« PrécédentContinuer »
4. With a noun or pronoun in qualifying phrases :
He went with those who planned the expedition. Obs.-Sentences of this kind may be deduced from the Coordinate form. Thus, 'The house that Jack built is wonderful.'
First Co-ordinate: That house is wonderful.
Second Co-ordinate: That house Jack built. Again,-' Hard was the hand that gave the blow.'
First Co-ordinate: Hard was that hand.
Second Co-ordinate : That hand gave the blow. The Adjective-clause is introduced by the relative pronouns who, which, that, or by the relative adverbs when, where, whither, how, &c.
92. Professor Bain makes a distinction in the use of the relatives that,' who,' and 'which. To some this distinction may seem novel; but he contends that it is the revival of an old and idiomatic usage. According to his view (English Grammar, Preface, p. iv.) the distinction between that' on the one hand and who' and 'which' on the other, was clearly perceived by our idiomatic writers up to the beginning of the last century; but owing to an unfortunate misapprehension as to the English idiom of throwing a preposition to the end of a clause, the relative that’ is now very little employed in book composition, 'who' and 'which' being made to serve in its stead.
Hence, he says (English Grammar, p. 159), • The Adjective Clause, being by its nature restrictive, should be introduced by the restricting relative " that” or its equivalents, rather than by “who" or “ which the relatives more properly adapted for co-ordination. “The man that is wise” (meaping the same as the wise man”) is preferable to “ the man who is wise."
• This construction (Grammar, p. 23) avoids ambiguities that often attend the indiscriminate use of "who" and “ which" for co-ordinate and for restrictive clauses. Thus when we say,
his conduct surprised his English friends, who had not
known him long, we may mean, either
(1) that his English friends generally were surprised (the
relative being in that case co-ordinating); or, (2) that only a portion of them-namely, the particular por
tion that had not known him long-were surprised. In this last case the relative is meant to define or explain the antecedent, and the doubt would be removed by writing thus
his English friends that had not known him long.' 93. This suggestion is worth considering, and may advantageously be applied in cases where ambiguity is likely to
arise from the employment of “who' or which.' But the custom of the language has so far sanctioned the indiscriminate use of the pronouns, that an attempt to revive the distinction will hardly find general acceptance.
94. The relative is sometimes omitted in English, but only in constructions where, if expressed, it would stand in the objective case : as,
The man I met was an old friend, that is,
The man whom (or that) I met was an old friend. But we must be careful to avoid ambiguity; and if the omission of the relative might possibly throw doubt upon the meaning of the sentence, we ought to insert it. Thus,
The man I saw was your friend, might mean, either
The man, whom I saw, was your friend, or,
The man, as I saw (i. e., as I observed), was your friend.
95. Care must be taken not to confound the noun-clause with an adjective-clause. They may both be introduced by the same connective : I know when we ought to start .
Noun-clause. I know the time when we ought to start Adjective-clause. I know where it is .
Noun-clause. I know the place where it is
Adjective-clause. The test is this. When the clause is used to qualify a noun, it is an adjective-clause. But when the whole clause stands in the place of a subject or an object, it is a noun-clause.
96. We have said that any sentence containing more than one subject-nominative, or more than one predicate-verb, is called a Compound Sentence.
But considerable difficulties arise where two or more subject-nominatives have only one predicate-verb, or where one subject-nominative has two or more predicate-verbs. Take for example sentences of the copulative class :
1. Where two subject-nominatives have one predicate
Cæsar and Pompey came to Rome, 2. Where one subject-nominative has two predicate
Cæsar conquered the Gauls, and invaded Britain. The question is, how we must deal with examples of this kind. But this question, which has been much perplexed, is connected with another enquiry, namely, whether conjunctions can be said to couple words as well as sentences; or whether we ought to hold that conjunctions can couple sentences only, and not individual words.
97. Those grammarians who maintain that conjunctions couple sentences only, explain all these cases upon one principle—that of contraction. They say, for example, that 'Cæsar and Pompey came to Rome' is a contraction for two simple sentences, Cæsar came to Rome,' and 'Pompey came to Rome.' Similarly, Cæsar conquered the Gauls, and invaded Britain' will be a contraction of the two simple sentences, Cæsar conquered the Gauls,' and Cæsar invaded Britain.'
