1. in_ernet_dli_2015_167923_2015_167923_The-New-Art-Of-Writing-And-Speaking-The-English-Language

Kansas City Public Library

REFERENCE ROOM

NOT TO BE TAKEN FROM ROOM

808 C67n v.1

Kansas City Public Library

SCHOOL DISTRICT OF KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI

This Volume is for REFERENCE USE ONLY

5-32-6m-P

KANSAS

CITY,

MO

PUBLIC

LIBRARY

0

0001

4543903

0

REFERENCE

THE

NE'

ART

OF

WRITING

AND

SPEAKING

THE

ENGLISH

LANGUAGE

Volume

I

GRAMMAR

THE NEW ART

OF

WRITING AND SPEAKING

THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE

SHERWIN CODY

GRAMMAR

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS

NEW YORK AND LONDON

Copyright,

1933

BY

SHERWIN

CODY

FOREWORD

The standard of correct English usage has changed

slowly but steadily since the opening of the twen-

tieth century. In times past the educational world

has felt a necessity for teaching and trying to main-

tain the formal literary standard, according to which

many common colloquial expressions are condemned,

either because they are illogical or at variance with

philological facts or principles, or because they seem

to grave educators as slightly vulgar by reason of

their everyday informal use.

The Oxford Dictionary, however, which must now

be accepted as our highest authority, recognizes at

least two different levels of good use, namely the

literary level and the good colloquial level—that is,

the use of words as well-educated people employ

them in talking and letter writing. More and more

all writing has come to be colloquial. Preachers

"talk" to their congregations, and lawyers "talk" to

juries. Above all, business men have learned that

letters which "pull" business must be engaging talk

on paper. Newspapers have always been colloquial,

and in times past the literary critics have sneered

at "newspaper English," but we hear little of such

condemnation in these days. In the field of literature

novels have always been colloquial, or full of the

talk of the characters, sometimes in dialect, some-

times in slang, but always in everyday colloquial

5

6

WRITING AND SPEAKING

English. And in these days even essays have lost

their formal character and have become familiar

little chats beside the evening fire. It is infinitely

more important, therefore, to know what good col-

loquial usage is than what so-called formal literary

usage ought to be. The ordinary person is no longer

misled into supposing that his everyday speech

should conform to the rules of literary standards—

it would be very bad speech indeed if it did, because

literary standards are as much out of place in daily

conversation as full evening dress would be in the

daytime.

This has now been recognized by the highest edu-

cational authorities. The writings of Dr. George

Philip Krapp of Columbia University in recognition

of our actual educated usages have been recognized

by the editors of the Oxford Dictionary as about

the highest authority we have on American good

usage. The late Dr. Sterling A. Leonard was a

student under Professor Krapp when he was taking

his doctor’s degree at Columbia, and later, when he

was professor of the teaching of English at the Uni-

versity of Wisconsin and president of the National

Council of Teachers of English, he had the interesting

idea of finding out by direct investigation how a

couple of hundred of the world’s leading authorities

on good English would classify some of our com-

monest expressions about which much discussion has

raged. So he chose 100 expressions, illustrated in

easy sentences or phrases, and referred them to 222

experts starting with a jury of 28 professional

linguists like Prof. Otto Jespersen of the University

of Copenhagen, H. W. Fowler, one of the editors

of the Oxford Dictionary, Dr. E. A. Cross of the

Colorado State Teachers College, Dr. C. T. Onions

of Oxford University, and Professor Krapp. Next

came a jury of 22 authors, including such well known

names as Booth Tarkington, Arnold Bennett, H. G.

Wells, Mrs. Dorothy Canfield Fisher, Winston

Churchill, Zona Gale, and Hamlin Garland, to men-

tion only a few. His jury of 30 editors included

H. L. Mencken, Dr. Frank Vizetelly editor of the

Standard Dictionary, Dr. Henry S. Canby editor of

the Saturday Review of Literature, William Allen

White editor of the Emporia Gazette, and the editors

of Scribner's, Harper's Magazine, J. B. Lippincott

Co., the Oxford University Press, the Boston Herald,

the Chicago Daily News, the Indianapolis News, the

Kansas City Star, the University of California

Press, and the Christian Science Monitor. There

was also a jury of business men, a group from the

National Council of Teachers of English, a group

from the Modern Language Association, and a group

from the Speech League. They were asked to

classify the 100 expressions selected on the basis

of whether they heard educated people using them

(1) on the literary level, in formal speech or writing,

(2) on the good colloquial level, in conversation and

letter writing, or avoiding them as (3) on the illit-

erate level. Professor Leonard also had a classifica-

tion of technical use, but this turned out of little

value and was ignored. He also asked the British

critics to indicate whether an expression was regarded

as an Americanism. Later there was a questionnaire

on punctuation sent out chiefly to editors, and an

additional questionnaire on usage of 128 more expres-

8

WRITING AND SPEAKING

sions, which was sent out only to the professional

linguists and teachers.

The statistics thus gathered have been published

since Professor Leonard's death by the National

Council of Teachers of English, and are full of

extremely interesting information if you know how

to dig it out from the tangle of "standard devia-

tions," "critical ratios," and whatnot. If seventy-

five per cent of the judges classified an expression as

good usage under either the first or second classifica-

tion Professor Leonard was willing to accept it. If

the same percentage classified it in the third category

of illiterate usage he was willing to reject it. If

the vote lay in the neighborhood of fifty-fifty he

confessed that usage was divided and it yet remained

to determine whether to accept or reject the expres-

sion; or we might say, it yet remained to determine

under what circumstances and conditions the expres-

sion might be used without criticism, or under what

circumstances it would be condemned.

The colloquial standard was recognized in the

edition of this book published in 1903, but the in-

vestigation referred to above has helped to make

the treatment of each expression more surely and defi-

nitely in conformance to the consensus of these

highest authorities, which have been studied with

utmost care and whose definite decisions have been

generally accepted.

In addition experience has etched deeply the art of

effectively "using words so as to make people do

things." There is a vital difference between imagining

what that art ought to be, and after success recording

how it actually was achieved.

The New Art of Writing and Speaking the English Language

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

If there is a subject of really universal interest and utility, it is the art of writing and speaking one's own language effectively. It is the basis of culture, as we all know; but it is infinitely more than that: it is the key to all human relationship, the medium through which alone we can make people pay any attention to us. No salesman can sell anything unless he can explain the merits of his goods in effective English, nor can a lover make love without words to express himself. Indeed, the way we talk, and write letters, largely determines our success in life, both social and business.

Language is a sort of code by which we seek to influence the minds of other people, and the most important thing about it is the effect which the words and phrases we use have upon these other people. Just how does a word strike the other person's ear? How does it make him feel? If it strikes him favorably, and makes him feel the way we should like to have him feel, we are using language successfully - we couldn't possible use it any better. The real

9

10

WRITING AND SPEAKING

authorities on correct use are not the dictionaries or the critics or school teachers but the people who listen to what we have to say, and approve our way of saying it, or question it. If we wish to appeal to educated people generally, then the usage of educated people is what we need to know. There has been in books on English a great deal of theoretical criticism of what ought to be good or bad, but in this modern age educators are agreed that above the dictionaries and the critics is the customary usage of educated people. The words, phrases, and sentences which such people like to use and like to hear are good even if they can't be explained in a logical way. Our English language is full of curious idioms that have grown up quite unconsciously, but some finer instinct of the mind recognizes the fact that these expressions are good and effective, and so educated people use them even if they are quite unable to explain them. Language is a living, growing organism, like a tree or a vine. It is always changing, and we must take it as we find it, constantly trying to understand it better.

But we must go still farther. We must face the fact that there is no absolute right or wrong. Words are good or bad according to the time and occasion on which they are used, and the person to whom they are addressed. The great thing is to know something about the words and expressions we use so that we can tell just what effect they will have on the ear and mind of the particular person to whom we speak them. If we are talking to an educated person and say "couldn't hardly" or "hadn't ought," we betray to that person that we are uneducated our-

selves—we "give ourselves away,"—and he is dis-

gusted with us and forgets the interesting and useful

things we are trying to say.

In the past we have made the mistake of supposing

that if we learn the rules of grammar and rhetoric

we shall know what is right and what is wrong. Yet

there are many who can say, "I have studied gram-

mar for years and it has done me no good." That

is probably quite true, because the studying has been

from the wrong point of view. A measuring stick

is of little value unless you have something to

measure. Language cannot be acquired by analysis,

but only tested, and grammar is an analytic and

critical science, not a constructive one. Still, it helps

us to know whether we are right or not, and so it is

one of the elements that we must make use of.

How then, shall we go about mastering the English

language?

In recent years we have learned that the study

of English is a far simpler undertaking than we

had at first thought. Though there are some 400,000

words in the language, the ordinary person probably

does not use more than 4,000 or 5,000, and does not

need to understand more than 10,000 for most prac-

tical purposes. A list of 1,000 words will contain

most of those we are likely to misspell, and if we

will check up our own faults we probably shall find

not more than 100 or 200 that trouble us,—possibly

no more than 50 or 60. All we need is a simple

system to discover what the 50 or 60, or 100 or

200 are.

Most of the rules of grammar we obey uncon-

sciously, and if we are not in any trouble about

12

WRITING AND SPEAKING

them there is little need for us to study them. On

certain points there is great danger of confusion,

as on pronouns that have two forms such as I and

me, he and him, we and us, and on the agreement

of some verbs with their subjects when we do not

know whether a subject such as each or every is

singular or plural. In all there appear to be not

more than 25 principles of grammatical usage, and

perhaps 150 special cases of customary incorrect

use which are really troublesome. If we can get a

clear understanding of these it will enable us to

correct much the larger part of our own habitual

mistakes and confusions. So also punctuation, pro-

nunciation, and the good use of ordinary words are

by no means impossibly large or difficult subjects to

master if we go about it in a rational and common-

sense way with a trustworthy guide.

We need to realize at the start, however, that

though English has now been greatly simplified, the

changing of habits is always difficult. It requires a

terrific effort. We can't go about the subject in any

half-hearted way. We must make a drive, head-on,

with all the force of our will. At the same time we

must follow the right technique.

In the matter of diction, or right choice of words,

there used to be a long list of expressions that were

taboo and must never be used. Today, since the

publication of the Oxford Dictionary, we think of

different levels of speech. The formal or literary

level in these days has become far less important than

it used to be because we like to talk in a natural and

simple way even in sermons and public addresses

instead of "orating"; the level of good colloquial

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

13

usage is perfectly suited to the informal interchange

of conversation and personal letters; on the level of

the low colloquial we find homely expressions that

are tainted with a vulgarity or offensiveness which

makes educated people dislike them; and we recog-

nize the level of slang, or what may be called new,

and experimental expressions that often are racy and

effective on certain occasions, especially between

intimate friends, but lack dignity and permanence

for serious speech and writing. This brings us back

to what different people think and feel about words

and expressions, and how we may choose the right

language to produce the effects we desire.

Taken up in this way the study of English may be

as fascinating and romantic as under the old grind

of grammar and parsing and formal rules it was

dull and hateful. We never can master any subject

till we learn to like it a little, and if the reading

of this set of books on the Art of Writing and Speak-

ing the English Language helps people to find the

study of words and their uses interesting, that

interest is likely to go through life with them and

finally make them truly educated people in the best

sense of that word.

The Trend of Modern Usage—Fit the Word to the

Occasion

It is natural that we should all wish to keep the

English language as simple as possible. The student

likes to be told definitely that this is right and that

is wrong. Teachers are irritated by numerous ex-

ceptions to the rules they lay down. But the in-

14

WRITING AND SPEAKING

evitable result of having two standards of good use,

the literary standard and the colloquial standard,

with all the gradations between, is to introduce a new

element into the art of good English to which we

have not been accustomed, namely applying the

adage "fit the word to the occasion" to grammatical

correctness as well as to rhetorical effectiveness.

The principle of relativity has entered into language

just as it has into science, and if a yard is no longer

a yard, or an atom of solid matter no longer an atom

when it may lose some of its electrons at any

moment, we must use our rules of grammar with

discretion.

While English that makes pretensions to literary

style is often highly colored, and is read quite as

much for delight in the language as for interest in

what is said, the ideal of the English of conversation

and letter writing assuredly is that of a limpid,

colorless medium like air or water—the less attention

it attracts to itself the better it is. It is merely a

means of conveying our thoughts and feelings, and

if we wish to get them into another person's mind

we need to avoid all forms that sound stiff or un-

natural—even consciously or awkwardly correct and

so a little pretentious. This is undoubtedly a more

difficult art than the old one that was taught us years

ago in school and college—and correspondingly

more flexible and effective for our purposes. A

few illustrations will help us to understand what is

meant.

The last sentence in Lincoln's Gettysburg speech

(you will find it as the concluding literary selection

in the volume "Composition") violates the rule

of grammar against mixed constructions. Let me quote it:

It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us,—that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion,—that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain,—that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom,—and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

The first “that” after the first dash appears to mean “so that,” but when we get down to the second, third, and fourth “that’s” we seem to have a construction parallel to the original infinitive “for us to be here dedicated.”

I never suspected there was anything wrong with this passage till a college professor called my attention to this “violation of a rule of grammar” (it was the late Prof. Maurice Egan of the Catholic University at Washington). Of course the easy remedy for the error would be to place a period after “the last full measure of devotion” and start a new sentence with a repetition of “It is rather for us to be here dedicated” in such form as to supply a logical introduction for all the clauses beginning with “that” which follow. But think what a horrible massacre of the lyrical movement this formal introduction of a correcting clause would produce! Is it not far simpler to do as Lincoln did—just let the hearer unconsciously and instantaneously supply the missing clause for himself? Our language is full of condensations and short-cuts. It is a rhetorical waste to express in words anything which the mind of the

16

WRITING AND SPEAKING

hearer will supply for himself. The hearer resents

the criticism of his intelligence involved in this

literal-minded repetition. The essence of successful

play writing is to make the man in the audience

collaborate with the author by drawing little infer-

ences for himself and filling in the gaps to his own

great satisfaction and delight. We hear how impor-

tant it is in writing for the public, to explain every-

thing in the utmost detail as for an eight-year-old

child; but it is equally important to avoid giving

offense by writing for the eight-year-old as if he

were only seven-year-old. Children are won by

writing and speaking to them as if they were equals,

though without wandering far beyond the limited

and simple vocabulary which they can understand,

and the same principle applies to all classes of

people.

In a racy, satirical speech one business executive

said to another who had referred a point of grammar

to the University of Chicago, "I don't know who you

consulted there—quite likely it was Coach Stagg,"

As you hear that—as you would hear it in rapid

speech—would you notice anything wrong with it?

Yet the pronoun "who" must be the object of the

verb "consulted." Would you change it to "whom"?

If you did, would you not feel you would be con-

demned for being pedantic? Is it not better to make

the error that will go unnoticed by at least ninety-

nine out of a hundred than to invite the condemna-

tion on other grounds of ninety-nine out of a

hundred? Possibly the grammarians are wrong in

their application of the rule and when the interroga-

tive "who" begins the clause, we may think of it as

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

17

a condensed form of "Who is it whom you consulted?"

The fact is, the best authorities today have abandoned the interrogative "whom" altogether.

Nearly everyone recognizes the flat adverb as an idiom of the English language in such an expression as "You'd better go slow," but the artistic sense of fifteen out of twenty-two authors preferred "Drive slowly down that hill," though twenty-two out of thirty professional linguists could see no difference.

If college presidents in public addresses pronounce such words as adviser with a full or sound instead of the usual er, or operate with a long e in the middle (op'ē rate) instead of our usual op'er ate, should their students in the classroom try to be extra-meticulous and say er'ror instead of the usual er'er?

The formality of formal addresses is one thing, and the informality of classroom talk is another. In any case, even in a formal address, the college president would not say er'ror even if he did say ad-vi'sor, any more than he would pronounce the unimportant word the with a long e. Formality of pronunciation is a touch you give only to formal words. The student who has been drilled on the long u sound in gratitude, news, and Tuesday slips up when he tries to carry his artificial rule to blue, which linguists tell us should be pronounced bloo because the long u sound is too difficult to pronounce after bl.

Such colloquial words as nice, awful, guess, fix would certainly be regarded as a blemish in a newspaper editorial (unless they were used humorously or satirically); but any other words substituted for the colloquial uses of these in children's conversation among themselves would be equally out of place and

18

WRITING AND SPEAKING

equally worthy of condemnation from the point of

view of suitability. The essence of good use is in

knowing when to use such words and when not to use

them—“fitting the word to the occasion.”

We are all familiar with the customary singular

use of such plural forms as politics, athletics, and

means. The Latin plural opera from opus, operis,

has been accepted completely as a singular, perhaps

because it came to us from the Italian with a purely

singular special meaning. Can data (the Latin plural

form of datum), which is now a thoroughly domesti-

cated English word, be ever regarded as a singular?

