86

Of grammatical purity

quotations following: "When you fall into a man's conversation, the first thing you should consider, "is" Properly, "fall into conversation with a "man." "I wish, Sir, you would animadvert frequently on the false taste the town is in, with relation to plays as well as operas ‡." Properly, "the false "taste of the town."

66

46

"THE presence of the Deity, and the care such an august Cause is to be supposed to take about any ac"tion *." The impropriety here is best corrected by substituting the word being in the place of cause; for though there be nothing improper in calling the Deity an august Cause, the author hath very improperly connected with this appellative some words totally unsuitable; for who ever heard of a cause taking care about an action.

46

66

I SHALL produce but one other instance-" Neither implies that there are virtuous habits and accomplish"ments already attained by the possessor, but they certainly shew an unprejudiced capacity towards "them." In the first clause of this sentence, there is a gross inconsistency; we are informed of habits and accomplishments that are possessed, but not attained; in the second clause there is a double impropriety, the participial adjective is not suited to the substantive with which it is construed; nor is the subsequent pre

+ Spectator, No. 49. *Pope's View of the Epic Poem.

Ibid, No. 22.

+ Guardian, No. 34.

Sect. III.

The Impropriety.... Part II. Impropriety in phrases.

position expressive of the sense. Supposing, then, that the word possessor hath been used inadvertently for person, or some other general term, the sense may be exhibited thus: "Neither implies that there are vir"tuous habits and accomplishments already attained

66

by this person; but they certainly shew that his “mind is not prejudiced against them, and that it hath "a capacity of attaining them."

UNDER this head I might consider that impropriety which results from the use of metaphors, or other tropes, wherein the similitude to the subject, or connection with it, is too remote; also, that which results from the construction of words with any trope, which are not applicable in the literal sense. The former errs chiefly against vivacity, the latter against elegance. Of the one, therefore, I shall have occasion to speak, when I consider the catachresis; of the other, when I treat of mixed metaphor.

I HAVE NOW finished what was intended on the subject of grammatical purity; the first, and in some respect the most essential of all the virtues of elocution. I have illustrated the three different ways in which it may be violated; the barbarism, when the words employed are not English; the solecism, when the construction is not English; the impropriety, when the meaning in which any English word or phrase is used, by a writer or speaker, is not the sense which good se hath assigned to it.

CHAP. IV.

Some grammatical Doubts in regard to English Construction stated and examined.

BEFORE I dismiss this article altogether, it will not be amiss to consider a little some dubious points in construction, on which our critics appear not to be agreed.

ONE of the most eminent of them makes this remark upon the neuter verbs: "A neuter verb cannot "become a passive. In a neuter verb the agent and

object are the same, and cannot be separated event in imagination; as in the examples to sleep, to walk ; "but when the verb is passive, one thing is acted up

66

on by another, really or by supposition different from "it." To this is subjoined in the margin the following note: "That some neuter verbs take a passive

form, but without a passive signification, has been "observed above. Here we speak of their becoming "both in form and signification passive, and shall en"deavour further to illustrate the rule by example. "To split, like many other English verbs, has both an "active and a neuter signification; according to the

Short Introduction, &c. Sentences.

Some grammatical doubts in regard to English construction stated.

former we say, The force of gunpowder split the rock; according to the latter, The ship split upon the "rock :-and converting the verb active into a passive,

we may say, The rock was split by the force of gun"powder; or, The ship was split upon the rock. But "we cannot say with any propriety, turning the verb "neuter into a passive, The rock was split upon by "the ship."

THIS author's reasoning, so far as concerns verbs properly neuter, is so manifestly just, that it commands a full assent from every one that understands it. I differ from him only in regard to the application. In my apprehension, what may grammatically be named the neuter verbs, are not near so numerous in our tongue as he imagines. I do not enter into the difference between verbs absolutely neuter, and intransitively active. I concur with him in thinking, that this distinction holds more of metaphysics than of grammar. But by verbs grammatically neuter, I mean such as are not followed either by an accusative, or by a preposition and a noun; for I take this to be the only grammatical criterion with us. Of this kind is the simple and primitive verb to laugh; accordingly to say he was laughed, would be repugnant alike to grammar and to sense. But give this verb a regimen, and say, To laugh at, and you alter its nature, by adding to its signification. It were an abuse of words to call this a neuter, being as truly a compound active verb in English, as deridere is in

Some grammatical doubts in regard to English construction,

Latin, to which it exactly corresponds in meaning. Nor doth it make any odds that the preposition in the one language precedes the verb, and is conjoined with it, and in the other follows it, and is detached from it. The real union is the same in both. Accordingly be was laughed at is as evidently good English, as derisus fuit is good Latin.

66

66

LET us hear this author himself, who, speaking of verbs compounded with a preposition, says expressly, "In English the preposition is more frequently plac"ed after the verb, and separate from it, like an ad"verb; in which situation it is no less apt to affect "the sense of it, and to give it a new meaning; and may still be considered as belonging to the verb, "and a part of it. As, to cast is to throw; but to "cast up, or to compute, an account, is quite a diffe"rent thing: thus, to fall on, to bear out, to give over," &c. Innumerable examples might be produced, to show that such verbs have been always used as active or transitive compounds, call them which you please, and therefore as properly susceptible of the passive voice. I shall produce only one authority, which, I am persuaded, the intelligent reader will admit to be a good one. It is no other than this ingenious critic himself, and the passage of his which I have in view will be found in the very quotation above made. When the verb is passive, one thing "is acted upon by another." Here the verb to act upon is undoubtedly neuter, if the verb to split

66