TENDENCY TO EXTEND USAGE. - In newspaper and advertising English there is a growing tendency to employ the possessive form with an impersonal word; as, "England's glorious history"; "A train's narrow escape"; "America's best five-cent cigar." This is one of the things to be watched and avoided; at present it sounds like a cheap attempt at fine writing.

A similar tendency may be noted of the relative whose, which ought to be used only sparingly to refer to other than a personal object or an impersonal object personified; of which should be used for inanimate objects unless the use of it makes the style too lumbering.

Poetry is much freer than prose to use the possessive with impersonal words; thus, "my heart and my heart's joy," which sounds affected in ordinary prose, is quite natural as an impassioned expression such as we associate with poetry. It is the presence of the emotion that justifies the difference in style.

16. Be watchful to adapt pronoun caseforms to the actual

case.

It is only the pronouns that have distinctive endings for nominative and objective case; and whenever we introduce a pronoun we need immediately to think what is or is to be its government, and make the case-ending correspond. It is in the ability it gives to do this instantly and accurately that the great advantage of being proficient in parsing lies.

sense of grammatical "This is an important

ILLUSTRATIONS. - In the following sentences, which represent very common errors, it requires only a quick government to adjust the pronoun to its case. question for you and I to decide" (where I should be changed to me because the pronoun is the object of for); " It makes we Americans think we are being systematically despoiled" (we should be changed to us); "Who do you take me for?" (whom, object of for).

Such a sentence as, "I will give this to whoever shows the most skill and endurance" raises a question, on which not all are agreed,

as to whether whoever should be used, as subject of "shows," or whomever, as object of "to." It is not "whoever" alone, however, but "whoever shows the most skill and endurance," that is the real object of "to"; hence it is better to keep "whoever" in the nominative, as that is its real office within its clause.

Than whom, as in the sentence, "Wilfred, than whom no truer friend to me exists, counsels this course,” is an anomalous expression (than being treated as if it were a preposition with an object, whereas it is a conjunction) which it is better to avoid. The high example of Milton has given currency to the phrase.

17. With two objects use comparative degree; with more, superlative,

When an object has more of some quality, it is more than some other object has; or if more than all other objects, the all other are put together

and make, for comparison, a single object. When an object has the most of some quality, it is regarded as one of a whole class; and a pair is not large enough to make up a class.

ILLUSTRATIONS. Do not say, "He is the eldest of the two brothers," but "the elder." Say "eldest of the three" (or more); or you can say “eldest of the family." In the latter example the superlative is used with a collective noun implying more than two.

Quite like a comparative in principle are the words either, neither, the former, the latter, which should not be used to refer to more than two objects. When more than two are spoken of, use any, none, the first, the last. "He was stronger than either of the three competitors" (say rather, than any). "Three men were implicated in the crime, Ebbitt, Ranger, and Williams; of these the latter (say rather the last named) received the severest sentence."

m

18. Do not compare

Some qualities of objects are incawhat has no degree. pable of comparison because they are already expressed so absolutely that we cannot think of them as greater or less. The use of endings or adverbs of comparison with such qualities involves, therefore, an

absurdity; this we realize by reflecting on the nature of

the quality.

ILLUSTRATIONS. Such words as unique, perfect, extreme, unanimous, square, round, cannot be thought of as having more or less of the quality; what is unique cannot be more unique; what is perfect cannot be less perfect, though an object can be less than perfect.

Such expressions as "more preferable," "more superior," "most straitest' are wrong, not because the qualities do not admit of degree, but because the expressions involve a double comparison.

19. Express clearly

ticiple.

Form the habit of thinking immedi

the subject of a par- ately, whenever you use a participle, of the word to which it belongs, so as to give that word a place in the construction; otherwise the word is very liable to slip away from you, and something else to take its grammatical place. This is called the error of the "misrelated participle."

ILLUSTRATIONS. — Thus, "Speaking with a poor woman about the daughter of her neighbor, she said "— is wrong, because the real subject of the participle is crowded out by another word. Say rather, Speaking . . . I heard her say," which supplies the subject "I,” or (better still, perhaps, in this case) change from the phrasal to the clausal construction. "As I was speaking with . . . she said."

66

The error of the misrelated participle is frequently incurred by changing unadvisedly to the passive construction; thus, "Having just now spoken rather of the disciples than of the Master, this opportunity may be taken to say that," etc. Say rather, "I may take this opportunity."

NOTE. The subject of a participle ought to be either in the nominative or in the objective case, not in the possessive. Thus, "Not having seen them for some years, her arrival occasioned much excitement," does not give prominence enough to the subject of the participle (the possessive being virtually only an adjective) and supplies another word (arrival) to which the participle might be grammatically related. If it be objected that this sentence is not mislead

ing, as no one would naturally refer arrival as subject to having seen; the answer may be made, and laid down as a general rule of speech, Do NOT SAY GRAMMATICALLY WHAT YOU DO NOT MEAN ACTUALLY; there is always liability of ambiguity if you do.

20. Use indicative mood when the condition is certain; subjunctive when it is doubtful.

do

The indicative mood, as its name implies, is used to indicate what really is We may

or what we regard as a fact. use it after a conditional conjunction. like if or though, but when we do we regard the condition as actual. Using the subjunctive mood, we regard the condition as merely supposed, and imply that it is not actual. The distinction between the two moods, which is real and important, is too little observed now-adays.

ILLUSTRATIONS. In the expression, "If Mr. B. is present will he please come forward," his presence is looked upon as a fact, and the mood of the verb is indicative. In the expression, "If he were here, we could get much information on this subject," his presence is only supposed, the implication being that he is not actually here; and the mood of the verb is subjunctive.

In the scripture verse, “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience," the two clauses are inconsistent with each other, because the first, given as supposition ("were subj.), implies that he was not a Son, while the second asserts a fact based on his being actually a Son; accordingly the Revised Version has changed the expression to 'Though he was a Son, yet learned obedience."

66

NOTE. The subjunctive mood is generally used after such words as if, though, unless, except, lest, whether, that. Sometimes, however, the expression is condensed, the particle being implied; as, “Were I perfect, yet would he prove me perverse."

The question whether, in any case, subjunctive or indicative mood should be employed is often a question whether doubt or fact predominates in the condition.

V

21. Use shall when the speaker assumes control of the future; will when he asserts purpose of it.

The primary implication of the word shall (Anglo-Saxon sceal, ought) is obligation; of the word will (AngloSaxon willan, to will) purpose, intention. These meanings are traceable, with greater or less distinctness, in every use of the words; but the effect differs according to the person to whom the assertion applies.

Thus, by saying shall (obligation, destiny) the speaker assumes control of the subject of the verb. The effect of this, when he imposes such obligation on himself (that is, when the verb is in the first person) is simply to predict; hence shall with the first person is the auxiliary of the future. The effect when he assumes control of others (verb in second or third person) is to command or to assert absolute destiny.

EXAMPLES.. Keep in mind the primary meaning.

I. I shall be late

I am destined to be late.

Simple

1. We shall be satisfied = We are destined to be satisfied. Š future.

By saying will the speaker asserts purpose or intent. The effect of this, when he speaks of himself (verb in first person) is just what is said, simple purpose and no more. When he asserts others' purpose (second and third person) the effect, by natural courtesy, is to imply that what is purposed will come to pass; hence will with the second and third persons is the auxiliary of the future.

I will ride
I.

=

it is my intention.

2. You will lose your appointment.} Simple future.

3. It will rain to-morrow.