« السابقةمتابعة »
thus situated needs no governing word; the sentence is complete in its simplest form.
Participial nouns may have the same cases, and be governed in the same mamer, as common substantives. They also have the power of governing other words in the objective case;
Our heavenly Father, by diffusing his benefits, manifests his kindness: Blessed is the man that keepeth his band fron doing evil. In these examples, diffusing and doing are participial nouns, in the objective case, governed by the prepositions by and from; and they likewise govern the nouns benefits and evil by which they are followed. Participial nouns are sometimes placed after transitive verbs and governed by them; as, I cannot omit noting this truth: They could not avoid seeing me as I passed along the street. Here, noting and seeing are participial nouns, and are governed by the verbs omit and avoid.
In the following examples the participial noun is intransitive, having no government of a as, They talked of returning here last week: He is desirous of going with his friends.-In the fol lowing sentences, the participial noun is used in the nominative case: The loving of our enemies is the command of God: The executing of good laws will strengthen government: His dying reduced the family to poverty.
The participial noun, although capable of expressing the relation of property or possession, does not elegantly assume the distinctive form of the possessive case: thus, instead of saying, They
were deprived of reading and writing's advantages: we more properly say, They were deprived of the advantages of reading and writing.
Two or more nouns coming together and signifying the same thing, are put by apposition in
the same case; as,
Joseph, the son of Jacob, was much beloved by his father: The Israelites were greatly oppressed by Pharaoh, king of Egypt: Give me here John the baptist's head. In the first example, Joseph and son both refer to the same person, and are therefore in apposition; in the second, Pharaoh and king are in apposition; in the third, John and baptist's are in apposition, and both in the possessive case. The sign of the possessive after John is understood. When two nouns in the possessive case thus succeed each other, in apposition, the sign of the possessive is very properly omitted after the former. Two or more nouns of the singular number, when put in apposition, always require a singular verb. The following sentences are therefore inaccurate. Paul the servant of Christ, the apostle to the Gentiles, were eminent for piety and christian enterprise was eminent. Solomon, the son of David, and king of Israel, are much celebrated for wisdom: is much celebrated.
Any intransitive or passive verb may have the same case after it as before it when both words refer to the same thing; as,
The disciples were first called christians at ARtioch. The verb to be, through all its variations, has the same case after it as that which next pre cedes it as, I am he whom they invited: It may be (or might have been) he, but it cannot be (or could not have been) I: It seems to have been he who conducted himself so wisely: It appeared to be she that transacted the business: I understood it to be him: I believe it to have been them: We at first took it to be her; but were afterwards convinced that it was not she: He is not the person who it seemed he was: She is not now the woman whom they represented her Whom do you fancy him to be? ples, it appears that this verb has of case, but serves, in all its forms, as a conductor to the cases; so that the two cases which, in the construction of the sentence, are the next before and after it, must always be alike.
to have been: By these examno government
When the verb to be is understood, it has the same case before and after it as when it is expres sed: as, He seems the leader of the party: He shall continue clerk: They appointed me executor; i. e. he seems to be the leader of the party; &c.
Verbs which signify to become, to wander, to live, to die, to go, to return, and others of a similar nature, have the same case before and after them; as, The calf became an ox: He wandered an outcast: He lived the object of paternal love, &c.
Passive verbs have the same case before and after them, when both words refer to the same thing; as, He was styled Casar: She was named Penelope Homer is styled the prince of poets:. James was created a duke: The general was sa
luted emperor: The professor was appointed tutor to the prince.
All the examples under this rule, and all others of a similar nature, may be explained on the principle that nouns and pronouns are in the same case, when they signify the same thing; the one merely describing the other, or exhibiting it under different circumstances.
Pronouns must always agree with their antecedents and the nouns for which they stand, in gender and number; as,
This is the friend whom I love; That is the vice which I hate: The king and the queen had put on their robes: The moon appears, and she shines, but the light is not her own.
The relative pronoun is of the same person with the antecedent; as, Thou who lovest wisdom: I who speak from experience.
This rule is violated in the following sentences: Each of the sexes should keep within its particular bounds, and content themselves with the advantages of their particular districts; better thus The sexes should keep within their particular bounds, &c. Can any one, on their entrance into the world, be fully secure that they shall not be deceived? on his entrance, and that he shall. One should not think too favourably of ourselves; of one's self. He had one acquaintance which poisoned his principles; who poisoned.
Who, which, what, and the relative that, though in the objective case, are always placed before the
verb; as are also their compounds, whoever, who soever, &c.; as, He whom ye seek: This is what, or the thing which, or that you want: Whomsoever you please to appoint.
Personal pronouns being used to supply the place of the noun, are not employed in the same part of a sentence as the noun which they represent; for it would be improper to say, The king he is just I saw her the queen: The men they were there. These personals are superfluous, as there is not the least occasion for substitute in the same part where the principal word is present. The nominative case they in the following sentence, is also superfluous: Who, instead of going about doing good, they are perpetually intent upon doing mischief.
The pronoun that is frequently applied to persons as well as to things; but after an adjective in the superlative degree, and after the pronominal adjective same, it is generally used in preference to who or which; as, Charles XII, king of Sweden, was one of the greatest madmen that the world ever saw Cataline's followers were the most profligate that could be employed in any city: He is the same man that we saw before. There are cases in which we cannot conveniently dispense with this relative as applied to person; as, first, after who, the interrogative; Who that has any sense of religion, would have argued thus ? Secondly, when persons make but a part of the antecedent: The woman, and the estate that became his portion, were too much for his moderation.
Many persons are apt, in conversation, to put the objective case of the personal pronouns, in the place of these and those; as, Give me them