, to be based on sound reason and common sense.

4.Mine, thine, his, hers, ours, yours, theirs, have, by many respectable grammarians, been considered merely the possessive cases of personal pronouns, whilst, by others, they have been denominated pronouns or nouns in the nominative or objective case. It is believed, however, that a little attention to the meaning and office of these words, will clearly show the impropriety of both these classifications. Those who pursue the former arrangement, allege, that, in the examples, "You may imagine what kind of faiththeirswas; My pleasures are past;hersandyoursare to come; they applauded his conduct, but condemnedhersandyours," the wordstheirs, hers, andyours, are personal pronouns in the possessive case, and governed by their respective nouns understood. To prove this, they construct the sentence thus, "You may imagine what kind of faiththeir faithwas;—her pleasuresandyour pleasuresare to come;—but condemnedher conductandyour conduct;" or thus, "You may imagine what kind of faith the faith of them was;—the pleasures of her and the pleasures of you, are to come;— but condemned the conduct of her and the conduct of you." But these constructions, (both of which are correct,) prove too much for their purpose; for, as soon as we supply the nouns after these words, they are resolved into personal pronouns of kindred meaning, and the nouns which we supply: thus,theirsbecomes, their faith:hers, her pleasures; andyours, your pleasures. This evidently gives us two words instead of, and altogether distinct from, the first; so that, in parsing,their faith, we are not, in reality, analyzingtheirs, but two other words of whichtheirsis the proper representative. These remarks also prove, with equal force, the impropriety of calling these words merely simple pronouns or nouns in the nominative or objective case. Without attempting to develop the original or intrinsic meaning of these pluralizing adjuncts,neands, which were, no doubt, formerly detached from the pronouns with which they now coalesce, for all practical purposes, it is sufficient for us to know, that, in the present application of these pronouns, they invariably stand for, not only the person possessing, but, also the thing possessed, which gives them acompoundcharacter. They may, therefore, be properly denominated COMPOUND PERSONAL PRONOUNS; and, as they always perform a double office in a sentence by representing two other words, and, consequently, including two cases, they should, like the compound relativewhat, be parsed as two words. Thus, in the example, "You may imagine what kind of faith theirs was,"theirsis a compound personal pronoun, equivalent totheir faith. Theiris a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun; personal, it personates the persons spoken of, understood; third pers. plur. numb., &c.—and in the possessive case, and governed by "faith," according to Rule 12.Faithis a noun, the name of a thing, &c. &c.—and in the nominative case to "was," and governs it; Rule 3. Or, if we render the sentence thus, "You may imagine what kind of faiththe faith ofthem[4]was,"faithwould be in the nominative case to "was," andthemwould be in the objective case, and governed by "of:" Rule31.

Objections to this method of treating these pronouns, will doubtlessbe preferred by those who assert, that a noun is understood afterthese words, and not represented by them. But this is assertionwithout proof; for, if a noun were understood, it might be supplied.If the question be put, whose book? and the answer be,mine, ours, hers, ortheirs, the word book is included in such answer. Were it not included, we might supply it, thus, minebook, oursbook, hersbook, and so on. This, however, we cannot do, for it would be giving adoubleanswer: but when the question is answered by anoun in the possessive case, the word book is not included, butimplied; as, Whose book? John's, Richard's; that is, John'sbook; Richard'sbook.

This view of the subject, without a parallel, except in thecompoundswhat, whoever, andothers, is respectfully submittedto the public; believing, that those who approve of a criticalanalysis of words, will coincide with me. Should any still bedisposed to treat these words so superficially as to rank them amongthe simple pronouns, let them answer the following interrogatory: Ifwhat, when compound, should be parsed as two words, why notmine, thine, his, hers, ours, yours, andtheirs?

5.Mineandthine, instead ofmyandthy, are used in solemn style, before a word beginning with a vowel or silenth; as, "Blot out allmineiniquities;" and when thus used, they are not compound.Hisalways has the same form, whether simple or compound; as, "Give Johnhisbook; That desk ishis." Her, when placed before a noun, is in the possessive case; as, Takeherhat:when standing alone, it is in the objective case; as, Give the hattoher.

