But he goes on: "We cannot say, "They or I _am_ in fault; I, or they, or he, _is_ the author of it; George or I _am_ the person." Mr. Lindley Murray says, that we _may_ use these phrases; and that we have only to take care that the verb agree with that person which is _placed nearest_ to it; but, he says also, that it would be _better_ to avoid such phrases by giving a different turn to our words. I do not like to leave any thing to chance or to discretion, when we have a _clear principle_ for our guide."--_Ib._, -- 243. This author"s "clear principle" is merely his own confident a.s.sumption, that every form of figurative or implied agreement, every thing which the old grammarians denominated _zeugma_, is at once to be condemned as a solecism. He is however supported by an other late writer of much greater merit. See _Churchill"s New Gram._, pp. 142 and 312.
OBS. 7.--If, in lieu of their fict.i.tious examples, our grammarians would give us actual quotations from reputable authors, their instructions would doubtless gain something in accuracy, and still more in authority. "_I or they were offended by it_," and, "_I, or thou, or he, is the author of it_," are expressions that I shall not defend. They imply an _egotistical_ speaker, who either does not know, or will not tell, whether he is _offended_ or not,--whether he _is the author_ or not! Again, there are expressions that are un.o.bjectionable, and yet not conformable to any of the rules just quoted. That nominatives may be correctly connected by _or_ or _nor_ without an express agreement of the verb with each of them, is a point which can be proved to as full certainty as almost any other in grammar; Churchill, Cobbett, and Peirce to the contrary notwithstanding.
But with which of the nominatives the verb shall expressly agree, or to which of them it may most properly be understood, is a matter not easy to be settled by any _sure_ general rule. Nor is the lack of such a rule a very important defect, though the inculcation of a false or imperfect one may be. So judged at least the ancient grammarians, who noticed and named almost every possible form of the zeugma, without censuring any as being ungrammatical. In the Inst.i.tutes of English Grammar, I noted first the usual form of this concord, and then the allowable exceptions; but a few late writers, we see, denounce every form of it, exceptions and all: and, standing alone in their notions of the figure, value their own authority more than that of all other critics together.
OBS. 8.--In English, as in other languages, when a verb has discordant nominatives connected disjunctively, it most commonly agrees expressly with that which is nearest, and only by implication, with the more remote; as, "When some word or words _are_ dependent on the attribute."--_Webster"s Philos. Gram._, p. 153. "To the first of these qualities, dulness or refinements _are_ dangerous enemies."--_Brown"s Estimate_, Vol. ii, p. 15.
"He hazards his own life with that of his enemy, and one or both _are_ very _honorably_ murdered."--_Webster"s Essays_, p. 235. "The consequence is, that they frown upon everyone whose faults or negligence _interrupts_ or _r.e.t.a.r.ds_ their lessons."--_W. C. Woodbridge: Lit. Conv._, p. 114. "Good intentions, or at least sincerity of purpose, _was_ never denied her."--_West"s Letters_, p. 43. "Yet this proves not that either he or we _judge_ them to be the rule."--_Barclay"s Works_, i, 157. "First clear yourselves of popery before you or thou _dost throw_ it upon us."--_Ib._, i, 169. "_Is_ the gospel or glad tidings of this salvation brought nigh unto all?"--_Ib._, i, 362. "Being persuaded, that either they, or their cause, _is_ naught."--_Ib._, i, 504. "And the reader may judge whether he or I _do_ most fully acknowledge man"s fall."--_Ib._, iii, 332. "To do justice to the Ministry, they have not yet pretended that any one, or any two, of the three Estates, _have_ power to make a new law, without the concurrence of the third."--_Junius_, Letter xvii. "The forest, or hunting-grounds, _are_ deemed the property of the tribe."--_Robertson"s America_, i, 313. "Birth or t.i.tles _confer_ no preeminence."--_Ib._, ii, 184. "Neither tobacco nor hides _were_ imported from Caraccas into Spain."--_Ib._, ii, 507. "The keys or seed-vessel of the maple _has_ two large side-wings."--_The Friend_, vii, 97. "An example or two _are_ sufficient to ill.u.s.trate the general observation."--_Dr. Murray"s Hist. of Lang._, i, 58.
"Not thou, nor those thy factious arts engage, _Shall_ reap that harvest of rebellious rage."--_Dryden_, p. 60.
