ASES." His examples are
these: "A poem of Pope's;"--"A soldier of the king's;"--"That is a horse of
my father's."--_Blair's Practical Gram._, p. 110, 111. He ought to have
supplied the plural nouns, _poems, soldiers, horses_. This is the true
explanation of all the "double genitives" which our grammarians discover;
for when the first noun is _partitive_, it naturally suggests more or other
things of the same kind, belonging to this possessor; and when such is not
the meaning, this construction is improper. In the following example, the
noun _eyes_ is understood after _his_:
"Ev'n _his_, the _warrior's eyes_, were forced to yield,
That saw, without a tear, Pharsalia's field."
--_Rowe's Lucan_, B. viii, l. 144.
OBS. 23.--When two or more nouns of the possessive form are in any way
connected, they usually refer to things individually different but of the
same name; and when such is the meaning, the governing noun, which we
always suppress somewhere to avoid tautology, is _understood_ wherever the
sign is added without it; as, "A _father's_ or _mother's sister_ is an
aunt."--_Dr. Webster_. That is, "A _father's sister_ or a mother's sister
is an aunt." "In the same commemorative acts of the senate, _were thy
name_, thy _father's_, thy _brother's_, and the _emperor's_."--_Zenobia_,
Vol. i, p. 231.
"From Stiles's pocket into _Nokes's_" [pocket].
--_Hudibras_, B. iii, C. iii, l. 715.
"Add _Nature's, Custom's, Reason's_, Passion's strife."
--_Pope, Brit. Poets_, Vol. vi, p. 383.
It will be observed that in all these examples the governing noun is
singular; and, certainly, it must be so, if, with more than one possessive
sign, we mean to represent each possessor as having or possessing but one
object. If the noun be made plural where it is expressed, it will also be
plural where it is implied. It is good English to say, "A _father's_ or
_mother's sisters_ are aunts;" but the meaning is, "A father's _sisters_ or
a mother's sisters are aunts." But a recent school critic teaches
differently, thus: "When different things of the same name belong to
different possessors, the sign should be annexed to each; as, _Adams's,
Davies's_, and _Perkins'_ Arithmetics; i. e., _three different
books_."--_Spencer's Gram._, p. 47. Here the example is fictitious, and has
almost as many errors as words. It would be much better English to say,
"_Adams's, Davies's, and Perkins's Arithmetic_;" though the o
|