When you shall have studied this lecture attentively, and committed thedeclensionof the personal pronouns, you may commit the following

The order of parsing aPERSONAL PRONOUN, is—a pronoun, and why?—personal, and why?—person, and why?—gender and number, and why?—RULE: case, and why?—RULE.—Decline it.

There are many peculiarities to be observed in parsing personal pronouns in their different persons; therefore, if you wish ever to parse them correctly, you must pay particular attention to the manner in which the following are analyzed. Now notice, particularly, and you will perceive that we apply onlyonerule in parsingIandmy, andtwoin parsingthou, him, andthey.

"Isawmyfriend."

Iis a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun—personal, it represents the person speaking, understood—first person, it denotes the speaker—singular number, it implies but one—and in the nominative case, it represents the actor and subject of the verb "saw," and governs it, agreeably to RULE 3.The nom. case gov. the verb. Declined—first pers. sing. num. nom. I, poss. my or mine, obj. me. Plur. nom. we, poss. our or ours, obj. us.

Myis a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun—personal, it personates the person speaking, understood—first pers. it denotes the speaker—sing. num. it implies but one—and in the possessive case, it denotes possession; it is governed by the noun "friend", agreeably to RULE 12.A noun or pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the noun it possesses. Declined—first pers. sing. nom. I, poss. my or mine, obj. me. Plur. nom. we, poss. our or ours, obj. us.

"Young man,thouhast deserted thy companion, and lefthimindistress."

Thouis a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun—personal, it personates "man"—second person, it represents the person spoken to—mas. gend. sing. num. because the noun "man" is for which it stands, according to RULE 13.Personal pronouns must agree with the nouns for which they stand in gender and number.

Thouis in the nom. case, it represents the actor and subject of the verb "hast deserted," and governs it agreeably to RULE 3.The nom. case governs the verb.Declined—sec. pers. sing. num. nom. thou, poss. thy or thine, obj. thee. Plur. nom. ye or you, poss. your or yours, obj. you.

Himis a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun—personal, it personates "companion"—third pers. it represents the person spoken of—mas. gend. sing. num. because the noun "companion" is for which it stands: RULE 13.Pers. pro. &c. (Repeat the Rule.)—Himis in the objective case, the object of the action expressed by the active-transitive verb "hast left," and gov. by it: RULE 20.Active-trans. verbs gov. the obj. case. Declined—third pers. mas. gend. sing. num. nom. he, poss. his, obj. him. Plur. nom. they, poss. their or theirs, obj. them.

"Thrice I raised my voice, and called the chiefs to combat, buttheydreaded the force of my arm."

Theyis a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun—personal, it represents "chiefs"—third pers. it denotes the persons spoken of—mas. gend. plur. num. because the noun "chiefs" is for which it stands: RULE 13.Pers. Pron. &c. (Repeat the Rule.) It is the nom. case, it represents the actors and subject of the verb "dreaded," and governs it: RULE 3.The nom. case, gov. the verb. Declined—third pers. mas. gend. sing. num. nom. he, poss. his, obj. him. Plur. nom. they, poss. their or theirs, obj. them.

NOTE. We do not apply gender in parsing the personal pronouns, (excepting the third person singular,) if the nouns they represent are understood; and therefore we do not, in such instances, apply Rule 13. But when the noun is expressed, gender should be applied, andtwoRules.

I saw a man leading his horse slowly over the new bridge. My friends visit me very often at my father's office. We improve ourselves by close application. Horace, thou learnest many lessons. Charles, you, by your diligence, make easy work of the task given you by your preceptor. Young ladies, you run over your lessons very carelessly. The stranger drove his horses too far into the water, and, in so doing, he drowned them.

Gray morning rose in the east. A green narrow vale appeared before us: its winding stream murmured through the grove. The dark host of Rothmar stood on its banks, with their glittering spears. We fought along the vale. They fled. Rothmar sunk beneath my sword. Day was descending in the west, when I brought his arms to Crothar. The aged hero felt them with his hands: joy brightened his thoughts.

