ff
by commas, if they are used parenthetically or co-ordinately; no point
is used if they are used restrictively.[1]

The "Religio Laici," which borrows its title from the
"Religio Medici" of Browne, is almost the only work of
Dryden which can be considered as a voluntary effusion.

That sentiment of homely benevolence was worth all the
splendid sayings that are recorded of kings.

The advocates for this revolution, not satisfied with
exaggerating the vices of their ancient government, strike
at the fame of their country itself.

The ships bound on these voyages were not advertised.

Chapter VII., where we stopped reading, is full of interest.

The chapter where we stopped reading is full of interest.

We must explain this distinction at some length; for, on the one hand,
it is hardly ever observed, and, on the other hand, almost every
sentence that we write furnishes an example of it.

[Footnote 1: To distinguish the different kinds of adjective clauses,
different names have been used: "co-ordinating" and "restrictive"
(Bain); "continuative" and "definitive," or "restrictive" (Mason).]

Examine the first sentence which we have quoted. It contains both a
co-ordinate clause, "Which borrows its title," &c., and a restrictive
clause, "Which can be considered as a voluntary effusion." In
distinguishing them we may begin by applying tests of almost a
mechanical nature.

(_a_) The first clause may be thrown into the form of an independent
statement; the second cannot. Thus: "The 'Religio Laici' borrows its
title from the 'Religio Medici' of Browne. It is almost the only
work," &c.; or, "The 'Religio Laici' (it borrows its title from the
'Religio Medici' of Browne) is almost the only work," &c. We cannot in
the same way destroy the close connexion of the second clause with
"the only work of Dryden."

(_b_) The first clause may be omitted and still leave a complete and
intelligent sentence; if we were to omit the second clause, the
sentence would cease to have any meaning.

These tests may be practically useful; but they are rough and by no
means infallible. Let us see the reason for the distinction.

The name "Religio Laici" of itself tells us what thing is spoken
about. It is the name of one thing, and only of one thing. The clause
that follows informs us, indeed, of a fact concerning the poem; but
the information is given purely as information, not in ord