OBS. 9.--But when the remoter nominative is the princ.i.p.al word, and the nearer one is expressed parenthetically, the verb agrees literally with the former, and only by implication, with the latter; as, "One example, (or ten,) _says_ nothing against it."--_Leigh Hunt_. "And we, (or future ages,) _may_ possibly _have_ a proof of it."--_Bp. Butler_. So, when the alternative is merely in the _words_, not in the _thought_, the former term is sometimes considered the princ.i.p.al one, and is therefore allowed to control the verb; but there is always a harshness in this mixture of different numbers, and, to render such a construction tolerable, it is necessary to read the latter term like a parenthesis, and make the former emphatic: as, "A _parenthesis_, or brackets, _consists_ of two angular strokes, or hooks, enclosing one or more words."--_Whiting"s Reader_, p.
28. "To show us that our own _schemes_, or prudence, _have_ no share in our advancements."--_Addison_. "The Mexican _figures_, or picture-writing, _represent_ things, not words; _they_ exhibit images to the eye, not ideas to the understanding."--_Murray"s Gram._, p. 243; _English Reader_, p.
xiii. "At Travancore, _Koprah_, or dried cocoa-nut kernels, _is_ monopolized by government."--_Maunder"s Gram._, p. 12. "The _Scriptures_, or Bible, _are_ the only authentic source."--_Bp. Tomline"s Evidences_.
"Nor foes nor fortune _take_ this power away; And is my Abelard less kind than _they_?"--_Pope_, p. 334.
OBS. 10.--The English adjective being indeclinable, we have no examples of some of the forms of zeugma which occur in Latin and Greek. But adjectives differing in _number_, are sometimes connected without a repet.i.tion of the noun; and, in the agreement of the verb, the noun which is understood, is less apt to be regarded than that which is expressed, though the latter be more remote; as, "There _are one or two_ small _irregularities_ to be noted."--_Lowth"s Gram._, p. 63. "There _are one or two persons_, and but one or two."--_Hazlitt"s Lectures_. "There _are one or two_ others."--_Crombie"s Treatise_, p. 206. "There _are one or two_."--_Blair"s Rhet._, p. 319. "There _are one or more_ seminaries in every province."--_H. E. Dwight: Lit. Conv._, p. 133. "Whether _one or more_ of the clauses _are_ to be considered the nominative case."--_Murray"s Gram._, Vol. i, p. 150. "So that, I believe, there _is_ not _more_ than _one_ genuine example extant."--_Knight, on the Greek Alphabet_, p. 10. "There _is_, properly, no _more_ than _one_ pause or rest in the sentence."--_Murray"s Gram._, Vol. i, p. 329; _Blair"s Rhet._, p. 125.
"Sometimes a small _letter or two is_ added to the capital."--_Adam"s Lat.
Gram._, p. 223; _Gould"s_, 283. Among the examples in the seventh paragraph above, there is one like this last, but with a plural verb; and if either is objectionable, _is_ should here be _are_. The preceding example, too, is such as I would not imitate. To L. Murray, the following sentence seemed false syntax, because _one_ does not agree with _persons_: "He saw _one or more persons_ enter the garden."--_Murray"s Exercises_, Rule 8th, p. 54. In his Key, he has it thus: "He saw one _person_, or _more than one_, enter the garden."--_Oct. Gram._, Vol. ii, p. 189. To me, this stiff _correction_, which many later grammarians have copied, seems worse than none. And the effect of the principle may be noticed in Murray"s style elsewhere; as, "When a _semicolon, or more than one_, have preceded."--_Octavo Gram._, i, p. 277; _Ingersoll"s Gram._, p. 288. Here a ready writer would be very apt to prefer one of the following phrases: "When a semicolon _or two_ have preceded,"--"When _one or two semicolons_ have preceded,"--"When _one or more semicolons_ have preceded." It is better to write by guess, than to become systematically awkward in expression.
OBS. 11.--In Greek and Latin, the p.r.o.noun of the first person, according to our critics, is _generally_[398] placed first; as, "[Greek: Ego kai su ta dikaia poiaesomen]. Xen."--_Milnes"s Gr. Gram._, p. 120. That is, "_Ego et tu justa faciemus_." Again: "_Ego et Cicero valemus_. Cic."--_Buchanan"s Pref._, p. x; _Adam"s Gram._, 206; _Gould"s_, 203. "I and Cicero are well."--_Ib._ But, in English, a modest speaker usually gives to others the precedence, and mentions himself last; as, "He, or thou, or I, must go."--"Thou and I will do what is right."--"Cicero and I are well."--_Dr.
