must be spelled and spoken in such a manner as to correspond with the
_first, second_, or _third_ person of the noun or pronoun which is its
nominative.
I will now show you how the verb is varied in order to agree with its
nominative in number and person. I, Thou, He, She, It; We, Ye or You,
They, are _personal pronouns_. _I_ is of the _first_ person, and
_singular_ number; _Thou_ is _second_ person, _sing._; _He, She_, or
_It_, is _third_ per. _sing._; _We_ is _first_ per. _plural_; _Ye_ or
_You_ is _second_ per. _plural_; _They_ is _third_ per. _plural_. These
pronouns are the representatives of nouns, and perform the same office
that the nouns would for which they stand. When placed before the verb,
they are, therefore, the _nominatives_ to the verb.
Notice particularly, the different variations or endings of the verb, as
it is thus conjugated in the INDICATIVE MOOD, PRESENT TENSE.
_Singular_. _Plural_.
1. _Per_. I walk, 1. _Per_. We Walk,
2. _Per_. Thou walk_est_, 2. _Per_. Ye _or_ you walk,
3. _Per_. He walk_s_, _or_ 3. _Per_. They walk, or
the boy walk_s_, the boys walk.
_or_ walk_eth_.
This display of the verb shows you, that whenever it ends in _est_, it
is of the _second_ person _singular_; but when the verb ends in _s_, or
_eth_, it is of the _third_ person singular. _Walkest, ridest,
standest_, are of the second person singular; and _walks_ or _walketh,
rides_ or _rideth, stands_ or _standeth_, are of the third person
singular.
I have told you, that when the nominative is singular number, the verb
must be; when the nominative is plural, the verb must be; and when the
nominative is first, second, or third person, the verb must be of the
same person. If you look again at the foregoing conjugation of _walk_,
you will notice that the verb varies if its endings in the _singular_,
in order to agree in _form_ with the first, second, and third person of
its nominative; but in the _plural_ it does not vary its endings from
the first person singular. The verb, however, agrees in _sense_ with its
nominative in the plural, as well as in the singular. Exercise a little
mind, and you will perceive that _agreement_ and _government_ in
language do not consist _merely_ in the _form_ of words. Now, is it not
clear, that when I say, I _walk_, the verb walk is _singular_, because
it expresses but _one_ action? And when I say, Two men _walk_, is it not
equally apparent, that walk is _plural_, because it expresses _two_
actions? In the sentence, Ten men _walk_, the verb _walk_ denotes _ten_
actions, for there are ten actors. Common sense teaches you, that there
must be as many _actions_ as there are _actors_; and that the verb, when
it has _no form_ or _ending_ to show it, is as strictly plural, as when
it has. - So, in the phrase, _We_ walk, the verb walk is _first_ person,
because it expresses the actions performed by the _speakers: Ye_ or
_you_ walk, the verb is _second_ person, denoting the actions of the
persons _spoken to;_ third person, _They_ walk. The verb, then, when
correctly written, always agrees, in _sense_, with its nominative in
number and person.
At present you are learning two parts of speech, neither of which can be
understood without a knowledge of the other. It therefore becomes
necessary to explain them both, in the same lecture. You have been
already informed, that nouns have three cases; the nominative, the
possessive, and the objective.
POSSESSIVE CASE. The _possessive case_ denotes the possessor of
something; as, This is _John's_ horse. This expression implies, that
_John_ is the _owner_ or _possessor_ of the horse; and, that horse is
the _property_ which he possesses.
When I say, These are the _men's_, and those, the _boys'_ hats, the two
words, "boys' hats," plainly convey the idea, if they have any meaning
at all, that the boys _own_ or _possess_ the hats. "Samuel Badger sells
_boys'_ hats." Who _owns_ the hats? Mr. Badger. How is that fact
ascertained? Not by the words, "boys' hats," which, taken by themselves,
imply, not that they are _Mr. Badger's_ hats, nor that they are _for_
boys, but that they are hats _of_, or _belonging to_, or _possessed by_
boys. But we _infer_ from the _words connected_ with the phrase, "boys'
hats," that the boys are not yet, as the phrase literally denotes, in
the actual possession of the hats. The possession is anticipated.
