FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2383   2384   2385   2386   2387   2388   2389   2390   2391   2392   2393   2394   2395   2396   2397   2398   2399   2400   2401   2402   2403   2404   2405   2406   2407  
2408   2409   2410   2411   2412   2413   2414   2415   2416   2417   2418   2419   2420   2421   2422   2423   2424   2425   2426   2427   2428   2429   2430   2431   2432   >>   >|  
tself."--_Text-Book_, p. 88. This appears to me a foolish innovation, too much in the spirit of Oliver B. Peirce, who also adopts it. The person who knows not the meaning of the word _nominative_, will not be very likely to find out what is meant by _subjective_; especially as some learned grammarians, even such men as Dr. Crombie and Professor Bullions, often erroneously call the word which is governed by the verb its _subject_. Besides, if we say _subjective_ and _objective_, in stead of _nominative_ and _objective_, we shall inevitably change the accent of both, and give them a pronunciation hitherto unknown to the words.--G. BROWN. [165] The authorities cited by Felch, for his doctrine of "_possessive adnouns_," amount to nothing. They are ostensibly two. The first is a remark of Dr. Adam's: "'_John's book_ was formerly written _Johnis book_. Some have thought the _'s_ a contraction of _his_, but improperly. Others have imagined, with more justness, that, by the addition of the _'s_, the substantive is changed into a possessive adjective.'--_Adam's Latin and English Grammar_, p. 7."--_Felch's Comp. Gram._, p. 26. Here Dr. Adam by no means concurs with what these "_others have imagined_;" for, in the very same place, he declares the possessive case of nouns to be their _only_ case. The second is a dogmatical and inconsistent remark of some anonymous writer in some part of the "_American Journal of Education_," a work respectable indeed, but, on the subject of grammar, too often fantastical and heterodox. Felch thinks it not improper, to use the possessive case before participles; in which situation, it denotes, not the owner of something, but the agent, subject, or recipient, of the action, being, or change. And what a jumble does he make, where he attempts to resolve this ungrammatical construction!--telling us, in almost the same breath, that, "The agent of a _nounal_ verb [i. e. participle] is never expressed," but that, "Sometimes it [the _nounal_ or _gerundial_ verb] is _qualified_, in its _nounal capacity_, by a possessive _adnoun_ indicative _of its agent_ as a verb; as, there is _nothing like one's_ BEING useful he doubted _their_ HAVING it:" and then concluding, "_Hence it appears_, that the _present participle_ may be used _as agent or object_, and yet retain its character as a verb."--_Felch's Comprehensive Gram._, p. 81. Alas for the schools, if the wise men of the East receive for grammar such utter confu
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2383   2384   2385   2386   2387   2388   2389   2390   2391   2392   2393   2394   2395   2396   2397   2398   2399   2400   2401   2402   2403   2404   2405   2406   2407  
2408   2409   2410   2411   2412   2413   2414   2415   2416   2417   2418   2419   2420   2421   2422   2423   2424   2425   2426   2427   2428   2429   2430   2431   2432   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

possessive

 

nounal

 

subject

 

grammar

 

imagined

 
remark
 

appears

 

participle

 

objective

 

change


subjective

 

nominative

 
denotes
 

recipient

 
jumble
 

action

 

situation

 
participles
 
fantastical
 

heterodox


American

 

Journal

 

Education

 

respectable

 

writer

 

inconsistent

 
anonymous
 
thinks
 

improper

 

dogmatical


breath

 

present

 

object

 

concluding

 
doubted
 

HAVING

 

retain

 
receive
 

schools

 

character


Comprehensive

 

telling

 
declares
 

construction

 

ungrammatical

 

attempts

 

resolve

 

adnoun

 

indicative

 

capacity