NOTE.Horace, Charles, andladies, are of the second person, and nom. caseindependent: see RULE 5, and NOTE. The firstyouis used in the nom. poss. and obj. case.—It represents Charles, therefore it issingularin sense, although plural in form. In the next example,youpersonifiesladies, therefore it isplural. Givenis a perfect participle.Youfollowing given, is governed bytounderstood, according to NOTE 1, under Rule 32.Run overis a compound verb.Andis a conjunction. The firstitspersonates vale; the seconditsrepresents stream.

You may now parse the following examples three times over.

"Juliet, retain her paper, and presentyours."

Yoursis a compound personal pronoun, representing both the possessor and the thing possessed, and is equivalent toyour paper.Youris a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun—personal, it personates "Juliet"—second person, it represents the person spoken to—fem. gender, sing. number, (singular in sense, butpluralin form,) because the noun Juliet is for which it stands: Rule 13.Pers. Pron. &c.—Youris in the possessive case, it denotes possession, and is governed by "paper," according to Rule 12.A noun or pron. &c.(Repeat the Rule, and decline the pronoun.)Paperis a noun, the name of a thing—common, the name of a sort of things—neuter gender, it denotes a thing without sex—third person, spoken of—sing. number, it implies but one—and in the obj. case, it is the object of the action expressed by the transitive verb "present," and governed by it: Rule 20.Active-transitive verbs govern the obj. case.

NOTE. Should it be objected, thatyoursdoes not meanyour paper, any more than it meansyour book, your house, yourany thing, let it be borne in mind, that pronouns have nodefinitemeaning, like other words; but theirparticularsignification is always determined by the nouns they represent.

Julia injured her book, and soiled mine: hers is better than mine. My friend sacrificed his fortune to secure yours: his deeds deserve reward; yours merit disgrace. Henry's labors are past; thine are to come. We leave your forests of beasts for ours of men. My sword and yours are kin.

NOTE.Sheunderstood, is nominative tosoiled, in the first example; and the substantive part ofmine, after than, is nom. tois, understood: Rule 35. The verbsto secureandto comehave no nominative. The pronounsmine, my, yours, thine, we, your, ours, my, andyours, personate nouns understood.REMARKS ONIT.For the want of a proper knowledge of this little pronounit, many grammarians have been greatly puzzled how to dispose of it, or how to account for its multiform, and, seemingly, contradictory characters. It is in great demand by writers of every description. They use it without ceremony; either in the nominative or objective case; either to represent one person or thing, or more than one. It is applied to nouns in the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender, and, very frequently, it represents a member of a sentence, a whole sentence, or a number of sentences taken in a mass.A little attention to its true character, will, at once, strip it of all its mystery.It, formerly writtenhit, according to H. Tooke, is the past participle of the Moeso-Gothic verbhaitan. It means,the said, and, therefore, like its near relativethat, meaning,the assumed, originally had no respect, in its application, to number, person, or gender. "Itis a wholesome law;" i.e.thesaid(law) is a wholesome law; or,that(law) is a wholesome law;—the assumed(law) is a wholesome law. "Itis the man; I believeitto be them:"—the said(man) is the man;that(man) is the man: I believethe said(persons) to be them; I believethatpersons (according to the ancient application ofthat) to be them. "Ithappened on a summer's day, that many people were assembled," &c.—Many people were assembled:it, that, orthe said(fact or circumstance) happened on a summer's day.It, according to its accepted meaning in modern times, is not referred to a noun understood after it, but is considered a substitute. "How isitwith you?" that is, "How is yourstateorcondition?" "Itrains;Itfreezes;Itis a hard winter;"—The rainrains;The frostfrosts or freezes;The said(winter) is a hard winter. "Itis delightful to see brothers and sisters living in uninterrupted love to the end of their days." What is delightful?To see brothers and sisters living in uninterrupted love to the end of their days. It, this thing, is delightful.It, then, stands for all that part of the sentence expressed in italics; and the sentence will admit of the following construction; "To see brothers living in uninterrupted love to the end of their days, is delightful."