In the phrases, _fine_ hats, _coarse_ hats, _high-crowned_ hats,
_broad-brimmed_ hats, _woollen, new, ten, some, these, many_ hats, the
words in italics, are adjectives, because they restrict, qualify, or
define the term _hats;_ but the term _boys'_ does not _describe_ or
limit the meaning of _hats. Boys'_, therefore, is not, as some suppose,
an adjective.
"The _slave's_ master." Does the slave possess the master? Yes. The
slave _has_ a master. If he _has_ him, then, he _possesses_ him; - he
sustains that relation to him which we call possession.
A noun in the possessive case, is always known by its having an
apostrophe, and generally an _s_ after it; thus, _John's_, hat; the
_boy's_ coat. When a plural noun in the possessive case, ends in _s_,
the apostrophe is added, but no additional _s_; as, "_Boys'_ hats;
_Eagles'_ wings." When a singular noun ends in _ss_, the apostrophe
only is added; as, "For _goodness'_ sake; for _righteousness'_ sake;"
except the word witness; as, "The _witness's_ testimony." When a noun in
the possessive case ends in _ence_, the _s_ is omitted, but the
apostrophe is retained; as, "For _conscience'_ sake."
Now please to turn back, and read over this and the preceding lecture
_three_ times, and endeavor, not only to understand, but, also, to
_remember_, what you read. In reading, proceed thus: read one sentence
over slowly, and then look off the book, and repeat it two or three
times over in your mind. After that, take another sentence and proceed
in the same manner, and so on through the whole lecture. Do not presume
to think, that these directions are of no real consequence to you; for,
unless you follow them strictly, you need not expect to make rapid
progress. On the other hand, if you proceed according to my
instructions, you will be sure to acquire a practical knowledge of
grammar in a short time. - When you shall have complied with this
requisition, you may commit the following _order of parsing a noun_, and
_the order of parsing a verb_; and then you will be prepared to parse or
analyze the following examples.
ANALYSIS, OR PARSING.
Do you recollect the meaning of the word _analysis?_ If you do not, I
will explain if: and first, I wish you to remember, that analysis is the
reverse of synthesis. _Synthesis_ is the act of combining simples so as
to form a whole or compound. Thus, in putting together letters so as to
form syllables, syllables so as to form words, words so as to form
sentences, and sentences so as to form a discourse, the process is
called synthetic. _Analysis_, on the contrary, is the act of
decomposition; that is, the act of separating any thing compounded into
its simple parts, and thereby exhibiting its elementary principles.
Etymology treats of the analysis of language. To analyze a sentence, is
to separate from one another and classify the different words of which
it is composed; and to analyze or _parse_ a word, means to enumerate and
describe all its various properties, and its grammatical relations with
respect to other words in a sentence, and trace it through all its
inflections or changes. Perhaps, to you, this will, at first, appear to
be of little importance; but, if you persevere, you will hereafter find
it of great utility, for parsing will enable you to detect, and correct,
errors in composition.
SYSTEMATIC ORDER OF PARSING.
The _order of parsing_ a NOUN, is - a noun, and why? - common, proper, or
collective, and why? - gender, and why? - person, and why? - number, and
why? - case, and why? - RULE: - decline it.
_The order of parsing_ a VERB, is - a verb, and why? - active, passive,
or neuter, and why? - if _active_ - transitive or intransitive, and
why? - if _passive_ - how is it formed? - regular, irregular, or defective,
and why? - mood, and why? - tense, and why? - person and number, and
why? - with what does it agree? - RULE: - conjugate it.
I will now parse two nouns according to the order, and, in so doing, by
applying the definitions and rules, I shall answer all those questions
given in the order. If you have _perfectly committed_ the order of
parsing a noun and verb, you may proceed with me; but, recollect, you
cannot parse a verb _in full_, until you shall have had a more complete
explanation of it.
_John's hand trembles_.
_John's_ is a noun, [because it is] the name of a person - proper, the
name of an individual - masculine gender, it denotes a male - third
person, spoken of - singular number, it implies but one - and in the
possessive case, it denotes possession - it is governed by the noun
"hand," according to
RULE 12. _A noun or pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the
noun it possesses_.
Declined - Sing. nom. John, poss. John's, obj. John. Plural - nom.
Johns, poss. Johns', obj. Johns.
_Hand_ is a noun, the name of a thing - common, the name of a sort or
species of things - neuter gender, it denotes a thing without sex - third
person, spoken of - sing. number, it implies but one - and in the
nominative case, it is the actor and subject of the verb "trembles," and
governs it agreeably to
RULE 3. _The nominative case governs the verb:_ - that is, the nominative
determines the number and person of the verb.
