The sentence under II exemplifies a construction that corresponds to the "objective genitive" of some other languages but that is rare in English prose. Shakspere may say,

Shall Rome stand under one man's awe?1

and modern poets may follow his example; but in everyday English we should write, "Shall Rome stand in awe of one man?"

As a rule, do not use the possessive case of a noun unless it indicates real possession.

EXERCISE XII

Tell the difference in meaning in each case between the expressions connected by "and":

1. “Do you wear Burt and Reed's shoes?" and "Do you wear Burt's and Reed's shoes?"

2. "We use Spiers and Surenne's dictionary" and "We use Webster's and Worcester's dictionaries."

3. "I saw either a man or a woman's head and "I saw either a man's or a woman's head."

4. "Sighing for Phillis or Chloe's pity" and "Sighing for Phillis's or Chloe's pity."

5. “This news of papa agitated me very much" and "This news of papa's agitated me very much."

6. "Mary has lost her brother's picture" and "Mary has lost the picture of her brother."

7. “Did you ever read a better story of Mr. Kipling's?" and "Did you ever read a better story of Mr. Kipling?"

EXERCISE XIII

Express relation between the words, or groups of words, in each of the following pairs either by the possessive case or by the objective with "of," as may seem best :

Aristophanes, "Birds"; Plutarch, "Lives"; king of Great Britain, dominions; Sir Giles, servant; Charles the Second, reign; witness,

1 Julius Cæsar, ii. 1.

testimony; Partridge, restaurant; eagles, talons; enemy, repulse; book, cover; princess, evening gowns; Major André, capture; gunpowder, invention; torrent, force; year, events; Essex, death; Adams, administration; six months, wages; world, government; Queen Louisa of Prussia, charity; Mr. Todd the baker, shop; Wendell Phillips, courage; goodness, sake; somebody else, ring; my friend Mary, children; Clark and Eaton, bill.

Case before

Gerund.1- A writer sometimes finds it difficult to decide whether a noun that limits a gerund should, or should not, be in the possessive case.

I

The reason for Bassanio's wanting the money was that he was a suitor of a rich heiress.

The doctor insisted on the nurse's going out for fresh air.

66

II

The reason for Bassanio wanting the money was that he was a suitor of a rich heiress.

The doctor insisted upon the nurse going out for fresh air.

Wanting" and "going" are gerunds—that is, verbal forms which are in construction partly verbs and partly nouns. As nouns they are limited by preceding nouns, which should, according to the rules of grammar, be in the possessive case. These rules, however, are often ignored.

I

I hope you do not imagine that there was any impropriety in the king and queen's walking together in the palace garden.

II

I hope you do not imagine that there was any impropriety in the king and queen walking together in the palace garden.

In the sentence under II, the absence of the possessive sign may imply that the impropriety is in the king and queen themselves, instead of in the fact of their walking together. The phrase "king and queen" is a single possessive expression, and consequently takes but one possessive sign.2

1 Some grammars make a distinction between gerunds and verbal nouns; but in this book, for convenience, all nouns in "-ing" are called gerunds. 2 See page 48.

I

The chances that peace will be reëstablished at an early date are vanishing.

II

The chances of peace being reëstablished at an early date are vanishing.

The possessive of "peace" is demanded by the construction of the sentence under II; but, since "the chances of peace's being" is objectionable from every point of view, a construction that does not require a possessive is preferable. Before a gerund, put a limiting noun in the possessive case.

EXERCISE XIV

Give the meaning of each sentence in the two forms suggested, with the noun in parenthesis and with that which precedes:

1. Imagine, if you can, Marguerite (Marguerite's) studying Latin! 2. Brown (Brown's) being a manufacturer secured the election. 3. The man (man's) asking to be allowed to vote started a quarrel. 4. I had to laugh at John (John's) riding a bicycle.

5. Much depends on the teacher (teacher's) knowing the subject. 6. No one ever heard of that man (man's) running for office. 7. We were afraid of the men (men's) overhearing us.

