9 s
4
. have no distinct forms for the nominative and objective cases: hence no mistake can be made in using them. But
some remarks are required concerning the use of the possessive case.
Whe
3 n
9
5. two or more possessives modify the same noun, or indicate joint ownership or
Use of the possessive. Joint
possession, the possessive sign is added to the last noun only; for example,—Live your king
possession.
and country's best support.—Rowe.
Woman, sense and nature's easy fool.—Byron.
Oliver and Boyd's printing office.—Mcculloch.
Adam and Eve's morning hymn.—Milton.
In Beaumont and Fletcher's "Sea Voyage," Juletta tells, etc.—Emerson.
Whe
3 n
9
6.two or more possessives stand before the same noun, but imply separate possession
Separate possession.
or ownership, the possessive sign is used with each noun; as,—He lands us on a grassy
stage, Safe from the storm's and prelate's rage.—Marvell
Where were the sons of Peers and Members of Parliament in Anne's and George's time?—Thackeray.
Levi's station in life was the receipt of custom; and Peter's, the shore of Galilee; and Paul's, the antechamber of the High
Priest.—Ruskin.
Swift did not keep Stella's letters. He kept Bolingbroke's, and Pope's, and Harley's, and Peterborough's.—Thackeray.
An actor in one of Morton's or Kotzebue's plays.—Macaulay.
Putting Mr. Mill's and Mr. Bentham's principles together. —Id.
The
3 p
9 o
7. ssessive preceding the gerund will be considered under the possessive of pronouns (Sec. 408).
PRONOUNS.
PERSONAL PRONOUNS.
I. NOMINATIVE AND OBJECTIVE FORMS.
Sinc
3 e
9
8 m
. ost of the personal pronouns, together with the relative who, have separate forms for nominative and objective
use, there are two general rules that require attention.
(1) The nominative use is usually marked by the nominative form of the pronoun.
General rules.
(2) The objective use is usually marked by the objective form of the pronoun.
These simple rules are sometimes violated in spoken and in literary English. Some of the violations are universally
condemned; others are generally, if not universally, sanctioned.
The
3 o
9 b
9. jective is sometimes found instead of the nominative in the following instances:—
Objective for the nominative.
(1) By a common vulgarism of ignorance or carelessness, no notice is taken of the proper
form to be used as subject; as,—
He and me once went in the dead of winter in a one-hoss shay out to Boonville.—Whitcher, Bedott
Papers.
It seems strange to me that them that preach up the doctrine don't admire one who carrys it out.
—Josiah Allens Wife.
(2) By faulty analysis of the sentence, the true relation of the words is misunderstood; for example, "Whom think ye that I
am?" (In this, whom is the complement after the verb am, and should be the nominative form, who.) "The young Harper,
whom they agree was rather nice-looking" (whom is the subject of the verb was).
Especially is this fault to be noticed after an ellipsis with than or as, the real thought being forgotten; thus,—But the
consolation coming from devotion did not go far with such a one as her.—Trollope.
This should be "as she," because the full expression would be "such a one as she is."
Still
4,
0 th
0. e last expression has the support of many good writers, as shown in the following examples:—She was neither
better bred nor wiser than you or me.—Thackeray.
No mightier than thyself or me.—Shakespeare.
Lin'd with Giants deadlier than 'em all.—Pope.
But he must be a stronger than thee.—Southey.
Not to render up my soul to such as thee.—Byron.
I shall not learn my duty from such as thee.—Fielding.
It will be safer for the student to follow the general rule, as illustrated in the following
A safe rule.
sentences:—
If so, they are yet holier than we.—Ruskin.
Who would suppose it is the game of such as he?—Dickens.
Do we see
The robber and the murd'rer weak as we?
—Milton.
I have no other saint than thou to pray to.—Longfellow.
One
4
0 e
1.xception is to be noted. The expression than whom seems to be used universally
"Than whom."
instead of "than who." There is no special reason for this, but such is the fact; for example,—
One I remember especially,—one than whom I never met a bandit more gallant.—Thackeray.