Declined - Sing. nom. hand, poss. hand's, obj. hand. Plur. nom. hands,
poss. hands', obj. hands.
_Trembles_ is a verb, a word which signifies to do - active, it expresses
action - third person, singular number, because the nominative "hand" is
with which it agrees, according to
RULE 4. _The verb must agree with its nominative in number and person_.
You must not say that the verb is of the third person because _it is
spoken of_. The verb is never spoken of; but it is of the third person,
and singular or plural number, because its nominative is.
Conjugated - First pers. sing. I tremble, 2 pers. thou tremblest, 3 pers.
he trembles, or, the hand trembles. Plural, 1 pers. we tremble, 2 pers.
ye or you tremble, 3 pers. they or the hands tremble.
Government, in language, consists in the power which one word has over
another, in causing that other word to be in some _particular case,
number, person, mood_, or _tense_.
ILLUSTRATION.
RULE 3. _The nominative case governs the verb_.
If you employ the pronoun _I_, which is of the _first_ person, singular
number, as the nominative to a verb, the verb must be of the first pers.
sing, thus, I _smile_; and when your nominative is _second_ pers. sing,
your verb must be; as, thou smil_est_. Why, in the latter instance, does
the ending of the verb change to _est_? Because the nominative changes.
And if your nominative is _third_ person, the verb will vary again;
thus, he smiles, the man smiles. How clear it is, then, that _the
nominative governs the verb_; that is, the nominative has power to
change the _form_ and _meaning_ of the verb, in respect to num. and
person. Government, thus far, is evinced in the _form_ of the words, as
well as in the sense.
RULE 4. _The verb must agree with its nominative in number and person_.
It is improper to say, thou _hear_, the men _hears_. Why improper?
Because _hear_ is _first_ pers. and the nominative _thou_ is _second_
pers. _Hears_ is singular, and the nom. _men_ is _plural_. Rule 4th
says, _The verb must agree with its nominative_. The expressions should,
therefore, be, thou hear_est_, the men _hear_; and then the verb would
_agree_ with its nominatives. But _why_ must the verb agree with its
nominative? Why must we say, thou talk_est_, the man talks, men _talk_?
Because the genius of our language, and the common consent of those who
speak it, _require_ such a construction: and this _requisition_ amounts
to a _law_ or _rule_. This _rule_, then, is founded in _the nature of
things_, and sanctioned by _good usage_.
RULE 12. _A noun or pronoun in the possessive case, is governed by the
noun which it possesses_.
It is correct to say, The _man_ eats, _he_ eats; but we cannot say, the
_man_ dog eats, _he_ dog eats. Why not? Because the man is here
represented as the _possessor_, and _dog_, the _property_, or _thing
possessed_; and the genius of our language requires, that when we add to
the possessor, the _thing_ which he is represented as possessing, the
possessor shall take a particular form to show its _case_, or _relation
to the property_; thus, The _man's_ dog eats, _his_ dog eats. You
perceive, then, that the _added_ noun, denoting the thing possessed, has
power _to change the form_ of the noun or pronoun denoting the
possessor, according to RULE 12. thus, by adding dog in the preceding
examples, _man_ is changed to _man's_, and _he_, to _his_.
Now parse the sentence which I have parsed, until the manner is quite
familiar to you; and then you will be prepared to analyze correctly and
_systematically_, the following exercises. When you parse, you may
spread the Compendium before you; and, if you have not already committed
the definitions and rules, you may read them on that, as you apply them.
This mode of procedure will enable you to learn _all_ the definitions
and rules by applying them to practice.
EXERCISES IN PARSING.
Rain descends - Rains descend - Snow falls - Snows fall - Thunder
rolls - Thunders roll - Man's works decay - Men's labors cease - John's dog
barks - Eliza's voice trembles - Julia's sister's child improves - Peter's
cousin's horse limps.
In the next place, I will parse a noun and a _neuter_ verb, which verb,
you will notice, differs from an active only in one respect.
_"Birds repose_ on the branches of trees."
_Birds_ is a noun, the name of a thing or creature - common, the name of
a genus or class - masculine and feminine gender, it denotes both males
and females - third person, spoken of - plural number, it implies more
than one - and in the nominative case, it is the _subject_ of the verb
"repose," and governs it according to RULE 3. _The nominative case
governs the verb_. Declined - Sing. nom. bird, poss. bird's, obj. bird.