For the want of a proper knowledge of this little pronounit, many grammarians have been greatly puzzled how to dispose of it, or how to account for its multiform, and, seemingly, contradictory characters. It is in great demand by writers of every description. They use it without ceremony; either in the nominative or objective case; either to represent one person or thing, or more than one. It is applied to nouns in the masculine, feminine, or neuter gender, and, very frequently, it represents a member of a sentence, a whole sentence, or a number of sentences taken in a mass.

A little attention to its true character, will, at once, strip it of all its mystery.It, formerly writtenhit, according to H. Tooke, is the past participle of the Moeso-Gothic verbhaitan. It means,the said, and, therefore, like its near relativethat, meaning,the assumed, originally had no respect, in its application, to number, person, or gender. "Itis a wholesome law;" i.e.thesaid(law) is a wholesome law; or,that(law) is a wholesome law;—the assumed(law) is a wholesome law. "Itis the man; I believeitto be them:"—the said(man) is the man;that(man) is the man: I believethe said(persons) to be them; I believethatpersons (according to the ancient application ofthat) to be them. "Ithappened on a summer's day, that many people were assembled," &c.—Many people were assembled:it, that, orthe said(fact or circumstance) happened on a summer's day.

It, according to its accepted meaning in modern times, is not referred to a noun understood after it, but is considered a substitute. "How isitwith you?" that is, "How is yourstateorcondition?" "Itrains;Itfreezes;Itis a hard winter;"—The rainrains;The frostfrosts or freezes;The said(winter) is a hard winter. "Itis delightful to see brothers and sisters living in uninterrupted love to the end of their days." What is delightful?To see brothers and sisters living in uninterrupted love to the end of their days. It, this thing, is delightful.It, then, stands for all that part of the sentence expressed in italics; and the sentence will admit of the following construction; "To see brothers living in uninterrupted love to the end of their days, is delightful."

ADJECTIVE PRONOUNS, PRONOMINAL ADJECTIVES, or, more properly, SPECIFYING ADJECTIVES, are a kind of adjectives which point out nouns by some distinct specification.

Pronouns and adjectives are totally distinct in their character. The formerstand fornouns, and never belong to them; the latterbelong tonouns, and never stand for them. Hence, such a thing as anadjective-pronouncannot exist.Each, every, either, this, that, some, other, and the residue, are pure adjectives.

Those specifying adjectives commonly called Adjective Pronouns, may be divided into three sorts; thedistributive, thedemonstrative, and theindefinite. They are all known by thelists.I. Thedistributive adjectivesare those that denote the persons or things that make up a number, each taken separately and singly.List: each, every, either, and sometimesneither; as, "Eachof his brothers is in a favorable situation;" "Everyman must account for himself;" "Neitherof them is industrious."

Those specifying adjectives commonly called Adjective Pronouns, may be divided into three sorts; thedistributive, thedemonstrative, and theindefinite. They are all known by thelists.

I. Thedistributive adjectivesare those that denote the persons or things that make up a number, each taken separately and singly.List: each, every, either, and sometimesneither; as, "Eachof his brothers is in a favorable situation;" "Everyman must account for himself;" "Neitherof them is industrious."

These distributives are words which are introduced into language in its refined state, in order to express the nicest shades and colors of thought. "Manmust account for himself;" "Mankindmust account for themselves;" "All menmust account for themselves;" "All men, women,andchildren,must account for themselves;" "Every manmust account for himself." Each of these assertions conveys the same fact or truth. But the last, instead of presenting the whole human family for the mind to contemplate in a mass, by the peculiar force ofevery, distributesthem, and presents each separately and singly; and whatever is affirmed of one individual, the mind instantaneously transfers to the whole human race.

Eachrelates to two or more persons or things, and signifies either of the two, or every one of any number taken separately.Everyrelates to several persons or things, and signifies each one of them all taken separately.Eitherrelates totwopersons or things taken separately, and signifies the one or the other. "Eitherof thethree," is an improper expression. It should be, "any of the three."Neitherimportsnot either; that is, not one nor the other; as, "Neitherof my friends was there." When an allusion is made to more thantwo, noneshould be used instead ofneither; as, "Noneof my friends was there."

