The Grammar of English Grammars Part 161

19. Does a singular antecedent ever admit of a plural p.r.o.noun? 20. Can a p.r.o.noun agree with its antecedent in one sense and not in an other? 21. If the antecedent is a collective noun conveying the idea of plurality, must the p.r.o.noun always be plural? 22. If there are two or more antecedents connected by _and_, must the p.r.o.noun always be plural? 23. If there are antecedents connected by _or_ or _nor_, is the p.r.o.noun always to take them separately? 24. Must a finite verb always agree with its nominative in number and person? 25. If the nominative is a collective noun conveying the idea of plurality, must the verb always be plural? 26. If there are two or more nominatives connected by _and_, must the verb always be plural? 21. If there are nominatives connected by _or_ or _nor_, is the verb always to refer to them separately? 28. Does the preposition _to_ before the infinitive always govern the verb? 29. Can the preposition _to_ govern or precede any other mood than the infinitive? 30. Is the preposition _to_ "understood" after _bid, dare, feel_, and so forth, where it is "superfluous and improper?" 31. How many and what exceptions are there to rule 20th, concerning participles? 32. How many and what exceptions are there to the rule for adverbs? 33. How many and what exceptions are there to the rule for conjunctions? 34. How many and what exceptions are there to the rule for prepositions? 35. Is there any exception to the 24th rule, concerning interjections?

LESSON XI.--THE OBSERVATIONS.

1. How many of the ten parts of speech in English are in general incapable of any agreement? 2. Can there be a syntactical relation of words without either agreement or government? 3. Is there ever any needful agreement between unrelated words? 4. Is the mere relation of words according to the sense an element of much importance in English syntax? 5. What parts of speech have no other syntactical property than that of simple relation? 6.

What rules of relation are commonly found in grammars? 7. Of what parts is syntax commonly said to consist? 8. Is it common to find in grammars, the rules of syntax well adapted to their purpose? 9. Can you specify some that appear to be faulty? 10. Wherein consists _the truth_ of grammatical doctrine, and how can one judge of what others teach? 11. Do those who speak of syntax as being divided into two parts, Concord and Government, commonly adhere to such division? 12. What false concords and false governments are cited in Obs. 7th of the first chapter? 13. Is it often expedient to join in the same rule such principles as must always be applied separately? 14. When one can condense several different principles into one rule, is it not expedient to do so? 15. Is it ever convenient to have one and the same rule applicable to different parts of speech? 16. Is it ever convenient to have rules divided into parts, so as to be double or triple in their form? 17. What instance of extravagant innovation is given in Obs. 12th of the first chapter?

LESSON XII.--THE OBSERVATIONS.

18. Can a uniform series of good grammars, Latin, Greek, English, &c., be produced by a mere revising of one defective book for each language? 19.

Whose are "The Principles of English Grammar" which Dr. Bullions has republished with alterations, "on the plan of Murray's Grammar?" 20. Can praise and success ent.i.tle to critical notice works in themselves unworthy of it? 21. Do the Latin grammarians agree in their enumeration of the concords in Latin? 22. What is said in Obs. 16th, of the plan of mixing syntax with etymology? 23. Do not the principles of etymology affect those of syntax? 24. Can any words agree, or disagree, except in something that belongs to each of them? 25. How many and what parts of speech are concerned in government? 26. Are rules of government to be applied to the governing words, or to the governed? 27. What are gerundives? 28. How many and what are the principles of syntax which belong to the head of simple relation? 29. How many agreements, or concords, are there in English syntax? 30. How many rules of government are there in the best Latin grammars? 31. What fault is there in the usual distribution of these rules?

32. How many and what are the governments in English syntax? 33. Can the parsing of words be varied by any transposition which does not change their import? 34. Can the parsing of words be affected by the pa.r.s.er's notion of what const.i.tutes a simple sentence? 35. What explanation of simple and compound sentences is cited from Dr. Wilson, in Obs. 25? 36. What notion had Dr. Adam of simple and compound sentences? 37. Is this doctrine consistent either with itself or with Wilson's? 38. How can one's notion of _ellipsis_ affect his mode of parsing, and his distinction of sentences as simple or compound?

LESSON XIII.--ARTICLES.