In our English use it is clearly a collective noun,

and the plural aspect of the word is often lost en-

tirely. If I entered your office and said, “This data

is now complete” the meaning would undoubtedly

be expressed more accurately than if I were to say

“These data are now complete,” for this latter ex-

pression implies various clearly distinguished units

which do not exist in the thought of anyone. The

plural expression evidently distorts the meaning, and

in such a case there is no doubt in the world that

sooner or later the needs of accurate expression will

prevail over an artificial philology. At the same

time no educated person would dare to stand up

before a meeting of the National Education Associa-

tion and use data as a singular. We would all simply

sidestep the matter by using the word in some posi-

tion in the sentence where its plural or singular form

would not be in question. There are some things we

need to know merely to avoid them as too learned

if not as too vulgar.

If the principal of a school came into a classroom

and told about some wonderful exploit performed by one of the boys, could you criticize the excited lad for exclaiming under his breath "That's me!" If he said priggishly "That's I," he would probably be ostracized by his fellow pupils. At the same time if he were called before the principal in his private office to account for some serious offense that he had committed, he would be well advised to choose some other form than "That was me," though probably at the same time he would equally avoid "That was I." Once more we see that we need to know what is considered right and wrong in order to avoid both. And likewise anyone who exclaimed "That was them, all right!" would probably be set down as uneducated. So far as rules of grammar are concerned, "That is me" is precisely in the same class with "That is him" or "That is them," but for some reason our language instincts make us feel that there is a great difference. Possibly "That is I" sounds too blatantly egotistical, and that is why people in conversation and on the stage find themselves unable to utter it, try as they will under the whip of teaching. But of course the other pronouns are free from that difficulty. I don't know. The unconscious working of the language instinct is difficult to analyze.

Of course we know that words in the class of "everyone," "someone," or "either" and "neither" are logically singular; but it cannot be denied that these words have a distinctly plural aspect. Shall we deny that plural aspect and refer to them exclusively at all times by singular pronouns? Only a few of Professor Leonard's 222 English experts were willing to tolerate "Everybody bought their own ticket";

20

WRITING AND SPEAKING

but the case was very different with "Everyone was

here, but they all went home early." All the educa-

tional juries would accept it in colloquial use, and

while the professional juries of authors, editors, and

business men gave majorities against it, the very

conservative authors were divided almost equally-

11 for and 12 against. Anyone can see that if the

plural noun "guest" were substituted for "they" the

grammar of the sentence would be entirely above

criticism. In the shorthand of conversation why may

not the antecedent of "they" be considered to be the

noun "guests" implied? For it is perfectly clear that

something of the sort is implied.

There is another point on which usage is distinctly

wavering, and that is the use of the possessive or the

objective case before verbal nouns (gerunds). The

British "Society for Pure English" has published a

pamphlet on the subject by the great Danish author-

ity Otto Jespersen, in which he argues that both

constructions have been recognized in English litera-

ture for two hundred years or more.

In the sentence "I saw him going down the street"

it is clear that the object of the verb "saw" is "him,"

and "going" is a participle, adjective in nature.

But in "I did not approve of his going down the

street," it is equally clear that the object of the

preposition "of" is the verbal noun "going," and this

difference of meaning is made instantly clear by the

possessive pronoun "his." No one would wish to

obscure this useful device of language by encouraging

the vulgar use of the objective pronoun in such a

situation. When we have an impersonal noun as the

subject of the gerund, as in the sentence "I recon-

mend this subject's being taken up at our next

meeting," we feel that the possessive form ought not

to be applied to such impersonal words as "subject."

In cases of that kind the simple form "subject" cer-

tainly sounds more natural than "subject's." Again,

if I say "What do you think of Helen's and my

coming to call on you this afternoon" the two pos-

sessives are so awkward that many good speakers

refuse to use them and prefer to say "What do you

think of Helen and me coming to call on you this

afternoon?"

With one more illustration we must have done with

this argument. Teachers have had such a job with

their pupils to make them divide their words into

sentences at all that they have developed a violent

prejudice against opening the door in any way what-

ever to what they call "the comma splice." Never-

theless professional writers from the earliest days of

modern punctuation have recognized that when two

clauses are closely related by contrast or otherwise

in what we may call a grammatical sense, running

them together with only a comma between is equiv-

alent to making a compound sentence with an implied

conjunction. In such cases the comma is really better

than a conjunction, because there is a meaning ex-

pressed that can be conveyed by no conjunction in

the language. The sentence "This book is valueless,

that one has more to recommend it" was approved by

all of Professor Leonard's juries except the high

school teachers, and they were against it by a

majority of only one.

In short, it is evident that the successful writer or

speaker will use even the rules of grammar with tact,

22 WRITING AND SPEAKING

and not allow himself to be made a slave of any narrow logic, which after all may be based on inadequate premises. In matters of language, a trained and cultivated instinct is nearly always a safer guide than any set rules; but the master of English can never know too much about it. The real crime is ignorance.

GRAMMAR

CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION—HOW TO STUDY GRAMMAR

35

I. THE PARTS OF SPEECH

39

II. THE SENTENCE

47

III. CASE OF NOUNS AND PRONOUNS

53

IV. THE VERB AND ITS VARIOUS FORMS

63

V. PRACTICAL PROBLEMS IN THE USE OF VERBS

71

VI. PARTICIPLES AND INFINITIVES

85

VII. OTHER PROBLEMS OF GRAMMAR

91

VIII. ENGLISH IDIOM

100

IX. CONCLUSION

109

REVIEW TEST ON CORRECT ENGLISH USAGE

111

APPENDIX—WHAT IS GOOD ENGLISH ?

117

125

KEY TO ERRORS OF GRAMMAR

(Arranged according to paragraph numbers)

INTRODUCTION

Chapter I. The Parts of Speech

Sec.

1. Nouns

2. Verbs

3. Pronouns

4. Adjectives

5. Adverbs

6. Prepositions

7. Conjunctions

8. Interjections

Chapter II. The Sentence

9. What is a sentence?

10. Compound and complex sentences

11. The principal subject and predicate—subordinate clauses—diagrams

12. Two most important laws of grammar

13. Interjections as condensed sentences

Chapter III. Cases of Nouns and Pronouns

14. Kinds of nouns

15. Subjective and objective cases

16. Predicate nominatives

17. Case of pronouns—“It is I,” “We boys are giving the party” (not “Us boys”), “Between you and me” (not “between you and I”)

27

28

GRAMMAR

18. Verbs that take predicate nominatives

19. Possessive case—ladies', its, his, hers, yours, whose (no apostrophe in pronouns); possessive of one either one's or his

20. Apposition

21. Apposition of possessives—“William the Conqueror's,” “no one else's”

22. Predicate complements diagramed

23. Some troublesome uses of pronouns:

“My brother is older than I” (not “than me”)

“I am not as tall as he” (not “as him”)

“The baby acts as I do” (not “like I do”)

24. “Whom will the paper be read by” (more strictly correct than “Who will the paper be read by,” which is less pedantic)

“I will give this book to whoever will read it first” (not “to whomever will read it”)

“Who do you expect will go with you?” (not “Whom do you expect?”)

Chapter IV. The Verb and Its Various Forms

25. Verb auxiliaries

26. Conjugation of regular verbs

27. Person and number

28. Tense

29. Changes of form in the regular verb

30. Future time indicated by shall and will

31. The perfect tenses

32. Potential mode

33. Imperative mode

34. The passive voice

35. The progressive form

36. Use of do as an auxiliary

37. Colloquial contractions “don't,” “doesn't,” “isn't,” “hasn't”

38. Conjugation of the irregular verb to be—“you

KEY TO ERRORS

were'' (not ''you was''), ''isn't'' (not ''ain't''), ''Am I?'' (not ''Aren't I?'')

39. Irregularities of to have and to do--''He hasn't'', (not ''He hain't'') and ''He doesn't'' (not ''He don't'')

40. Principal parts of chief irregular verbs

Chapter V. Practical Problems in the Use of Verbs

41. Singular and Plural--agreement of verb with subject

42. ''John and Helen'' plural, ''John or Helen'' singular

43. ''All of us'' plural, ''every one of us,'' ''each of us,'' ''not one of his friends'' singular

44. None used either as singular or plural, though usually plural

45. Collective nouns (people, government, firm, company, army, multitude) either singular or plural

46. The singular or plural form of the verb shows the intent of the writer

47. ''Peace and tranquillity rests'' (two nouns treated as singular), ''ten dollars is'' (one sum of money singular)

48. Single noun followed by others introduced by with singular or plural?

49. Copulative verb to be between a singular and a plural noun agrees with subject

50. Politics, athletics, news, mathematics, physics, etc., treated as usually singular (plural meaning possible), means either singular or plural

51. Foreign or unusual plurals--data, memoranda, strata, alumni, alumnæ, formulæ, phenomena, analyses, parentheses, sheep, deer, trout, sons-in-law, handfuls

52. Two subjects connected by or, verb agrees with nearest--''He or I am the person intended''

53. Difference between past tense and past participle

30

GRAMMAR

54. Present accepted forms—drink, drank, (have) drunk; begin, began, (have) begun, etc.

55. “I saw him” (not “I seen him”), “He did it” (not “He done it”)

56. Break, broke, broken; vulgar use of “busted”; “broke” for “bankrupt” possibly justified

57. “He came in” (not “He come in”), “The mouse ran into his hole” (not “run into his hole”), “My mother gave me something to eat” (not “she give me something to eat”)

58. “Has got” better than “has gotten”

59. Transitive and intransitive verbs—difference between sit and set, lie and lay, raise and rise

60. Difference between learn and teach, shone and shown, flown and overflowed (not “overflown”)

61. Perfect tense required with yet, already, etc.

62. Subjunctive mode used to express wishes and supposed cases contrary to fact

63. Sequence of tenses

64. Present infinitive indicates same time as principal verb

65. General truths require present tense

66. Uses of shall and will

67. “I shall be glad to see you” (not “I will be glad” )—will after editorial we

68. Should and would like shall and will

Chapter VI. Participles and Infinitives

69. Uses of participles

70. Uses of infinitives

71. Subject of infinitive in objective case

72. Predicate complements after infinitives

73. Use of the participle pictured

74. Verb action in participles must have a subject

75. “The dangling participle”

76. Tracing the subject of participles and infinitives

77. Use of the nominative absolute

KEY TO ERRORS

31

78. Participles used as nouns modified by possessive case

79. Jespersen justifies "object to Molly and me taking"

80. Granting and speaking have general implied subjects

Chapter VII. Other Problems of Grammar

81. Reference of pronouns to antecedents must be clear

82. John or Helen, everybody, somebody, etc., referred to by his (not "their")

83. Situations where everybody may be referred to by plural pronoun

84. Relative pronouns—objection to whose as possessive of which as well as who—use of that and which

85. Difference between predicate adjectives and adverbs

86. Comparison of adjectives and adverbs—"The car works well" (not "works good"), "Drive slow" or "slowly"

87. "It doesn't do any good" (not "It doesn't do no good")

88. "He ought not to do it" (not "He hadn't ought to do it"), "had better" approved

89. Good colloquial usage to end a sentence with a preposition

90. Discussion of—

"not so" rather than "not as"

"try to" rather than "try and"

"nice people," "guess" for "think," "got home," "got through," "I've got my opinion," "I've really got to go"; distinction between "further" and "farther"

91. Splitting the infinitive; taboo of "proven" for "proved," of "between three or four," of "either of four," of "laughed at each other,"

32

GRAMMAR

for "one another"; use of "may" instead of "can" in asking permission; "He only lacked" for "He lacked only"; taboo of "He does his work as well or better than I"

92. Educated people condemn—

"them boys" (very low colloquial)

"most anybody"

"raised" for "reared"

"different than" for "different from"

"these kind of people" for "this kind"

"Where am I at?" (very low colloquial)

"leave me come in" for "let me come in"

"wa'n't" for "wasn't"

"off of" for "from" or "off" without "of"

"some better" for "somewhat better"

Chapter VIII. English Idiom

93. Idioms

94. Indirect object

95. Adverbial nouns

96. Possessive case interchangeable with phrase with "of"

97. Meaning of possessives coupled by "and"

98. Phrase or clause used as subject or object of verb

99. "By killing his victim" or "By the killing of his victim," both right

100. Noun in apposition with phrase or clause

101. Object unexplained in "They were offered a pardon"

102. Use of hyphens in compounds—coalbin, apple tree, old-fashioned

103. What is antecedent of it in "It rains"?

104. Double possessive "a book of John's"—hers, mine, yours

105. Antecedent may follow a pronoun

106. Interjections—"Ah me!" (objective case), "O thou," "O ye" (subjective)

KEY TO ERRORS

33

107. Is as a relative pronoun in "as follows"?

108. Analysis of "as soon as," "such as"

109. "As regards," "as though" for "as if"

110. Defense of "more perfect," "most complete,"

etc.

Chapter IX. Conclusion

Review Test on Correct English Usage

Appendix—What is Good English?

GRAMMAR

INTRODUCTION

HOW TO STUDY GRAMMAR

The subject of grammar* originally included all that we have considered under the head of "Word Study," and also the subject of prosody, or verse making. It was defined as the art or science of writing and speaking a language correctly in every detail.

In modern usage the meaning of the word has been restricted to accuracy in the relation of words in sentence structure. One writer has defined it as "the science of the sentence." In Latin and Greek the relations of words in sentences were indicated by a system of terminations, and the study of grammar was largely a process of memorizing these terminations. At the bottom of all, however, was a logical relationship between words, which was as fixed and definite as the laws of mathematics; and an intelligent and literary use of the language required a full appreciation of this word-logic. In English the terminations have nearly all been lost, and the essential logic of sentence structure has become the main

*The word grammar is derived from the Greek gramma, a letter, and so meant minute accuracy in writing.

35

thing. In English, therefore, it has been necessary

to abandon the methods used in teaching Latin and

Greek grammar, and present the subject in a wholly

different way.

The early teaching of English grammar was merely

adapted from the Latin, and was entirely too com-

plicated and theoretical to be of any practical use.

In recent years there has been a tendency to omit

all teaching of formal grammar, but that is very

unwise. Everyone needs to understand grammar,

first because there are a few irregular forms in

English which cause much confusion; secondly be-

cause unless we understand the logical structure of

the sentence we can make nothing of punctuation,

which is closely connected with emphasis, which in

turn is a vital element in English expression.

There are two important phases of the subject,

both of which we need to understand thoroughly.

There is the logical relationship of words in the sen-

tence, which is unchanging and may fairly be re-

garded as a science. There is also the question of

meanings and values of words, which are determined

by usage and which are likely to change more or less

as time goes by. On some points confusion is likely,

and we need to master thoroughly the underlying

principles that will help us to clear up that con-

fusion. The mere correction of errors without this

understanding of principles will help us little. We

should therefore begin at the foundation and build

up that knowledge of the few principles of grammar

which is going to help us in a practical way, at the

same time passing over all those points which we

will get right naturally and instinctively because

HOW TO STUDY GRAMMAR 37

there is inherent in them little possibility of con-fusion. That small amount of practical grammar needs to be mastered very thoroughly. It will not only help us to clear up positive errors into which we are liable to fall, but also give us a better under-standing of the logical structure of the sentence, which we need for successful use of the English language.

It is really remarkable to what an extent grammar may be simplified for ordinary use. Words may have seven different logical relationships to ideas and to each other as used in a sentence, which are known as the parts of speech (the logical relation-ships of the noun and of the pronoun being regarded as the same). These principal relationships have important modifications in the case of nouns and pronouns, and verbs. But here in a nutshell we have practically the whole science of grammar. The few forms to indicate cases of nouns, and number and person of verbs we do not need to learn because we know them already, and all we require is to be able to distinguish those cases in which confusion is pos-sible. It is of little use to us to be able to name all the combinations of words in English which are merely a part of theoretical grammar. We also have little use for the names of groups of words, of kinds of sentences, etc. The only thing really required is an understanding of the fundamental logical laws according to which words must be united if they are to form perfect sentences. If we know twenty-five principles in grammar—the twenty-five most essen-tial—we may write with reasonable accuracy without knowing a thousand and one minor points such as

38

GRAMMAR

may be found in Gould Brown's Grammar of Grammars.*

But this simplification of grammar does not mean quite so much as it seems to. We must admit that

it is easier to learn the thousand and one useless things than the twenty-five essentials. Indeed, if we

understood the seven fundamental relationships denominated the parts of speech we should probably

be excellent grammarians; but few of us ever do fully master even those seven fundamentals of word-

logic.† We find it very easy to fall into the mechanical habit of saying but is a conjunction, by

is a preposition, etc.; so of course we are puzzled when but is a preposition or an adjective or a noun

or a verb, and our system fails us when we come across by used as an adverb or the like. The truth

is that the "parts of speech" are not "classes of words," as we have been told, but "classes of logical

relationships in sentences," and nothing on earth will enable us to tell what part of speech any given word

• Prof. W. W. Charters in an investigation published by the U. S. Bureau of Education lists twenty-five principles

made by school children. They will be found set forth in the following pages.

