he allows the excellence of virtue, he does not regard her precepts ;""Though he seems to be simple and artless, he has deceived us ;" "Whether virtue is better than rank or wealth, admits not of any dispute ;""If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayst," &c. Acts viii. 37.—There are many sentences, introduced by conjunctions, in which neither contingency nor futurity is denoted as, "Though he excels her in knowledge, she far exceeds him in virtue." "I have no doubt of his principles: but if he believes the truths of religion, he does not act acccording to them."

That both the circumstances of contingency and futurity are necessary, as tests of the propriety of altering the terminations, will be evident, by inspecting the following ex-. amples; which show that there are instances, in which neither of the circumstances alone implies the other. In the three examples following, contingency is denoted, but not futurity. "If he thinks as he speaks, he may safely be trusted." "If he is now disposed to it, I will perform the operation." "He acts uprightly, unless he deceives me." In the following sentences, futurity is signified, but not contingency. "As soon as the sun sets, it will be cooler," "As the autumn advances, these birds will gradually emigrate."

It appears, from the tenor of the examples adduced, that the rules above mentioned may be extended to assert that in cases wherein contingency and futurity do not concur, it is not proper to turn the verb from its signification of present time, nor to vary its form or termination. The verb would then be in the indicative mood, whatever conjunctions might attend it.—If these rules, which seem to form the true distinction between the subjunctive and the indicitive moods in this tense, were adopted and established in practice, we should have on this point, a principle of decision simple and precise, and readily applicable to every case that may occur.-It will, doubtless, sometimes, happen, that, on this occasion, as well as on many other

occasions, a strict adherence to grammatical rules, would render the language stiff and formal: but when cases of this sort occur, it would be better to give the expression a different turn, than to violate grammar for the sake of ease, or even of elegance. See Rule 14. Note 2.

5. On the form of the auxiliaries in the compound tenses of the subjunctive mood, it seems proper to make a few observations. Some writers express themselves in the perfect tense, as follows: "If thou have determined, we must submit:""Unless he have consented, the writing will be void :" but we believe that few authors of critical sagacity write in this manner. The proper form seems to be, “ If thou hast determined; unless he has consented," &c. conformably to what we meet with in the Bible: “I have surnamed thee, though thou hast not known me." Isaiah xlv. 4, 5. “ What is the hope of the hypocrite, though he hath gained," &c. Job xxvii. 8. See also Acts xxviii. 4.

66

6. In the pluperfect and future tenses, we sometimes meet with such expressions as these: "If thou had applied thyself diligently, thou wouldst have reaped the advantage ;" "Unless thou shall speak the whole truth, we cannot determine ;"" If thou will undertake the business, there is little doubt of success." This mode of expressing the auxiliaries does not appear to be warranted by the general practice of correct writers. They should be hadst, shalt, and wilt and we find them used in this form in the sacred Scriptures.

"If thou hadst known," &c. Luke xix. 47. "If thou hadst been here," &c. John xì. 21. "If thou wilt, thou canst make me clean," Matt. viii. 2. See also, 2 Sam. ii. 27. Matt. xvii. 4.

7. The second person singular of the imperfect tense in the subjunctive mood, is also very frequently varied in its termination: as, "If thou loved him truly, thou wouldst obey him ;""Though thou did conform, thou hast gained

nothing by it." This variation, however, appears to be improper. Our present version of the Scriptures, which we again refer to, as a good grammatical authority in points of this nature, decides against it. "If thou knewest the

gift," &c. John iv. 10. "If thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory?" &c. 1 Cro. iv. 7. See also, Dan. v. 22. But it is proper to remark, that the form of the verb to be, when used subjunctively in the imperfect tense, is indeed very considerably and properly varied from that which it has in the imperfect of the indicative mood: as the learner will perceive by turning to the conjugation of that verb.*

