artly of
the borrower's own invention. If _what_ is a compound, it was compounded
more than a thousand years ago; and, of course, long before any part of the
English language existed as such. King Alfred used it, as he found it, in
the Saxon form of _hwaet_. The Scotch afterwards spelled it _quhat_. Our
English grammarians have _improperly_ called it a compound; and _Kirkham_,
still more absurdly, calls the word _others_ a compound, and _mine, thine,
ours, yours_, &e. compounds.[218]

OBS. 33.--According to this gentleman's notion of things, there is, within
the little circle of the word _what_, a very curious play of antecedent
parts and parts relative--a dodging contra-dance of _which that_ and _that
which_, with _things which_, and so forth. Thus: "When _what_ is a
_compound relative_ you must always parse it as _two words_; that is, you
must parse the antecedent part _as a noun_, and give it case; the relative
part you may _analyze_ like any other relative, giving it a case likewise.
Example: 'I will try _what_ (that which) can be found in female delicacy.'
Here _that_, the antecedent part of _what_, is in the obj. case, governed
by the verb 'will try;' _which_, the relative part, is in the nom. case to
'can be found.' 'I have heard _what_ (i.e. _that which_, or _the thing
which_) has been alleged.' "--_Kirkham's Gram._, p. 111. Here, we sec, the
author's "_which-that_" becomes _that which_, or something else. But this
is not a full view of his method. The following vile rigmarole is a further
sample of that "_New Systematick Order of Parsing_," by virtue of which he
so very complacently and successfully sets himself above all other
grammarians: "'From _what_ is recorded, he appears, &c.' _What_ is a comp.
rel. pron. including both the antecedent and the relative, and is
equivalent to _that which_, or the _thing which.--Thing_, the antecedent
part of _what_, is a noun, the name of a thing--com. the name of a
species--neuter gender, it has no sex--third person, spoken of--sing.
number, it implies but one--and in the obj. case, it is the object of the
relation expressed by the prep. 'from,' and gov. by it: RULE 31. (Repeat
the Rule, and _every other Rule_ to which I refer.) _Which_, the relative
part of _what_, is a pronoun, a word used instead of a noun--relative, it
relates to 'thing' for its antecedent--neut. gender, third person, sing,
number, because the antecedent is with which it agrees, according to RULE
14. _R