1. Can one noun have more than one article? 2. Can one article relate to more than one noun? 3. Why cannot the omission of an article const.i.tute a proper ellipsis? 4. What is the position of the article with respect to its noun? 5. What is the usual position of the article with respect to an adjective and a noun? 6. Can the relative position of the article and adjective be a matter of indifference? 7. What adjectives exclude, or supersede, the article? 8. What adjectives precede the article? 9. What four adverbs affect the position of the article and adjective? 10. Do other adverbs come between the article and the adjective? 11. Can any of the definitives which preclude _an_ or _a_, be used with the adjective _one_?

12. When the adjective follows its noun, where stands the article? 13. Can the article in English, ever be placed after its noun? 14. What is the effect of the word _the_ before comparatives and superlatives? 15. What article may sometimes be used in lieu of a possessive p.r.o.noun? 16. Is the article _an_ or _a_ always supposed to imply unity? 17. Respecting _an_ or _a_, how does present usage differ from the usage of ancient writers? 18.

Can the insertion or omission of an article greatly affect the import of a sentence? 19. By a repet.i.tion of the article before two or more adjectives, what other repet.i.tion is implied? 20. How do we sometimes avoid such repet.i.tion? 21. Can there ever be an implied repet.i.tion of the noun when no article is used?

LESSON XIV.--NOUNS, OR CASES.

1. In how many different ways can the nominative case be used? 2. What is the usual position of the nominative and verb, and when is it varied? 3.

With what nominatives of the second person, does the imperative verb agree?

4. Why is it thought improper to put a noun in two cases at once? 5. What case in Latin and Greek is reckoned _the subject_ of the infinitive mood?

6. Can this, in general, be literally imitated in English? 7. Do any English authors adopt the Latin doctrine of the accusative (or objective) before the infinitive? 8. Is the objective, when it occurs before the infinitive in English, usually governed by some verb, participle, or preposition? 9. What is our nearest approach to the Latin construction of the accusative before the infinitive? 10. What is _apposition_, and from whom did it receive this name? 11. Is there a construction of like cases, that is not apposition? 12. To which of the apposite terms is the rule for apposition to be applied? 13. Are words in apposition always to be pa.r.s.ed separately? 14. Wherein are the common rule and definition of apposition faulty? 15. Can the explanatory word ever be placed first? 16. Is it ever indifferent, which word be called the princ.i.p.al, and which the explanatory term? 17. Why cannot two nouns, each having the possessive sign, be put in apposition with each other? 18. Where must the sign of possession be put, when two or more possessives are in apposition? 19. Is it compatible with apposition to supply between the words a relative and a verb; as, "At Mr.

Smith's [_who is_] the bookseller?" 20. How can a noun be, or seem to be, in apposition with a possessive p.r.o.noun? 21. What construction is produced by the _repet.i.tion_ of a noun or p.r.o.noun? 22. What is the construction of a noun, when it emphatically repeats the idea suggested by a preceding sentence?

LESSON XV.--NOUNS, OR CASES.

23. Can words differing in number be in apposition with each other? 24.

What is the usual construction of _each other_ and _one an other_? 25. Is there any argument from a.n.a.logy for taking _each other_ and _one an other_ for compounds? 26. Do we often put proper nouns in apposition with appellatives? 27. What preposition is often put between nouns that signify the same thing? 28. When is an active verb followed by two words in apposition? 29. Does apposition require any other agreement than that of case? 30. What three modes of construction appear like exceptions to Rule 4th? 31. In the phrase, "For _David_ my servant's sake," which word is governed by _sake_, and which is to be pa.r.s.ed by the rule of apposition?

32. In the sentence, "It is _man's_ to err," what is supposed to govern _man's_? 33. Does the possessive case admit of any abstract sense or construction? 34. Why is it reasonable to limit the government of the possessive to nouns only, or to words taken substantive? 35. Does the possessive case before a real participle denote the possessor of something?