The camp of Richard of England, than whom none knows better how to do honor to a noble foe.—
Scott.
She had a companion who had been ever agreeable, and her estate a steward than whom no one
living was supposed to be more competent.—Parton.
And
4
0th
2.ere is one question about which grammarians are not agreed, namely, whether the
"It was he" or "It was him"?
nominative or the objective form should be used in the predicate after was, is, are, and the
other forms of the verb be.
It may be stated with assurance that the literary language prefers the nominative in this instance, as,—
For there was little doubt that it was he.—Kingsley.
But still it is not she.—Macaulay.
And it was he
That made the ship to go.
—Coleridge.
In spoken English, on the other hand, both in England and America, the objective form is regularly found, unless a
special, careful effort is made to adopt the standard usage. The following are examples of spoken English from
conversations:—"Rose Satterne, the mayor's daughter?"—"That's her."—Kingsley.
"Who's there?"—"Me, Patrick the Porter."—Winthrop.
"If there is any one embarrassed, it will not be me."—Wm. Black.
The usage is too common to need further examples.
Exercise.
Correct the italicized pronouns in the following sentences, giving reasons from the analysis of the sentence:—
1. Whom they were I really cannot specify.
2. Truth is mightier than us all.
3. If there ever was a rogue in the world, it is me.
4. They were the very two individuals whom we thought were far away.
5. "Seems to me as if them as writes must hev a kinder gift fur it, now."
6. The sign of the Good Samaritan is written on the face of whomsoever opens to the stranger.
7. It is not me you are in love with.
8. You know whom it is that you thus charge.
9. The same affinity will exert its influence on whomsoever is as noble as these men and women.
10. It was him that Horace Walpole called a man who never made a bad figure but as an author.
11. We shall soon see which is the fittest object of scorn, you or me.
It is
4 t
0o
3 .be remembered that the objective form is used in exclamations which turn the attention
Me in exclamations.
upon a person; as,—Unhappy me! That I cannot risk my own worthless life.—Kingsley
Alas! miserable me! Alas! unhappy Señors!—Id.
Ay me! I fondly dream—had ye been there.—Milton.
The
4 r
0 u
4.le for the objective form is wrongly departed from—
Nominative for the objective.
(1) When the object is far removed from the verb, verbal, or preposition which governs it; as,
"He that can doubt whether he be anything or no, I speak not to" (he should be him, the object of to); "I saw men very like
him at each of the places mentioned, but not he" (he should be him, object of saw).
(2) In the case of certain pairs of pronouns, used after verbs, verbals, and prepositions, as this from Shakespeare, "All
debts are cleared between you and I" (for you and me); or this, "Let thou and I the battle try" (for thee and me, or us).
(3) By forgetting the construction, in the case of words used in apposition with the object; as, "Ask the murderer, he who
has steeped his hands in the blood of another" (instead of "him who," the word being in apposition with murderer).
The
4 i
0 n
5 t
. errogative pronoun who may be said to have no objective form in spoken English. We
Exception 1, who interrogative.
Exception 1, who interrogative.
regularly say, "Who did you see?" or, "Who were they talking to?" etc. The more formal "To
whom were they talking?" sounds stilted in conversation, and is usually avoided.
In literary English the objective form whom is preferred for objective use; as,—
Knows he now to whom he lies under obligation?—Scott.
What doth she look on? Whom doth she behold?—Wordsworth.
Yet the nominative form is found quite frequently to divide the work of the objective use; for example,—
My son is going to be married to I don't know who.—Goldsmith.
Who have we here?—Id.
Who should I meet the other day but my old friend.—Steele.
He hath given away half his fortune to the Lord knows who.—Kingsley.
Who have we got here?—Smollett.
Who should we find there but Eustache?—Marrvat.
Who the devil is he talking to?—Sheridan.
It is
4 a
0
6.well-established usage to put the nominative form, as well as the objective, after the
Exception 2, but he, etc.
preposition but (sometimes save); as,—All were knocked down but us two.—Kingsley.