Adam_.[399] Yet, in speaking of himself and his _dependants_, a person most commonly takes rank before them; as, "Your inestimable letters supported _myself, my wife_, and _children_, in adversity."--_Lucien Bonaparte, Charlemagne_, p. v. "And I shall be destroyed, _I_ and _my house_."--_Gen._, x.x.xiv, 30. And in acknowledging a fault, misfortune, or censure, any speaker may a.s.sume the first place; as, "Both _I and thou_ are in the fault."--_Adam"s Gram._, p. 207. "Both _I and you_ are in fault."--_Buchanan"s Syntax_, p. ix. "Trusty did not do it; _I and Robert_ did it."--_Edgeworth"s Stories_.
"With critic scales, weighs out the partial wit, What _I_, or _you_, or _he_, or _no one_ writ."
--_Lloyd"s Poems_, p. 162.
OBS. 12.--According to the theory of this work, verbs themselves are not unfrequently connected, one to an other, by _and, or_, or _nor_; so that two or more of them, being properly in the same construction, may be pa.r.s.ed as agreeing with the same nominative: as, "So that the blind and dumb [_man_] both _spake_ and _saw_."--_Matt._, xii, 22. "That no one _might buy_ or _sell_."--_Rev._, xiii, 17. "Which _see_ not, nor _hear_, nor _know_."--_Dan._, v, 23. We have certainly very many examples like these, in which it is neither convenient nor necessary to suppose an ellipsis of the nominative before the latter verb, or before all but the first, as most of our grammarians do, whenever they find two or more finite verbs connected in this manner. It is true, the nominative may, in most instances, be repeated without injury to the sense; but this fact is no proof of such an ellipsis; because many a sentence which is not incomplete, may possibly take additional words without change of meaning. But these authors, (as I have already suggested under the head of conjunctions,) have not been very careful of their own consistency. If they teach, that, "Every finite verb has its own separate nominative, either expressed or implied,"
which idea Murray and others seem to have gathered from Lowth; or if they say, that, "Conjunctions really unite sentences, when they appear to unite only words," which notion they may have acquired from Harris; what room is there for that common a.s.sertion, that, "Conjunctions connect the same moods and tenses of verbs," which is a part of Murray"s eighteenth rule, and found in most of our grammars? For no agreement is usually required between verbs that have separate nominatives; and if we supply a nominative wherever we do not find one for each verb, then in fact no two verbs will ever be connected by any conjunction.
OBS. 13.--What agreement there must be, between verbs that are in the same construction, it is not easy to determine with certainty. Some of the Latin grammarians tell us, that certain conjunctions connect "sometimes similar moods and tenses, and sometimes similar moods but different tenses." See _Prat"s Grammatica Latina, Octavo_, Part ii, p. 95. Ruddiman, Adam, and Grant, omit the concord of tenses, and enumerate certain conjunctions which "couple like cases and moods." But all of them acknowledge some exceptions to their rules. The instructions of Lindley Murray and others, on this point, may be summed up in the following canon: "When verbs are connected by a conjunction, they must either agree in mood, tense, and form, or have separate nominatives expressed." This rule, (with a considerable exception to it, which other authors had not noticed.) was adopted by myself in the Inst.i.tutes of English Grammar, and also retained in the Brief Abstract of that work, ent.i.tled, The First Lines of English Grammar. It there stands as the thirteenth in the series of princ.i.p.al rules; but, as there is no occasion to refer to it in the exercise of parsing, I now think, a less prominent place may suit it as well or better. The principle may be considered as being less certain and less important than most of the usual rules of syntax: I shall therefore both modify the expression of it, and place it among the notes of the present code. See Notes 5th and 6th below.