8. It may not be superfluous, also to observe, that the auxiliaries of the potential mood, when applied to the subjunctive, do not change the termination of the second person singular. We properly say, "If thou mayst or canst go:" " Though thou mightat live;""Unless thou couldst read;" "If thou wouldst learn ;" and not "If thou may or can go ;"&c. It is sufficient, on this point, to adduce the authorities of Johnson and Lowth; "If thou shouldst go;" Johnson. "If thou mayst, mightst, or couldst love ;" Lowth. Some authors think, that when that expresses the motive or end, the termination of these auxiliaries should be varied: as, "I advise thee, that thou may beware;" "He checked thee, that thou should not presume:" but there does not appear to be any ground for this exception. If the expression of "condition, doubt, contingency," &c. does not warrant a change in the form of these auxiliaries, why should they have it, when a motive or end is expressed? The translators of the Scriptures do not appear to have made the distinction contended for. "Thou buildest the wall, that thou mayst be their king,” Neh. vi. 6. "There is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayst be feared." Psalm cxxx. 4.

From the preceding observations under this rule, it appears, that with respect to what is termed the present

See observations on the manner of conjugating the subjunctive mood, at pages 90, 102.

tense of any verb, when the circumstances of contingency and futurity concur, it is proper to vary the terminations of the second and third persons singular; that without the concurrence of those circumstances, the terminations should not be altered: and that the verb and the auxiliaries of the three past tenses, and the auxiliaries of the future, undergo no alterations whatever: except the imperfect of the verb to be, which, in cases denoting contingency, is varied in all the persons of the singular number.

After perusing what has been advanced on this subject, it will be natural for the student to inquire, what is the extent of the subjunctive mood? Some grammarians think it extends only to what is called the present tense of verbs generally, under the circumstances of contingency and futurity; and to the imperfect tense of the verb to be, when it denotes contingency because in these tenses only, the form of the verb admits of variation; and they suppose that it is variation merely which constitutes the distinction of moods. It is the opinion of other grammarians, that, besides the two cases just mentioned, all verbs in the three past, and the two future tenses, are in the subjunctive mood, when they denote contingency and uncertainty, though they have not any change of termination; and that, when contingency is not signified, the verb, through all these five tenses, belongs to the indicative mood, whatever conjunction may attend it. They think, that the definition and nature of the subjunctive mood, have no reference to change of termination, but that they refer merely to the manner of the being, action, or passion, signified by the verb; and that the subjunctive mood may as properly exist, without a variation of the verb, as the infinitive mood, which certainly has no terminations different from those of the indicative. The decision of this point is not, however, of much consequence. The rules which ascertain the propriety of varying, or not varying, the terminations of the verb, are of more importance; and may be well observed, without a uniformity of sentiment respecting the nature

and limits of the subjunctive mood. For further remarks on the subject, see sect. 8. p. 102.

There is a peculiar neatness in a sentence beginning with the conjunctive form of a verb. "Were there no difference, there would be no choice."

A double conjunctive, in two correspondent clauses of a sentence, is sometimes made use of: as, "Had he done this, he had escaped ;"" Had the limitations on the prerogative been, in his time, quite fixed and certain, his integrity had made him regard as sacred, the boundaries of the constitution." The sentence in the common form would have read thus: "If the limitations on the prerogative had been, &c. his integrity would have made him regard," &c.

9. Some conjunctions have their correspondent conjunctions belonging to them, so that, in the subsequent member, of the sentence, the latter answers to the former: as,

1st,, Though, yet, nevertheless: as, "Though he was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor."

2d, Whether-or: as, "Whether he will go or not, Í

cannot tell."

3d, Either-or: as, "I will either send it, or bring it myself."

4th, Neither-nor: as, "Neither thou nor I am able to compass it."

5th, As-as: expressing a comparison of equality: as, "She is as amiable as her sister."

6th, A8-80: expressing a comparison of equality: as, "As the stars, so shall thy seed be."

7th, As-so: expressing a comparison of quality : as, "As the one dieth, so dieth the other,"

8th, So-as: with a verb expressing a comparison of quality: as," To see thy glory, so as I have seen thee in the sanctuary."

9th, Somas: with a negative and an adjective expressing a comparison of quantity: as, "Pompey was not so great a man as Cæsar."