Plural, nom. birds, poss. birds', obj. birds.
_Repose_ is a verb, a word that signifies to _be_ - neuter, it expresses
neither action nor passion, but a state of being - third person, plural
number, because the nominative "birds" is with which it agrees,
agreeably to RULE 4. _The verb must agree with its nominative in number
and person_.
Declined - 1. pers. sing. I repose, 2. pers. thou reposest, 3. pers. he
reposes, or the bird reposes. Plur. 1. pers. we repose, 2. pers. ye or
you repose, 3. pers. they repose, or birds repose.
Now parse those nouns and neuter verbs that are distinguished by
_italics_, in the following
EXERCISES IN PARSING.
The _book lies_ on the desk - The _cloak hangs_ on the wall - _Man's days
are_ few - _Cathmor's warriors sleep_ in death - _Caltho reposes_ in the
narrow house - Jocund _day stands_ tiptoe on the misty mountain tops. The
_sunbeams rest_ on the grave where her _beauty sleeps_.
You may parse these and the preceding exercises, and all that follow,
_five or six times over_, if you please.
OBJECTIVE CASE. - ACTIVE-TRANSITIVE VERBS.
The _objective_ case expresses the object of an action or of a
relation. It generally follows a transitive verb, a participle, or a
preposition.
A noun is in the objective case when it is the _object_ of something. At
present I shall explain this case only as the object of an _action_; but
when we shall have advanced as far as to the preposition, I will also
illustrate it as the object of a _relation_.
An active verb is _transitive_ when the action passes over from the
subject or nominative to an object; as, Richard _strikes_ John.
_Transitive_ means _passing_. In this sentence the action of the verb
_strikes_ is _transitive_, because it _passes over_ from the nominative
Richard to the object John; and you know that the noun John is in the
_objective_ case, because it is _the object of the action_ expressed by
the active-transitive verb strikes. This matter is very plain. For
example: Gallileo invented the telescope. Now it is evident, that
Gallileo did not exert his powers of invention, without some object in
view. In order to ascertain that object, put the question, Gallileo
invented what? The telescope. _Telescope_, then, is the real object of
the action, denoted by the transitive verb invented; and, therefore,
telescope is in the objective case. If I say, The horse _kicks_ the
servant - Carpenters _build_ houses - Ossian _wrote_ poems - Columbus
_discovered_ America - you readily perceive, that the verbs _kick, build,
wrote_, and _discovered_, express transitive actions; and you cannot be
at a loss to tell which nouns are in the objective case: - they are
_servant, houses, poems_, and _America_.
The nominative and objective cases of nouns are generally known by the
following rule: the nominative _does something_; the objective _has
something done to it_. The nominative generally comes _before_ the verb;
and the objective, _after_ it. When I say, George struck the servant,
_George_ is in the nominative, and _servant_ is in the objective case;
but, when I say, The servant struck George, _servant_ is in the
nominative case, and _George_ is in the objective. Thus you perceive,
that _Case_ means the different state or situation of nouns with regard
to other words.
It is sometimes very difficult to tell the case of a noun. I shall,
therefore, take up this subject again, when I come to give you an
explanation of the participle and preposition.
Besides the three cases already explained, nouns are sometimes in the
nominative case _independent_, sometimes in the nominative case
absolute, sometimes in apposition in the same case, and sometimes in the
nominative or objective case after the neuter to _be_, or after an
active-intransitive or passive verb. These cases are illustrated in
Lecture X. and in the 21 and 22 rules of Syntax.
ACTIVE-INTRANSITIVE VERBS.
An active verb is _transitive_, when the action terminates on an object:
but
An active verb is _intransitive_, when the action does _not_ terminate
on an object; as, John _walks_.
You perceive that the verb _walks_, in this example, is _intransitive_,
because the action does not pass over to an object; that is, the action
is confined to the agent John. The following _sign_ will generally
enable you to distinguish a _transitive_ verb from an _intransitive_.
Any verb that will make sense with the words _a thing_ or _a person_,
after it, is _transitive_. Try these verbs by the sign, _love, help,
conquer, reach, subdue, overcome_. Thus, you can say, I love _a person_
or _thing_ - I can help _a person_ or _thing_ - and so on. Hence you know
that these verbs are transitive. But an intransitive verb will not make
sense with this sign, which fact will be shown by the following
examples: _smile, go, come, play, bark, walk, fly_. We cannot say, if we
mean to speak English, I smile a _person_ or _thing_ - I go _a person_ or
_thing_: - hence you perceive that these verbs are not transitive, but
intransitive.
