Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

tive, the antecedent belongs to the first clause. who command (not commands) you.

It is I, John,

To recapitulate, the train of reasoning has been as follows:

1. The person of the second verb is the person of the relative.

2. The person of the relative is that of one of two antecedents.

3. Of such two antecedents the relative agrees with the one which stands in the same proposition with itself.

4. Which position is determined by the connection or want of connection between the substantive antecedent and the verb governed by the relative.

Respecting the person of the verb in the first proposition of a complex sentence there is no doubt. I, your master, who commands you to make haste, am (not is) in a hurry. Here, I am in a hurry is the first proposition; who commands you to make haste, the second.

It is not difficult to see why the construction of sentences consisting of two propositions is open to an amount of latitude which is not admissible in the construction of single propositions. As long as the different parts of a complex idea are contained within the limits of a single proposition, their subordinate character is easily discerned. When, however, they amount to whole propositions, they take the appearance of being independent members of the sentence.

§ 492. The concord of number. It is believed that the following three rules will carry us through all difficulties of the kind just exhibited.

Rule 1. That the verb agrees with the subject, and with nothing but the subject. The only way to justify such an expression as the wages of sin is death, is to consider death not as the subject, but as the predicate; in other words, to consider the construction to be, death is the wages of sin.

Rule 2. That, except in the case of the word there (§ 486), the word which comes first is always the subject, until the contrary be proved.

Rule 3. That no number of connected singular nouns can govern a plural verb, unless they be connected by a copulative

conjunction. The sun and moon shine,-the sun in conjunction with the moon shines.

Plural subjects with singular predicates.-The wages of sin are death.-Honest men are the salt of the earth.

Singular subjects with plural predicates.-These constructions are rarer than the preceding: inasmuch as two or more persons (or things) are oftener spoken of as being equivalent to one, than one person (or thing) is spoken of as being equivalent to

two or more.

Sixpence is twelve halfpennies.

He is all head and shoulders.
Vulnera totus erat.

Tu es deliciæ meæ.

Εκτωρ, ἀτὰρ σύ μοι ἔσσι πατὴρ καὶ πότνια μήτηρ,
Ηδε κασίγνητος, σὺ δέ μοι θαλερὸς παρακοίτης.

CHAPTER XVII.

ON THE GOVERNMENT OF VERBS.

§ 493. THE government of verbs is of two sorts, (1.) objective, and (2.) modal.

It is objective where the noun which follows the verb is the name of some object affected by the action of the verb,—as he strikes me; he wounds the enemy.

It is modal when the noun which follows the verb is not the name of any object affected by the verb, but the name of some object explaining the manner in which the action of the verb takes place, the instrument with which it is done, the end for which it is done, &c.

The government of all transitive verbs is necessarily objective. It may also be modal,—I strike the enemy with the sword =ferio hostem gladio.

The government of all intransitive verbs can only be modal, -I walk with the stick. When we say, I walk the horse, the word walk has changed its meaning, and signifies make to walk, and is, by the very fact of its being followed by the name of an object, converted from an intransitive into a transitive verb.

The modal construction may also be called the adverbial construction; because the effect of the noun is akin to that of an adverb, I fight with bravery = I fight bravely; he walks a king he walks regally. The modal (or adverbial) construction (or government) sometimes takes the appearance of the objective: inasmuch as intransitive verbs are frequently followed by a substantive; which substantive is in the objective

case. Nevertheless, this is no proof of government. For a verb to be capable of governing an objective case, it must be a verb signifying an action affecting an object: and if there be no such object, there is no room for any objective government. To break the sleep of the righteous is to affect, by breaking, the sleep of the righteous: but, to sleep the sleep of the righteous, is not to affect by sleeping the sleep of the righteous; since the act of sleeping is an act that affects no object whatever. It is a state. We may, indeed, give it the appearance of a transitive verb, as we do when we say, the opiate slept the patient, meaning thereby, lulled to sleep; but the transitive character is only apparent.

To sleep the sleep of the righteous is to sleep in agreement with -or according to—or after the manner of—the sleep of the righteous, and the construction is adverbial.

In the grammars of the classical languages, the following rule is exceptionable Quodvis verbum admittit accusativum nominis sibi cognati. It does so; but it governs the accusative case not objectively but modally.

Modal verbs may be divided into a multiplicity of divisions. Of such, it is not necessary in English to give more than the following four

1. Appositional.-As, she walks a queen: you consider me safe. The appositional construction is, in reality, a matter of concord rather than of gender. It will be considered more fully in the following section.

2. Traditive.-As, I give the book to you do librum tibi. I teach you the lesson = διδάσκω σὲ τὴν διδασκάλιαν. In all traditive expression, there are three ideas: (1.) an agent, (2.) an object, (3.) a person, or thing, to which the object is made over, or transferred, by the agent. For this idea the term dative is too restricted: since in Greek and some other languages, both the name of the object conveyed, and the name of the person to whom it is conveyed are, frequently, put in the accusative case.

3. Instrumental.-As, I fight with a sword = pugno ense = feohte sweorde,-Anglo-Saxon.

4. Emphatic.-As, he sleeps the sleep of the righteous.

native case.

§ 494. Verb and nominative case.—No verb governs a nomiThe appositional construction seems to require such a form of government; but the form is only apparent.

It is I.

It is thou.

It is he, &c.

Here, although the word is is followed by a nominative case, it by no means governs one-at least not as a verb.

It has been stated above that the so-called verb-substantive is only a verb for the purposes of etymology. In syntax, it is only a part of a verb, i. e. the copula.

Now this fact changes the question of the construction in expressions like it is I, &c., from a point of government to one of concord. In the previous examples the words it, is, and I, were, respectively, subject, copula, and predicate; and, as it is the function of the copula to denote the agreement between the predicate and the subject, the real point to investigate is the nature of the concord between these two parts of a proposition.

Now the predicate need agree with the subject in case only. 1. It has no necessary concord in gender-she is a man in courage—he is a woman in effeminacy—it is a girl.

2. It has no necessary concord in number-sin is the wages of death it is these that do the mischief.

3. It has no necessary concord in person-I am he whom you mean.

4. It has, however, a necessary concord in case. Nothing but a nominative case can, by itself, constitute a term of either kind—subject or predicate. Hence, both terms must be in the nominative, and, consequently, both in the same case. Expressions like this is for me are elliptic. The logical expression is this is a thing for me.

Rule. The predicate must be of the same case with its subject.

Hence--The copula, instead of determining a case, expresses a concord.

Rule 1.-All words connected with a nominative case by the

« ElőzőTovább »