OBS. 14.--By the agreement of verbs with each other in _form_, it is meant, that the simple form and the compound, the familiar form and the solemn, the affirmative form and the negative, or the active form and the pa.s.sive, are not to be connected without a repet.i.tion of the nominative. With respect to _our_ language, this part of the rule is doubtless as important, and as true, as any other. A thorough agreement, then, in mood, tense, and form, is _generally_ required, when verbs are connected by _and, or_, or _nor_; and, under each part of this concord, there may be cited certain errors which ought to be avoided, as will by-and-by be shown. But, at the same time, there seem to be many allowable violations of the rule, some or other of which may perhaps form exceptions to every part of it. For example, the _tense_ may be varied, as it often is in Latin; thus, "As the general state of religion _has been, is_, or _shall be_, affected by them."--_Butlers a.n.a.logy_, p. 241. "Thou art righteous, O Lord, which _art_, and _wast_, and _shall be_, because thou hast judged thus."--_Rev._, xvi, 5. In the former of these examples, a repet.i.tion of the nominative would not be agreeable; in the latter, it would perhaps be an improvement: as, "_who_ art, and _who_ wast, and _who_ shalt be." (I here change the p.r.o.noun, because the relative _which_ is not now applied as above.) "This dedication may serve for almost any book, that _has been_, or _shall be_ published."--_Campbell"s Rhet._ p. 207; _Murray"s Gram._, p. 222. "It ought to be, "_has been, is_, or _shall be_, published.""--_Crombie"s Treatise_, p. 383. "Truth and good sense _are_ firm, and _will establish_ themselves."--_Blair"s Rhet._ p. 286. "Whereas Milton _followed_ a different plan, and _has given_ a tragic conclusion to a poem otherwise epic in its form."--_Ib._, p. 428. "I am certain, that such _are not_, nor ever _were_, the tenets of the church of England."--_West"s Letters_, p.
148. "They _deserve_, and _will meet with_, no regard."--_Blair"s Rhet._, p. 109.
"Whoever thinks a faultless piece to see, Thinks what ne"er _was_, nor _is_, nor e"er _shall be_."
--_Pope, on Crit._
OBS. 15.--So verbs differing in _mood_ or _form_ may sometimes agree with the same nominative, if the simplest verb be placed first--rarely, I think, if the words stand in any other order: as, "One _may be_ free from affectation and _not have_ merit"--_Blair"s Rhet._, p. 189. "There _is_, and _can be_, no other person."--_Murray"s Key_. 8vo. p. 224. "To see what _is_, and _is allowed_ to be, the plain natural rule."--_Butler"s a.n.a.logy_, p. 284. "This great experiment _has worked_, and _is working_, well, every way well"--BRADBURN: _Liberator_, ix. 162. "This edition of Mr. Murray"s works on English Grammar, _deserves_ a place in Libraries, and _will not fail_ to obtain it."--BRITISH CRITIC: _Murray"s Gram._, 8vo, ii, 299.
"What nothing earthly _gives_, or _can destroy_."--_Pope_.
"Some _are_, and _must be_, greater than the rest."--_Id._
OBS. 16.--Since most of the tenses of an English verb are composed of two or more words, to prevent a needless or disagreeable repet.i.tion of auxiliaries, participles, and princ.i.p.al verbs, those parts which are common to two or more verbs in the same sentence, are generally expressed to the first, and understood to the rest; or reserved, and put last, as the common supplement of each; as, "To which they _do_ or _can extend_."--_Butler"s a.n.a.logy_, p. 77. "He _may_, as any one _may_, if he _will, incur_ an infamous execution from the hands of civil justice."--_Ib._, p. 82. "All that has usurped the name of virtue, and [_has_] deceived us by its semblance, must be a mockery and a delusion."--_Dr. Chalmers_. "Human praise, and human eloquence, may acknowledge it, but the Discerner of the heart never will" [_acknowledge it_].--_Id._ "We use thee not so hardly, as prouder livers do" [_use thee_].--_Shak._ "Which they might have foreseen and [_might have_] avoided."--_Butler_. "Every sincere endeavour to amend, shall be a.s.sisted, [_shall be_] accepted, and [_shall be_]
rewarded."--_Carter_. "Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and [_will_] stand and [_will_] call on the name of the Lord his G.o.d, and [_will_] strike his hand over the place, and [_will_] recover the leper."--_2 Kings_, v, 11. "They mean to, and will, hear patiently."--_Salem Register_. That is, "They mean to _hear patiently_, and _they_ will hear patiently." "He can create, and he destroy."--_Bible_.
That is,--"and he _can_ destroy."