Thy shores are empires, changed in all save thee.—Byron.
Rich are the sea gods:—who gives gifts but they?—Emerson.
The Chieftains then
Returned rejoicing, all but he.
—Southey
No man strikes him but I.—Kingsley.
None, save thou and thine, I've sworn,
Shall be left upon the morn.
—Byron.
Exercise.
Correct the italicized pronouns in the following, giving reasons from the analysis of the quotation:—
1. Thou, Nature, partial Nature, I arraign.
2. Let you and I look at these, for they say there are none such in the world.
3. "Nonsense!" said Amyas, "we could kill every soul of them in half an hour, and they know that as well as me."
4. Markland, who, with Jortin and Thirlby, Johnson calls three contemporaries of great eminence.
5. They are coming for a visit to she and I.
6.
They crowned him long ago;
But who they got to put it on
Nobody seems to know.
7. I experienced little difficulty in distinguishing among the pedestrians they who had business with St. Bartholomew.
8. The great difference lies between the laborer who moves to Yorkshire and he who moves to Canada.
9. Besides my father and Uncle Haddock—he of the silver plates.
10.
Ye against whose familiar names not yet
The fatal asterisk of death is set,
Ye I salute.
11. It can't be worth much to they that hasn't larning.
12. To send me away for a whole year—I who had never crept from under the parental wing—was a startling idea.
II. POSSESSIVE FORMS.
The
4
0 p
7 o
. ssessive forms of personal pronouns and also of nouns are sometimes found as
As antecedent of a relative.
antecedents of relatives. This usage is not frequent. The antecedent is usually nominative or
objective, as the use of the possessive is less likely to be clear.
We should augur ill of any gentleman's property to whom this happened every other day in his drawing
room.—Ruskin.
For their sakes whose distance disabled them from knowing me.—C. B. Brown.
Now by His name that I most reverence in Heaven, and by hers whom I most worship on earth.—Scott.
He saw her smile and slip money into the man's hand who was ordered to ride behind the coach.—
Thackeray.
He doubted whether his signature whose expectations were so much more bounded would avail.—De
Quincey.
For boys with hearts as bold
As his who kept the bridge so well.
—Macaulay.
Ano
4 th
0 e
8. r point on which there is some variance in usage is such a construction as this: "We
Preceding a gerund,—possessive,
or objective?
heard of Brown studying law," or "We heard of Brown's studying law."
That is, should the possessive case of a noun or pronoun always be used with the gerund to indicate the active agent?
Closely scrutinizing these two sentences quoted, we might find a difference between them: saying that in the first one
studying is a participle, and the meaning is, We heard of Brown, [who was] studying law; and that in the second,
studying is a gerund, object of heard of, and modified by the possessive case as any other substantive would be.
But in common use there is no such distinction. Both types of sentences are found; both are
Why both are found.
gerunds; sometimes the gerund has the possessive form before it, sometimes it has the
objective. The use of the objective is older, and in keeping with the old way of regarding the person as the chief object
before the mind: the possessive use is more modern, in keeping with the disposition to proceed from the material thing to
the abstract idea, and to make the action substantive the chief idea before the mind.
In the examples quoted, it will be noticed that the possessive of the pronoun is more common than that of the noun.
The last incident which I recollect, was my learned and worthy patron falling from a
Objective.
chair.—Scott.
He spoke of some one coming to drink tea with him, and asked why it was not made.—Thackeray.
The old sexton even expressed a doubt as to Shakespeare having been born in her house.—Irving.
The fact of the Romans not burying their dead within the city walls proper is a strong reason, etc.—
Brewer.
I remember Wordsworth once laughingly reporting to me a little personal anecdote.—De Quincey.
Here I state them only in brief, to prevent the reader casting about in alarm for my ultimate meaning.—
Ruskin.
We think with far less pleasure of Cato tearing out his entrails than of Russell saying, as he turned
away from his wife, that the bitterness of death was past.—Macaulay.