† "All language is imperfectly logical," remarks a friendly critic on reading this declaration of principles. That is

quite true. As far as the values of words are concerned, language is a purely natural growth. Not only does the

same word have many different meanings, but its value in relation to other words is constantly shifting without any

logical reason for doing so. These shifting word values we must learn by reading good books and talking with

cultivated people. This natural side of language is illustrated by our idioms. But once we have determined our

word values, we must unite our words in sentences for the expression of our thought according to exactly the same

laws which govern our thinking, that is, the laws of logical sequence.

is except as we find it in a sentence, or conveying

an idea of some kind. The idea which the word con-

veys is the sole determining factor. In this book we

undertake to separate the logical relationship of

words in sentences from the changing meanings and

values of those words, to which are due the so-called

"illogical" phases of grammar.

One class of words does convey ideas without

assistance, and that is the "name" class—"nouns."

Beginning with this class, let us examine the various

relationships which other words may have to it and

to each other until we have arrived at the complete

and perfect sentence,—our unit in grammar, just as

the word is our unit in spelling. This part of our

work is fully defined by the term "sentence-study."

CHAPTER I

THE PARTS OF SPEECH

1. Nouns. In the paragraph which follows let

us pick out the words that stand for some definite

object we can think of :

"The first place that I can well remember was a

large, pleasant meadow, with a pond of clear water

in it. Some shady trees leaned over it, and rushes

and water-lilies grew at the deep end. Over the

hedge on one side we looked into a plowed field, and

on the other we looked over a gate at our master's

house, which stood by the roadside. At the top of

the meadow was a grove of fir trees, and at the

bottom a running brook overhung by a steep bank." *

• This is the opening paragraph of "Black Beauty," the

imaginary story of a horse.

40

GRAMMAR

Words that stand for definite objects here are

meadow, pond, water, trees; also place, end, top,

etc. Say nothing but the word pond, for instance,

and you have in your mind a clear picture of some-

thing real.

In the sentences in this passage there are also

many other kinds of words, such as the, remember,

with, pleasant, over. But none of these words

means anything definite except in connection with

other words. Pond calls up the idea of a pond,

without any other words being needed, but remember

means nothing unless there is someone who remem-

bers, and something that is remembered. So over

and the mean nothing except in connection with other

words. Even pleasant must be connected with

some other word in order to have its full mean-

ing, as "a pleasant day," "a pleasant thought," or

the like.

By careful consideration you will see that every

word depends on some other word, until you come

back to the noun, or name-word, which is complete

in itself. Each word in a complete sentence has a

fixed logical relationship of its own. The study of

these logical relationships is the basis of grammar.

The starting-point is the noun, which represents a

complete idea in itself, and which (along with the

other words that may accompany it) gives us the

"subject" (of a sentence). A sentence is a complete

chain of words, representing a complete thought.

2. Verbs. A noun, as we have said, means some-

thing apart from any other word connected with it.

But when we say boy, man, tree, John we call up

merely a picture. If we wish to speak of the boy

THE PARTS OF SPEECH

41

as running, the man as walking, the tree as growing,

John as speaking, we must use a verb. When we say

"The boy runs," "The man walks," "The tree grows,"

"John speaks," we make a statement, we assert some-

thing to be true. The word that asserts, such as

runs, walks, or speaks, is called a verb. A verb also

expresses a command, as when we say "Run, John,"

or it asks a question, as when we say "Does John

run?"

As we shall see later, a verb often comprises sev-

eral separate words, as might have done, shall have

been done, can be done, is being done, etc. The verb

(with all the words connected with it) is called the

"predicate" of the sentence. Each predicate with

its subject constitutes a "clause." Several clauses

may be joined by conjunctions to a main clause to

form a complete sentence.

Participles are forms of the verb that may be used

as adjectives or as nouns. The present participle

ends in ing, as rising, living, etc. The past participle

regularly ends in ed, as walked, called, etc., though

there are various irregular forms such as gone,

broken, got, written, etc.

In participles and in certain other forms of the

verb called infinitives (to walk, to have) the assertive

quality of the verb is imperfect, but it still exists.

3. Pronouns. There are a number of small words

that take the place of nouns, called pronouns (Latin

"for nouns"). Thus when I speak of myself I do

not call myself by name and say "John runs"; I say

"I run." If we have once mentioned John's name,

so that we know to whom he refers, we say "He

walks." And if we have been talking about the

42

GRAMMAR

meadow, instead of repeating the word we say "It is

full of water." These words, called pronouns, have

just the same relationships in sentences as nouns.

The chief difficulty in the use of them comes in

making it clear to exactly what noun each pronoun

refers. The noun to which a pronoun refers is called

its antecedent, and a pronoun should not be far

from the noun for which it stands. Besides the per-

sonal pronouns mentioned above there are more

general ones such as one, some, this, these, and the

relative pronouns who, which, what, which also serve

as subordinate conjunctions.

4. Adjectives. Then there are words which are

usually placed before nouns to describe them. When

we say, "A large pleasant meadow," a, large, and

pleasant, are descriptive of the noun meadow. They

are called adjectives. When we say, "The boy is

good," good is an adjective also, though placed

after the verb, because it expresses a quality of the

noun boy. First, last, white, blue, fair, sweet, kind,

lovely, hard, bitter, sour, etc. are all words used to

describe nouns,—that is, adjectives, though under

some circumstances they may also be other parts of

speech.

5. Adverbs. When we say, "The sun shines

brightly," "The man strikes hard," "I am heartily

pleased to see you," etc., brightly modifies shines,

hard modifies strikes, heartily modifies pleased, tell-

ing how the sun shines, how the man strikes, how

much I am pleased to see you. These words are

called adverbs. When we say, "I am here," "Do you

love me now?" "Speak thus," the words here, now,

and thus, expressing place, time, and manner, are

also adverbs. Again when we say, "He speaks very plainly," "He draws extremely badly," not only plainly and badly are adverbs modifying verbs, but very and extremely are also adverbs, though they modify other adverbs. We also say, "He is a very good boy," "The day is tediously long," "The rose has an exquisitely sweet odor," and in these sentences very, tediously, and exquisitely are adverbs modifying adjectives.

Adverbs are words which modify verbs, adjectives, or other adverbs.

(Note.—There are many words placed in the predicate near the verb which are not adverbs. We shall find later that these may be "predicate adjectives," "predicate nouns," and nouns which are objects of the verbs.)

6. Prepositions. There are also various small words which introduce nouns. Thus we have such phrases as "from the gate," "above the water," "into the sea," "by means of love," etc. The words from, above, into, by, of, used to introduce the nouns which follow them and connect them to other nouns and to verbs, etc., are called prepositions. A preposition with its noun is called a phrase. A phrase that modifies a noun just as an adjective does, is called an adjective phrase, and a phrase that modifies a verb just like an adverb, is called an adverbial phrase.

A prepositional phrase (there are other kinds of phrases) may have any or all the relationships which an adjective or an adverb may have.

Such phrases as "to go," "to be," "to kill," etc., in which a verb follows the preposition to, are called the "infinitive mode of the verb." The to is often

omitted or implied. It is not really a preposition,

but is called "the sign of the infinitive."

7. Conjunctions. A word that joins together two

words, two phrases, or two clauses is called a con-

junction. Words and phrases thus joined together

are always in the same construction and of equal

value, but this is not always the case with clauses.

When we have to join clauses together we discover

that there are two kinds of conjunctions, which are

used for indicating two different relationships be-

tween clauses. In joining the equal clauses of a

compound sentence (see page 49) we employ what

are called co-ordinate conjunctions: and, or (nor),

but. In joining dependent clauses (see pages 49-51)

to the rest of the sentence we employ what are called

subordinate conjunctions. A subordinate conjunc-

tion introduces a clause to the rest of the sentence

in much the same way that a preposition introduces

a noun or pronoun to some other word in the sen-

tence. The commonest of these is that (which is also

used as a relative pronoun). It is used as a con-

junction after said and similar words in such sen-

tences as "He said that he would do the work" or

"He was told that he must do it." In such cases it

is frequently merely implied, as in "He said he

would do the work." (We see it used as a relative

pronoun in "He gave me the book that you lent him,"

in which that means the same as book and stands for

it.) Other common subordinate conjunctions are—

if, because, unless, whether, why, as, though. The

word for is sometimes considered a co-ordinate con-

junction, but it probably belongs in the subordinate

list. An important group of conjunctions is made

up of those which have adverbial value and might be called relative adverbs, though there is no special

practical reason for classifying them otherwise than as subordinate conjunctions. They include—when,

where, how, until, while, before, since, after. Of course the relative pronouns who, which, what, that,

perform the function of subordinate conjunctions as well as pronouns, but it is more convenient to call

them pronouns.

8. Interjections. The only other kind of word which we shall find is the interjection. Examples:

Oh! ah! alas! The interjection stands alone, without direct relationship to other words. We may call it

a "sentence word" because it is equivalent to an entire sentence.

We now have a rough classification of the different kinds of relationships which a word may have in a

sentence. These relationships are called "the parts of speech." A word will sometimes have one rela-

tionship, and sometimes another. Thus, that may be a pronoun, a conjunction, an adjective; but may be

a preposition as well as a conjunction; and any word when spoken of as an object is a noun.

Exercise 1

Write out the following first paragraph of the King of the Golden River, placing the words in a column one

below the other, and opposite each word indicate its part of speech. We will count a and the as adjectives,

and will treat each word that goes to make up a verb phrase as a separate verb. The notes indicate a few

pairs of words that may be counted in the score as

single words. There is a total of 230 parts of speech,

of which 48 are nouns, 22 pronouns, 29 verbs, 54 adjec-

tives, 21 adverbs, 32 prepositions, and 24 conjunctions.

In a secluded and mountainous part of Syria there

was, in old time, a valley of the most surprising and

luxuriant fertility. It was surrounded on all sides

by steep and rocky mountains, rising

into peaks

which were always covered with snow, and from

which a number of torrents descended in constant

cataracts. One

of these fell westward over the

face of a crag so high

that,

when the sun had set

to everything else

and all below

was darkness, his

beams still shone full

upon this waterfall, so that

it looked like a shower of gold. It was, therefore,

called by the people of the neighborhood the Golden

River.

It was strange that none of these streams

fell into the valley itself.

They all

descended on

the other side of the mountains and wound away

through broad plains and by populous cities. But

the clouds were drawn so constantly to the snowy

hills, and rested so softly in the circular hollow,

that in time of drought and heat, when all the coun-

try round was burnt up, there was still rain in the

little valley; and its crops were so heavy, and its

hay so high, and its apples so red, and its grapes

so blue, and its wine so rich, and its honey so sweet,

that it was a marvel to everyone who beheld it, and

was commonly called the Treasure Valley.

1. There is an anticipative adverb, which fills the

place of the subject of the verb was so that this subject

(valley) may be placed after the verb. 2. Rising is a

participle which may be classified as an adjective modi-

fying mountains. 3. We may call one a pronoun taking

the place of cataract. 4. High is an adjective modify-

ing crag, though it follows its noun. 5. That as a

subordinate conjunction introduces the clause "his

beams still shone" some distance ahead through the

adverb so before high. 6. Regard else as an adjective

though it follows its noun everything. 7. All is a noun

and below may be called an adjective, though the full

form would be "all which is below," in which below

appears as an adverb, which is its usual construction.

8. We may regard full as a predicate adjective. 9. So

that is a compound conjunction and may be counted as

one word. 10. Therefore is an adverb modifying the

verb was called. 11. Golden River may be treated as a

single compound noun. 12. Itself is an intensive pro-

noun. 13. Here all is an adjective modifying they.

14. But connects the entire sentence that follows to the

ideas in what precedes. 15. We will call Treasure Val-

ley, like Golden River, a single noun.

CHAPTER II

THE SENTENCE

9. A sentence is a collection of words so chosen

and arranged as to express a thought completely.

Nouns may express ideas, but they do not represent

a thought. The expression of a thought absolutely

requires a verb united to a noun (or pronoun). The

noun constitutes the simple subject, and the verb the

simple predicate of the sentence. Any collection of

words which does not contain both a subject and a

predicate, expressed or implied, does not constitute

a sentence or represent a thought. (Fragmentary

phrases, if any special thought is attached to them,

48

GRAMMAR

must be supposed to imply the lacking members.)

The simple subject and the simple predicate may

have modifiers, and together with these modifiers

they constitute the complete subject and the complete

predicate.

The following example will illustrate the funda-

mental and necessary division of every sentence into

subject and predicate.

The Subject

(noun)

The Predicate

(verb)

The country church

is a square old building of

wood.

It

stands upon a hill with a

little churchyard in its

rear where

one or two sickly trees

keep watch and ward over

the vagrant sheep

that

graze among the graves.

Bramble bushes

seem to thrive on the

bodies below,

and

there is

no flower

in the yard, save a

few goldenrods

which

flaunt their gaudy, in-

odorous color under

the lee of the north-

ern wall.

10. Our first observation upon this is that each

complete sentence seems to contain more than one

subject and predicate. For instance, in the second

sentence we have three subjects and three predicates,

and also three in the next and last. We also ob-

serve, however, that each subject has its own definite

predicate, and that the succeeding sets of subjects

and predicates are connected with each other by

conjunctions. The unit containing a subject and

predicate we call a clause.

When the subjects and predicates are of equal

importance, and are connected by conjunctions

capable of connecting equals, we have a compound

sentence; when one subject and predicate is subordi-

nate to another, and is connected to it by a conjunc-

tion used to show subordinate relationship, we have

a complex sentence.

11. In every sentence we must have a principal

subject and a principal predicate to which all other

words must be related.

In analyzing any sentence, our first task should be

to find the principal subject and the principal predi-

cate, and then trace out the chain of relationships of

every other word to these. It is not difficult to make

a picture, or diagram,* of these relationships, which

will present the whole matter to the eye at a glance.

We begin by drawing a straight line and dividing it

distinctly in the middle, and then placing the subject

noun or pronoun on the left and the predicate verb

on the right, thus:

Boys || run

• The diagram is liable to abuse, just as parsing is, but it

helps us to comprehend that every word has a fixed relation-

ship in the sentence. For a full exposition of the diagram

see Reed and Kellogg's "Higher Lessons in English."

50

GRAMMAR

If we have any adjectives or adverbs, we may place them on slanting lines attached to the lines on which stand the words they modify, thus:

boy || runs

In this sentence a and healthy are adjectives modifying boy, the first very is an adverb modifying the adjective healthy, swiftly is an adverb modifying runs, and the second very an adverb modifying swiftly.

Phrases introduced by prepositions may be treated as follows:

We || lived

Subordinate clauses introduced by relative adverbs (or adverbial conjunctions) may be diagramed as follows:

THE SENTENCE

It || does . . matter

not where

we || go

But subordinate clauses introduced by relative pronouns which have a necessary office in the subordinate clause must be connected to the main clause by a blank or dotted line, thus:

We || care

not

it || applies

to whom

He || must pay

who || buys

12. There are many other relationships besides those we have pictured; but these will illustrate the two most important laws in grammar, which may be stated as follows:

Law I. No collection of words expresses thought, and no sentence exists, unless a noun or pronoun (expressed or implied) unites with a verb (expressed or implied) to form a subject and a predicate.

52

GRAMMAR

Law II. Every word in a sentence must have a clear relationship, directly or through other words, to the principal simple subject or the principal simple predicate, that is, to the main noun or pronoun, or to the main verb.

13. The only apparent exception to the last statement is the interjection, which is a word that is as nearly independent as a word can be. Close logical analysis, however, will show, either that the interjection is in some way related to an adjoining sentence without which it would be devoid of meaning or significance; or it is a condensed sentence * in itself, distinctly implying a subject or a predicate or both. For instance, if we go about shouting "Fire! Fire! Fire!" we are simply condensing into a word some such full sentence as "There is a fire," or "Come and see the fire," or "Come and put out the fire." Implied words are frequent, and must always be supplied if we would understand grammatical relationships. Such interjections as "alas!" "oh!" "ah!" as a usual thing have no special meaning except in connection with some sentence, as in "Oh, I don't know." Grammarians have never found a name for this relationship, and in picturing such a sentence we set the interjection apart; but the relationship evidently exists, and we may remark in passing that it would have been just as well if the grammarians had failed to find names for some other relationships no more distinct than this.

• Interjectory noises, such as grunts, squeals, etc., are the most primitive methods of expression. Animals usually have no other kind of speech (if speech this may be called).

NOUNS AND PRONOUNS

53

Exercise 2

Draw a line down the center of a sheet of paper and

write out the first paragraph of the King of the Golden

River, as found in Exercise 1, placing all words that

belong to complete subjects on the lefthand side and

all words belonging to complete predicates on the right-

hand side of the line, with conjunctions which unite

clauses written in the middle across the line.