"Virtue _may be a.s.sail"d_, but never _hurt_, _Surpris"d_ by unjust force, but not _inthrall"d_."--_Milton_.
"Mortals whose pleasures are their only care, First wish to be _imposed on_, and then _are_."--_Cowper_.
OBS. 17.--From the foregoing examples, it may be seen, that the complex and divisible structure of the English moods and tenses, produces, when verbs are connected together, a striking peculiarity of construction in our language, as compared with the nearest corresponding construction in Latin or Greek. For we can connect different auxiliaries, participles, or princ.i.p.al verbs, without repeating, and apparently without connecting, the other parts of the mood or tense. And although it is commonly supposed that these parts are necessarily understood wherever they are not repeated, there are sentences, and those not a few, in which we cannot express them, without inserting also an additional nominative, and producing distinct clauses; as, "_Should_ it not _be taken_ up and _pursued_?"--_Dr.
Chalmers_. "Where thieves _do_ not _break_ through nor _steal_."--_Matt._, vi, 20. "None present _could_ either _read_ or _explain_ the writing-."--_Wood"s Dict._, Vol. i, p. 159. Thus we sometimes make a single auxiliary an index to the mood and tense of more than one verb.
OBS. 18.--The verb _do_, which is sometimes an auxiliary and sometimes a princ.i.p.al verb, is thought by some grammarians to be also fitly made a _subst.i.tute_ for other verbs, as a p.r.o.noun is for nouns; but this doctrine has not been taught with accuracy, and the practice under it will in many instances be found to involve a solecism. In this kind of subst.i.tution, there must either be a true ellipsis of the princ.i.p.al verb, so that _do_ is only an auxiliary; or else the verb _do_, with its _object_ or _adverb_, if it need one, must exactly correspond to an action described before; so that to speak of _doing this_ or _thus_, is merely the shortest way of repeating the idea: as, "He _loves_ not plays, as thou _dost_. Antony."--_Shak._ That is, "as thou _dost love plays._" "This fellow is wise enough _to play the fool_; and, _to do that_ well, craves a kind of wit."--_Id._ Here, "_to do that_," is, "_to play the fool_." "I will not _do it_, if I find thirty there."--_Gen._, xviii, 30. Do what? Destroy the city, as had been threatened. Where _do_ is an auxiliary, there is no real subst.i.tution; and, in the other instances, it is not properly the verb _do_, that is the subst.i.tute, but rather the word that follows it--or perhaps, both. For, since every action consists in _doing something_ or in _doing somehow_, this general verb _do_, with _this, that, it, thus_, or _so_, to identify the action, may a.s.sume the import of many a longer phrase. But care must be taken not to subst.i.tute this verb for any term to which it is not equivalent; as, "The _a_ is certainly to be sounded as the English _do_."--_Walker"s Dict., w. A_. Say, "as the English _sound it_;" for _do_ is here absurd, and grossly solecistical. "The duke had not behaved with that loyalty with which he ought to have _done_."--_Lowth"s Gram._, p. 111; _Murray"s_, i, 212; _Churchill"s_, 355; _Fisk"s_, 137; _Ingersoll"s_, 269.
Say, "with which he ought to have _behaved_;" for, to have _done_ with loyalty is not what was meant--far from it. Clarendon wrote the text thus: "The Duke had not behaved with that loyalty, _as_ he ought to have done."
This should have been corrected, not by changing _"as"_ to _"with which"_, but by saying--"with that loyalty _which_ he ought to have _observed;"_ or, "_which would have become him"_.