36. What two great authors differ in regard to the correctness of the phrases, "_upon the rule's being observed_," and "_of its being neglected_?" 37. Is either of them right in his argument? 38. Is the distinction between the participial noun and the participle well preserved by Murray and his amenders? 39. Who invented the doctrine, that a participle and its adjuncts may be used as "_one name_" and in that capacity govern the possessive? 40. Have any popular authors adopted this doctrine? 41. Is the doctrine well sustained by its adopters, or is it consistent with the a.n.a.logy of general grammar? 42. When one doubts whether a participle ought to be the governing word or the adjunct,--that is, whether he ought to use the possessive case before it or the objective,--what shall he do? 43, What is objected to the sentences in which participles govern the possessive case, and particularly to the examples given by Priestley, Murray, and others, to prove such a construction right? 44. Do the teachers of this doctrine agree among themselves? 45. How does the author of this work generally dispose of such government? 46. Does he positively determine, that the participle should _never_ be allowed to govern the possessive case?

LESSON XVI.--NOUNS, OR CASES.

47. Are the distinctions of voice and of time as much regarded in participial nouns as in participles? 48. Why cannot an omission of the possessive sign be accounted a true _ellipsis_? 49. What is the usual position of the possessive case, and what exceptions are there? 50. In what other form can the meaning of the possessive case be expressed? 51. Is the possessive often governed by what is not expressed? 52. Does every possessive sign imply a separate governing noun? 53. How do compounds take the sign of possession? 54. Do we put the sign of possession always and only where the two terms of the possessive relation meet? 55. Can the possessive sign be ever rightly added to a separate adjective? 56. What is said of the omission of _s_ from the possessive singular on account of its hissing sound? 57. What errors do Kirkham, Smith, and others, teach concerning the possessive singular? 58. Why is Murray's rule for the possessive case objectionable? 59. Do compounds embracing the possessive case appear to be written with sufficient uniformity? 60. What rules for nouns coming together are inserted in Obs. 31st on Rule 4th? 61. Does the compounding of words necessarily preclude their separate use? 62. Is there a difference worth notice, between such terms or things as _heart-ease_ and _heart's-ease_; a _harelip_ and a _hare's lip_; a _headman_ and a _headsman_; a _lady's-slipper_ and a _lady's slipper_? 63. Where usage is utterly unsettled, what guidance should be sought? 64. What peculiarities are noticed in regard to the noun _side_? 65. What peculiarities has the possessive case in regard to correlatives? 66. What is remarked of the possessive relation between time and action? 67. What is observed of nouns of weight, measure, or time, coming immediately together?

LESSON XVII.--NOUNS, OR CASES.

68. Are there any exceptions or objections to the old rule, "Active verbs govern the objective case?" 69. Of how many different constructions is the objective case susceptible? 70. What is the usual position of the objective case, and what exceptions are there? 71. Can any thing but the governing of an objective noun or p.r.o.noun make an active verb transitive? 72. In the sentence, "What _have_ I to _do_ with thee?" how are _have_ and _do_ to be pa.r.s.ed? 73. Can infinitives, participles, phrases, sentences, and parts of sentences, be really "in the objective case?" 74. In the sentence, "I _know why_ she blushed," how is _know_ to be pa.r.s.ed? 75. In the sentence, "I _know that_ Messias cometh," how are _know_ and _that_ to be pa.r.s.ed? 76. In the sentence, "And _Simon_ he surnamed _Peter_", how are _Simon_ and _Peter_ to be pa.r.s.ed? 77. In such sentences as, "I paid _him_ the _money_,"--"He asked _them_ the _question_," how are the two objectives to be pa.r.s.ed? 78. Does any verb in English ever govern two objectives that are not coupled? 79. Are there any of our pa.s.sive verbs that can properly govern the objective case? 80. Is not our language like the Latin, in respect to verbs governing two cases, and pa.s.sives retaining the latter?

81. How do our grammarians now dispose of what remains to us of the old Saxon dative case? 82. Do any reputable writers allow pa.s.sive verbs to govern the objective case? 83. What says Lindley Murray about this pa.s.sive government? 84. Why is the position, "Active verbs govern the objective case," of no use to the composer? 85. On what is the construction of _same cases_ founded? 86. Does this construction admit of any variety in the position of the words? 87. Does an ellipsis of the verb or participle change this construction into apposition? 88. Is it ever right to put both terms before the verb? 89. What kinds of words can take different cases after them? 90. Can a participle which is governed by a preposition, have a case after it which is governed by neither? 91. How is the word _man_ to be pa.r.s.ed in the following example? "The atrocious _crime of being_ a young _man_, I shall neither attempt to palliate, nor deny."

LESSON XVIII.--NOUNS, OR CASES.