CHAPTER III

CASES OF NOUNS AND PRONOUNS

14. Nouns, we have learned, are the names of

things. An idea, a thought, an act may also have

a name, which is a noun (called abstract). Several

forms of the verb and verbal phrases are also used

as nouns, as in "Doing is better than waiting," "To

be cautious is a necessity in business," and "Growing

old should not make a man sour."

15. We have seen nouns as subjects of verbs, the

starting-points of sentences. They may also be

objects of verbs or prepositions. A preposition

must have a noun as object, since the sole office of

prepositions is to introduce nouns, or pronouns.

Unless a word has such an object, it is not a prepo-

sition. Active verbs also take a noun as object when

they are of such a nature that they express action

which passes over to an object. Thus when we say

"He killed a man," the word man is an object noun,

since the action of the subject as expressed in the

verb passes over and takes effect on the object man.

Subject nouns are said to be in the subjective or

54

GRAMMAR

nominative case, and object nouns are said to be in

the objective case.

16. Not all nouns that follow verbs are in the

objective case. All nouns following the verb to be

or its parts (am, is, are, was, were, would be, have

been, might be) are in the subjective or nominative

case, and are called predicate nominatives, because

the verb to be merely asserts that the subject is the

same as the noun in the predicate. Thus in “John

is a man,” man is precisely the same as the subject

and the verb is merely asserts this sameness. So also

in the sentence “John will become a man,” man and

John are equivalent, or are in the process of becom-

ing so. There is no action which passes over to an

object. Of course in the sentence, “He killed him-

self,” he and himself are the same, but in this case

the man is the object of his own act.

17. Case of Pronouns. Nouns in English have

the same form, whether they are in the subjective

or in the objective case. But pronouns, the words

which stand for nouns and are used so very fre-

quently, have in many instances different forms for

the subjective and objective cases, as follows:

Subjective Objective

I me

we us

he him

she her

they them

who whom

Therefore we should say “It is I,” not “It is me,”

“It is he, she, they, or we,” not “It is him, her, them,

NOUNS AND PRONOUNS

55

or us," as we often hear people say.* Also, remem-

bering that the object of a preposition is always in

the objective case, we will say "between you and

me," not "between you and I," "It can be done by

you and me," not "It can be done by you and I,"

We would not say "between I and the fence-post,"

nor "It is being done by I and somebody else."

These sound absurd. It is quite as absurd to say

"between you or the fence-post and I." And of

course the subjective case should be used in such a

sentence as "We boys are giving this party" (not

"us boys"), since "we boys" is subject of the verb

"are giving."

18. The verbs followed by the nominative case

are very few, but they are so common that they occur

as often, probably, as all other verbs put together.

They are chiefly to be (is, am, was, were, would be,

have been, etc.), to become, to appear, and to seem.

There is no action expressed by these verbs, only a

state or condition of existence.

19. Nouns and pronouns also have a third case,

the possessive, indicated in nouns by the apostrophe

and s or the apostrophe alone. The possessive case

has precisely the logical relation in a sentence that

an adjective has, that is, it is a direct modifier of

a noun, and is used in no other way, though often

the noun it modifies is implied. Like a noun, how-

ever, it is modified by adjectives, not by adverbs.

The case offers no special difficulty. It is usually

• Since "It is I" sounds pedantic, most educated people

have a tendency to say "It is me," as the French say

C'est moi (rather than C'est je). If "It is me" is on the

way to becoming good usage, the same cannot be said of

"It is him," "It is her," etc.

56

GRAMMAR

interchangeable with a prepositional phrase contain-

ing of.

Note. Nouns in the singular regularly form the

possessive case by adding an apostrophe and s, as

man's, John's, Dickens's. Some writers omit the s

when the singular form itself ends with s or an

equivalent sound, and write Dickens', conscience',

etc.; but the best usage is always to write the s after

the apostrophe even if it cannot be pronounced.

Plural nouns ending in s take merely the apostrophe

to indicate the possessive case, as cows', hens', ladies'

(of course "ladie's" would be absurd), etc. If, how-

ever, the plural form does not end in s the apostrophe

must be followed by s, as in men's, children's, etc.

Pronouns never take an apostrophe to indicate the

possessive case. We write its, his, yours, hers, etc.

It's is a contraction for it is and must not be confused

with the possessive case of it. Likewise whose is the

possessive case of who and who's is a contraction of

who is. The possessive of one is either one's or his.

It may be noted that modern usage is restricting

the possessive case as far as possible to persons, or

at any rate to animals, or inanimate objects which

have been personified. We may say "John's bag"

"Alexander's empire," "the pupil's work." We would

not say "the pig-pen's side," "the rock's opening"

but "the side of the pig-pen," "the opening of (or

in) the rock," etc. If we say "Chicago's beauty" we

seem to personify the city; and perhaps something

of the same sort may be discerned in "the city's

progress." "The day's work," "an hour's ride," "for

conscience' sake," "art for art's sake" are old forms

that have survived so far.

NOUNS AND PRONOUNS

20. Apposition. When one noun follows another as an alternative name for the same thing, or to explain the preceding noun, it is said to be in apposition with the noun it explains; and as nouns which are in every way equivalent should agree in case, it is an established rule that a noun in apposition with another noun agrees in case with that other noun; and the same rule applies to pronouns, since they take the place of nouns. Thus: “William, conqueror of England, became king.” Conqueror is equivalent to William and is added by way of explanation.

21. The application of this rule to the possessive case is very awkward, however, and is always to be avoided. In some cases in which the explanatory noun is absolutely required, the possessive sign is omitted from one or the other of the pair; and in some cases the whole phrase is treated as a compound word and the sign of the possessive put at the end of the whole. The same rule applies when the possessive has modifiers of any other kind. Thus we may say, “I called at Smith the bookseller's.” The latter is the form to be preferred in all such expressions as “William the Conqueror's,” “The captain of the guard's house,” etc. We even write “no one else's,” which sounds more natural than “no one's else.”

22. Predicate Complements. We have seen that a verb may be followed by an object noun or by a “predicate nominative”—a noun in the nominative or subjective case which means the same as the subject of the verb. The verb may also assert a quality or characteristic of the subject by the use of an adjective in the predicate which really qualifies the

58

GRAMMAR

subject, as when we say "He is good" we assert the

quality of goodness as belonging to the subject he.

These predicate complements, as they are called,

may be pictured as follows:

A noun as the direct object of a verb, as in "He

killed the man"—

A noun as predicative nominative, as in "His

name was John"—

An adjective expressing a quality asserted of the

subject, as in "That story is excellent"—

Sameness may be asserted between two objects

of an active verb, as in "We named him John"

which may be pictured thus:

(In this case John is placed before him, though

him is more closely related to the verb, in order that

NOUNS AND PRONOUNS 59

the slanting line before John may clearly indicate that the word is to be connected with him. If John followed him, preceded by a slanting line, it might seem to refer back to the subject, we.)

In the same way an active verb may assert a quality of its object, as in "The medicine will make you sick," which may be diagramed as follows:

medicine || will make / sick | you

The

These secondary objects and qualifiers are spoken of as objective nouns and adjectives, or objective complements.

23. Some Troublesome Uses of Pronouns. Mastery of the use of the subjective and objective cases of pronouns would probably eliminate as much as a third of the errors of grammar commonly made. It is therefore important that this subject should be thoroughly understood. The two following situations may be regarded as a test of knowledge of the principles, since they are the most difficult. Reduce them to an everyday habit of thought.

A preposition such as like governs the objective case, but conjunctions such as as and than introduce clauses, of which the verb is frequently or usually implied. For example: "My brother is older than I (am)," "Harry and I are the same age but I am not as tall as he (is)," "The baby looks like me" (but not "acts like I do," for "acts as I do," since like ought not to be used as a conjunction). Obviously the objective case cannot be used in these sen-

tences after as and than, but rather the pronoun

forms that will be the subjects of the implied verbs.*

24. Still more difficult is the correct use of who

and whom. In the sentence "Whom will the paper

be read by," the objective case whom is required as

the object of the preposition by, which comes at the

end of the sentence. In the sentence "I will give

this book to whoever will read it first" it would seem

at first sight that the preposition to should be fol-

lowed by the objective case whomever, but in reality

whoever is the subject of the verb will read, and the

real object of the preposition to is him implied—"I

will give it to (him) whoever will read it first."

This is a situation where even good writers fre-

quently make mistakes. In "Whom do you expect to

meet?" whom is the object of meet, but in "Who do

you expect will go with you?" who is the subject of

the verb will go.

In conversation the use of whom at the beginning

of a sentence sounds pedantic and the best educated

people today avoid it. Since the objective case is not

accounted for until the end of the sentence, and

the speaker and listener must both hold their minds

in suspense until the sentence is ended, use of the

correct form may perhaps be a violation of a psycho-

logical principle that is more important and super-

sedes the grammatical principle. If we said appar-

ently incorrectly but quite naturally "Who will the

paper be read by?" we might think of it as a

• Sometimes the noun or pronoun after as or than is the

object rather than the subject of an implied verb, and then

of course it must be in the objective case. Example: "They

loved him more than me;" "It was better expressed by

George than him" (i.e., "than by him").

NOUNS AND PRONOUNS

61

condensed form for "Who is it by whom the paper will be read?" English is full of condensed forms,

and usually our unconscious instincts, if well trained to begin with, are our safest guides. At any rate it is

agreed that we should avoid in some way the awk-

ward use of whom at the beginning of a question.

At the same time this principle needs to be

thoroughly understood or we shall fall into such

confusions as "I wish you would tell me whom you

expect will be there," in which whom as the subject

of the verb will be should of course be changed to

who, though if we said "I wish you would tell me

whom you expect to be there" we should be correct,

since whom in that sentence is required as the sub-

ject of the infinitive to be, which (not being a com-

plete verb) cannot take the subjective case.

Exercise 3

Write the words of the following second paragraph

of the King of the Golden River in a column on a sheet

of paper, and opposite each word indicate the part of

speech, and also the case of nouns and pronouns, num-

bering each separately. Such pairs of words as in

Exercise 1 were counted as single words will be counted

the same here, and in addition we will treat the sign

of the infinitive to as part of the verb (to keep, for

example, as one part of speech). In all there are 258

parts of speech, of which 51 are nouns, 39 are pro-

nouns, 47 are verbs, 46 are adjectives, 23 are adverbs,

28 are prepositions, and 24 are conjunctions. Nouns

and pronouns in the subjective case are, in the order

in which they come, as follows: 1. whole 2. Schwartz

3. Hans 4. brothers 5. men 6. which 7. you 8. they

4. They 10. farmers 11. they 12. they 13. They 14. they

15. they 16. they 17. which 18. they 19. they 20. It

16. they 22. they 23. They 24. it 25. they 26. it 27. they

17. they 29. they 30. they. Those in the objective case

are: 1. valley 2. brothers 3. Schwartz 4. Hans 5. Gluck

6. eyebrows 7. eyes 8. them 9. you 10 farming 11. Treasure Valley 12. everything 13. that 14. eating 15. black-

birds 16. fruit 17. hedgehogs 18. cows 19. crickets 20, eating 21. crumbs 22. kitchen 23. cicadas 24. summer

25. lime trees 26. servants 27. wages 28. them 29. them 30. doors 31. paying 32. them 33. farm 34. system 35. farming 36. corn 37. them 38. it 39. value 40. heaps

26. gold 42. floors 43. penny 44. crust 45. charity 46. mass 47. paying 48. tithes 49. word 50. temper 51. those

27. whom 53. dealings 54. nickname 55. Black Brothers. Those in the possessive case are: 1. its 2. their 3. their

28. its 5. their

The whole of this little valley belonged to three brothers called Schwartz,1 Hans, and Gluck. Schwartz and Hans, the two elder brothers, were very ugly men, with overhanging eyebrows and small dull eyes, which were always half shut 2 so that you couldn’t see into them and always fancied they saw very far into you. They lived by farming the Treasure Valley, and very good farmers 3 they were. They killed everything that did not pay for its eating. They shot the blackbirds, because they pecked the fruit; and killed the hedgehogs, lest they should suck the cows; they poisoned the crickets for eating the crumbs in the kitchen; and smothered the cicadas, which used to sing all summer in the lime trees.4 They worked their servants without any wages till they would not work any more, and then quarrelled with them, and turned them out of doors without paying them. It would have been very odd if, with such

THE VERB AND ITS FORMS

63

a farm and such a system of farming, they hadn't got very rich; and very rich they did get. They generally contrived to keep their corn by them till it was very dear, and then sell it for twice its value; they had heaps of gold lying about on their floors, yet it was never known that they had given a penny or a crust in charity; they never went to mass; they grumbled perpetually at paying tithes, and were, in a word, of so cruel and grinding a temper as to receive from all those with whom they had any dealings the nickname of the "Black Brothers."

1. These names are predicate nouns after called and mean the same as brothers, so of course they are in the same case as brothers. 2. Shut is here an adjective rather than part of the verb. 3. Farmers is a predicate complement meaning the same as they, though it precedes its verb were. 4. We may count lime trees as one noun though it consists of two words. 5. Rich is a predicate adjective modifying they and belongs after did get, though transposed to the beginning of the sentence for rhetorical emphasis. 6. We will call twice an adjective modifying value. 7. Yet may here be regarded as a conjunction. 8. We will call as a conjunction introducing an infinitive instead of a full clause.

CHAPTER IV

THE VERB AND ITS VARIOUS FORMS

25. The verb offers far more complications than any other part of speech. In the first place it often consists of more than one word. There are a number of verbs known as auxiliaries, most of which are also

64

GRAMMAR

used independently, and the combination of these with the principal verbs forms verb phrases such as have done, is being written, etc. It is not the easiest task in the world to identify the verb exactly in any given sentence.

26. The so-called conjugation of the verb, after the model of the Latin in which the personal pronouns were indicated by endings, will help us to get a picture of the development of the verb from its simplest forms to its more complex. The following is the conjugation of the present and past tenses of the indicative mode of the regular verb walk:

Present Tense

Singular Number

Plural Number

I walk (first person speaking)

We walk

You walk (second person spoken to)

You walk

He walks (third person spoken of)

They walk

Past Tense

I walked

We walked

You walked

You walked

He walked

They walked

27. First we notice the three persons—the person speaking (I, we), the person spoken to (you, or in the old form thou), and the person or thing spoken of (he, she, it in the singular, they in the plural, or any nouns or names of which the pronouns. take the place). Number indicates whether there is one or more than one—singular or plural.

28. Tense means time, and the present tense shows

THE VERB AND ITS FORMS

65

the verb indicating action going on at the time of the statement, while the past tense indicates action that took place at any time in the past.

29. In Latin there were different forms for all these, but in English we notice only two changes of form-the s in the third person singular of the present tense (walks), and the ed for all forms of the past tense. In regular verbs the past participle is the same form as the past tense (ending in ed), and the present participle ends in ing (walking). These are all the variations of form in the regular verbs in English, though in the irregular verbs there are other variations.

30. Future time is indicated by the auxiliary shall used regularly with the first person and will used regularly with the second and third persons. The future tense is conjugated as follows:

I shall walk

You will walk

He will walk

We shall walk

You will walk

They will walk

This is the regular combination. To express certain shades of meaning and emphasis, however, will is used with the first person and shall with the other persons.

31. The perfect tenses indicate action that continues up to a fixed time. This fixed time is usually indicated by some other word in the sentence, as in case of the present perfect by already, yet, so far:

I have talked to him already.

In the past perfect or pluperfect tense it would be indicated by other words, as-

66

GRAMMAR

I had talked to him before I saw you.

In the future perfect tense there is also the same fixing of a time, as—

I shall have talked to him before I see you again.

These complete the forms of the indicative mode, which is used in unconditional statements.

32. The potential mode is used in conditional statements, and is indicated by the auxiliaries can (past form could), should, would (which appear to be past forms of shall and will but really have a different kind of meaning). In such a sentence as “Would you have done it if I had requested it?” the subordinate conjunction if introducing the subordinate clause shows the conditional character and requires the potential form would in the main clause. May, might, and must are similar auxiliaries.

33. The imperative mode is used to express commands. As these are always addressed to the second person (spoken to), the subject of the imperative verb is not expressed, and we say “Walk away from here,” “Speak to my father about it,” “Go home at once,” in which the subject you is always implied. A kind of imperative with other persons is expressed with the aid of the auxiliary let, as in “Let him speak to his father,” “Let us see what we can do.” In full this is “(You) let us (to) see.”

The subjunctive mode has gone almost entirely out of use in English, and only one or two forms of irregular verbs survive, which we shall refer to later (see Sec. 62).

34. The so-called passive voice is formed by use of the irregular verb to be, as in “I am told,” “He was killed,” “He has been killed,” in which the action

comes back on the subject itself instead of taking effect on some different object, as in "We accidently killed that man," which in the passive form would be "That man was accidentally killed."

35. The progressive form of the verb is made by combination of the verb to be with the present participle in ing, as in "We are going to town," "They were coming home late at night," and expresses continuing action.