If you reflect upon these examples for a few moments, you will have a
clear conception of the nature of transitive and intransitive verbs.
Before I close this subject, however, it is necessary farther to remark,
that some transitive and intransitive verbs express what is called a
_mental_ or _moral_ action; and others, a _corporeal_ or _physical_
action. Verbs expressing the different affections or operations of the
mind, denote moral actions; as, Brutus _loved_ his country; James
_hates_ vice; We _believe_ the tale: - to _repent_, to _relent_, to
_think_, to _reflect_, to _mourn_, to _muse_. Those expressing the
actions produced by matter, denote physical actions; as, The _dog hears_
the bell; Virgil _wrote_ the Aenead; Columbus _discovered_ America; - to
_see_, to _feel_, to _taste_, to _smell_, to _run_, to _talk_, to _fly_,
to _strike_. In the sentence, Charles _resembles_ his father, the verb
_resembles_ does not appear to express any action at all; yet the
construction of the sentence, and the office which the verb performs,
are such, that we are obliged to parse it as an _active-transitive_
verb, governing the noun _father_ in the objective case. This you may
easily reconcile in your mind, by reflecting, that the verb has a
_direct reference_ to its object. The following verbs are of this
character: _Have, own, retain_; as, I _have_ a book.
Active _in_transitive verbs are frequently made _transitive_. When I
say, The birds _fly_, the verb _fly_ is _in_transitive; but when I say,
The boy _flies_ the kite, the verb _fly_ is _transitive_, and governs
the noun _kite_ in the objective case. Almost any active intransitive
verb, and sometimes even neuter verbs, are used as transitive. The horse
_walks_ rapidly; The boy _runs_ swiftly; My friend _lives_ well; The man
_died_ of a fever. In all these examples the verbs are _in_transitive;
in the following they are _transitive_: The man _walks_ his horse; The
boy _ran_ a race; My friend _lives_ a holy life; Let me _die_ the death
of the righteous.
The foregoing development of the character of verbs, is deemed
sufficiently critical for practical purposes; but if we dip a little
deeper into the verbal fountain, we shall discover qualities which do
not appear on its surface. If we throw aside the veil which art has
drawn over the real structure of speech, we shall find, that almost
every verb has either a _personal_ or a _verbal_ object, expressed or
implied. Verbal objects, which are the _effects_ or _productions_
resulting from the actions, being necessarily implied, are seldom
expressed.
The fire _burns_. If the fire burns, it must burn _wood, coal, tallow_,
or some other combustible substance. The man _laughs_. Laughs what?
Laughs _laughter_ or _laugh_. They _walk_; that is, They walk or take
_walks_. Rivers flow (move or roll _them-selves_ or their _waters_)
into the ocean.
"I _sing_ the shady _regions_ of the west."
"And _smile_ the _wrinkles_ from the brow of age."
The child _wept itself_ sick; and then, by taking (or _sleeping_) a
short _nap_, it _slept itself_ quiet and well again. "He will soon
_sleep_ his everlasting _sleep"_; that is, "He will _sleep_ the _sleep_
of death."
Thinkers think _thoughts_; Talkers talk or employ _words, talk,_ or
_speeches_; The rain rains _rain_. "Upon Sodom and Gomorrah the Lord
_rained fire_ and _brimstone_." "I must _go_ the whole _length_." "I
shall soon _go_ the _way_ of all the earth."
Now please to turn back again, and peruse this lecture attentively;
after which you may parse, systematically, the following exercises
containing nouns in the three cases, and active-transitive verbs.
The printer _prints_ books.
_Prints_ is a verb, a word that signifies to do - active, it expresses
action - transitive, the action passes over from the nominative "printer"
to the object "books" - third pers. sing. numb. because the nominative
printer is with which it agrees.
RULE 4. _The verb must agree with its nominative case in number and
person_.
Declined - 1. pers. sing. I print, 2. pers. thou printest, 3. pers. he
prints, or the printer prints, and so on.
