being or action, but for what would otherwise be the object of the gerund, or of the participle, as may be seen above. The objection to the participle as governing the possessive, is, that it retains its object or its adverb; for when it does not, it becomes fairly a noun, and the objection is removed. R. Johnson, like many others, erroneously thinks it a noun, even when it governs an objective, and has merely a preposition before it; as, "For the sake of seeing them. Where seeing (says he) is a Substantive."-Gram Com., p. 353.

66

OBS. 43.-If the Latin gerund were made to govern the genitive of the agent, and allowed at the same time to retain its government as a gerund, it would then correspond in every thing but declension, to the English participle when made to govern both the possessive case and the objective. But I have before observed that no such analogy appears. The following example has been quoted by Seyer, as a proof that the gerund may govern the genitive of the agent: Cujus autem in dicendo aliquid reprehensum est—Cic.”—Grant's Lat. Gram., p. 226. That is, (as I understand it,) "But in whose speaking something is reprehended." This seems to me a case in point; though Crombie and Grant will not allow it to be so. But a single example is not sufficient. If the doctrine is true, there must be others. In this solitary instance, it would be easier to doubt the accuracy even of Cicero, than to approve the notion of these two critics, that cujus is here governed by aliquid, and not by the gerund. "Here," says Grant, "I am inclined to concur in opinion with Dr. Crombie, whose words I take the liberty to use, 'That, for the sake of euphony, the gerund is sometimes found governing the genitive of the patient, or subject [say object] of the action, is unquestionable: thus, studio videndi patrum vestrorum. [That is, literally, By a desire of seeing of your fathers.] But I recollect no example, where the gerund is joined with a possessive adjective, or genitive of a noun substantive, where the person is not the patient, but the agent; as, dicendum meum, ejus dicendum, cujus dicendum. [That is, my speaking, his speaking, whose speaking.] In truth, these phraseologies appear to me, not only repugnant to the idiom of the language, but also unfavourable to precision and perspicuity."-Grant's Latin Gram., Svo, p. 236.

OBS. 44. Of that particular distinction between the participle and the participial noun, which depends on the insertion or omission of the article and the preposition of, a recent grammarian of considerable merit adops the following views: "This double nature of the participle has led to much irregularity in its use. Thus we find, indulging which,' 'indulging of which,' 'the indulging which,' and 'the indulging of which,' used indiscriminately. Lowth very properly instructs us, either to use both the article and the preposition with the participle; as, the indulging of which:' or to reject both; as, 'indulging which:' thus keeping the verbal and substantive forms distinct. But he is wrong, as Dr. Crombie justly remarks, in considering these two modes of expression as perfectly similar. Suppose I am told, Bloomfield spoke warmly of the pleasure he had in hearing Fawcet:' I understand at once, that the eloquence of Fawcet gave Bloomfield great pleasure. But were it said, 'Bloomfield spoke warmly of the pleasure he had in the hearing of Fawcet:' I should be led to conclude merely that the orator was within hearing, when the poet spoke of the pleasure he felt from something, about which I have no information. Accordingly Dr. Crombie suggests as a general rule, conducive at least to perspicuity, and perhaps to elegance; that, when the noun connected with the participle is active, or doing something, the article should be inserted before the participle, and the preposition after it; and, when the noun is passive, or represents the object of an action, both the article and the preposition should be omitted:* agreeably to the examples just adduced. It is true, that when the noun following the participle denotes something incapable of the action the participle expresses, no mistake can arise from using either form: as, 'The middle condition seems to be the most advantageously situate for the gaining of wisdom. Poverty turns our thoughts too much upon the supplying of our wants; and riches, upon enjoying our superfluities.' Addison, Spect., 464. Yet I cannot think it by any means a commendable practice, thus to jumble together different forms; and indeed it is certainly better, as the two modes of expression have different significations, to confine each to its distinct and proper use, agreeably to Dr. Crombie's rule, even when no mistake could arise from interchanging them."- Churchill's Gram., p. 319.