36. The auxiliary to do is regularly used in asking questions, as "Do you wish cream in your coffee?" and in negative sentences, as "I do not care for cream in my coffee." It is also used for emphasis, as in "I do wish you to come."

37. The colloquial contractions don't, doesn't, isn't, aren't, hasn't (of course not "hasent" through confusion with haven't), etc., are quite proper in conversation and informal writing, but are not generally used in formal writing or public speaking.

Irregular Verbs

38. A large part of the troublesome forms in English are to be found in the irregular verbs. The most irregular is to be, which is the oldest and most frequently used verb in the language. Its indicative mode is conjugated as follows:

Present Tense Past Tense

I am we are I was we were

you are you are you were you were

he is they are he was they were

68

GRAMMAR

Future Tense

I shall be

we shall be

you will be

you will be

he will be

they will be

The perfect is I have been etc.

There are three of these forms that trouble some people. You was, of course, is never right: you were is required for the singular as well as the plural.

The negative form isn’t (is not), which is quite all right in conversation and letter writing though it would not be used in very formal speaking or writing, is sometimes changed to ain’t, which is also used in questions with the first person because of the awkwardness of am I not? In Great Britain many educated people who dislike ain’t as vulgar say aren’t I? though of course I are would seem to them absurd.

There just isn’t in English any satisfactory form for questions in the first person and we must constantly use our ingenuity to avoid awkwardness.

39. To be is not only the most commonly used independent verb, but also one of the three chief auxiliaries, the others being to have and to do.

There is little trouble with any form of have, though hain’t for hasn’t is sometimes heard among the wholly uneducated, but many educated people for some unknown reason fall into the habit of saying he don’t for he doesn’t, though in the full form they always say he does not and would never think of saying he do not.

40. Most of the other irregular verbs are troublesome because the past tense and the past participle are different in form and so are often confused, while

THE VERB AND ITS FORMS

69

with regular verbs both forms simply add ed, and

as they are alike they cannot be confused. The past

tense is a complete and independent verb, while the

past participle is merely part of a verbal form,

required after the auxiliaries to be and to have, as

"I spoke to you yesterday," and "I have spoken to

you already."

There is a group of irregular verbs with the old

English ending for the participle en or n, which in-

clude the following:

Present Past Participle

speak spoke (have) spoken

break broke broken

swear swore sworn

take took taken

bear bore borne

steal stole stolen

eat ate eaten

bite bit bitten

bid bade bidden

forget forgot forgotten

write wrote written

rise rose risen

see saw seen

go went gone

know knew known

draw drew drawn

drive drove driven

fly flew flown

give gave given

Then there is another important group that changes

the vowel:

70

GRAMMAR

Present

begin

drink

sing

spring

swim

ring

Past

began

drank

sang

sprang

swam

rang

Participle

begun

drunk

sung

sprung

swum

rung

Formerly even in good usage there was considerable confusion between the form of the past tense and that of the past participle in these verbs, but now the forms above are pretty well settled. There is also a group in which there is no change for the past tense or the past participle, as

put

spit

burst

cast

put

spit

burst

cast

put

spit

burst

cast

Other kinds of irregularity are as follows:

get

build

teach

catch

come

run

shine

sit

set

lie

lay

read (ĕ)

lead

got

built

taught

caught

came

ran

shone

sat

set

lay

laid

read (ĕ)

led

got

built

taught

caught

come

run

shone

sat

set

lain

laid

read (ĕ)

led

PROBLEMS IN VERBS

71

This outline of the verb and its forms will serve

to give a sort of picture of what the verb is, and

briefly define some of the terms used in connection

with it, as preparation for studying some of the

uses of the verb which are liable to be confusing.

CHAPTER V

PRACTICAL PROBLEMS IN THE USE OF

VERBS.

41. Singular and plural. The single variation of

form which the English verb has (apart from tense)

is the s of the third person singular of the present

indicative: he, she, it walks, does, loves, but they,

men, women walk, do, love. There seems to be noth-

ing puzzling about that, but when we check over

various words and combinations of words that may

be either singular or plural subjects we are liable to

be puzzled and need to think carefully.

42. John and Helen would be followed by a plural

form of the verb, because the two are taken together

as the subject; but John or Helen would be followed

by the singular form of the verb, because we are

thinking of either one, but not of both at the same

time. The same principle applies to "Neither John

nor Helen is planning to go to college" (not "are

planning," which is a very common error needing

some attention), and "How are John and his

brother?" (not "How is?" )

43. All of us is evidently plural, but every one of

us, which means nearly the same thing, is singular,

because every one of us means all of us taken one at

72

GRAMMAR

a time. While man and woman are plural, every man

and woman is singular because every indicates that

we think of only one man or one woman at a time;

hence the verb should be singular. The same is true

of everybody, anybody, somebody, and each of the

men and women. All of these normally require a

singular verb since they all lay the emphasis on an

individual. Likewise say, "Not one of our friends

was there," and "She is one of those who are easily

overlooked."

44. In the past some critics have contended that

none is always singular, since it is evidently derived

by a contraction of no one, but the best writers treat

none as either singular or plural according as the

writer is thinking of the last person or the last group

of persons. "None of the men remain in the room,"

would be said quickly and without special thought to

mean that the group of men that was in the room is

entirely gone. To say "None of the guests remains"

would lay special emphasis on the thought that not a

single one remains. So some grammarians have con-

tended that a number of men is always singular, be-

cause there is only one number. But usage and in-

stinct make us say "A number of us are going to

town," just as we should say "a few of us," and

regard a number as singular only when we mean a

certain fixed number, as in "A certain number of

employees has been selected for promotion."

45. Another source of difficulty lies in the so-called

collective nouns such as people, government, firm,

company, army, multitude, etc. Of course a people,

meaning a nation or a race, would be treated as a

singular subject, but such expressions as "People

say," "Most people believe" are naturally treated as plural. In speaking of the government of the United States we commonly use the singular verb with the word government, since in this country we think of the government acting as a unified corporation. In Great Britain, where the word government is used to designate the premier and his ministers who may be in power at the time, the word is almost invariably treated as a plural, since it calls to mind that small, fixed group of men who are thought of as individuals. So we might say in a general way "An army of people are swarming over the city square" (treating army as plural), but "General Pershing's army is encamped by the river" (since we think now of an organized military body that is a unit).

46. The form of the verb should show the nature of the subject. The correct form is the one that expresses our thought with logical exactness. If we use the singular form of the verb it should mean that we wish to refer to the subject as a single object, but if we use the plural form it should show that we are thinking of all the various single objects that go to make up the whole, and that we are thinking of each as acting alone.

47. There is also good authority in the use of great writers for treating two nouns united by and as a singular subject if together they convey a single idea, as in "Peace and tranquillity rests over the land," in which the form of the verb emphasizes the unity of idea in "peace and tranquillity."

A single sum of money such as ten dollars or fifteen cents is regarded as a singular subject, as in "Fifteen cents was too much to pay for that paper."

74 GRAMMAR

48. When a single noun, followed by other nouns introduced by with, is the subject of a verb, are we justified in regarding it as plural? By strict grammatical rule it is clearly singular and the grammatically minded insist on using a singular form of the verb in all such cases. At the same time many of our best writers have used a plural verb, and possibly they are right. In such cases we may suppose that with is more a conjunction than a preposition, and since words are frequently used as different parts of speech we need not be slaves to the idea that with is always and necessarily a preposition. We may ask if we should criticize such sentences as the following: "The king, with the lords and commons, form an excellent frame of government."

49. When a copulative verb like to be comes between two nouns (or pronouns) one of which is singular and the other plural, the first is naturally the subject and the one which follows the verb is the predicate complement. But an inversion of the natural order is sometimes allowable, and a writer may exercise his judgement in making the verb singular or plural. Examples: (regular) "His meat was locust and wild honey"; (reversed) "A cause of the low state of industry were the restraints put upon it"; "To fear no eye and to suspect no tongue is the great prerogative of innocence." It will be noticed that this inversion is somewhat rhetorical. It is natural to make the verb agree with the noun which comes first and stands nearest to it.

50. There are several irregular forms in English which may cause confusion. Such words as politics, athletics, news, mathematics, physics, though plural

PROBLEMS IN VERBS

73

in form, are essentially singular when used in their

ordinary meaning. Of course there is no such thing

as "a politic" or "a mathematic." Politics is an

occupation or a subject for thought, and athletics is

a general name for sport. On the other hand we may

use politics in a different sense and think of it as

plural, as when we say "His politics have changed

repeatedly." Athletics may also be thought of as a

comprehensive name for the different sports,

and then could be regarded as a plural. Means is

either singular or plural, and we may say "this

means" or "these means."

51. There are a few foreign plurals still retained

in English, particularly the word data1 (plural of

datum, which is seldom used in the singular). We

must say "These data are very enlightening."

Memoranda is a Latin plural of memorandum, but

the English plural memorandums is coming into

general use. Strata is more common as a plural

than stratums. Alumni (plural of alumnus) and

alumnæ (plural of alumna, the feminine of alumnus)

are universally used. The Latin plural formulæ is,

however, giving way to the English plural formulas.

Phenomena is the plural of phenomenon, and analysis,

parenthesis, crisis, basis, and oasis have as their

plurals analyses, parentheses, crises, bases, and oases,

while series is the same in the plural as in the singu-

lar. The common English words sheep, deer, and

trout are the same in the singular and in the plural,

and we may speak of "a sheep" or "a hundred sheep."

1The plural aspect of data has been so nearly lost in

English that some writers think the word should be treated

as singular, just as opera is (Latin plural of opus).

76

GRAMMAR

Son-in-law, daughter-in-law, etc. form their plural by adding s to the first or main element (sons-in-law, etc.); but handful, cupful, etc. take the plural s at the end of the word (handfuls, cupfuls).

52. When two nouns or pronouns connected by or form the subject of a verb, it agrees with the nearest -that is, the second or last, as in "He or I am the man," "He or we are going to have that money". Of course this is also a difference of person, and as combination subjects of this kind sound awkward, the wiser plan is to avoid them and express the idea in another way, as "Either he is going to have that money, or we are."

53. Past Tense and Past Participle. Confusion between the past tense and the past participle is not possible in the case of regular verbs ending in ed for both, but it does give rise to many errors in use of the irregular verbs. As we already know, the past tense stands complete by itself, while the past participle is used after the auxiliaries to have and to be.

We forgot to ask his opinion.

An hour later the incident was forgotten.

He spoke about it at supper time.

He has often spoken about it.

The child broke the dish.

The dish is broken.

The dish has been broken.

54. The difference between the past participle and the past tense has been more or less undetermined in the language almost up to the present time. As an alternative for the past tense sang, sank, sprang,

swam, etc. it was permissible until within a few years to use sung, sunk, sprung, and swum, but now these latter forms are obsolete. Since there is an adjective drunk meaning intoxicated and not directly connected with the verb, there has in the past been an impression that drank should be used as the past participle of drink as well as for the past tense. This was just the opposite of the tendency of similar verbs mentioned above and did away with the use of drunk as a past tense and seemed to be tending to displace drunk as a past participle, but that tendency has spent its force and usage now turns strongly against the use of drank as a past participle. A still older usage was in favor of begun as an alternative for the past tense began. Now the only accepted form of these verbs is-

Present Past Participle

drink drank (have) drunk

begin began begun

55. Just why, in the case of some particular verbs, there is confusion of the past tense and the past participle it is difficult to say. Perhaps the most vulgar and most obnoxious is saying "I seen him do it" for "I saw him do it." That is a childish error, which naturally is not corrected by the uneducated, but which is the first one to be corrected by schooling. Next to that is using the past participle done for the past tense did and saying "I done the work as you told me to," for "I did the work." Only the most uneducated would say "I have did the work," but "I done it" is common.

78

GRAMMAR

56. Another vulgar error often made by children and corrected by the most elementary school training is confusion in regard to break, broke, broken. Children have a vulgar word bust or busted. There is a verb burst, burst, burst, with the same form for present, past, and past participle, but the meaning is different from that commonly attached to bust, which is clearly that of break. When a man is on the verge of bankruptcy even well-educated people speak of him as "broke." The meaning of this word is not that of broken, but it is rather an adjective equivalent to bankrupt, except that the latter word suggests the formality of being in the bankruptcy court while broke suggests no more than being completely out of money. It may perhaps be regarded as a new word spelled the same as the past tense broke but really a different word and so not to be condemned as an ignorant confusion, as it would be when the child says "My bicycle is broke" or "Johnny has went home."

57. Fairly well educated persons will say "He come in just as I left" for "He came in," or "The mouse run into his hole before the cat could catch him" for "The mouse ran into his hole," or "When I went home mother give me something to eat" for "mother gave." Two of these verbs are peculiar in having the past participle the same as the present tense, and this perhaps helps the tendency to misuse the past participle for the past tense.

58. The best authorities favor get, got, got (not gotten). The use of gotten probably grew up because of confusion with forget, forgot, forgotten, which does not permit forgot to be used as a past

participle, but it has come to be so common among educated people that its use is no longer condemned.

59. The most serious confusion in the minds of educated people seems to be in regard to the use of different forms of the two pairs of similar verbs sit and set, lie and lay. Here a new difference enters in which we have not considered before. Some verbs require an object on which their action must take effect and are called transitive verbs, while others cannot take an object and are called intransitive verbs. When verbs are listed in the dictionary they are followed by the initials v.t. (transitive verb) or v.i. (intransitive verb), and attention must be given to these initials if one is to catch the exact meaning of the definitions. Sit is an intransitive verb and cannot take an object. We ourselves sit down, but we never sit anything down. Instead in such cases we must use the transitive verb set and say, for example, "I will set the lamp on the table." So we say that we go to lie down on the bed to rest, or a book lies on the table, but we lay the book on the table—we lay the child down to sleep. Lay is a transitive verb and requires an object—there must always be something to be laid; while lie is an intransitive verb and cannot have an object. Further difficulty arises in confusing the different forms of this pair of verbs. Let us look at them:

Present Past Participle

lie lay (have) lain

lay laid laid

We notice that the past tense of lie is precisely the same as the present form of lay. Then we notice

80

GRAMMAR

that lie has the past participle lain, while the transitive verb lay has laid as its past participle.

Also rise is an intransitive verb (we "rise from our chair") while raise is transitive (we "raise our hand").

60. Teach and learn are also often confused. While we can learn a lesson, we cannot learn a dog a trick—we must teach him.

Shine, shone, (have) shone may be confused with shown (past participle of show, showed, shown or showed).

While fly has the past participle flown, overflow (an entirely different word) has as its past participle overflowed (never "overflowed"). Say "The river has overflowed its banks" (not "has overflown its banks").

61. Use of the Perfect Tense. The first step in composition is choosing the right word to agree with other words in the same sentence or adjoining sentences. The choice of tense in English is determined almost entirely by something of that sort. If I speak of a time definitely fixed in the past by such a word as yesterday, last night, before I met you, or the like, I use the past tense of the verb; but if I speak of something that is in the past but existing right up to the present I must use the perfect tense. Words which indicate that are yet, already, so far, or some expression that implies time up to the present, as since meeting you. We say "Harmon has already seen the local manager," "I have not yet met Doctor Satterlee," "Jenny has been working hard since you talked with her about her music" (not "Harmon already saw the local manager," or "I didn't yet meet Doctor Satterlee"). Getting the tense right is a

matter of constantly studying the exact nature of the time implied by other words in the sentence.

62. Subjunctive Mode. This mode has almost disappeared from English, except in a few idiomatic expressions like "as it were." The use of were instead of was with singular subjects is the only remaining sign of it, since the present form "if it be" is no longer used. We read in the Bible such expressions as "Reprove not a scorner lest he hate thee," and "Though he slay me, yet will I trust in him," with "he slay" and "he hate" where the indicative mode would have "he slays" and "he hates," but modern English finds other methods of expressing these ideas.

There are two situations in which were is used with singular subjects, 1. wishes, and 2. supposed cases clearly contrary to fact. The subjunctive form indicates that the supposition is not even a possibility. Of course we do not wish for anything we may possibly have. If I say "I wish I were a bird," it is obvious that I am not a bird. If I say, "If John were here he would put out the fire," the word were says perfectly plainly that he is not here; but if I say, "If John was on the pier I know he took part in the dancing," the word was indicates that he may have been there, or he may not have been there. Notice that the supposed cases contrary to fact have would or the like in the main clause. Even in these supposed cases contrary to fact, modern usage wavers in the direction of was.

63. Sequence of Tenses. It is a well known rule of English that verbs in subordinate clauses must be governed by the tense of the principal verb. A

82

GRAMMAR

present tense requires a present tense or a future tense, a past tense requires a past tense, or the meaning must call for some distinct variation.

Examples: I see the new building every time I go to town.

He said he would call for me.

He says he will bring the book over tomorrow.