There is actually a kind of sacredness in the fact of such a man being sent into this earth.—Carlyle.
There is no use for any man's taking up his abode in a house built of glass.—Carlyle.
Possessive.
As to his having good grounds on which to rest an action for life.—Dickens.
The case was made known to me by a man's holding out the little creature dead.—De Quincey.
There may be reason for a savage's preferring many kinds of food which the civilized man rejects.—
Thoreau.
It informs me of the previous circumstances of my laying aside my clothes.—C. Brockden Brown.
The two strangers gave me an account of their once having been themselves in a somewhat similar
condition.—Audubon.
There was a chance of their being sent to a new school, where there were examinations.—Ruskin
This can only be by his preferring truth to his past apprehension of truth.—Emerson
III. PERSONAL PRONOUNS AND THEIR ANTECEDENTS.
The
4 p
0 r
9.onouns of the third person usually refer back to some preceding noun or pronoun, and ought to agree with them in
person, number, and gender.
There are two constructions in which the student will need to watch the pronoun,—when the
Watch for the real antecedent.
antecedent, in one person, is followed by a phrase containing a pronoun of a different
person; and when the antecedent is of such a form that the pronoun following cannot indicate exactly the gender.
Examples of these constructions are,—Those of us who can only maintain themselves by continuing in some business or
salaried office.—Ruskin.
Suppose the life and fortune of every one of us would depend on his winning or losing a game of chess.—Huxley.
If any one did not know it, it was his own fault.—Cable.
Everybody had his own life to think of.—Defoe.
In s
4 u
1 c
0 h
. a case as the last three sentences,—when the antecedent includes both masculine and feminine, or is a
distributive word, taking in each of many persons,—the preferred method is to put the pronoun following in the masculine
singular; if the antecedent is neuter, preceded by a distributive, the pronoun will be neuter singular.
The following are additional examples:—
The next correspondent wants you to mark out a whole course of life for him.—Holmes.
Every city threw open its gates.—De Quincey.
Every person who turns this page has his own little diary.—Thackeray.
The pale realms of shade, where each shall take
His chamber in the silent halls of death.
—Bryant.
Sometimes this is avoided by using both the masculine and the feminine pronoun; for
Avoided: By using both pronouns.
example,—
Not the feeblest grandame, not a mowing idiot, but uses what spark of perception and faculty is left, to
chuckle and triumph in his or her opinion.—Emerson.
It is a game which has been played for untold ages, every man and woman of us being one of the two
players in a game of his or her own.—Huxley.
By using the plural pronoun.
Ano
4 th
1 e
1. r way of referring to an antecedent which is a distributive pronoun or a noun modified by a distributive adjective, is
to use the plural of the pronoun following. This is not considered the best usage, the logical analysis requiring the
singular pronoun in each case; but the construction is frequently found when the antecedent includes or implies both
genders. The masculine does not really represent a feminine antecedent, and the expression his or her is avoided as
being cumbrous.
Notice the following examples of the plural:—
Neither of the sisters were very much deceived.—Thackeray.
Every one must judge of their own feelings.—Byron.
Had the doctor been contented to take my dining tables, as anybody in their senses would have
done.—Austen.
If the part deserve any comment, every considering Christian will make it themselves as they go.—
Defoe.
Every person's happiness depends in part upon the respect they meet in the world.—Paley.
Every nation have their refinements—Sterne.
Neither gave vent to their feelings in words.—Scott.
Each of the nations acted according to their national custom.—Palgrave.
The sun, which pleases everybody with it and with themselves.—Ruskin.
Urging every one within reach of your influence to be neat, and giving them means of being so.—Id.
Everybody will become of use in their own fittest way.—Id.
Everybody said they thought it was the newest thing there.—Wendell Phillips.
Struggling for life, each almost bursting their sinews to force the other off.—Paulding.
Whosoever hath any gold, let them break it off.—Bible.
Nobody knows what it is to lose a friend, till they have lost him.—Fielding.