_Books_ is a noun, the name of a thing - common, the name of a sort of
things, - neut. gend. it denotes a thing without sex - third pers. spoken
of - plur. num. it implies more than one - and in the objective case, it
is the object of the action, expressed by the active-transitive verb
"prints," and is governed by it according to
RULE 20. _Active-transitive verbs govern the objective case_.
The noun _books_ is thus declined - Sing. nom. book, poss. book's, obj.
book - Plur. nom. books, poss. books', obj. books.
RULE 20. Transitive verbs _govern_ the objective case; that is, they
_require_ the noun or pronoun following them to be in that case; and
this requisition is government. Pronouns have a particular _form_ to
suit each case; but nouns have not. We cannot say, She _struck he_; I
gave the book _to they_. Why not? Because the genius of our language
requires the pronoun following a transitive verb or preposition (_to_ is
a preposition) to assume that _form_ which we call the _objective_ form
or case. Accordingly, the construction should be, She struck _him_; I
gave the book to _them_. - Read, again, the illustration of "government"
on page 52.
EXERCISES IN PARSING.
_Nom. case. - Trans. verb - Poss. case - Obj. case._
Julius prints childrens' primers.
Harriet makes ladies' bonnets.
The servant beats the man's horse.
The horse kicks the servant's master.
The boy struck that man's child.
The child lost those boys' ball.
The tempest sunk those merchants' vessels.
Pope translated Homer's Illiad.
Cicero procured Milo's release.
Alexander conquered Darius' army.
Perry met the enemy's fleet.
Washington obtained his country's freedom.
NOTE 1. The words _the, that, those_, and _his_, you need not parse.
2. A noun in the possessive case, is sometimes governed by a noun
understood; as, Julia's lesson is longer than John's [lesson.]
As you have been analyzing nouns in their three cases, it becomes
necessary to present, in the next place, the declension of nouns, for
you must decline every noun you parse. _Declension_ means putting a noun
through the different cases: and you will notice, that the possessive
case varies from the nominative in its termination, or ending, but the
_objective_ case ends like the nominative. The nominative and objective
cases of nouns, must, therefore, be ascertained by their situation in
the sentence, or by considering the office they perform.
DECLENSION OF NOUNS.
SING. PLUR.
_Nom._ king kings
_Poss._ king's kings'
_Obj._ king. kings.
_Nom._ man men
_Poss._ man's men's
_Obj._ man. men.
Now, if you have parsed every word in the preceding examples, (except
_the, that, those_, and _his_) you may proceed with me and parse the
examples in the following exercises, in which are presented nouns and
active-intransitive verbs.
"My _flock increases_ yearly."
_Flock_ is a noun, a name denoting animals - a noun of multitude, it
signifies many in one collective body - masculine and feminine gender,
denoting both sexes - third person, spoken of - singular number, it
denotes but one flock - and in the nominative case, it is the active
agent of the verb "increases," and governs it, according to RULE 3, _The
nominative case governs the verb_. (Decline it.)
_Increases_ is a verb, a word that signifies to do - active, it expresses
action - intransitive, the action does not pass over to an object - of the
third person, singular number, because its nominative "flock" conveys
_unity_ of idea, and it agrees with "flock" agreeably to
RULE 10. _A noun of multitude conveying_ unity _of idea, must have a
verb or pronoun agreeing with it in the singular_.
"The divided _multitude_ hastily _disperse_."
_Multitude_ is a noun, a name that denotes persons - a collective noun,
or noun of multitude, it signifies many - masculine and feminine gender,
it implies both sexes - third person, spoken of - singular number, it
represents but one multitude, or collective body; (but in another sense,
it is plural, as it conveys plurality of idea, and, also, implies more
_individuals_ than one;) - and in the nominative case, it is the actor
and subject of the verb "disperse," which it governs, according to RULE
3. _The nom. case governs the verb_. - Declined. - Sing. nom. multitude,
poss. multitude's, obj. multitude - Plur. nom. multitudes, poss.
multitudes', obj. multitudes.
_Disperse_ is a verb, a word that signifies to do - active, it expresses
action - intransitive, the action does not terminate on an object - third
person, plural number, because its nominative "multitude" conveys
plurality of idea; and it agrees with "multitude" agreeably to RULE 11.
