The man went _under_ the house.
The man went _without_ the house.
The man went _into_ the house.
The man went _by_ the house.
The man went _beyond_ the house.
The man went _to_ the house.
enemy city soldiers cannon man machine woman factory children school government people
A GOVERNING WORD
+312.+ The preposition shows the relation between two words. In this way it enables us to use a noun or a p.r.o.noun as a modifying word. For example, in the sentence given above, _I see the bird in the tree_, the preposition _in_ shows the relationship between _bird_ and _tree_, and makes of _tree_ a modifying word. It expresses a different meaning than if we used the word _tree_ as an adjective. For we do not mean that we see a tree bird, but a bird in a tree. So with the help of the preposition _in_, we have used _tree_ as a modifying word.
But the preposition _in_ also governs the form of the word that follows it. Since nouns have the same form whether they are used as subject or object, this does not mean any change in the form of the nouns. But p.r.o.nouns have different forms for the subject and object, so when we use a p.r.o.noun with a preposition, we must use the object form. There are seven object forms of the personal p.r.o.nouns, and after a preposition, always use one of these object forms.
He gave it to _me_.
Give it to _him_.
Give it to _her_.
Add this to _it_.
Bring it to _us_.
I will give it to _you_.
He gave it to _them_.
+313.+ Be careful to always use the object form of the p.r.o.noun following a preposition. Observe this also in the use of the relative and interrogative p.r.o.noun "who." The object form is "whom." For example:
To whom will you go?
This is the man to whom I wrote.
For whom are you looking?
Where is the woman for whom you would make such a sacrifice?
Where to Put the Preposition
+314.+ The preposition generally precedes its object. This is the reason it was given its name, _preposition_, meaning _to place before_.
Sometimes, however, the preposition is separated from its object. This is often true when it is used with an interrogative or relative p.r.o.noun.
With these p.r.o.nouns, the preposition is often thrown to the end of the sentence. For example:
This is the book about which I was speaking; _or_, This is the book which I was speaking about.
To whom shall I give this letter; _or_, Who shall I give this letter to?
The sentence, _To whom shall I give this letter_, is grammatically correct; but in ordinary usage we use the form, _Who shall I give this letter to?_
While the rule calls for the object form of the relative p.r.o.noun after a preposition--so that the use of _to whom_ is grammatically correct--in common usage we use the subject form of the p.r.o.noun when it is used so far away from the preposition which governs it. So we find this use common. For example, instead of saying, _For whom is this letter?_ we say, _Who is this letter for?_
+315.+ In poetry also, we often find the object coming before the preposition. For example:
"The interlacing boughs between Shadows dark and sunlight sheen, Alternate, come and go."
_Boughs_ is here the object of the preposition _between_, but in this poetic expression the object is placed before the preposition. Note also in the following:
"The unseen mermaid"s pearly song, Comes bubbling up the weeds _among_."
"Forever panting and forever young, All breathing human pa.s.sion far _beyond_."
+316.+ After an interrogative adjective, the preposition is also often thrown to the end of the sentence. As, for example:
What men are the people talking _about_?
Which person did you write _to_?
With these few exceptions, however, the preposition usually precedes its object, as:
We were astonished _at_ the news.
He arose _from_ his sleep.
POSSESSIVE PHRASES
+317.+ Review Lesson 4, in which we studied the possessive use of nouns.
You will recall that we make the possessive form of the nouns by the use of the apostrophe and _s_. But instead of using the possessive forms of the name of inanimate things; that is, things without life, we generally denote possession by the use of a phrase. Thus we would say, _The arm of the chair_, instead of, _The chair"s arm_; or, _The roof of the house_, instead of, _The house"s roof_.
+318.+ We also use a possessive phrase when the use of a possessive form would give an awkward construction. As, for example: _Jesus" sayings_.
So many hissing sounds are not pleasant to the ear and so, we say instead, _The sayings of Jesus_.
+319.+ We use a phrase also where both nouns are in the plural form. In many words, there is no difference in the sound between a single noun in the possessive form and a plural noun in the possessive form. We can readily tell the meaning when it is written, because the place of the apostrophe indicates the meaning, but when it is spoken the sound is exactly the same. As, for example:
The lady"s hats.
The ladies" hats.
Written out in this way, you know that in the first instance I am speaking of the hats belonging to one lady, but in the second instance of the hats belonging to two or more ladies. But when it is spoken, you can not tell whether I mean one lady or a number of ladies. So we use a phrase and say, _The hats of the lady_; or, _The hats of the ladies_.
Then the meaning is entirely clear.
+320.+ Sometimes we want to use two possessives together, and in this case it is better to change one of them into a phrase; for example, _This is my comrade"s father"s book_. This is an awkward construction.
Say instead, _This is the book belonging to my comrade"s father_.
+321.+ Do not overlook the fact, however, that the phrase beginning with _of_ does not always mean possession. Consider the following examples and see if there is not a difference in meaning:
The history of Wilson is interesting.
Wilson"s history is interesting.
In the first instance, I mean the history of Wilson"s life is interesting; in the second instance I mean the history belongs to or written by Wilson is interesting. So there is quite a difference in the meaning. The phrase _of Wilson_ used in the first example does not indicate possession.
Note the difference in meaning between the following sentences:
The picture of Millet is good.
Millet"s picture is good.
The statue of Rodin stands in the park.
Rodin"s statue stands in the park.