« PreviousContinue »
But the pro
the verb which determines its case. noun having a proper form for each of the cases, is sometimes placed after the verb, when in the nominative, and sometimes when in the objective, it is placed before it; as, Whom ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.
This position of the pronoun sometimes occasions its proper case and government to be neglected; as in the following instances: Who should I es. teem more than the wise and good? By the characer of those who you choose for your friends, your own is likely to be formed: Those are the persons who he thought true to his interest: Who should I see the other day but my old friend? Whosoever the court favors. In all these places it ought to be whom, the relative being governed in the objective case by the verbs, esteem, choose, thought, &c. He who, under all proper circumstances, has the boldness to speak truth, choose for thy friend. It should be, him who, &c.
Some verbs of a neuter signification, and others whose action is generally confined to the agent, becomo transitive in certain situations, and govern an objective case; as in the phrases, To dream a dream; to run a race; to walk a horse; to dance a child; to live a virtuous life. In instances like these, the verb governs the noun which follows it, and is therefore transitive. Intransitive verbs sometimes assume the form of the passive; as,
I am come; I was gone; he has grown; I was fallen; &c. These verbs are not passive, although they have the passive form, because they do not imply the receiving of an action or impression from another. The action originates with the agent, or
tive case; as,
nominative, and to this its effect is limited; consequently the verb is intransitive. Let
governs the objective case; as, Let him beware: Let us judge candidly: Let them not presume.
They found him transgressing the laws: And seeing the multitudes, he went up into a mountain: And finding disciples, we tarried there seven days: Transgressing, seeing, and finding, are participles, and govern the nouns which follow them.
A participle joined to an adverb is sometimes used independently of the rest of the sentence; as, Generally speaking, his conduct was very honorable: Two objects may sometimes be very happily compared together, though they resemble each other, strictly speaking, in nothing. A participle in this situation may be called independent, as it has no government of case or agreement with any noun.
RULE IX. Verbs of teaching, giving, and some others of a similar nature, govern two objectives, the one of a person and the other of a thing; as,
He taught me grammar: His tutor gave him a lesson: He promised me a reward. In these examples, the verbs, taught, gave, and promised, each of them governs the two nouns immediately following.
Grammarians have generally considered the personal pronoun, in such cases, to be governed by a preposition understood, as, He taught grammar to me. But the verb certainly has as much influence upon the pronoun me, as it has upon the substantive grammar; and why should it be said to govern
one and not the other? There appears to be no propriety in understanding a word, or supposing a - word to be implied, which, if expressed, would neither add any thing to the sense, nor render the meaning any more intelligible. Hence there ap
, pears to be ne propriety in understanding the preposition to, in the sentence under consideration; since the meaning is better expressed when it is omitted. Let the sentence be subjected to rigorous examination, and it will be found that the insertion of the word to, instead of being an illustration, is rather a perversion of the meaning; for strictly speaking, it is not the grammar which is taught, but the pupil is taught in the science of grammar. To ' say, He taught me, is literally true; but to say, taught grammar, is true only in a figurative sense. Sometimes, however, the preposition may be inserted before the pronoun, and the literal meaning be preserved; as, He gave me a book. Here the true meaning is, he gave a book to me. But although a pronoun thus situated admits of a prepoz' sition before it, still the verb may be considered as the governing word, when the preposition is not inserted. It is not unfrequent that the omission of a preposition gives the office of government to the verb, when it would belong to the preposition, if it were inserted; as, He visited my father's house; or, he visited at my father's house. He faces the storm, or he faces to the storm. He begged me to be quiet; or, he begged of me to be quiet. He entered the city; or, he entered into the city. In all these examples, when the preposition is omitted, the verb is transitive; it terminates on an object which it governs. But when the preposition is inserted, the verb becomes intransitive; its pow
er of government being taken away by the intervention of another governing word.
RULE X. A passive verb may govern an objective, when the words immediately preceding and following it, do not refer to the same thing; as,
Henry was offered a dollar by his father to induce him to remain. Here the verb was offered, terminates on dollar, and governs it. Change the construction of the verb to the transitive form, and it will read thus; Henry's father offered him a dollar. In this instance, the verb governs two objectives, agreeably to Rule 9th. And in all cases in which a passive verb governs an objective, the same verb, if put in the transitive form, would goyern two objectives, as in the examples which follow: He was refused admittance by the magistrate. Transitive--the magistrate refused him admittance. They were denied the privilege of a charter by the legislature. Transitive the legislature denied them the privilege of a charter.
I have heard a good character of her: From him that is needy, turn not away: A word to the wise is sufficient for them: We may be good and happy without riches.
The following are examples of the nominative case being used instead of the objective: Who servest thou under? Who do you speak to? We are still much at a loss who civil power belongs to : Who dost thou ask for? Associate not with those who none can speak well of. In all these places it ought to be whom. * The preposition is often separated from the rela
tive which it governs: as, Whom wilt thou give it to? instead of, To whom wilt thou give it? He is an author whom I am much delighted with. This is an idiom to which our language is strongly inclined; it prevails in common conversation, and suits very well with the familiar style in writing; but the placing of the preposition before the relative is more graceful, as well as more perspicuous, and agrees much better with the solemn and elevated style.
RULE XII. The conjunction as, when it takes the meaning of for, or, in the character of, governs an objective;
Addison, as a writer of prose, is highly distinguished: Shakspeare, as a describer of human nature, remains unrivalled: Brutus, although successful as a conspirator, was unfortunate as a general. In each of these examples, as performs the office of a preposition, and governs the following objective.
RULE XIII. Interjections sometimes govern an objective case;
Ah me! O the tender ties! O the soft enmity! 0 me miserable; O wretched prince! O cruel reverse of fortune!
When an address is made, the interjection does not perform the office of government; as, O generation of vipers! Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come! O Brutus! The heavens speed thee in thine enterprise! O constancy, be strong upon my side. In none of these examples does the interjection govern the noun which follows it; because in every instance an address is