OBS. 19.--It is little to the credit of our grammarians, to find so many of them thus concurring in the same obvious error, and even making bad English worse. The very examples which have hitherto been given to prove that _do_ may be a subst.i.tute for other verbs, are _none of them in point_, and all of them have been constantly and shamefully _misinterpreted._ Thus: "They [_do_ and _did_] sometimes also supply the place of _another verb_, and make the repet.i.tion of it, in the same or a subsequent sentence, unnecessary: as, "You attend not to your studies as he _does_;" (i. e. as he _attends_, &c.) "I shall come if I can; but if I _do not_, please to excuse me;" (i. e. if I _come_ not.)"--_L. Murray"s Gram._, Vol. i, p. 88; _R. C. Smith"s_, 88; _Ingersoll"s_, 135; _Fisk"s_, 78; _A. Flint"s_, 41; _Hiley"s_, 30. This remark, but not the examples, was taken from _Lowths Gram._, p. 41. Churchill varies it thus, and retains Lowth"s example: "It [i. e., _do_] is used also, to supply the _place of another verb_, in order to avoid the repet.i.tion of it: as, "He _loves_ not plays, As thou _dost_, Antony." SHAKS."--_New Gram._, p. 96. Greenleaf says, "To prevent the repet.i.tion of _one or more verbs_, in the same, or [a] following sentence, we frequently make use of _do_ AND _did_; as, "Jack learns the English language as fast as Henry _does_;" that is, "as fast as Henry _learns_." "I shall come if I can; but if I _do_ not, please to excuse me;" that is, "if I _come_ not.""--_Gram. Simplified_, p. 27. Sanborn says, "_Do_ is also used _instead of another verb_, and not unfrequently instead of both _the verb and its object_; as, "he _loves work_ as well as you _do_;" that is, as well as you _love work_."--_a.n.a.lyt. Gram._, p. 112. Now all these interpretations are wrong; the word _do, dost_, or _does_, being simply an auxiliary, after which the princ.i.p.al verb (with its object where it has one) is _understood_. But the first example is _bad English_, and its explanation is still worse. For, "_As he attends_, &c.," means, "As _he_ attends _to your studies!_" And what good sense is there in this? The sentence ought to have been, "You do not attend to your studies, as he does _to his_." That is--"as he does _attend_ to his _studies_." This plainly shows that there is, in the text, no real subst.i.tution of _does_ for _attends_. So of all other examples exhibited in our grammars, under this head: there is nothing to the purpose, in any of them; the common principle of _ellipsis_ resolves them all. Yet, strange to say, in the latest and most learned of this sort of text-books, we find the same sham example, fict.i.tious and solecistical as it is, still blindly repeated, to show that "_does_" is not in its own place, as an auxiliary, but "supplies the place of another verb."--_Fowler"s E. Gram._, 8vo. 1850. p. 265.
NOTES TO RULE XVII.
NOTE I.--When a verb has nominatives of different persons or numbers,[400]
connected by _or_ or _nor_, it must agree with the nearest, (unless an other be the princ.i.p.al term,) and must be understood to the rest, in the person and number required; as, "Neither you nor I _am_ concerned."--_W.
Allen_. "That neither they nor ye also _die_."--_Numb._, xviii, 3.
"But neither G.o.d, nor shrine, nor mystic rite, Their city, nor her walls, his soul _delight_."
--_Rowe"s Lucan_, B. x, l. 26.
NOTE II.--But, since all nominatives that require different forms of the verb, virtually produce separate clauses or propositions, it is better to complete the concord whenever we conveniently can, by expressing the verb or its auxiliary in connexion with each of them; as, "Either thou _art_ to blame, or I _am_."--_Comly"s Gram._, p. 78. "Neither _were_ their numbers, nor _was_ their destination, known."--_W. Allen"s Gram._, p. 134. So in clauses connected by _and_: as, "But declamation _is_ idle, and _murmurs_ fruitless."--_Webster"s Essays_, p. 82. Say,--"and murmurs _are_ fruitless."
NOTE III.--In English, the speaker should always mention himself last; unless his own superior dignity, or the confessional nature of the expression, warrant him in taking the precedence: as, "_Thou or I_ must go."--"He then addressed his discourse to _my father and me_."--"_Ellen and I_ will seek, apart, the refuge of some forest cell."--_Scott_. See Obs.
11th above.
NOTE IV.--Two or more distinct subject phrases connected by _or_ or _nor_, require a singular verb; and, if a nominative come after the verb, that must be singular also: as, "That a drunkard should be poor, _or_ that a fop should be ignorant, _is_ not strange."--"To give an affront, or to take one tamely, _is_ no _mark_ of a great mind." So, when the phrases are unconnected: as, "To spread suspicion, to invent calumnies, to propagate scandal, _requires_ neither labour nor courage."--_Rambler_, No. 183.
NOTE V.--In general, when _verbs_ are connected by _and, or_, or _nor_, they must either agree in mood, tense, and form, or the simplest in form must be placed first; as, "So Sennacherib king of a.s.syria _departed_, and _went_ and _returned_, and _dwelt_ at Nineveh."--_Isaiah_, x.x.xvii, 37. "For if I _be_ an offender, or _have committed_ any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die."--_Acts_, xxv, 11.