Eachrelates to two or more persons or things, and signifies either of the two, or every one of any number taken separately.

Everyrelates to several persons or things, and signifies each one of them all taken separately.

Eitherrelates totwopersons or things taken separately, and signifies the one or the other. "Eitherof thethree," is an improper expression. It should be, "any of the three."

Neitherimportsnot either; that is, not one nor the other; as, "Neitherof my friends was there." When an allusion is made to more thantwo, noneshould be used instead ofneither; as, "Noneof my friends was there."

II. Thedemonstrativeare those which precisely point out the subject to which they relate.List: thisandthat, and their plurals,theseandthose, andformerandlatter; as, "Thisis true charity; "thatis only its image."

There is but a slight shade of difference in the meaning and application oftheandthat. When reference is made to a particular book, we say, "Takethebook;" but when we wish to be very pointed and precise, we say, "Takethatbook;" or, if it be near by, "Takethisbook." You perceive, then, that these demonstratives have all the force of the definite article, and a little more.

Thisandtheserefer to the nearest persons or things,thatandthoseto the most distant; as, "Thesegoods are superior to those."Thisandtheseindicate the latter, or last mentioned;thatandthose, the former, or first mentioned; as, "Bothwealthandpovertyare temptations;thattends to excite pride,this, discontent.""Someplace the bliss in action,somein ease;Thosecall it pleasure, and contentment,these."They, those. As it is the office of the personaltheyto represent a noun previously introduced to our notice, there appears to be a slight departure from analogy in the following application of it: "Theywho seek after wisdom, are sure to find her:Theythat sow in tears, sometimes reap in joy." This usage, however, is well established, andthey, in such constructions, is generally employed in preference tothose.

They, those. As it is the office of the personaltheyto represent a noun previously introduced to our notice, there appears to be a slight departure from analogy in the following application of it: "Theywho seek after wisdom, are sure to find her:Theythat sow in tears, sometimes reap in joy." This usage, however, is well established, andthey, in such constructions, is generally employed in preference tothose.

III. Theindefiniteare those which express their subjects in an indefinite or general manner.List: some, other, any, one, all, such, both, same, another none. Of these,oneandotherare declined like nouns.Anotheris declined, but wants the plural.

The indefinite adjectives, like the indefinite article, leave the meaning unfixed, or, in some degree, vague. With a slight shade of difference in meaning, we say, Give meapaper,onepaper,anypaper,somepaper, and so on. Though these words restrict the meaning of the noun, they do not fix it to aparticularobject. We therefore call them indefinite.

These adjectives, or adjective pronouns, frequently belong to nouns understood, in which situation they should be parsed accordingly; as "You may takeeither; He is pleased withthisbook, but dislikesthat(book;)All(men) have sinned, butsome(men) have repented."

The words,one, other, andnone, are used in both numbers; and, when theystand fornouns, they are not adjectives, but indefinitepronouns; as, "The greatonesof the world have their failings;" "Some men increase in wealth, whileothersdecrease;" "Noneescape."

The word "ones," in the preceding example, does not belong to a noun understood. If it did, we could supply the noun. The meaning is not "the great one men, nor ones men," thereforeoneis not an adjective pronoun; but the meaning is, "The greatmenof the world," thereforeonesis a pronoun of the indefinite kind, representing the nounmenunderstood, and it ought to be parsed like a personal pronoun. The wordothers, in the next example, is a compound pronoun, equivalent toother men; and should be parsed likemine, thine, &c. See Note 4th, page 100.

I will now parse two pronouns, and then present some examples for you to analyze. If, in parsing the following exercises, you should be at a loss for definitions and rules, please to refer to the compendium. But before you proceed, you may commit the following

The order of parsing an ADJECTIVE PRONOUN, is—an adjective pronoun, and why?—distributive, demonstrative, or indefinite, and why?—to what noun does it belong, or with what does it agree?—RULE.

"Oneman instructs manyothers."