92. In what kinds of examples do we meet with a doubtful case after a participle? 93. Is the case after the verb reckoned doubtful, when the subject going before is a sentence, or something not declinable by cases?

94. In the sentence, "It is certainly as easy to be a _scholar_, as a _gamester_," what is the case of _scholar_ and _gamester_, and why? 95. Are there any verbs that sometimes connect like cases, and sometimes govern the objective? 96. What faults are there in the rules given by _Lowth, Murray, Smith_, and others, for the construction of _like cases_? 97. Can a preposition ever govern any thing else than a noun or a p.r.o.noun? 98. Is every thing that a preposition governs, necessarily supposed to have cases, and to be in the objective? 99. Why or wherein is the common rule, "Prepositions govern the objective case," defective or insufficient? 100.

In such phrases as _in vain, at first, in particular_, how is the adjective to be pa.r.s.ed? 101. In such expressions as, "I give it up _for lost_,"--"I take it _for granted_," how is the participle to be pa.r.s.ed? 102. In such phrases as, _at once, from thence, till now_, how is the latter word to be pa.r.s.ed? 103. What peculiarity is there in the construction of nouns of time, measure, distance, or value? 104. What is observed of the words _like, near_, and _nigh_? 105. What is observed of the word _worth_? 106.

According to Johnson and Tooke, what is _worth_, in such phrases as, "Wo _worth_ the day?" 107. After verbs of _giving, paying_, and the like, what ellipsis is apt to occur? 108. What is observed of the nouns used in dates?

109. What defect is observable in the common rules for "the case absolute,"

or "the nominative independent?" 110. In how many ways is the nominative case put absolute? 111. What participle is often understood after nouns put absolute? 112. In how many ways can nouns of the second person be employed?

113. What is said of nouns used in exclamations, or in mottoes and abbreviated sayings? 114. What is observed of such phrases as, "_hand to hand_,"--"_face to face_?" 115. What authors deny the existence of "the case absolute?"

LESSON XIX.--ADJECTIVES.

1. Does the adjective frequently relate to what is not uttered with it? 2.

What is observed of those rules which suppose every adjective to relate to some noun? 3. To what does the adjective usually relate, when it stands alone after a finite verb? 4. Where is the noun or p.r.o.noun, when an adjective follows an infinitive or a participle? 5. What is observed of adjectives preceded by _the_ and used elliptically? 6. What is said of the position of the adjective? 7. In what instances is the adjective placed after its noun? 8. In what instances may the adjective either precede or follow the noun? 9. What are the construction and import of the phrases, _in particular, in general_, and the like? 10. What is said of adjectives as agreeing or disagreeing with their nouns in number? 11. What is observed of _this_ and _that_ as referring to two nouns connected? 12. What is remarked of the use of adjectives for adverbs? 13. How can one determine whether an adjective or an adverb is required? 14. What is remarked of the placing of two or more adjectives before one noun? 15. How can one avoid the ambiguity which Dr. Priestley notices in the use of the adjective _no_?

LESSON XX.--p.r.o.nOUNS.

1. Can such p.r.o.nouns as stand for things not named, be said to agree with the nouns for which they are subst.i.tuted? 2. Is the p.r.o.noun _we_ singular when it is used in lieu of _I_? 3. Is the p.r.o.noun _you_ singular when used in lieu of _thou_ or _thee_? 4. What is there remarkable in the construction of _ourself_ and _yourself_? 5. Of what person, number, and gender, is the relative, when put after such terms of address as, _your Majesty, your Highness, your Lords.h.i.+p, your Honour_? 6. How does the English fas.h.i.+on of putting _you_ for _thou_, compare with the usage of the French, and of other nations? 7. Do any imagine these fas.h.i.+onable subst.i.tutions to be morally objectionable? 8. What figures of rhetoric are liable to affect the agreement of p.r.o.nouns with their antecedents? 9. How does the p.r.o.noun agree with its noun in cases of personification? 10. How does the p.r.o.noun agree with its noun in cases of metaphor? 11. How does the p.r.o.noun agree with its noun in cases of metonymy? 12. How does the p.r.o.noun agree with its noun in cases of synecdoche? 13. What is the usual position of p.r.o.nouns, and what exceptions are there? 14. When a p.r.o.noun represents a phrase or sentence, of what person, number, and gender is it? 15. Under what circ.u.mstances can a p.r.o.noun agree with either of two antecedents? 16.

