« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »
which hath been offered up to him.” The pronoun it is here the nominative case to the verb “observed ;" and which rule, is left by itself, a nominative case without any verb following it. This form of expression, though improper, is very common. It ought to be, “ If this rule. had been observed," &c. “ Man, though he has great variety of thoughts, and such from which others as well as himself might receive profit and delight, yet they are all within his own breast.” In this sentence, the nominative man stands alone and unconnected with any verb, either expressed or implied. It should be, “Though man has great variety,” &c.
4. When a verb comes between two nouns, either of which may be understood as the subject of the affirmation, it may agree with either of them; but some regard must be had to that which is more naturally the subject of it, as also to that which stands next to the verb: as, “ His meat was locusts and wild honey;" “ A great cause of the low state of industry were the restraints put upon it ;) "The wages of sin is death."
5. When the nominative case has no personal tense of a verb, but is put before a participle, independently on the rest of the sentence, it is called the case absolute: as, • Shame being lost, all virtue is lost;" " That having been discussed long ago, there is no occasion to resume it.”
As in the use of the case absolute, the case is, in English, always the nominative, the following example is erroneous, in making it the objective. " Solomon was of this mind; and I have no doubt he made as wise and true proverbs, as any body has done since; him only excepted, who was a much greater and wiser man than Solomon.” It should be," he only excepted."
The nominative case is commonly placed before the verb; but sometimes it is put after the verb, if it is a simple tense ; and between the auxiliary, and the verb or participle, if a compound tense: as,
*Ist, When a question is asked, a command given, or a wish expressed: as,
« Confidest thou in me?" « Read thou;" “Mayst thou be happy!” “Long live the King!"
2d, When a supposition is made without the conjunc. tion if: as, “ Were it not for this;" “ Had I been there."
3d, When a verb neuter is used: as, “ On a sudden appeared the king."
4th, When the verb is preceded by the adverbs, here, there, then, thence, hence, thus, &c.; as, “Here am I;" “There was he slain;" «Then cometh the end;" «Thence ariseth his grief;" “ Hence proceeds his anger;" “Thus was the affair settled.”
5th, When a sentence depends on neither or nor, so as to be coupled with another sentence: as, “Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye
die." Some grammarians assert, that the phrases, as follows, us appears, form what are called impersonal verbs; and should, therefore, be confined to the singular number: as, “The arguments advanced were nearly as follows ;" * The positions were as appears incontrovertible:" that is, was it follows,” “as it appears.” If we give (say they) the sentence a different turn, and instead of as, say such as, the verb is no longer termed impersonal; but properly agrees. with its nominative, in the plural number: as, “ The ars guments advanced were nearly such as follow;' «. The positions were such as appear incontrovertible *.*
They who doubt the accuracy of Horne Fooke's stale. ment, “That as, however and whenever used in English,
• These grammarians are supported by general usage, and by the authority of an eminent critic on language and composition.
" When a verb is used impersonally,” says Dr. Campbell in his Philosophy of Rhetoric, it ought undoubtedly to be in the singular number, whether the ncutcr. pronoun be expressed or understood. Eor this reason, analogy and usage, Savour this mode of expression: “ The conditions of the agreement were as hallowa jina and not, as follows. A few late writers have inconsiderately adopted this last form, through a mistake of the construction. For the same reason, we ought to say, " I shall consider his censures so far only as conceras my fricodis conduct;" and not so far as concito."
means the same as it, or that, or which;" and who are not satisfied whether the verbs, in the sentences first mentioned, should be in the singular or the plural number, may vary the form of expression. Thus, the sense of the preceding sentences, may be conveyed in the following terms. “The arguments advanced were nearly of the following nature;" “ The following are nearly the arguments which were advanced;" “ The arguments advanced were nearly those which follow:” “It appears that the positions were incontrovertible ;" “ That the positions were incontrovertible is apparent;" “ The positions were apparently incontrovertible.". See the Octavo Grammar; the note under Rule I.
RULE II. Two or more nouns, &c. in the singular num. ber, joined together by a copulative conjunction, expressed or understood, must have verbs, nouns, and pronouns, agreeing with them in the plural" number : as,
Socrates and Plato were wise; they were the most eminent philosophers of Greece;" “ The sun that rolls over our heads, the food that we receive," the rest that we enjoy. daily admonish us of a superior and superintending Power*.”
