, or of any complex element into the _parts_
which compose it, is called _parsing_." Next, the "_Parsing_" spoken of in
the second sentence, is _Syntactical_ Parsing only; and, without a
limitation of the species, neither this assertion nor the one concerning
precedence is sufficiently true. Again, the suggestion, that, "_Analysis_
consists in _pointing out_ the words or groups of words which _constitute
the elements_ of a sentence," has nothing distinctive in it; and, without
some idea of the author's peculiar system of "elements," previously
impressed upon the mind, is scarcely, if at all, intelligible. Lastly, that
a pupil must _understand_ a sentence,--or, what is the same thing, "_learn
the force of the words combined_,"--before he can be sure of parsing each
word rightly, is a very plain and certain truth; but what "advantage" over
parsing this truth gives to the lesser analysis, which deals with "groups,"
it is not easy to discover. If the author had any clear idea of "_this
advantage_," he has conveyed no such conception to his readers.

OBS. 11.--Greene's Analysis is the most expanded form of the Third Method
above.[333] Its nucleus, or germinating kernel, was the old partition of
_subject_ and _predicate_, derived from the art of logic. Its chief
principles may be briefly stated thus: Sentences, which are simple, or
complex, or compound, are made up of _words, phrases_, and _clauses_--three
grand classes of elements, called the _first_, the _second_, and the
_third_ class. From these, each sentence must have two elements; the
_Subject_, or Substantive element, and the _Predicate_, or Predicative
element, which are principal; and a sentence _may_ have five, the
subordinates being the Adjective element, the Objective element, and the
Adverbial element. The five elements have sundry modifications and
subdivisions. Each of the five may, like a sentence, be simple, or complex,
or compound; and each may be of any of the three grand classes. The
development of this scheme forms a volume, not small. The system is
plausible, ingenious, methodical, mostly true, and somewhat elaborate; but
it is neither very useful nor very accurate. It seems too much like a great
tree, beautiful, symmetrical, and full of leaves, but raised or desired
only for fruit, yet bearing little, and some of that little not of good
quality, but knurly or bitter. The chief end of a grammar, designed for our
tongue, is, to show what is, and what is no