-- 497. By referring to the Chapter on the Adverbs, we shall find that the neuter adjective is frequently converted into an adverb by deflection. As any neuter adjective may be so deflected, we may justify such expressions as _full_ (for _fully_) as _conspicuous_ (for _conspicuously_), and _peculiar_ (for _peculiarly_) _bad grace_, &c. We are not, however, bound to imitate everything that we can justify.
-- 498. The termination -ly was originally adjectival. At present it is a derivational syllable by which we can convert an adjective into an adverb: _brave, brave-ly_. When, however, the adjective ends in -ly already, the formation is awkward. _I eat my daily bread_ is unexceptionable English; _I eat my bread daily_ is exceptionable. One of two things must here take place: the two syllables ly are packed into one (the full expression being _dai-li-ly_), or else the construction is that of a neuter adjective deflected.
Adverbs are convertible. _The then men_ = ?? ??? ??t??, &c. This will be seen more clearly in the Chapter on Conjunctions.
-- 499. It has been remarked that in expressions like _he sleeps the sleep of the righteous_, the construction is adverbial. So it is in expressions like _he walked a mile, it weighs a pound_. The ideas expressed by _mile_ and _pound_ are not the names of anything that serves as either object or instrument to the verb. They only denote the _manner_ of the action, and define the meaning of the verb.
-- 500. _From whence_, _from thence_.--This is an expression which, if it have not taken root in our language, is likely to do so. It is an instance of excess of expression in the way of syntax; the -ce denoting direction _from_ a place, and the preposition doing the same. It is not so important to determine what this construction _is_, as to suggest what it is _not_.
It is _not_ an instance of an adverb governed by a preposition. If the two words be dealt with as logically separate, _whence_ (or _thence_) must be a noun = _which place_ (or _that place_); just as _from then till now_ = _from that time to this_. But if (which is the better view) the two words be dealt with as one (i.e., as an improper compound) the preposition _from_ has lost its natural power, and become the element of an adverb.
CHAPTER XXV.
ON PREPOSITIONS.
-- 501. All prepositions govern an oblique case. If a word ceases to do this, it ceases to be a preposition. In the first of the two following sentences the word _up_ is a preposition, in the second an adverb.
1. _I climbed up the tree._ 2. _I climbed up._
All prepositions in English, precede the noun which they govern. _I climbed up the tree_, never _I climbed the tree up_. This is a matter not of government, but of collocation. It is the case in most languages; and, from the frequency of its occurrence, the term _pre-position_ (or _pre-fix_) has originated. Nevertheless, it is by no means a philological necessity. In many languages the prepositions are_ post-positive_, following their noun.
-- 502. No preposition, in the present English, governs a genitive case.
This remark is made, because expressions like the _part of the body = pars corporis,--a piece of the bread = portio panis_, make it appear as if the preposition _of_ did so. The true expression is, that the preposition _of_ followed by an objective case is equivalent in many instances, to the genitive case of the cla.s.sical languages.
CHAPTER XXVI.
ON CONJUNCTIONS.
-- 503. A conjunction is a part of speech which connects _propositions_,--_the day is bright_, is one proposition. _The sun shines_, is another. _The day is bright_ because _the sun shines_ is a pair of propositions connected by the conjunction, _because_.
From this it follows, that whenever there is a conjunction, there are two subjects, two copulas, and two predicates: i.e., two propositions in all their parts.
But this may be expressed compendiously. _The sun shines, and the moon shines_ may be expressed by the _sun and moon shine_.
Nevertheless, however compendious may be the expression, there are always two propositions wherever there is one conjunction. A part of speech that merely combines two words is a preposition,--_the sun along with the moon shines_.
It is highly important to remember that conjunctions connect propositions.
It is also highly important to remember that many double propositions may be expressed so compendiously as to look like one. When this takes place, and any question arises as to the construction, they must be exhibited in their fully expanded form, i.e., the second subject, the second predicate, and the second copula must be supplied. This can always be done from the first proposition,--_he likes you better than me_ = _he likes you better than he likes me_. The compendious expression of the second proposition is the first point of note in the syntax of conjunctions.
-- 504. The second point in the syntax of conjunctions is the fact of their great convertibility. Most conjunctions have been developed out of some other part of speech.