64. The present infinitive, however, expresses time which is the same as that of the verb to which it is attached, as in "He wanted to do it" (not "to have done it.") "He wishes to do it" and "He wished to do it" are alike in taking the present infinitive, since the present infinitive expresses time which is the same as the time of the principal verb, whether that is present or past or future. Likewise we say "We have done no more than it was our duty to do" not "to have done." On the contrary if we wish to show in the infinitive time clearly past with reference to the time of the principal verb we should use the perfect infinitive, as in "He is said to have fallen from the bridge" (the falling distinctly took place before the saying).

65. While past tenses naturally follow past tenses, if we wish to indicate a general truth (one that is just as potent now as it ever was in the past) we vary from the usual order and employ the present tense, as in "He said that water freezes at 32 degrees." The use of the present tense conveys a special meaning of being just as true now as at any time in the past.

We try to use the tense that indicates precisely

what we mean, or if the time does not matter the

rule of sequence of tenses applies.

66. Use of shall and will. While in the simple

statement of future time we normally use shall with

I and we, and will with you and all subjects in the

third person, there are important variations of mean-

ing which just reverse this order.

When the idea of willingness is intended we use

will after I and we, as in "I will (am willing to) do

anything you wish," or "We will accept your offer"

("are willing to accept it"). Also when the speaker

thinks of imposing his will on the person spoken to

or spoken of, we use shall after you or any subject in

the third person, as in "You shall not go out till I

give you permission," or "He shall finish his lesson

before he is dismissed." Again, when a question is

asked we use the word we expect in the answer, as in

"Shall you eat your lunch before you go out?" (an-

swer expected of course "I shall eat my lunch"), or

"Will you wait for me?" (answer expected "I will

wait for you"). Likewise in indirect quotations we

use the form that the speaker would have employed,

as "He says he shall go directly to the train."

67. It is obviously ridiculous to say "I will be

glad to see you" for "I shall be glad to see you,"

since there is no possibility of willing in connection

with being glad. However, when there is no emphasis

on the first person as such, or when we use the edi-

torial we which means the editors of a paper, or

similarly when we is a general word for everyone in

sight, the best educated people use will and shall in-

discriminately, with a strong tendency toward will,

as in "We will be at home for lunch," "I will invite

84

GRAMMAR

him for dinner some day,

"I will see what I can

find," "We will certainly be there by one." Will is

less emphatic than shall, and also less formal. When-

ever we wish to suggest disregard of the person speak-

ing, or as the speaker merge ourselves into the crowd,

it is perfectly natural to use will in place of shall

even when there is no emphasis on the idea of willing.

We may say that the use of will is less personal than

the use of shall.

68. Should and would follow the same principles.

We should say "I should be glad to see you" and

"He said you would call me up." Besides its ordi-

nary meaning as a kind of past tense of shall, should

is often used in the sense of ought, as in "You should

be dressed by six o'clock." In this sense there is no

distinction between persons. Otherwise should and

would are used in the same way as shall and will, in-

cluding their use in questions where the form ex-

pected in the answer is employed, and in indirect

quotations where we prefer the form used by the

original speaker in the direct discourse. Would is,

like will, less emphatic than should, and it is very

commonly found with the editorial we and in similar

situations. Modern authorities are much less inclined

than those of former days to insist on the use of

shall and should. The reason is, probably, that in

this colloquial age we do not care so much for the

slight formality which seems to attach to these words.

PARTICIPLES AND INFINITIVES 83

CHAPTER VI

PARTICIPLES AND INFINITIVES

69. Many writers have ranked the participle as a separate part of speech. It is in reality a sort of hybrid, half verb and half adjective, and may become a noun. The infinitive is also a curious form of the verb, for it may often be used as a noun and is interchangeable to some extent with the present participle.

In such a sentence as "Steep and rocky mountains, rising into peaks always covered with snow, surrounded it on all sides," the participial phrases "rising into peaks" and "covered with snow" modify the nouns mountains and peaks respectively as adjectives, yet at the same time they give the effect of verbs. They are almost equivalent to subordinate clauses such as "which rise into peaks" and "which are covered with snow." In other situations the verb character is lost almost entirely and the participle becomes a pure adjective, as in "The boxing parson preached today," or "The learned doctor delivered the address." The present participle becomes a pure noun in such a sentence as "I like riding," or "Riding is healthful exercise," or "By signing your name here you will secure your rights." In the last sentence the verbal noun signing takes name as its object, as any verb might. These verbal nouns are called gerunds.

70. The chief office of the infinitive is simply to complete the meaning of other verbs, as when we say, "I like to ride"; "He is going to do it"; etc.

86

GRAMMAR

Here the assertion that is made in regard to the subject is not complete until the infinitive is added, and we may look on the first verb as more or less of an auxiliary. In fact, "He will do it" and "He is going to do it" are very much alike, and grammarians look on the do after will as an infinitive with the sign (to) omitted. However, in all cases in which the to is expressed we are accustomed to treat the infinitive as separate from the verb, and picture it in our diagrams as an ordinary prepositional phrase, thus:

71. But the infinitive may have a subject of its own, which will always be in the objective case. In such a relation the to is commonly omitted, as in "I shall make him do it," which may be diagramed thus:

Here the whole phrase, "him do it," may be regarded as taking the place of a noun and forming the object of shall make, though it would not be altogether improper to place it below and connect it with shall make by a dotted line, after the manner of a subordinate clause.

In such cases as "To be good is to be wise," the to

PARTICIPLES AND INFINITIVES 87

merely introduces the verbal phrases which serve as nouns, and we may picture the sentence as follows:

72. To explain such a sentence fully, however, with regard for both grammar and logic, we must reflect that a personal subject is implied, such as "anyone," "any person." The adjective good and the adjective wise really qualify this indefinite implied personality.

We see that while acting as a verbal noun, an infinitive may exercise all the qualities of a verb in taking predicate modifiers, either nouns or adjectives; and it may also be modified by adverbs.

73. The participles also may exercise the functions of verbs in the same way, as in the sentence, "I found him rapidly writing letters," which we may picture as follows:

74. We have already seen that the subject noun and the assertive verb are both indispensable to any

88

GRAMMAR

expression of thought. We may realize how far-reaching and important this principle is when we

know that every verb, whatever its form, even the participle and the infinitive in so far as they exer-

cise any of the functions of verbs, must have subjects of some kind, expressed or implied. If an infinitive

is used to complete a verb, we look back through the auxiliary verb and find the real subject of the action

or state expressed by the infinitive, in the subject of the sentence. Thus in the sentence, “I should like

to do it,” the logical subject of the act of doing is I. If we say, “I should like to have him do it,” the

subject of have is logically I, and of do, him.

75. The same is true of participles. Thus in the sentence “While sitting on my doorstep yesterday, I

caught sight of a most beautiful butterfly,” sitting is a participle evidently modifying the subject of the

sentence, I. I do the sitting and I catch sight. If we change the form of the sentence so as to make it

read, “While sitting on my doorstep yesterday, my notice was attracted to a most beautiful butterfly,”

we perceive that the real subject of the participle verb sitting is hard to find. It is perhaps implied in

the possessive my, but it would be out of the question, grammatically, to attach sitting to my. If we

should say “While sitting on the doorstep yesterday, a most beautiful butterfly attracted my notice,” we

would seem to imply that the butterfly was sitting, which is of course absurd. The sentences are mani-

festly imperfect from a logical point of view. This error in sentence-building is very common. Writers

on grammar call it the dangling participle.

76. Even if the sentence is so constructed that it

PARTICIPLES AND INFINITIVES 89

is not difficult to account for all the members, still if the subject of the infinitive or participle is obscured, the sentence is imperfect. Thus if we say, "To relieve him of all responsibility, he was given a written statement by the members of the firm," To relieve is evidently a simple qualifier of the verb was given, but whatever act was performed in relieving was not by he, the subject of was given, but by members, which appears in a subordinate phrase. The sentence is logically imperfect. The same is true of the sentence, "By doing so the matter will be cleared up by him," which should be "By doing so he will clear the matter up."

77. In good writing, sentences will be so constructed that the participial phrase will be clearly connected with the nouns which are the subjects of their verb action. Usually this leads back to the subject of the main verb.

There is also what is called the nominative absolute. A participle may stand as an independent verb with a nominative or subjective case as its subject, though always in a dependent relation to some principal clause, as in "The wind blowing furiously, the boat was overset"; "He knowing that, I had no choice, but to act as I did." The wind is subject of the participle blowing, and He is the subject of the independent participle knowing. Both he and wind are spoken of as independent nominatives, though they are no more independent than any other subjects of verbs. It would be better to speak of the participles as independent in their use, for here they perform the offices of an ordinary verb even to having a separate subject in the nominative case. This use is not

90

GRAMMAR

favored by the best critics or writers, and evidently

grew up because the instincts of the mind sought to

supply a suitable subject for the participle when no

implied subject was in sight. This is a bungling

method of relieving the logical incompleteness of such

sentences as we discussed in the preceding paragraph.

78. The subject of the participle may be implied

in a possessive, as in the sentence, "By his doing

that, the situation was relieved." Here the character

of the participle as noun is emphasized by the

presence of a possessive used as a simple adjective

modifier, but we do not entirely lose the feeling of a

verb and its subject.

79. The idiom of the English language prefers

not to make the objective case the subject of a par-

ticiple. The subject of an infinitive, as we have seen,

is regularly in the objective case. In the past gram-

marians have condemned such sentences as "I could

not prevent him doing it," or "There was no excuse

for Harry making such a remark," which should be

"I could not prevent his doing it" or "I could not

prevent him from doing it," or "There was no excuse

for Harry's making such a remark." There are situa-

tions, however, where the possessive is very awkward,

as in "Would you object to Molly and me taking the

baby a little while?" where "Molly's and my taking"

would sound a little absurd. Jespersen, a Danish

scholar who is recognized as perhaps our best author-

ity on English grammar, has examined a large num-

ber of cases of this sort in the writings of well known

authors past and present. He concludes that the

participle is used in English in two ways, as a pure

noun modified by a possessive and as a verb like an

infinitive with the objective case as its subject, and

most linguists accept his conclusions so far as col-

loquial language is concerned, though some would

not admit this construction into formal or literary

writing. H. W. Fowler, of the Oxford Dictionary,

strongly objects to it.

80. We have already given an example of an in-

definite subject which is not stated but merely im-

plied when an infinitive is used in a general sense.

The subject of the participle may be implied in the

same way when it is general or indefinite, as in

"Speaking of the President, what did you think of

his manifesto?" or "Granting all that, still how do

you account for the strange circumstances?" Grant-

ing and speaking are evidently independent, with

such subjects as you, we, anyone so clearly implied

that no objection can be raised.

CHAPTER VII

OTHER PROBLEMS OF GRAMMAR

81. Reference of Pronouns. As a pronoun is a

word used in place of a noun, it is very important

that there should be no confusion as to precisely

what noun it stands for, called its antecedent. There

is little opportunity for doubt as to the antecedent of

the first personal pronouns I and we, for this is

always the person speaking, and the antecedent of

the second personal pronoun you is the person spoken

to. Pronouns of the third person, however, are used

so numerously, and even in the same sentence refer

so variously to different persons and objects, that

92

GRAMMAR

confusion is not only easy, but inevitable unless the greatest care is taken. Here is a sentence taken from Lane's translation of the Arabian Nights: "Aladdin was so frightened at what he saw that he would have run away; but as he was to be serviceable to the magician, he caught hold of him, scolded him, and gave him such a box on the ear that he knocked him down, and had like to have beat his teeth down his throat." The first three times he is used in this sentence it clearly refers to Aladdin, but the first italicized he refers to magician, a word just introduced in a subordinate phrase, while him in the same clause and succeeding ones refers to Aladdin. The result is exceedingly confusing, though it would not be so bad if he as the subject were consistently used to refer to magician and him to Aladdin. A little individual study is all that is needed to find ways of making such situations perfectly clear.

82. The English language lacks a singular pronoun of common gender, and when we need to employ a pronoun that refers to either sex we must use he and his, or if more emphasis is needed on the difference of sex, we must awkwardly say his or her. This applies to such combinations as "John or Helen." The plural they and their are of common gender, however, and on that account we feel the temptation to use these pronouns even when the antecedent is distinctly singular. For example, the correct form of expression is, "I will ask each boy and girl to write his name (or, his or her name) on a slip of paper"; "Everybody must carry his flag straight up"; "Somebody has forgotten his rubbers." In most of these cases careless speakers, feeling the advantage

of a pronoun of common gender, are tempted to use the pronoun their although the antecedent is singular.

83. While each, every, somebody, anybody, everybody lay emphasis on thinking of a number of persons one at a time, so that one of these words in the subject of a verb has the effect of making the subject distinctly singular, the feeling of plurality often prevails when it comes to pronouns farther along in the sentence. In such cases most modern authorities would permit the use of the plural pronoun, as in the sentence "Everybody was there, and they all agreed that the party was a complete success." We may think of the antecedent of they not as everybody but as all those present, clearly implied in the clause as a whole. In formal writing this shorthand form of expression would not meet approval, but in rapid speech and letter writing pronouns may refer to ideas implied in expressions of a different sort if these ideas are entirely clear. What is objectionable is vagueness, and there is no need to follow a rule of grammar unless it either helps to make the meaning clearer, or to avoid offending the esthetic instincts of educated people. A feeling for clear and acceptable expression is more valuable in language than a logic that is too hard and fast, and that is why educated people may seem to refer to a singular word like everybody by a plural pronoun such as they, or treat none or a number as plural.

84. Relative Pronouns. Who is used of persons and which of things, though which of the two girls shows another recognized use of which. Relative pronouns are a combination of pronoun and subordinate conjunction. Who may be thought of as equivalent

94

GRAMMAR

to and he or she, and which to and it, while what may

be equivalent to that which. Each word may also be

used as an interrogative pronoun and convey the dif-

ferent idea of making a selection. Whose is properly

the possessive case of who and not of which, and

there is objection to saying "Is that the book whose

cover I liked so much?" instead of "Is that the book

the cover of which I liked so much?" This is not a

hard and fast rule, however, for though one would not

say "You have a big maltese cat who lies by the fire"

instead of "which lies by the fire," no one would feel

offended by "the cat whose long hair is so glossy,"

"a country whose people are intelligent." Relative

pronouns may also have person—the person or

number of their antecedent, as in "I who love you

am best able to judge you" (not "who loves"). That

as a relative pronoun (not to be confused with the

subordinate conjunction that) is less formal than who

or which, and is useful in reducing the emphasis of

these words, as in the sentence "The child that cries

is not really old enough to come to school," or "The

thing that I object to most is speaking so indistinctly

that you cannot be understood," or (omitting that

altogether) "The thing I object to most" (where that

of course is clearly enough implied).

85. Difference between Predicate Adjectives and

Adverbs. An adjective is a word that modifies or

qualifies a noun, while an adverb modifies or qualifies

a verb (or another adverb or an adjective). The

usual ending for adverbs is ly, but any word express-

ing the time, place, or manner in which any verb

action takes place must be construed as an adverb, as

soon, here, now, etc. The problem arises in the case

OTHER PROBLEMS

95

of certain verbs which assert a quality of the subject (noun) and require a predicate adjective rather than an adverb describing the manner in which the verb acts. Thus, "John looks pale" (he is pale; certainly the looking is not done palely or in a pale manner); "The milk tastes sour" (it is sour to the taste); "The little girl feels bad about missing her lesson" (this is more or less idiomatic, but means that she has a bad feeling); "The wind blows cold" (in blowing it is cold); "The proposal looks good to me" (so far as its look is concerned it is good to me). It is correct to say "Drive slow" as well as "Drive slowly," and the meaning is "Be slow in driving." Some have called this the "flat adverb," relic of the early English adverbs in ĕ after such endings had been dropped from the language, but I prefer to think of it as a sort of idiomatic use of the adjective that modifies a noun in a roundabout way, or even perhaps a noun implied in the verb. The same principle applies in "Look out or you will say it wrong."

86. Comparison of Adjectives and Adverbs. Short and common adjectives are ordinarily compared by adding er for the comparative degree and est for the superlative, but long and uncommon adjectives are less awkwardly compared by use of more and most, as red, redder, reddest, but beautiful, more beautiful, most beautiful. There are a few irregular comparisons, as good, better, best and bad, worse, worst. The common rule is to use the comparative degree with two and the superlative degree with three or more, saying the better of the two and the best of the three, or the worse of the two and the worst of the three, but that is a refinement that is by no means

96

GRAMMAR

always observed. Adverbs are compared the same as

adjectives, but we say quickly, more quickly, and

most quickly, since er cannot be added to ly, but

badly, worse, worst ("The car is running worse today

than it did yesterday") and well, better, best. The

adverb corresponding to good is well. It is an error

to say "The car acts good" or "works good" though

we may say it "looks good" or "feels good." but we

say correctly it "acts well," it "works well." (In-

cidentally it may be remarked that in another sense

well is an adjective meaning "in good health," and we

may say properly either "I feel well today" or "I

feel good today.")