_A noun of multitude conveying plurality of idea, must have a verb or
pronoun agreeing with it in the plural._
Rules 10, and 11, rest on a sandy foundation. They appear not to be
based on the principles of the language; and, therefore, it might,
perhaps, be better to reject than to retain them. Their application is
quite limited. In many instances, they will not apply to nouns of
multitude. The existence of such a thing as "unity or plurality of
idea," as applicable to nouns of this class, is _doubtful_. It is just
as correct to say, "The _meeting was_ divided in _its_ sentiments," as
to say, "The _meeting were_ divided in _their_ sentiments." Both are
equally supported by the genius of the language, and by the power of
custom. It is correct to say, either that, "The _fleet were_ dispersed;"
"The _council were_ unanimous;" "The _council were_ divided;" or that,
"The _fleet was_ dispersed;" "The _council was_ unanimous;" "The
_council was_ divided." But, perhaps for the sake of euphony, in some
instances, custom has decided in favor of a singular, and in others, of
a plural construction, connected with words of this class. For example;
custom gives a preference to the constructions, "My _people do_ not
consider;" "The _peasantry go_ barefoot;" "The _flock is_ his object;"
instead of, "_My people doth_ not consider;" "The _peasantry goes_
barefoot;" "The _flock are_ his object." In instances like these, the
application of the foregoing rules _may_ be of some use; but the
constructions in which they do not apply, are probably more numerous
than those in which they do.
EXERCISES IN PARSING.
Nom. case. Intran. verb. Nom. case. Intran. verb.
Men labor. The sun sets.
Armies march. The moon rises.
Vessels sail. The stars twinkle.
Birds fly. The rain descends.
Clouds move. The river flows.
Multitudes perish. The nation mourns.
Your improvement in grammar depends, not on the number of words which
you parse, but on the _attention_ which you give the subject. _You may
parse the same exercises several times over._
For the gratification of those who prefer it, I here present another
DIVISION OF VERBS.
Verbs are of two kinds, transitive and intransitive.
A verb is transitive when the action affects an object; as, "Earthquakes
_rock_ kingdoms; thrones and palaces _are shaken_ down; and potentates,
princes, and subjects, _are buried_ in one common grave."
The nominative to a passive verb, is the _object_, but not the _agent_,
of the action.
A verb is intransitive when it has no object; as, "The waters _came_
upon me;" "I _am_ he who _was_, and _is_, and _is_ to _come_."
As an exercise on what you have been studying, I will now put to you a
few questions, all of which you ought to be able to answer before you
proceed any farther.
QUESTIONS NOT ANSWERED IN PARSING.
With what two general divisions of grammar does the second lecture
begin? - Of what does Etymology treat? - Of what does Syntax treat? - On
what is based the true principle of classification? - How do you
ascertain the part of speech to which a word belongs? - What is meant by
its _manner_ of meaning? - Name the ten parts of speech. - Which of these
are considered the most important? - By what sign may a noun be
distinguished? - How many kinds of nouns are there? - What belong to
nouns? - What is gender? - How many genders have nouns? - What is
person? - How many persons have nouns? - What is number? - How many numbers
have nouns? - What is case? - How many cases have nouns? - Does case
consist in the _inflections_ of a noun? - How many kinds of verbs are
there? - By what sign may a verb be known? - What belong to verbs? - What
is synthesis? - What is analysis? - What is parsing? - Repeat the order of
parsing the noun. - Repeat the order of parsing the verb. - What rule do
you apply in parsing a noun in the possessive case? - What rule, in
parsing a noun in the nominative case? - What rule applies in parsing a
verb? - What is meant by government? - Explain rules 3, 4, and 12. - By
what rule are the nominative and objective cases of nouns known? - By
what sign can you distinguish a transitive from an intransitive
verb? - Do transitive verbs ever express a _moral_ action? - Are
intransitive and neuter verbs ever used as transitive? - Give some
examples of transitive verbs with _personal_ and _verbal_ objects. - What
rule do you apply in parsing a noun in the objective case? - Explain rule
20. - In parsing a verb agreeing with a noun of multitude conveying
_plurality_ of idea, what rule do you apply?
* * * * *
QUESTIONS ON THE NOTES.