Exercises, p. 11. Key, p. 33. This rule is often violated ; some instances of which are annexed. And so was also James and John the sons of Kebedee, who were partners with Simon ;”,and so were also." “ All joy, tranquillity, and peace, even for ever and ever, dotli dwell;": "dwell for ever.”
“ By whose power all good and evil is distributed;" are distributed." «Their love, and their hatred, and their envy, is now perished;" are perished.” “ The thoughtless and in temperate enjoyment of pleasure, the criminal abuse of it, and the forgetfulness of our being accountable creatures, obliterates every serious thought of the proper business of
• See the exceptions to this rule, at p. 46 of the Key ; 12th edition,
life, and effaces the sense of religion and of God;". It ought to be," obliterate," and "efface."
1. When the nouns are nearly related, or scarcely distinguishable in sense, and sometimes even when they are very different, some authors have thought it allowable to put the verbs, nouns, and pronouns, in the singular number: as, “Tranquillity and peace dwells there ;" “Ignorance and negligence has produced the effect;" “ The discomfiture and slaughter was very great.” But it is evidently contrary to the first principles of grammar, to consider two distinct ideas as one, however nice may be their shades of difference: and if there be no difference, one of them must be superfluous, and ought to be rejected.
To support the above construction, it is said, that the verb may be understood as applied to each of the preceding terms; as in the following example. “ Sand, and salt, and a mass of iron, is easier to bear than a man without understanding." But besides the confusion, and the latitude of application, which such a construction would introduce, it appears to be more proper and analogical, in cases where the verb is intended to be applied to any one of the terms, to make use of the disjunctive conjunction, which grammatically refers the verb to one or other of the preceding terms in a separate view. To preserve the distinctive uses of the copulative and disjunctive conjunctions, would render the rules precise, consistent, and intelligible. Dr. Blair very justly observes, that “two or more substantives, joined by a copulative, must always require the verb or pronoun to which they refer, to be placed in the plural number."
2. In many complex sentences, it is difficult for learners to determine, whether one or more of the clauses are to be considered as the nominative case; and consequently, whether the verb should be in the singular or the plural number. We shall, therefore, set down a number of varied examples of this nature, which may serve as some governinent to the scholar, with respect to sentences of a similar
construction. “Prosperity, with humility, renders its posşessor truly amiable.” “ The ship, with all her furniture, was destroyed.” “Not only his estate, his reputation too has suffered by his misconduct.” “ The general also, in conjunction with the officers, has applied for redress.' “ He cannot be justified; for it is true, that the prince, as well as the people, was blameworthy.” “The king, with his life-guard, has just passed thro' the village.” “In the mutual influence of body and soul, there is a wisdom, a wonderful wisdom, which we cannot fathom.” “ Virtue, honour, nay, even self-interest, conspire to recommend the measure." “ Patriotism, morality, every public and private consideration, demand our submission to just and lawful government." Nothing delights me so much as the works of nature.”-See the THIRD edition of the Octavo grammar, Vol. 2. p. 43-52.
In support of such forms of expression as the following, we see the authority of Hume, Priestley, and other writers; and we annex them for the reader's consideration. 'A long course of time, with a variety of accidents and circumstances, are requisite to produce those revolutions." • The king, with the lords and commons, form an excellent frame of government.” “ The side A, with the sides B and C, compose the triangle.” “ The fire communicated itself to the bed, which, with the furniture of the room, and a valuable library, were all entirely consumed.” It is, however, proper to observe, that these modes of expression do not appear to be warranted by the just principles of construction. The words, “ A long course of time,”. “The king,” “The side A,” and “ which,” are the true nominatives to the respective verbs. In the last example, the word all should be expunged. As the preposition with governs the objectide case, in English; and, if translated into Latin, would govern the ablative case, it is manifest, that the clauses following with, in the preceding sentences, cannot form any part of the nominative case. They cannot be at the same time in the objective and the nominative cases. The following sentence appears to he unexceptionable; and may serve to explain the others.