With what does the relative agree when an other word is introduced by the p.r.o.noun _it_? 17. In the sentence, "_It_ is useless to complain," what does _it_ represent? 18. How are relative and interrogative p.r.o.nouns placed? 19.

What are the chief constructional peculiarities of the relative p.r.o.nouns?

20. Why does the author discard the two special rules commonly given for the construction of relatives?

LESSON XXI.--p.r.o.nOUNS.

21. To what part of speech is the greatest number of rules applied in parsing? 22. Of the twenty-four rules in this work, how many are applicable to p.r.o.nouns? 23. Of the seven rules for cases, how many are applicable to relatives and interrogatives? 24. What is remarked of the ellipsis or omission of the relative? 25. What is said of the suppression of the antecedent? 26. What is noted of the word _which_, as applied to persons?

27. What relative is applied to a proper noun taken merely as a name? 28.

When do we employ the same relative in successive clauses? 29. What odd use is sometimes made of the p.r.o.noun _your_? 30. Under what _figure_ of syntax did the old grammarians rank the plural construction of a noun of mult.i.tude? 31. Does a collective noun with a singular definitive before it ever admit of a plural verb or p.r.o.noun? 32. Do collective nouns generally admit of being made literally plural? 33. When joint antecedents are of different persons, with which person does the p.r.o.noun agree? 34. When joint antecedents differ in gender, of what gender is the p.r.o.noun? 35. Why is it wrong to say, "The first has a lenis, _and_ the other an asper over _them_?" 36. Can nouns without _and_ be taken jointly, as if they had it?

37. Can singular antecedents be so suggested as to require a plural p.r.o.noun, when only one of them is uttered? 38. Why do singular antecedents connected by _or_ or _nor_ appear to require a singular p.r.o.noun? 39. Can different antecedents connected by _or_ be accurately represented by differing p.r.o.nouns connected in the same way? 40. Why are we apt to use a plural p.r.o.noun after antecedents of different genders? 41. Do the Latin grammars teach the same doctrine as the English, concerning nominatives or antecedents connected disjunctively?

LESSON XXII.--VERBS.

1. What is necessary to every finite verb? 2. What is remarked of such examples as this: "The _Pleasures_ of Memory _was_ published in 1702?" 3.

What is to be done with "_Thinks I_ to myself," and the like? 4. Is it right to say with Smith, "Every hundred _years const.i.tutes_ a century?" 5.

What needless ellipses both of nominatives and of verbs are commonly supposed by our grammarians? 6. What actual ellipsis usually occurs with the imperative mood? 7. What is observed concerning the place of the verb?

8. What besides a noun or a p.r.o.noun may be made the subject of a verb? 9.

What is remarked of the faulty omission of the p.r.o.noun _it_ before the verb? 10 When an infinitive phrase is made the subject of a verb, do the words remain adjuncts, or are they abstract? 11. How can we introduce a noun or p.r.o.noun before the infinitive, and still make the whole phrase the subject of a finite verb? 12. Can an objective before the infinitive become "the subject of the affirmation?" 13. In making a phrase the subject of a verb, do we produce an exception to Rule 14th? 14. Why is it wrong to say, with Dr. Ash, "The king and queen appearing in public _was_ the cause of my going?" 15. What inconsistency is found in Murray, with reference to his "_nominative sentences_?" 16. What is Dr. Webster's ninth rule of syntax?

17. Why did Murray think all Webster's examples under this rule bad English? 18. Why are both parties wrong in this instance? 19. What strange error is taught by Cobbett, and by Wright, in regard to the relative and its verb? 20. Is it demonstrable that verbs often agree with relatives? 21.

What is observed of the agreement of verbs in interrogative sentences? 22.

Do we ever find the subjunctive mood put after a relative p.r.o.noun? 23. What is remarked of the difference between the indicative and the subjunctive mood, and of the limits of the latter?

LESSON XXIII.--VERBS.

24. In respect to collective nouns, how is it generally determined, whether they convey the idea of plurality or not? 25. What is stated of the rules of Adam, Lowth, Murray, and Kirkham, concerning collective nouns? 26. What is Nixon's notion of the construction of the verb and collective noun? 27.