Comment on Miscellaneous Expressions

87. It has often been said that in English two

negatives make an affirmative (that is, cancel each

other rather than intensify each other as they do in

some languages), and children are carefully taught

not to say "It doesn't do no good" (for "any good").

The same principle applies to can't hardly, since the

true meaning is fully expressed by can hardly, as

in "He can hardly walk at all."

88. Had better is a well recognized idiom, pre-

ferred by many to would better, as in "She had better

look out for hostile criticism." Possibly this use of

had with better has created some sort of confusion

that leads to saying "He hadn't ought to do it" for

"He ought not to do it," though few would say "He

had ought to do it." The verb ought cannot be used

in perfect tenses—indeed it has only one form, which

appears to be present indicative, but the same in

singular and plural.

OTHER PROBLEMS

97

89. There is an old rule of rhetoric that a sentence should not end with a preposition, and it seems to have lasted far beyond its period of usefulness. All that it ever meant was that a preposition is a weak word in general, and in rhetorical or oratorical speaking the effect of strength and dignity is lessened when a sentence ends with a preposition. In modern speaking and writing the easy, flowing, colloquial type of sentence is the one usually most desired, and this kind of sentence ends most naturally with a preposition. So today the rule has practically no meaning at all—to try to apply it is to formalize one's language and make it stilted. In English many verbs are really made up of a root and a preposition placed at the end, as come over, look around, speak up, be sent for. In other languages the preposition would be incorporated directly into the verb, usually at the beginning of the word instead of at the end. These English words that look like prepositions have no nouns to govern, so we cannot truly call them prepositions and are forced to regard them as adverbs, since in a way they modify the meaning of the verb. There is no essential difference, however, whether we say "We sent for the man" (in which for is clearly a preposition) and "The man was sent for" (in which for has no object). It would be more consistent to think of the verb in both cases as sent for. If we can forget entirely about the old rule and think only of the easy rhythm of our sentences, and the arrangement of words that will sound most natural and so most winning, we shall use language in the most effective way.

90. Some critics have told us that not should be

98

GRAMMAR

followed by so rather than as and we should say "James is not so tall as Dick" rather than "not as

tall," though we would say "James is as tall as Dick." In such direct comparisons as seems the

better word, though we should say "That is not so good." The expression "try and do it" as a substi-

tute for "try to do it" is now accepted as an English idiom. Usage appears to have adopted nice as

passably good colloquial language in "a nice time," or "nice people"; such intensives as terribly in

"It was terribly hard work"; guess as equivalent to think in "I guess it will be all right" if the meaning

is "I am inclined to think"; got in various colloquial uses such as "got home in time for supper," "got

through with the work by six," "I've really got to go," "I've got my opinion"; proven as a substitute

for proved if that supposedly old Scotch legal term as used in "not proven" is preferred for any definite

reason; but of course colloquial use does not justify use in careful writing or speaking. It sounds sloppy

even in informal talk to say "between three or four persons," "either of three or four," "We laughed at

each other" instead of "at one another," since between, either, and each other all seem to imply a relation

between two only. Teachers have drilled pupils on "May I go out?" instead of "Can I go out?" when

asking permission to leave the room, and use of may does give one's language more distinction,

though the point has been overemphasized, for educated people everywhere say "Can I take this book?"

Farther should be used of distance, while further is used in the sense of additional, as in "further-

more." While further is often used in place of

farther, the reverse is not true—“farthermore” is never heard.

91. Next to the myth that no sentence should end with a preposition, perhaps the most widely disseminated and discussed is the myth that the infinitive should not be “split” by placing an adverb between the “to” and its verb. It is safe to say that the infinitive has been split by all good writers since the English language was invented, but good writers and speakers do not split an infinitive except when it is necessary to bring the emphasis precisely upon the infinitive verb, as in “He was determined to at least protect her good name.” Logically only should be placed next to the word or phrase it modifies, but English has an idiomatic way of carrying its meaning over the verb, as in “He only lacked one point of winning the match,” which is unconsciously natural and easy as compared with “He lacked only one point,” which is precise and correct. It is a good thing to know that placing only in its logical position is one way of giving precision and exactness to one’s language, but if one does not wish to call attention to that particular manner, that can be avoided by placing only in the illogical but idiomatic position before the verb. Such an expression as “He does his work as well or better than I” is merely shorthand for “as well as, or better than, I do mine,” but when we say “In the hospital there was a curtain between each bed” (leaving out “and the next”) we seem to be slovenly rather than brief.

92. Educated people strongly condemn them boys (for those boys), real good, most anybody (for almost); “The boy was raised on a farm” (for

100

GRAMMAR

"brought up on a farm" or reared); different than (for different from), these kind of people (for this kind); "Where am I at?" (for "Where am I?");

"He won't leave me come in" (for "won't let me come in"); "That wasn't what I meant" (for "That wasn't what I meant"); "He got it off of his mother,"

or "He jumped off of the bridge" (for "He got it from his mother" or "He jumped off the bridge");

"He is feeling some better" (for "He is feeling somewhat better").

CHAPTER VIII

ENGLISH IDIOM

93. The word idiom means that which is peculiar. The idiom of a language consists in those peculiarities of construction in sentences and phrases which distinguish it from other languages.

By extension of meaning, we call any phrase an idiom when it does not seem fully to conform to the rules of grammar, though usage has established its rights and gained for it universal recognition.

Much of the beauty and force of a language lies in its idioms,—how much we may easily perceive when we open a poor translation.

The translator who is not a master of his art does not succeed in finding the idioms in the language into which he is translating which correspond to the idioms in the language he is seeking to translate, and his literal rendering of the words fails to convey the fullness of the meaning intended in the original.

So persons who have been studying a foreign language often unconsciously pick up usages which are not appre-

priate to English, and their “English style” is spoiled for the time being.

There are many peculiarities which may be considered under the heading of “idiom,” however, which may be common to several languages. In this chapter we wish to consider some of these peculiar uses of words in English.

94. Indirect object. Sometimes after an active verb (or one which is capable of taking a direct object) we find two objects which are certainly in no way dependent upon, or equivalent to, each other. Thus if we say, “Give me the book,” “book” is the direct object, but “me” appears to be an object, too. The relation is clear if we supply the preposition to and say, “Give (to) me the book.” The omission of the preposition constitutes an idiom of the English language. In Latin this “indirect” object, as it is called, is distinguished by a separate case called the dative, with an ending peculiar to itself signifying to or for.

95. Adverbial nouns. Many nouns signifying time, place, etc., are used in an adverbial sense without prepositions. To all intents and purposes they are adverbs; yet they retain the powers of nouns. Examples: “I am going home”; “He arrived a day late,” or “a day later”; “I walked a mile today”; “He offered Caesar the crown three times.” The construction may usually be seen if we insert a preposition and other words and say, for example, “I am going (to my) home”; “He arrived late (by) a day”; “I walked (for, or over) a mile today”; “He offered Caesar the crown (to the number of) three times.” It is not quite clear in this last sentence that our

102

GRAMMAR

added words help the case at all. At any rate, no prepositions are implied. We must simply say that the nouns are used adverbially. The Latin has a special case for such constructions called the ablative.

96. The noun preceded by of is usually equivalent to the possessive, and in case of awkwardness we usually change the form. Thus when two possessives follow each other, we change one of them, and in place of "my friend's wife's sister," we say, "the sister of my friend's wife."

97. When two nouns are coupled, we may put the sign of the possessive after the last one only, to show that what is possessed belongs to them in common, as in "John and Eliza's fortune." If there were two fortunes, one belonging to John and the other to Eliza, we should indicate it by saying, "John's and Eliza's fortunes."

98. A prepositional phrase, a subordinate clause, or a participial phrase may take the place of a noun in almost any of its relations, especially as subject or object of a verb, and may have adjective modifiers in the same way that a noun has. Thus, "For him to use the society's money was dishonest," affords us a case in which an infinitive (to use) serving as a noun, the object of the preposition for, as a verb takes a subject in him and an object in money; and the whole unites to form the subject of the verb was, and is qualified by the adjective dishonest. The same sentence may be reconstructed a little so as to show a subordinate clause fulfilling the same offices as the prepositional phrase, thus: "That he should use the society's money was abominable." It is a little difficult to say to what the preposition for and

the conjunction that connect the words dependent upon them. To imagine an implied noun with a

proper construction is not easy. We must be content with saying that these are “idioms.” The fol-

lowing diagram pictures a sort of theory, however, in regard to one of the sentences:

99. Almost any adjective may be turned into a noun by placing the article the before it, as the good,

the great, the splendid. We have seen that the present participle in ing is often used as a noun, though

it retains powers of a verb. In the idiom of the English language there seem to be gradations of pro-

portion between the verb quality and the noun quality. We may place the before the participle,

and that seems to rob it of some of its verb powers. Thus we may say, “By killing his victim he lost all

sympathy,” or “By the killing of his victim he deprived himself of all sympathy.” If we place the

before the participle, we must follow it with a preposition to govern what was before a direct object.

100. A noun may be in apposition with a general idea contained in a variety of phrases and clauses,

104

GRAMMAR

as when we sum up a long statement by saying, "a state of things which we must admit to be wholly bad"; or "a fact no one will deny"; or "a thing which is obvious."

101. When we change such a sentence as "He offered them a pardon" into the passive form and say "They were offered a pardon," the noun "pardon" is left without a relationship to the verb which can be classed under any of the rules of grammar. In the first sentence it was the direct object of a verb; but a passive verb can have no direct object, and no preposition seems to be implied. Some grammarians condemn it as incorrect. If it is to be used, it should no doubt be classed as an idiom, and so left without explanation.

102. Sometimes one noun is made to modify another as an adjective. In such cases there is a strong tendency to run the two words into one, as coalbin, policeman, rosebush, etc., or else write them separately without any hyphens, as apple tree. Nouns followed by a present participle used as noun should be connected with the participle by a hyphen, as story-writing, paper-making, etc. But in short story writing no hyphen can be used, because short modifies story, not story-writing. Because of such difficulties many today omit the hyphens entirely.

103. Though it is an established rule that every pronoun must have its antecedent (expressed or implied), there is one case in which it would be very hard to find anything that could be regarded as antecedent. When we say "It rains," "It freezes," "It looks like snow," evidently it is as nearly devoid of meaning as a pronoun can be. It is merely a

dummy subject thrown in to fill up the gap so that we may use the verb. The same is perhaps even more true when we say, "It is I," "It is he," "It is they," etc., for here a neuter pronoun is made to be equivalent to a personal pronoun, and a singular pronoun to a plural. (The so-called "anticipative" adverb there is used to fill a grammatical gap in much the same way when we say, "There is to be music tonight." In this sentence the subject of "is" is "music," which the adverb "there" permits to come after the verb.)

104. When we say "Here is a book of John's," we seem to have a double possessive in "of John's," but if we understand that books is implied--"a book of John's (books)"--the construction is clear. But when pronouns are used in a similar way, some of them slightly change their forms, and we say, "This book is hers," "Here is a book of mine," "That is ours," etc. These pronouns are not essentially different, however, from the simpler forms my, her, our, etc. The changed form enables us to avoid giving the idea that a noun is to follow. It is a universal law of language that, so far as possible, the mind should be relieved of doubt as we pass from word to word.

105. Though the "antecedent" of a pronoun may follow the pronoun instead of preceding it, the construction should always be avoided when that is possible. When the antecedent follows the pronoun, the reader or listener is kept in suspense till the explanation of the pronoun is forthcoming. This is sometimes a justifiable rhetorical device, as in this sentence: "There was therefore, which is all that we

106

GRAMMAR

assert, a course of life pursued by them, different from that which they before led"; also in "I, John, saw all these things."

106. As interjections are independent words, with a relation to the sentence before or after them which is rather rhetorical than grammatical, or with no relation at all, no difficulties attend their use. There is one curious fact to be noted, however, and that is that first personal pronouns associated with interjections are in the objective case, as "Ah me!" "Oh me!" while pronouns of the second person are in the nominative case, as "O thou, who dwellest," etc., "O ye hypocrites," and the like. We may suppose that the attitude of the speaker in using the first person in such cases is commonly such as to imply a preposition to govern the pronoun, as in "Alas for me."

In the second person we have what in Latin and Greek constitutes a separate case, the vocative. It was usually nearly the same as the nominative or subjective. We have no peculiar form in English confined to address, and hence we may class such words with nominatives used independently. They are connected, or are identical, with some word in the accompanying sentence, but they are not in apposition, for the word with which we identify them may be in the objective case, while the nouns used in address are in effect subjective. Perhaps the best way to dispose of all such words is to class them with interjections, and make no special attempt to name their real relation to a sentence. We merely note that they have no meaning except in connection with a sentence, and so they do have a relation to that sentence even if we do not give it a name.

107. Every verb must have its subject, but it is not easy to find the subject of the verb in such idiomatic expressions as "as follows," "as appears," "may be," etc. Some maintain that as is a pronoun and the subject of the verb that follows, some that the subject varies and is implied from what goes before, so that we should sometimes have a plural verb "as follow"; but other grammarians maintain that the impersonal pronoun it is implied, so that even in connection with plurals we really have "as (it) follows," etc.

108. There is no word in the English language, perhaps, so peculiarly idiomatic in its use as as. We commonly regard it as an adverb or conjunction. In such phrases as "as soon as," etc., the first as is a simple adverb modifying soon, itself an adverb, and the second as is an adverb serving as a conjunction, as in the sentence "As soon as I see him, I will deliver your invitation." We may suppose that soon modifies deliver, the first as modifies soon, and the second as modifies the first as and also serves as a conjunction to introduce the subordinate clause.

Some have maintained, however, that as is always a relative pronoun. With the pronoun such it is obviously a sort of relative pronoun, as in the sentence, "Such as presume to advise others, should look well to their own conduct." But there are certainly many cases in which no amount of ingenuity could explain the word as a pronoun.

Certainly as is a conjunction in "Do as I do," and good usage does not approve of substituting like, which is a preposition. ("He is like his father," but not "He acts like his father does.")

109. As regards has been criticized in such a sentence as "As regards your suggestion, I hardly know what to say," but many have defended it as idiomatic colloquial use. As though for as if was in times past also criticized, since though seemed to make nonsense in such a sentence as "He acted as (he would act) though he thought he owned the place," when of course if in place of though would make sense. In the more idiomatic phrase "It would seem as though he ought to do it" we do not find any more sense if we change though to if and say "It would seem as (it would seem) if he ought to do it." So as though is now accepted as an English idiom.

110. The comparative and superlative degrees are not appropriate to such adjectives as perfect, circular, complete, etc., since they express an absolute, not a relative quality. What is perfect is absolutely perfect, and cannot be more perfect. Something may be more nearly perfect, however, more nearly complete, more nearly circular. By a sort of syncope, the nearly is often omitted, and while more circular can perhaps never be found in good writers, and more perfect seldom, more complete is very commonly used. The fact is, in common use these words do not have their strictly logical meaning.

CONCLUSION

109

CHAPTER IX

CONCLUSION

A sentence is like an arch. It must rest upon two solid foundations, the subject noun and the predicate verb. To be a good arch, every word must fit nicely into its particular niche. One word which does not fit perfectly may cause the whole arch to fall. We may even have arch upon arch in a structure complicated and beautiful, but each word, like each brick, must be of faultless material, and moreover must be so precisely adapted in form as to fill the space allotted to it without being anything but just what is required of it.

In such a comparison as this we find our two universal laws, the necessity for two bases—the subject and the predicate, and the requirement that every word be adjusted to a perfect relation with every other word without a break or flaw of any kind. These two requirements cover the entire subject.

In making a sentence we must take account of two things, the individual meanings of the words and the relationship which they are to bear to each other. The meanings are given us by usage. We must acquire them as we acquire bricks. But once possessed of an ample supply, we must exercise our mental ability in fitting them together, selecting just the right one for each little niche and turn. If we have the mind to understand, each problem may be solved as we go along. We may look at our niche and then hunt about till we find the right word to fill it. We

110

GRAMMAR

may try one, and if that does not serve, we may try

another. Unless we are pretty nearly right, our

arch will not stand at all; and if it is poorly put

together and awkward, no doubt we shall realize it

as we look it over, as well as anyone would.

In studying grammar it is first necessary that we

understand a few general principles on which sen-

tences are constructed; and then we should train our

minds to logical analysis of word relationships. It

is utterly impossible to foresee every difficulty and

provide for it. We must have a mind capable of

original solutions. We may be put on our guard

against errors that seem natural to all human kind,

errors which no doubt we shall commit ourselves;

but we should never correct an error because we are

told that we ought, but because we see that not to

correct it will be fatal to our purpose of expressing

our ideas. We may forget what we have been told;

we may even lose faith in our authority; but if we

can solve the problem for ourselves, as we solve the

problem of the multiplication of 15 by 4, we always

have it in our power to find out for ourselves even

if we do forget what we have been told or otherwise

have learned; and what we have logically demon-

strated we will not doubt.

