FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   926   927   928   929   930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   941   942   943   944   945   946   947   948   949   950  
951   952   953   954   955   956   957   958   959   960   961   962   963   964   965   966   967   968   969   970   971   972   973   974   975   >>   >|  
ositions, in Rule 20th. OBS. 23.--The _Arrangement_ of words, (which will be sufficiently treated of in the observations hereafter to be made on the several rules of construction,) is an important part of syntax, in which not only the beauty but the propriety of language is intimately concerned, and to which particular attention should therefore be paid in composition. But it is to be remembered, that the mere collocation of words in a sentence never affects the method of parsing them: on the contrary, the same words, however placed, are always to be parsed in precisely the same way, so long as they express precisely the same meaning. In order to show that we have parsed any part of an inverted or difficult sentence rightly, we are at liberty to declare the meaning by any arrangement which will make the construction more obvious, provided we retain both the sense and all the words unaltered; but to drop or alter any word, is to pervert the text under pretence of resolving it, and to make a mockery of parsing. Grammar rightly learned, enables one to understand both the sense and the construction of whatsoever is rightly written; and he who reads what he does not understand, reads to little purpose. With great indignity to the muses, several pretenders to grammar have foolishly taught, that, "In parsing poetry, in order to _come at the meaning_ of the author, the learner will find it necessary to transpose his language."--_Kirkham's Gram._, p. 166. See also the books of _Merchant, Wilcox, O. B. Peirce, Hull, Smith, Felton_, and others, to the same effect. To what purpose can he _transpose_ the words of a sentence, who does not first see what they mean, and how to explain or parse them as they stand? OBS. 24.--Errors innumerable have been introduced into the common modes of parsing, through a false notion of what constitutes a _simple sentence_. Lowth, Adam, Murray, Gould, Smith, Ingersoll, Comly, Lennie, Hiley, Bullions, Wells, and many others, say, "A simple sentence has in it _but one subject_, and _one finite verb_: as, 'Life is short.'"--_L. Murray's Gram._, p. 141. In accordance with this assertion, some assume, that, "Every nominative _has its own verb_ expressed or understood;" and that, "Every verb (except in the infinitive mood and participle) _has its own nominative_ expressed or understood."--_Bullions's E. Gram._, p. 87. The adopters of these dogmas, of course think it right to _supply_ a nominative whenever
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   926   927   928   929   930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   941   942   943   944   945   946   947   948   949   950  
951   952   953   954   955   956   957   958   959   960   961   962   963   964   965   966   967   968   969   970   971   972   973   974   975   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

sentence

 

parsing

 

rightly

 

nominative

 

meaning

 

construction

 

precisely

 
parsed
 
Bullions
 

Murray


simple

 

understood

 

expressed

 

transpose

 
purpose
 

understand

 

language

 

common

 

introduced

 

constitutes


observations

 

Ingersoll

 

notion

 
Errors
 

effect

 

Felton

 

explain

 

Peirce

 

innumerable

 

infinitive


participle
 

ositions

 

supply

 

adopters

 

dogmas

 

assume

 

sufficiently

 

subject

 
Wilcox
 

treated


finite

 

Arrangement

 

assertion

 

accordance

 

Lennie

 
attention
 

obvious

 
arrangement
 

liberty

 

declare