FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2474   2475   2476   2477   2478   2479   2480   2481   2482   2483   2484   2485   2486   2487   2488   2489   2490   2491   2492   2493   2494   2495   2496   2497   2498  
2499   2500   2501   2502   2503   2504   2505   2506   2507   2508   2509   2510   2511   2512   2513   2514   2515   2516   2517   2518   2519   2520   2521   2522   2523   >>   >|  
ars in the list of prepositions: but the revised list, in his edition of 1847, does not contain it. In both books, however, it is expressly parsed as a preposition; and, in expounding the sentence, "The book is worth a dollar," the author makes this remark: "_Worth_ has been called an adjective by some, and a noun by others: _worth_, however, in this sentence expresses a relation by value, and is so far a preposition; and no ellipsis, which may be formed, would change the nature of the word, without giving the sentence a different meaning."--_Chandler's Gram._, Old Ed., p. 155; New Ed., p. 181. [370] Cowper here purposely makes Mrs. Gilpin use bad English; but this is no reason why a school-boy may not be taught to correct it. Dr. Priestley supposed that the word _we_, in the example, "_To poor we_, thine enmity," &c., was also used by Shakespeare, "in a droll humorous way."--_Gram._, p. 103. He surely did not know the connexion of the text. It is in "Volumnia's _pathetic_ speech" to her victorious son. See _Coriolanus_, Act V, Sc. 3. [371] Dr. Enfield misunderstood this passage; and, in copying it into his Speaker, (a very popular school-book,) he has perverted the text, by changing _we_ to _us_: as if the meaning were, "Making us fools of nature." But it is plain, that all "fool's of nature!" must be fools of nature's own making, and not persons temporarily frighted out of their wits by a ghost; nor does the meaning of the last two lines comport with any objective construction of this pronoun. See _Enfield's Speaker_, p. 864. [372] In Clark's Practical Grammar, of 1848, is found this NOTE: "The Noun should correspond in number with the Adjectives. EXAMPLES--A two feet ruler. A ten feet pole."--P. 165. These examples are wrong: the doctrine is misapplied in both. With this author, _a_, as well as _two_ or _ten_, is an _adjective_ of number; and, since these differ in number, what sort of concord or construction do the four words in each of these phrases make? When a numeral and a noun are united to form a _compound adjective_, we commonly, if not always, use the latter in its primitive or singular form: as, "A _twopenny_ toy,"--"a _twofold_ error,"--"_three-coat_ plastering," say, "a _twofoot_ rule,"--"a _tenfoot_ pole;" which phrases are right; while Clark's are not only unusual, but unanalogical, ungrammatical. [373] Certain adjectives that differ in number, are sometimes connected disjunctively by _or_ or _than
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2474   2475   2476   2477   2478   2479   2480   2481   2482   2483   2484   2485   2486   2487   2488   2489   2490   2491   2492   2493   2494   2495   2496   2497   2498  
2499   2500   2501   2502   2503   2504   2505   2506   2507   2508   2509   2510   2511   2512   2513   2514   2515   2516   2517   2518   2519   2520   2521   2522   2523   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

number

 

nature

 

meaning

 

sentence

 

adjective

 
construction
 

school

 

differ

 

phrases

 

Enfield


author

 

preposition

 
Speaker
 

Adjectives

 
EXAMPLES
 

making

 

temporarily

 
persons
 
frighted
 

pronoun


objective

 

comport

 

Practical

 

examples

 

Grammar

 

correspond

 
numeral
 
twofoot
 

tenfoot

 

plastering


twofold

 

connected

 

disjunctively

 

adjectives

 
Certain
 

unusual

 

unanalogical

 
ungrammatical
 

twopenny

 

singular


concord

 

doctrine

 
misapplied
 

primitive

 

commonly

 

compound

 

united

 

Chandler

 

change

 

giving