The author of this book, therefore, strongly recom-

mends the study of grammar by original processes,

not by authorities and rules. All that a rule can

do is to aid the memory in regard to a certain peculi-

arity; and when the peculiarity is perfectly familiar,

we do not need the rule or the definition, and may

safely forget both. Not until we have reached the

point at which we can go on just as well without

REVIEW TEST ON ENGLISH USAGE 111

remembering a single rule or definition, can we be

said to have become "accomplished" writers.

REVIEW TEST ON CORRECT ENGLISH USAGE

Directions for taking the Test: Read through one

entire paragraph at a time to get the meaning and

decide what word is required in each blank space. The

required word will usually be some form of one of the

words in parenthesis, which must harmonize with the

meaning of other words in the sentence. Instead of

writing the words in the book, write them in a column

on a separate sheet of paper, opposite the corresponding

numbers. If no word is required in any space write

"Nothing needed."

Section One

As I was going down the street I (see) —(1)—

a squirrel in the road. When I came up he (run)

—(2)— up a tree. He had a nut in his mouth,

but when he began to run he had to l—(3)— it go.

He —(4)—n't there now. I think he has (go,

went) —(5)— into his hole. He must have been

frightened by (them, those) —(6)— girls who

were just behind me. I think it (do) —(7)—n't

do —(8)— good to try to tame a squirrel, for he

always runs away when you get near to him.

I wonder if the pear you had for lunch was as sweet

as mine. I noticed that you had (tear) —(9)—

part of the skin off and had (eat) —(10)— half

112

GRAMMAR

of it before I began mine. If you hadn't had a pear

I would —(11)— (give) —(12)— you part

of mine, for I have always (know) —(13)— that

you (were, was) —(14)— fond of pears. Last

winter we had three bushels from one tree, but they

were (freeze) —(15)— in that cold snap we had.

My mother had a few in her bureau drawer, and some-

times I was able to get one —(16)— her.

I am sorry I can't go with you this afternoon, but

my bicycle is b—(17)—. I have (write) —(18)—

a letter to the manufacturers for a new handle, but it

—(19)—n't come yet. Th—(20)— (is, are)

—(21)— six boys in our cycle club. They all got

(possessive pronoun) —(22)— wheels last Christmas.

I thought I was going to have a wheel on the

tree at Grandfather's. It wasn't there, but when I

(come) —(23)— home I saw it standing in the

hall with my name on it. My father had (take, took)

—(24)— it up from the cellar while we were

away. In the spring my oldest brother (learn, teach)

—(25)— me to ride it.

Section Two

Do you know Minnie Jones? She has (begin)

—(26)— again to tell tales about me. She hasn't

yet (drive) —(27)— me to revenge, but she will

if she keeps on (like, as) —(28)— she has been

doing. They told me that just before I came into the

office yesterday she had (drew) —(29)— my picture.

REVIEW TEST ON ENGLISH USAGE 113

ture on a sheet of paper. I could see it partly crum-

pled up and knew some girl had (do) —(30)— it.

If we're going to have a half holiday, why shouldn't

(us, we) —(31)— girls go to the woods for a

picnic? We might take our bathing suits and go into

the water. I have already (swim) —(32)— across

the pond and back. Jenny can swim very (in a good

manner) —(33)—, too. You remember seeing

Helen and (she, her) —(34)— in the hundred-

yards race last year, but of course Helen can swim

much better than (she, her) —(35)—. Helen and

(she, her) —(36)— went to the swimming-meet in

Chicago last spring, and it was (her, she) —(37)—

who dared the champion to race her. The meet took

place on Saturday, and Jenny wasn't (to, at) —(38)—

the office the next Monday morning.

John isn't as tall as (I, me) —(39)— by half a

head, but he can run faster. Is it t—(40)— late

to run a race before supper? Yes. The bell has already

(ring) —(41)—, but I haven't yet (drink)

—(42)— up all my glass of soda water. Have you

finished (you) —(43)—? I had a headache when

I came out, but my head feels (some) —(44)—

better now. Hey! Don't be in such a hurry. Some-

body has left (possessive pronoun) —(45)— brief-

case on the steps here. Wait a minute! Either Fred

or Harry has left (possessive pronoun) —(46)—

sweater, too. (Who) —(47)— hat is this? See

what I have found on the sidewalk—some (ladies)

—(48)— handkerchiefs! Who could have (lie,

114

GRAMMAR

lay) —(49)— them there? How long do you

suppose they have (lie, lay) —(50)— there?

Section Three

This morning there was a bird in our office. It had

(fly) —(51)— right through the window. It

lighted on the side of the tank where our goldfish are

kept and took a drink. Then I saw it flapping around

in the water. I thought it had fallen in and was going

to be (drown) —(52)—. For two or three minutes

while we watched it not a word was (speak) —(53)—.

by anyone. Then the bird flew out of the tank, but I

shut the window just in time to prevent (it) —(54)—

flying away. Then it didn't seem to know where it

was —(55)—.

See what a fine ball Joe has —(56)—! But

fifty-nine cents (is, are) —(57)— too much to pay

for it. It (ought had not) —(58)— to cost as

much as that. It is quite different (to, from, than)

—(59)— mine. But let's see which can hit it

hardest, you or (I, me) —(60)—.

Josie is sick. I have told her to (lay, lie) —(61)—

down in the restroom. She could (not hardly)

—(62)— walk across the hall. When I found her

she was (sit, set) —(63)—ting on the floor. She

said she wished she (was, were) —(64)— at home.

If she (was, were) —(65)— there she would go

to bed at once. She has spells all the time. I don't

know what will become of that (there) —(66)—

girl. (Did, has) —(67)— the doctor come yet?

REVIEW TEST ON ENGLISH USAGE 115

See! you have filled this cup till it has (overflow)

—(68)— . I certainly (will, shall) —(69)— be glad when Josie is better. Probably tomorrow she

will be (all—right) —(70)— again.

Section Four

Copy the following, dividing it into sentences by inserting the necessary periods and capital letters:

When I was coming home from the party last night I saw a ghost I was just coming to the brook all of a

sudden a big white thing came out of the woods, but I could see stars right through it it beckoned to me with

its hand I was scared stiff and stopped then I turned around and ran home by the other road.

Key to Review Test on Correct English Usage

Section One. 1. saw 2. ran 3. let 4. isn't 5. gone

6. those 7. doesn't 8. any 9. torn 10. eaten 11. have

7. given 13. known 14. were 15. frozen 16. from 17. broken 18. written 19. hasn't 20. There 21. are 22. their

8. came 24. taken 25. taught.

Section Two. 26. begun 27. driven 28. as 29. drawn

30. done 31. we 32. swum 33. well 34. her 35. she

31. she 37. she 38. at 39. I 40. too 41. rung 42. drunk

32. yours 44. somewhat 45. his 46. his 47. Whose 48. ladies' 49. laid 50. lain.

Section Three. 51. flown 52. drowned 53. spoken

54. its 55. Nothing needed 56. Nothing needed 57. is

55. ought not 59. from 60. I 61. lie 62. hardly 63. sitting

116

GRAMMAR

64. were 65. were 66. Nothing needed 67. has 68. overflowed 69. shall 70. all right.

Section Four. When I was coming home from the party last night I saw a ghost. I was just coming to the brook. All of a sudden a big white thing came out of the woods, but I could see stars right through it. It beckoned to me with its hand. I was scared stiff and stopped. Then I turned around and ran home by the other road.

More than three errors on this test would indicate that a habit-forming practice course in English should be taken by the student.

APPENDIX

WHAT IS GOOD ENGLISH?

Arranged according to majorities of juries from data

in "Current English Usage," by Sterling A. Leonard.

Published by the National Council of Teachers of English, 211 West 68th St., Chicago.

The juries, totaling 222, were groups of authors, editors, business men, linguists, members of the National

Council of Teachers of English, members of the Modern

Language Association, and speech teachers.

Accepted by a Majority of all Juries as good

formal or literary usage

1. He toils to the end that he may amass wealth.

All agree it is formal.

2. It behooves them to take action at once.

Not commonly used in Great Britain.

3. Under these circumstances I will concede the point.

Authors, editors, and business men consider it colloquial.

Accepted by a Majority of all Juries as Good Colloquial

4. I had rather go at once.

5. This is a man I used to know. (Relative omitted.)

6. You had better stop that foolishness.

7. He did not do as well as we expected.

8. We got home at three o'clock.

9. As regards the League, let me say . . .

117

118

GRAMMAR

10. This was the reason why he went home.

11. None of them are here.

12. I felt I could walk no further.

13. That will be all right, you may be sure.

14. I've absolutely got to go.

15. We can expect the commission to at least protect our interests.

Forty-nine judges considered this good literary usage, but none of the authors did.

16. There are some nice people here.

17. The members of that family often laughed at each other.

18. Will you be at the Browns' this evening?

19. This room is awfully cold.

20. You had to have property to vote, in the eighteenth century.

21. They invited my friends and myself. Myself is slightly more apologetic than me.

22. What was the reason for Bennett making that disturbance?

Jespersen has given a large number of instances from recognized literature to show that the objective is an alternative form in English with the possessive, but only 24 judges classified it as good literary usage.

23. My folks sent me a check.

24. The banker loaned me $200 at 6%.

"He loaned me his skates" is also considered good colloquial usage by the linguists and English teachers.

APPENDIX

119

25. That clock must be fixed.

This is distinctly an American colloquial expression, not used in this sense in Great Britain.

26. My contention has been proven many times.

This seems to be an acceptable colloquial alternative for proved in addition to its use in the Scotch legal phrase "not proven."

27. One rarely likes to do as he is told.

The use of he in referring to one avoids such a stilted expression as "One rarely enjoys one's lunch when one is tired." Meredith uses it in "Evan Harrington."

28. He never works evenings or Sundays.

29. The Rock Island depot burned down last night.

The American use of depot for station seems to be passing, but apparently the authorities see nothing especially wrong with it.

30. I guess I'll go to lunch.

This is an American colloquialism that seems not to be objectionable to anyone.

31. He went right home and told his father.

32. I can't seem to get this problem right.

33. I was pretty mad about it.

The American use of mad for angry seems to be acceptable colloquially in this country.

Questioned Usages

Approved by more than half of the Juries

34. This book is valueless, that one has more to recommend it. (Comma splice.)

Only the English teachers by a majority of one reject this.

120

GRAMMAR

35. We only had one left.

Only the authors disapprove this by a majority of one.

36. Haven't you got through yet?

Only the business men reject this by a majority of 2.

37. That's a dangerous curve; you'd better go slow.

Only the business men vote against this by a majority of 2.

38. I will go providing you keep away.

This is rejected only by the authors by a majority of 5.

39. I will probably come in a little late.

The authors alone reject this by a majority of 5.

40. Leave me alone, or else get out.

Only the English Council members reject this, by a majority of 7. "Leave me go" is in quite a different category.

41. I have got my own opinion on that.

Only the business men reject this, by a majority of 7.

42. Pikes Peak is in Colorado.

Only the linguists reject this omission of the apostrophe, by a majority of 11.

43. I can't help but eat it.

Only the authors reject this, by a majority of 15.

44. There is a big woods behind the house.

Again, only the authors reject this, by a majority of 17.

APPENDIX

121

45. They have gotten a new car this year.

This American survival of an old English form is rejected only by the authors by a majority of one and the business men by a majority of 4.

46. He dove off the pier.

Only the linguists reject this by a majority of one, and the authors by a majority of 8.

47. Drive slow down that hill.

Only the authors reject this by a majority of 6 and the business men by a majority of 4.

48. It was good and cold when I came in.

Only the authors reject this by a majority of 9 and the business men by a majority of 6.

49. My experience on the farm helped me some, of course.

This is rejected only by the linguists by a majority of 7 and the authors by a majority of 12.

50. He could write as well or better than I.

This condensation is disapproved by the authors by a majority of 9 and by the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 10.

51. If I asked him, he would likely refuse.

This is rejected only by the authors by a majority of 8 and the editors by a majority of 13.

52. We will try and get it.

This is rejected by the authors by a majority of one, by the business men by a majority of 5, and by the speech teachers by a majority of 3.

122

GRAMMAR

53. I expect he knows his subject.

This is rejected by the authors by a majority of one, by the editors by a majority of 6, and by the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 3.

54. Everyone was here, but they all went home early.

Rejected by the authors by a majority of one, by the editors by a majority of 4, and by the business men by a majority of 6.

55. There was a bed, a dresser, and two chairs in the room.

Rejected only by the English Council members by a majority of 3, by the editors by a majority of 4, and by the business men by a majority of 4.

56. Such naïf actions seem to me absurd.

This is merely a question whether the English word may be spelled with an f instead of naïve, the usual spelling. The linguists refuse this permission by a majority of 10, the editors by a majority of 2, and the business men by a majority of 2. The rest are willing.

57. John was raised by his aunt.

The linguists reject this by a majority of 7, the authors by a majority of 4, and the editors by a majority of 5.

58. Who are you looking for?

Only the authors by a majority of 4, the business men by a majority of 8, and the speech teachers by a majority of 5 reject this.

59. It is me.

In spite of the tremendous propaganda in favor of it, this is rejected by the authors by a majority of 6, by the editors by a majority of 6, and by the business men by a majority of 11.

APPENDIX

123

60. The child was weak, due to improper feeding.

Said to be used a good deal in Great Britain by military writers. Rejected by the linguists by a majority of 12, by the authors by a majority of 6, and by the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 18.

Condemned by more than half of the Juries

61. A treaty was concluded between the four powers.

Approved only by the linguists by a majority of 18, by the editors by a majority of one, and by the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 9.

62. He is kind of silly, I think.

Approved only by the linguists by a majority of 7, by the English Council members by a majority of 9, and by the business men by a majority of 6.

63. That boy's mischievous behavior aggravates me.

Approved only by the English Council members by a majority of 9, the business men by a majority of 5, and by the speech teachers by a majority of one.

64. The British look at this differently than we do.

Approved only by the business men by a majority of 4, by the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 10, and by the speech teachers by an even vote.

65. It's real cold today.

Approved only by English Council members by a majority of 6, business men by a majority of 12, and speech teachers by a majority of one.

124

GRAMMAR

66. Can I be excused from this class?

Approved only by the linguists by a majority of 19 and the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 4.

67. Either of these three roads is good.

Supported only by the linguists by a majority of 7 and the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 2.

68. Trollope's novels have already begun to date.

Supported only by the business men by an even vote and by the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 2.

69. It seems to be them.

Supported only by the linguists by a majority of 4 and the speech teachers by a majority of 3.

70. Everybody bought their own ticket.

Supported only by the linguists by an even vote and the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of one.

71. Most anybody can do that.

Supported only by the business men by a majority of 4 and the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 3.

72. It is liable to snow tonight.

Supported only by the business men by an even vote and by the speech teachers by a majority of 7.

73. The data is often inaccurate.

Supported only by the business men by a majority of 8 and by the speech teachers by a majority of 9.

APPENDIX

125

74. What are the chances of them being found out?

Supported only by the linguists by a majority of 7.

75. Of two disputants, the warmest is generally in the wrong.

Supported only by the linguists by a majority of 5.

76. The man was very amused.

This use of very without an intervening adverb much may often be found in British writing and formal speech, but is supported only by the members of the Modern Language Association by a majority of 13.

77. There is a row of beds with a curtain between each bed.

This condensed expression is supported only by the business men by a majority of 4.

78. The fire captain with his loyal men were cheered.

Though many writers on grammar have given support to this, only the speech teachers voted for it by a majority of 2, though 13 judges considered it a good literary expression. It cannot be said to be colloquial.

79. We don't often see sunsets like they have in the tropics.

Supported only by the speech teachers by an even vote.

80. She sung very well.

Supported only by members of the English Council by a majority of 18.

81. It is only a little ways farther.

Supported only by the speech teachers by a majority of 4. It is classified as dialectal.

126

GRAMMAR

Considered Illiterate by a majority of all Juries

82. They eat (et) dinner at twelve o'clock.

83. Aren't ('nt or rnt) I right?

A common use in Great Britain but not recognized in the United States.

84. Neither author nor publisher are subject to censorship.

This sentence is quoted from Galsworthy, but Americans are not as fond of the plural as the British are.

85. Don't get these kind of gloves.

86. I am older than him.

87. She leaped off of the moving car.

88. It looked like they meant business.

89. Do it like he tells you.

90. I haven't hardly any money.

91. Now just where are we at?

92. He drunk too much ice water.

93. He begun to make excuses.

94. That ain't so.

95. He looked at me and says . . .

96. I must go and lay down.

97. I want for you to come at once.

98. He won't leave me come in.

99. You was mistaken about that, John.

100. My cold wa'n't any better next day.

1986

UNIVERSAL

LIBRARY

142 148

LIBRARY

UNIVERSAL