EXERCISE XV

Correct errors in either the use or the omission of the possessive; give your reason for each correction :

1. Mr. John Smith accepts Mr. Jone's kind invitation to dinner. 2. Mr. John Smith accepts Mr. Jones kind invitation to dinner. 3. Jealousy is regarded as the crime's motive.

4. I bought a dress at Lord's and Taylor's.

5. She stood at the bedstead's head, looking over it.

6. A dog and a cat's head cannot but be differently shaped.

7. Whose Greek grammar do you prefer Goodwin or Hadley? 8. The visit ended in the doctor establishing himself in that

village.

9. I consulted Worcester's dictionary and Webster.

10. I like Hawthorne better than Irving's style.

11. A reception was given to Cambridge's distinguished visitor. 12. The novel is one of Dickens.

13. From here you can see that lion over Scarlett's, the butcher. 14. Benjamin Lincoln commanded the Massachusetts militia that quelled Shays' Rebellion.

15. Lord Conrad sat in the great hall at the board's head.

16. There is nothing between us, papa; but if there were, men speaking ill of him would not deter me.

17. Instead of going to Squire Williams', Abigail hurried home. 18. All the "Times'" correspondents discuss the speeches against the project.

19. It looks like the dog of our nearest neighbor's.

20. What are the chances of the coal strike being over soon? 21. From a safe distance they watched the volcano's discharge. 22. It is neither the captain nor the manager's duty.

Plural Forms.

The plurals of some nouns in everyday

use are often incorrectly formed.

I

Use two spoonfuls of flour.

66

II

Use two spoonsful of flour.

If two spoons are each to be filled once, "two spoons full" is correct; if one spoon is to be filled twice, "two spoonfuls" is correct. "Spoonful," "cupful," "pailful,” "shovelful," etc., are, like "peck" and "pint," words of measure, and form the plural in the regular way.

I

Two Mussulmans came next.

II

Two Mussulmen came next.

In the sentence under II, Mussulmen is incorrect. The plural of "Dutchman" is "Dutchmen," of "Englishman" "Englishmen," of "Frenchman" "Frenchmen" but the plural of "Mussulman" is "Mussulmans," of "German" "Germans," of "Ottoman" "Ottomans": the former are, the latter are not, compounds of "man. For a similar reason, the plural of "churchman" is "churchmen," of "layman" "laymen"; that of "cayman" (alligator) is "caymans, caymans," " of "talisman" "talismans."

I

II

Thus I had two mothers-in-law

at once.

Thus I had two mother-in-laws at once.

"Mothers-in-law" is correct; for "mother" is the fundamental, or distinguishing, part of the compound, and therefore receives the plural inflection. For a similar reason, "men-of-war" and "sail-lofts" are both correct.

I

Mary was long in finding among the idle heirs apparent any one who could satisfy her taste.

II

Mary was long in finding among the idle heir apparents any one who could satisfy her taste.

"Heirs apparent" is correct; for "heirs" is the fundamental part of the expression, as is "courts" in "courts martial."

I

In the office were twenty manclerks and ten woman-clerks.

II

In the office were twenty menclerks and ten women-clerks.

"Man-clerks" and "woman-clerks" are preferable to men-clerks and women-clerks; for "clerk" is the fundamental, or essential, part of the compound, "man or "woman the descriptive, or attributive, part. In "maid-servants" the same rule holds; but "men-servants" and "women-servants" (both parts plural), which occur in the King James translation of the Bible, are still in good use. So, too, in "lords-lieutenants," "lords-justices,” "knights-templars," "knights-bachelors," "knights-bannerets," and a few similar expressions, the plural termination is in each case retained in both parts of the compound. Usually, however, it is properly given to only the second word of a compound title, as in "lieutenantcolonels," "brigadier-generals."1 According to present usage, the better plural of "attorney-general" is "attorneygenerals," of "adjutant-general" "adjutants-general.

1 These compound titles are written either with or without hyphens. 2" Attorneys general," which is sometimes seen, was once in good use as the plural of " attorney general" as distinguished from "attorney special.”