Whether the learner be required to answer the following questions, or
not, is, of course, left _discretionary_ with the teacher. The author
takes the liberty to suggest the expediency of _not_, generally,
enforcing such a requisition, _until the pupil goes through the book a
second time._
Name some participial nouns. - What are abstract nouns? - What is the
distinction between abstract nouns and adjectives? - What are natural
nouns? - Artificial nouns? - What is the distinction between _material_
and _immaterial_ nouns? - Are nouns ever of the masculine and feminine
gender? - Give examples. - When are nouns, naturally neuter, converted
into the masculine or feminine gender? - Give examples. - Speak some nouns
that are always in the singular number. - Some that are always
plural. - Speak some that are in the same form in both numbers. - Name
_all_ the various ways of forming the plural number of nouns. - Of what
number are the nouns _news, means, alms_, and _amends_? - Name the
plurals to the following compound nouns, _handful, cupful, spoonful,
brother-in-law, court-martial_.
* * * * *
NOTES ON PHILOSOPHICAL GRAMMAR.
Perhaps no subject has, in this age, elicited more patient research,
and critical investigation of original, constituent principles,
formations, and combinations, than the English language. The
legitimate province of philology, however, as I humbly conceive,
has, in some instances, been made to yield to that of philosophy, so
far as to divert the attention from the combinations of our language
which refinement has introduced, to radical elements and
associations which no way concern the progress of literature, or the
essential use for which language was intended. Were this
retrogressive mode of investigating and applying principles, to
obtain, among philologists, the ascendency over that which
accommodates the use of language to progressive refinement, it is
easy to conceive the state of barbarism to which society would, in a
short time, be reduced. Moreover, if what some call the philosophy
of language, were to supersede, altogether, the province of
philology as it applies to the present, progressive and refined
state of English literature, the great object contemplated by the
learned, in all ages, namely, the approximation of language, in
common with every thing else, to that point of perfection at which
it is the object of correct philology to arrive, would be
frustrated.
The dubious and wildering track struck out by those innovators and
visionaries who absurdly endeavor to teach modern English, by
rejecting the authority and sanction of custom, and by conducting
the learner back to the original combinations, and the detached,
disjointed, and barbarous constructions of our progenitors, both
prudence and reason, as well as a due regard for correct philology,
impel me to shun. Those modest writers who, by bringing to their aid
a little sophistry, much duplicity, and a wholesale traffic in the
swelling phrases, "philosophy, reason, and common sense," attempt to
overthrow the wisdom of former ages, and show that the result of all
the labors of those distinguished philologists who had previously
occupied the field of grammatical science, is nothing but error and
folly, will doubtless meet the neglect and contempt justly merited
by such consummate vanity and unblushing pedantry. Fortunately for
those who employ our language as their vehicle of mental conference,
custom will not yield to the speculative theories of the visionary.
If it would, improvement in English literature would soon be at an
end, and we should be tamely conducted back to the Vandalic age.
As the use of what is commonly called the philosophy of language, is
evidently misapplied by those who make it the test of _grammatical
certainty_, it may not be amiss to offer a few considerations with a
view to expose the fallacy of so vague a criterion.
All reasoning and investigation which depend on the philosophy of
language for an ultimate result, must be conducted _a posteriori_.
Its office, according to the ordinary mode of treating the subject,
is to trace language to its origin, not for the purpose of
determining and fixing grammatical associations and dependances,
such as the agreement, government, and mutual relations of words,
but in order to analyze combinations with a view to develop the
first principles of the language, and arrive at the primitive
meaning of words. Now, it is presumed, that no one who has paid
critical attention to the subject, will contend, that the original
import of single words, has any relation to the syntactical
dependances and connexions of words in general; - to gain a knowledge
of which, is the leading object of the student in grammar. And,
furthermore, I challenge those who have indulged in such useless
vagaries, to show by what process, with their own systems, they can
communicate a practical knowledge of grammar. I venture to predict,
that, if they make the attempt, they will find their systems more
splendid in theory, than useful in practice.
Again, it cannot rationally be contended, that the radical meaning
has any efficiency in controlling the signification which, by the
power of association, custom has assigned to many words; - a
signification _essentially different_ from the original import. Were
this the case, and were the language now to be taught and understood
in compliance with the original import of words, it would have to
undergo a thorough change; to be analyzed, divided, and sub-divided,
almost _ad infinitum_. Indeed, there is the same propriety in
asserting that the Gothic, Danish, and Anglo-Saxon elements in our
language, ought to be pronounced separately, to enable us to
understand our vernacular tongue, that there is in contending, that
their primitive meaning has an ascendency over the influence of the
principle of association in changing, and the power of custom in
determining, the import of words. Many of our words are derived from
the Greek, Roman, French, Spanish, Italian, and German languages;
and the only use we can make of their originals, is to render them