Oneis an adjective pronoun, or specifying adjective, it specifically points out a noun—indefinite, it expresses its subject in an indefinite or general manner, and belongs to the noun "man," according to RULE 19.Adjective pronouns belong to nouns, expressed or understood.

Othersis a compound pronoun, including both an adjective pronoun and a noun, and is equivalent toother men.Otheris an adjective pronoun, it is used specifically to describe its noun—indefinite, it expresses its subject in an indefinite manner, and belongs tomen: Rule 19. (Repeat the rule.)Menis a noun, a name denoting persons—common, &c. (parse it in full;) and in the objective case, it is the object of the action expressed by the transitive verb "instructs," and gov. by it: Rule 20.Active-transitive verbs, &c.

"Thosebooks aremine."

Thoseis an adjective pronoun, it specifies what noun is referred to—demonstrative, it precisely points out the subject to which it relates—and agrees with the noun "books" in the plural number, according to NOTE 1, under Rule 19.Adjective pronouns must agree in number with their nouns.

Mineis a compound personal pronoun, including both the possessor and the thing possessed, and is equivalent tomy books.Myis a pron. a word used instead of a noun—personal, it stands for the name of the person speaking—first person, it denotes the speaker—sing. number, it implies but one—and in the poss. case, it denotes possession, and is gov. by "books," according to Rule 12. (Repeat the rule, and decline the pronoun.)Booksis a noun, the name of a thing—common, &c. (parse it in full;)—and in the nominative case after "are," according to RULE 21.The verbto beadmits the same case after it as before it.

Each individual fills a space in creation. Every man helps a little. These men rank among the great ones of the world. That book belongs to the tutor, this belongs to me. Some men labor, others labor not; the former increase in wealth, the latter decrease. The boy wounded the old bird, and stole the young ones. None performs his duty too well. None of those poor wretches complain of their miserable lot.

NOTE. In parsing the distributive pronominal adjectives, NOTE 2, undo Rule 19, should be applied.

Relative Pronouns are such as relate, in general, to some word or phrase going before, which is called the antecedent. They arewho, which, andthat.

The wordantecedent, comes from the two Latin words,ante, before, andcedo, to go. Hence you perceive, that antecedent means going before; thus, "Themanis happywholives virtuously; This is thelady whorelieved my wants;Thou wholovest wisdom, &c.We whospeak from experience," &c. The relative who, in these sentences, relates to the several words,man, lady, thou, andwe, which words, you observe, come before the relative: they are, therefore, properly called antecedents.

The relative is not varied on account of gender, person, or number, like a personal pronoun. When we use a personal pronoun, in speaking of a man, we sayhe, and of a woman,she; in speaking of one person or thing, we use a singular pronoun, of more than one, a plural, and so on; but there is no such variation of the relative.Who, in the first of the preceding examples, relates to an antecedent of the mas. gend. third pers. sing.; in the second, the antecedent is of the fem. gend.; in the third, it is of the second pers.; and in the fourth, it is of the first pers. plur. num.; and, yet, the relative is in the same form in each example. Hence you perceive, that the relative has no peculiarformto denote its gend. pers. and num., but it always agrees with its antecedentin sense. Thus, when I say, Theman whowrites,whois mas. gend. and sing.; but when I say, Theladies whowrite,whois feminine, and plural. In order to ascertain the gend. pers. and num. of the relative, you must always look at its antecedent.

Whois applied topersons, whichtothingsandbrutes; as, "He is afriend whois faithful in adversity; Thebird whichsung so sweetly, is flown; This is thetree whichproduces no fruit."Thatis often used as a relative, to prevent the too frequent repetition ofwhoandwhich. It is applied both to persons and things; as, "He thatacts wisely, deserves praise; Modesty is aquality thathighly adorns a woman."

Whois applied topersons, whichtothingsandbrutes; as, "He is afriend whois faithful in adversity; Thebird whichsung so sweetly, is flown; This is thetree whichproduces no fruit."

Thatis often used as a relative, to prevent the too frequent repetition ofwhoandwhich. It is applied both to persons and things; as, "He thatacts wisely, deserves praise; Modesty is aquality thathighly adorns a woman."

