FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1307   1308   1309   1310   1311   1312   1313   1314   1315   1316   1317   1318   1319   1320   1321   1322   1323   1324   1325   1326   1327   1328   1329   1330   1331  
1332   1333   1334   1335   1336   1337   1338   1339   1340   1341   1342   1343   1344   1345   1346   1347   1348   1349   1350   1351   1352   1353   1354   1355   1356   >>   >|  
ciple seems to be improperly made _the object_ of the verb: "I intend _doing_ it."--"I remember _meeting_ him." Better, "I intend _to do_ it."--"I remember _to have met_ him." According to my notion, it is an error to suppose that verbs in general may govern participles. If there are any proper instances of such government, they would seem to be chiefly among verbs of _quitting_ or _avoiding_. And even here the analogy of General Grammar gives countenance to a different solution; as, "They _left beating of_ Paul."--_Acts_, xxi, 32. Better, "They _left beating_ Paul;"--or, "They _quit beating_ Paul." Greek, "[Greek: Epausanto tuptontes ton Paulon.]" Latin, "Cessaverunt _percutientes_ Paulum."--_Montanus_. "Cessarunt _coedere_ Paulum."--_Beza_. "Cessaverunt _percutere_ Paulum."--_Vulgate_. It is true, the English participle in _ing_ differs in some respects from that which usually corresponds to it in Latin or Greek; it has more of a substantive character, and is commonly put for the Latin gerund. If this difference does not destroy the argument from analogy, the opinion is still just, that _left_ and _quit_ are here _intransitive_, and that the participle _beating_ relates to the pronoun _they_. Such is unequivocally the construction of the Greek text, and also of the literal Latin of Arias Montanus. But, to the mere English grammarian, this method of parsing will not be apt to suggest itself: because, at first sight, the verbs appear to be transitive, and the participle in _ing_ has nothing to prove it an adjunct of the nominative, and not the object of the verb--unless, indeed, the mere fact that it is a participle, is proof of this. OBS. 20.--Our great Compiler, Murray, not understanding this construction, or not observing what verbs admit of it, or require it, has very unskillfully laid it down as a rule, that, "The participle with its adjuncts, may be considered as a _substantive phrase_ in the objective case, governed by the preposition or verb, _expressed or understood_: as, 'By _promising much and performing but little_, we become despicable.' 'He studied to avoid _expressing himself too severely_.'"--_Octavo Gram._, p. 194.[421] This very popular author seems never to have known that participles, as such, may be governed in English by prepositions. And yet he knew, and said, that "prepositions do not, _like articles and pronouns_, convert the participle itself into the nature of a substantive."--_Ibid._ This he
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   1307   1308   1309   1310   1311   1312   1313   1314   1315   1316   1317   1318   1319   1320   1321   1322   1323   1324   1325   1326   1327   1328   1329   1330   1331  
1332   1333   1334   1335   1336   1337   1338   1339   1340   1341   1342   1343   1344   1345   1346   1347   1348   1349   1350   1351   1352   1353   1354   1355   1356   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
participle
 

beating

 
English
 
Paulum
 

substantive

 

Cessaverunt

 

Montanus

 

construction

 

intend

 
analogy

object

 

remember

 
Better
 
prepositions
 
participles
 

governed

 
nature
 
unskillfully
 

require

 

adjunct


nominative

 

transitive

 

Murray

 

understanding

 

observing

 
Compiler
 
Octavo
 

severely

 

convert

 

popular


author
 
articles
 

pronouns

 

expressing

 
preposition
 
expressed
 

understood

 

objective

 

considered

 
phrase

promising

 

despicable

 

studied

 
performing
 

adjuncts

 
gerund
 

General

 

Grammar

 

countenance

 

avoiding