NOTE VI.--In stead of conjoining discordant verbs, it is in general better to repeat the nominative or insert a new one; as, "He was greatly heated, and [_he] drank_ with avidity."--_Murray"s Key_, 8vo, p. 201. "A person may be great or rich by chance; but _cannot be_ wise or good, without taking pains for it."--_Ib._, p. 200. Say,--"but _no one can be_ wise or good, without taking pains for it."
NOTE VII.--A mixture of the forms of the solemn style and the familiar, is inelegant, whether the verbs refer to the same nominative or have different ones expressed; as, "What _appears_ tottering and in hazard of tumbling, _produceth_ in the spectator the painful emotion of fear."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 356. "And the milkmaid _singeth_ blithe, And the mower _whets_ his sithe."--_Milton"s Allegro_, l. 65 and 66.
NOTE VIII.--To use different moods under precisely the same circ.u.mstances, is improper, even if the verbs have separate nominatives; as, "Bating that one _speak_ and an other _answers_, it is quite the same."--_Blair"s Rhet._, p. 368. Say,--"that one _speaks_;" for both the speaking and the answering are a.s.sumed as facts.
NOTE IX.--When two terms are connected, which involve different forms of the same verb, such parts of the compound tenses as are not common to both forms, should be inserted in full: except sometimes after the auxiliary _do_; as, "And then he _falls_, as I _do_."--_Shak_. That is, "as I _do fall_." The following sentences are therefore faulty: "I think myself highly obliged _to make_ his fortune, as he _has_ mine."--_Spect._, No.
474. Say,--"as he _has made_ mine." "Every attempt to remove them, _has_, and likely _will prove_ unsuccessful."--_Gay"s Prosodical Gram._, p. 4.
Say,--"_has proved_, and likely _will prove_, unsuccessful."
NOTE X.--The verb _do_ must never be subst.i.tuted for any term to which its own meaning is not adapted; nor is there any use in putting it for a preceding verb that is equally short: as, "When we see how confidently men rest on groundless surmises in reference to their own souls, we cannot wonder that they _do it_ in reference to others."--_Simeon_. Better:--"that they _so rest_ in reference to _the souls of_ others;" for this repeats the idea with more exactness. NOTE XI.--The preterit should not be employed to form the compound tenses of the verb; nor should the perfect participle be used for the preterit or confounded with the present. Thus: say, "To have _gone_," not, "To have _went_;" and, "I _did_ so," not, "I _done_ so;"
or, "He _saw_ them," not, "He _seen_ them." Again: say not, "It was _lift_ or _hoist_ up;" but, "It was _lifted_ or _hoisted_ up."
NOTE XII.--Care should be taken, to give every verb or participle its appropriate form, and not to confound those which resemble each other; as, _to flee_ and _to fly, to lay_ and _to lie, to sit_ and _to set, to fall_ and _to fell_, &c. Thus: say, "He _lay_ by the fire;" not, "He _laid_ by the fire;"--"He _has become_ rich;" not, "He _is become_ rich;"--"I _would_ rather _stay_;" not, "I _had_ rather _stay_."
NOTE XIII.--In the syntax of words that express time, whether they be verbs, adverbs, or nouns, the order and fitness of time should be observed, that the tenses may be used according to their import. Thus: in stead of, "I _have seen_ him _last week_;" say, "I _saw_ him _last week_;"--and, in stead of, "I _saw_ him _this week_;" say, "I _have seen_ him _this week_."
So, in stead of, "I _told_ you _already_;" or, "I _have told_ you _before_;" say, "I _have told_ you _already_;"--"I _told_ you _before_."
NOTE XIV.--Verbs of commanding, desiring, expecting, hoping, intending, permitting, and some others, in all their tenses, refer to actions or events, relatively present or future: one should therefore say, "I hoped you _would come_;" not, "I hoped you _would have come_;"--and, "I intended _to do_ it;" not, "I intended _to have done_ it;"--&c.
NOTE XV.--Propositions that are as true now as they ever were or will be, should generally be expressed in the present tense: as, "He seemed hardly to know, that two and two _make_ four;" not, "_made_."--_Blair"s Gram._, p.