1.Whoshould never be applied to animals. The following application of it is erroneous:—"He is like aleastof prey,whodestroys without pity." It should be,thatdestroys, &c.2.Whoshould not be applied to children. It is incorrect to say, "Thechild whomwe have just seen," &c. It should be, "The childthatwe have just seen."3.Whichmay be applied to persons when we wish to distinguish oneperson of two, or a particular person among a number of others; as,"Whichof the two?Whichof them is he?"4.That, in preference towhoorwhich, is applied to personswhen they are qualified by an adjective in the superlative degree,or by the pronominal adjectivesame; as, "Charles XII., king of Sweden, was one of thegreatestmadmenthatthe world ever saw;—He is thesamemanthatwe saw before."5.Thatis employed after the interrogativewho, in cases like the following; "Whothathas any sense of religion, would haveargued thus?"

1.Whoshould never be applied to animals. The following application of it is erroneous:—"He is like aleastof prey,whodestroys without pity." It should be,thatdestroys, &c.

2.Whoshould not be applied to children. It is incorrect to say, "Thechild whomwe have just seen," &c. It should be, "The childthatwe have just seen."

3.Whichmay be applied to persons when we wish to distinguish oneperson of two, or a particular person among a number of others; as,"Whichof the two?Whichof them is he?"

4.That, in preference towhoorwhich, is applied to personswhen they are qualified by an adjective in the superlative degree,or by the pronominal adjectivesame; as, "Charles XII., king of Sweden, was one of thegreatestmadmenthatthe world ever saw;—He is thesamemanthatwe saw before."

5.Thatis employed after the interrogativewho, in cases like the following; "Whothathas any sense of religion, would haveargued thus?"

When the wordeverorsoeveris annexed to a relative pronoun, the combination is called acompound pronoun; as,whoeverorwhosoever, whicheverorwhichsoever, whateverorwhatsoever.

Whichandthatare indeclinable, except thatwhoseis sometimes used as the possessive case ofwhich; as, "Is there any other doctrinewhosefollowers are punished;" that is, the followersof whichare punished. The use of this license has obtained among our best writers; but the construction is not to be recommended, for it is a departure from a plain principle of grammar, namely, who, whose, whom, in their applications, should be confined to rational beings.

Thatmay be used as a pronoun, an adjective, and a conjunction, depending on the office which it performs in the sentence.

Thatis a relative only when it can be changed towhoorwhichwithout destroying the sense; as, "Theythat(who) reprove us, may be our best friends; From every thingthat(which) you see, derive instruction."Thatis a demonstrative adjective, when it belongs to, or points out, some particular noun, either expressed or implied; as, "Returnthatbook;Thatbelongs to me; Give methat." Whenthatis neither a relative nor an adjective pronoun, it is a conjunction; as, "Take carethatevery day be well employed." The wordthat, in this last sentence, cannot be changed towhoorwhichwithout destroying the sense, therefore you know it is not a relative pronoun; neither does it point out any particular noun, for which reason you know it is not an adjective pronoun; but it connects the sentence, therefore it is a conjunction.

If you pay particular attention to this elucidation of the wordthat, you will find no difficulty in parsing it. When it is a relative or an adjective pronoun, it may be known by the signs given; and whenever these signs will not apply to it, you know it is a conjunction.

Some writers are apt to make too free use of this word. I will give you one example of affrontedthat, which may serve as a caution. The tutor said, in speaking of the word that, that that that that that lady parsed, was not the that that that gentleman requested her to analyze. This sentence, though rendered inelegant by a bad choice of words, is strictly grammatical. The firstthatis a noun; the second, a conjunction; the third, an adjective pronoun; the fourth, a noun; the fifth, a relative pronoun; the sixth, an adjective pronoun; the seventh, a noun; the eighth, a relative pronoun; the ninth, an adjective pronoun. The meaning of the sentence will be more obvious, if rendered thus; The tutor said, in speaking of the word that, that that thatwhichthat lady parsed, was not the thatwhichthat gentleman requested her to analyze.

Back to Index Next