The conjunction of comparison, _than_, is derived from the adverb of time, _then_: which is derived from the accusative singular of the demonstrative p.r.o.noun.
The conjunction, _that_, is derived also from a demonstrative p.r.o.noun.
The conjunction, _therefore_, is a demonstrative p.r.o.noun + a preposition.
The conjunction, _because_, is a substantive governed by a preposition.
One and the same word, in one and the same sentence, may be a conjunction or preposition, as the case may be.
_All fled but John_.--If this mean _all fled_ except _John_, the word _but_ is a preposition, the word _John_ is an accusative case, and the proposition is single. If instead of _John_, we had a personal p.r.o.noun, we should say _all fled but_ him.
_All fled but John_.--If this mean _all fled but John did not fly_, the word _but_ is a conjunction, the word _John_ is a nominative case, and the propositions are two in number. If, instead of _John_, we had a personal p.r.o.noun, we should say, _all fled but_ he.
From the fact of the great convertibility of conjunctions it is often necessary to determine whether a word be a conjunction or not. _If it be a conjunction, it cannot govern a case. If it govern a case it is no conjunction but a preposition._ A conjunction cannot govern a case, for the following reasons,--the word that follows it _must_ be the subject of the second proposition, and as such, a nominative case.
-- 505. The third point to determine in the syntax of conjunctions is the certainty or uncertainty in the mind of the speaker as to the facts expressed by the propositions which they serve to connect.
1. Each proposition may contain a certain, definite, absolute fact--_the day is clear_ because _the sun shines_. Here there is neither doubt nor contingency of either the _day being clear_, or of the _sun shining_.
Of two propositions one may be the condition of the other--_the day will be clear_ if _the sun shine_. Here, although it is certain that _if the sun shine the day will be clear_, there is no certainty of _the sun shining_.
Of the two propositions one only embodies a certain fact, and that is certain only conditionally.
Now an action, wherein there enters any notion of uncertainty, or indefinitude, and is at the same time connected with another action, is expressed, not by the indicative mood, but by the subjunctive. _If the sun_ shine (not _shines_) _the day will be clear._
Simple uncertainty will not const.i.tute a subjunctive construction,--_I am_, perhaps, _in the wrong_.
Neither will simple connection.--_I am wrong_, because _you are right_.
But, the two combined const.i.tute the construction in question,--_if I _be_ wrong, you are right_.
Now, a conjunction that connects two certain propositions may be said to govern an indicative mood.
And a conjunction that connects an uncertain proposition with a certain one, may be said to govern a subjunctive mood.
_The government of mood is the only form of government of which conjunctions are capable._
-- 506. Previous to the question of the government of conjunctions in the way of mood, it is necessary to notice certain points of agreement between them and the relative p.r.o.nouns; inasmuch as, in many cases, the relative p.r.o.noun exerts the same government, in the way of determining the mood of the verb, as the conjunction.
Between the relative p.r.o.nouns and conjunctions in general there is this point of connection,--both join propositions. Wherever there is a relative, there is a second proposition. So there is wherever there is a conjunction.
Between certain relative p.r.o.nouns and those particular conjunctions that govern a subjunctive mood there is also a point of connection. Both suggest an element of uncertainty or indefinitude. This the relative p.r.o.nouns do, through the logical elements common to them and to the interrogatives: these latter essentially suggesting the idea of doubt. Wherever the person, or thing, connected with an action, and expressed by a relative is indefinite, there is room for the use of a subjunctive mood. Thus--"he that troubled you shall bear his judgment, _whosoever_ he _be_."
-- 507. By considering the nature of such words as _when_, their origin as relatives on the one hand, and their conjunctional character on the other hand, we are prepared for finding a relative element in words like _till_, _until_, _before_, _as long as_, &c. These can all be expanded into expressions like _until the time when_, _during the time when_, &c. Hence, in an expression like _seek out his wickedness till thou_ find (not _findest_) _none_, the principle of the construction is nearly the same as in _he that troubled you_, &c., or _vice versa_.[64]
-- 508. In most conditional expressions the subjunctive mood should follow the conjunction. All the following expressions are conditional.
1. _Except_ I _be_ by Silvia in the night, There is no music in the nightingale.--SHAKSPEARE.
2. Let us go and sacrifice to the Lord our G.o.d, _lest_ he _fall_ upon us with pestilence.--_Old Testament._