But, on the other hand, it is objected that the principle will not always hold good. For, if we examine the sentence. John and Jane are a handsome couple,' we cannot say that ‘John is a couple,' and 'Jane is a couple. Or, if we take one and one make two,' we cannot explain it as contracted from makes two,' and 'one makes two.'
98. Those who are moved by this objection have recourse to another explanation. They say, that.Cæsar and Pompey came to Rome' is a simple sentence with a compound subject, the conjunction and coupling the words 'Cæsar' and 'Pompey,' as though it were [Cæsar and Pompey] came to Rome.'
They wish to know why conjunctions may not couple individual words. The answer is, that if conjunctions couple words, grammarians find a difficulty in discriminating between conjunctions and prepositions. But this is met by the rejoinder, that prepositions can govern the cases of nouns, whereas conjunctions cannot. This part of the subject we shall consider hereafter; see $§ 441-445.
99. Similar diversity is found in explaining sentences of the alternative class. We are told, for instance, that, 'Neither Cæsar nor Pompey came to Rome,' is a contracted compound sentence, made up of two simple sentences, ‘Neither Cæsar came to Rome,''nor Pompey came to Rome.'
But · All men are black or white,' cannot be contracted from all men are black,' or 'all men are white;' for the meaning is 'all men are (either black or white].'
100. It may be, that perplexity has arisen from the confusion of form and meaning which sometimes enters into grammatical investigations. Similar forms are sometimes employed in cases where the meaning is at variance with the form. It does not follow, because the application of the principle will not suit the meaning in all instances, that therefore the principle itself did not originate from the method of contraction,
101. At the same time we must guard against that love of uniformity which so often leads grammarians astray. We should beware of hastily laying down general rules; and we should rather examine the cases separately as they arise. In instances where two or more subject-nominatives are answered hy one predicate-verb, we may distinguish the cases, (1) where the predicate is true of the subjects severally; (2) where the predicate is true of the subjects, not severally, but jointly.
For example, in the sentence Cæsar and Pompey came to Rome, it is true that Cæsar came to Rome,' and that Pompey came to Rome.' But in John and Jane are a handsome couple, the predicate is not true of John and Jane' severally. Here we must analyse thus :John and Jane Two subject-nominatives, united by
the conjunction 'and.' Predicate-verb. Article, qualifying the predicate- .
nominative, couple.' handsome
Adjective, qualifying the predicate
nominative, couple.' couple
, in such a case, we are obliged to adopt this method of analysis, the same method must be at least optional in other cases. For example :
Cæsar and Pompey came to Rome.
by the conjunction 'and.'
Predicate-verb. to Rome
Adverbial phrase, qualifying the
predicate-verb, came. 102. And similarly, where one subject-nominative has two predicate-verbs; as
Cæsar conquered the Gauls and invaded Britain.
Article, qualifying the objective, 'Gauls.' Gauls
Objective, dependent on the first predi
cate-verb, conquered.' and
Conjunction, coupling the two predicate
verbs, 'conquered' and 'invaded.' invaded Second predicate-verb. Britain Objective, dependent upon the second
ELLIPTICAL SENTENCES. 103. Although grammarians have abused the privilege of understanding' and 'supplying' words at pleasure, still we must admit that words are sometimes not found where we expect to see them, or where, according to grammatical theory, such words might find place. Nay, further, words are omitted in one language, which must be expressed in another. For example, we omit the relative pronoun in instances where the omission would be considered barbarous in Latin; as, “ This is the man I saw,' meaning 'whom I saw.'
We omit the relative in constructions where, if expressed, it would stand in the objective case. The Welsh, however, carry this much further; as
Gwelais y dyn oedd yn-canu,
singing, for 'I saw the man who was singing.' Thus, a Welshman, who has an imperfect acquaintance with English, will say, • This is the man was driving the horse,' for ' who was driving the horse.'