Where she was gone, or what was become of her, no one could take upon them to say.—Sheridan.
I do not mean that I think any one to blame for taking due care of their health.—Addison.
Exercise.—In the above sentences, unless both genders are implied, change the pronoun to agree with its antecedent.
RELATIVE PRONOUNS.
I. RESTRICTIVE AND UNRESTRICTIVE RELATIVES.
As t
4 o
1 t
2 h
. eir conjunctive use, the definite relatives who, which, and that may be coördinating
What these terms mean.
or restrictive.
A relative, when coördinating, or unrestrictive, is equivalent to a conjunction (and, but, because, etc.) and a personal
pronoun. It adds a new statement to what precedes, that being considered already clear; as, "I gave it to the beggar, who
went away." This means, "I gave it to the beggar [we know which one], and he went away."
A relative, when restrictive, introduces a clause to limit and make clear some preceding word. The clause is restricted to
the antecedent, and does not add a new statement; it merely couples a thought necessary to define the antecedent: as,
"I gave it to a beggar who stood at the gate." It defines beggar.
It is
4
1 s
3.ometimes contended that who and which should always be coördinating, and that always restrictive; but,
according to the practice of every modern writer, the usage must be stated as follows:—A loose rule the only one to be
formulated.
Who and which are either coördinating or restrictive, the taste of the writer and regard for euphony being the guide.
That is in most cases restrictive, the coördinating use not being often found among careful writers.
Exercise.
In the following examples, tell whether who, which, and that are restrictive or not, in each instance:—
1. "Here he is now!" cried those who stood near Ernest.—Hawthorne.
Who.
2. He could overhear the remarks of various individuals, who were comparing the
features with the face on the mountain side.—Id.
3. The particular recording angel who heard it pretended not to understand, or it might have gone hard
with the tutor.—Holmes.
4. Yet how many are there who up, down, and over England are saying, etc.—H. W. Beecher 5. A
grizzly-looking man appeared, whom we took to be sixty or seventy years old.—Thoreau.
6. The volume which I am just about terminating is almost as much English history as
Which.
Dutch.—Motley.
7. On hearing their plan, which was to go over the Cordilleras, she agreed to join the party.—De
Quincey.
8. Even the wild story of the incident which had immediately occasioned the explosion of this madness
fell in with the universal prostration of mind.—Id.
9. Their colloquies are all gone to the fire except this first, which Mr. Hare has printed.—Carlyle.
10. There is a particular science which takes these matters in hand, and it is called logic.—Newman.
11. So different from the wild, hard-mouthed horses at Westport, that were often
That.
vicious.—De Quincey.
12. He was often tempted to pluck the flowers that rose everywhere about him in the greatest
variety.—Addison.
13. He felt a gale of perfumes breathing upon him, that grew stronger and sweeter in proportion as he
advanced.—Id.
14. With narrow shoulders, long arms and legs, hands that dangled a mile out of his sleeves.—Irving.
II. RELATIVE AND ANTECEDENT.
The
4
1 g
4 e
. neral rule is, that the relative pronoun agrees with its antecedent in person and
The rule.
number.
This cannot be true as to the form of the pronoun, as that does not vary for person or
In what sense true.
number. We say I, you, he, they, etc., who; these or that which, etc. However, the relative
carries over the agreement from the antecedent before to the verb following, so far as the verb has forms to show its
agreement with a substantive. For example, in the sentence, "He that writes to himself writes to an eternal public," that is
invariable as to person and number, but, because of its antecedent, it makes the verb third person singular.
Notice the agreement in the following sentences:—
There is not one of the company, but myself, who rarely speak at all, but speaks of him as that sort,
etc.—Addison.
O Time! who know'st a lenient hand to lay Softest on sorrow's wound.—Bowles.
Let us be of good cheer, remembering that the misfortunes hardest to bear are those which never
come.—Lowell.
This
4
1 p
5.repares the way for the consideration of one of the vexed questions,—whether we
A disputed poin