Ons. 45. The two modes of expression which these grammarians would thus apply constantly to different uses, on the supposition that they have always different significations, are the same that Lindley Murray and his copyists suppose to be generally equivalent, and concerning which it is merely admitted by the latter, that they do "not in every instance convey the same meaning." (See Obs. 27th above.) If Dr. Lowth considered them "as perfectly similar," he was undoubt edly very wrong in this matter; though not more so than these gentlemen, who resolve to interpret them as being perfectly and constantly dissimilar. Dr. Adam says, "There are, both in Latin and [in] English, substantives derived from the verb, which so much resemble the Gerund in their signification, that frequently they may be substituted in its place. They are generally used, however, in a more undetermined sense than the Gerund, and in English, have the article always prefixed to them. Thus, with the gerund, Delector legendo Ciceronem, I am delighted with reading Cicero. But with the substantive, Delector lectione Ciceronis, I am delighted with the reading of Cicero."-Lat. and Eng. Gram., p. 142. "Gerunds are so called because they, as

it were, signify the thing in gerendo, (anciently written gerundo,) in doing; and, along with the

"RULE-When the participle expresses something of which the noun following is the nOER, it should have the article and preposition; as, 'It was said in the hearing of the witness.' When it expresses something of which the noun following is not the doer, but the OBJECT, both should be omitted; as, 'The court spent some time in hearing the witness."—BULLIONS, Prin. of E. Gram., p. 108; Analyt, and Pract. Gram., 181. + This doctrine is far from being true. See Obs. 12th, in this series, above.-G. B.

action, convey an idea of the agent."-Grant's Lat. Gram., p. 70; Johnson's Gram. Com., p. 353. "The reading of Cicero," does not necessarily signify an action of which Cicero is the agent, as Crombie, Churchill, and Hiley choose to expound it; and, since the gerundive construction of words in ing ought to have a definite reference to the agent or subject of the action or being, one may perhaps amend even some of their own phraseology above, by preferring the participial noun: as, "No mistake can arise from the using of either form."- And riches [turn our thoughts too much] upon the enjoying of our superfluities."-" Even when no mistake could arise from the interchanging of them." Where the agent of the action plainly appears, the gerundive form is to be preferred on account of its brevity; as, "By the observing of truth, you will command respect;" or, "By observing truth, &c."-Kirkham's Gram., p. 189. Here the latter phraseology is greatly preferable, though this author did not perceive it. "I thought nothing was to be done by me before the giving of you thanks."— Walker's Particles, p. 63. Say,-"before giving you thanks;" for otherwise the word thanks has no proper construction, the pronoun alone being governed by of—and here again is an error; for "you" ought to be the object of to. OBS. 46.-In Hiley's Treatise, a work far more comprehensive than the generality of grammars, "the established principles and best usages of the English" Participle are so adroitly summed up, as to occupy only two pages, one in Etymology, and an other in Syntax. The author shows how the participle differs from a verb, and how from an adjective; yet he neither makes it a separate part of speech, nor tells us with what other it ought to be included. In lieu of a general rule for the parsing of all participles, he presents the remark, "Active transitive participles, like their verbs, govern the objective case; as, 'I am desirous of hearing him; Having praised them, he sat down.'"-Iiley's Gram., p. 93. This is a rule by which one may parse the few objectives which are governed by participles; but, for the usual construction of participles themselves, it is no rule at all; neither does the grammar, full as it is, contain any. "Hearing" is here governed by of, and "Having praised" relates to he; but this author teaches neither of these facts, and the former he expressly contradicts by his false definition of a preposition. In his first note, is exhibited, in two parts, the false and ill-written rule which Churchill quotes from Crombie. (1.) "When the noun, connected with the participle, is active or doing something, the participle must have an article before it, and the preposition of after it; as, 'In the hearing of the philosopher;' or, 'In the philosopher's hearing;' 'By the preaching of Christ;' or, 'By Christ's preaching.' In these instances," says Hiley, "the words hearing and preaching are substantives." If so, he ought to have corrected this rule, which twice calls them participles; but, in stead of doing that, he blindly adds, by way of alternative, two examples which expressly contradict what the rule asserts. (2.) "But when the noun represents the object of an action, the article and the preposition of must bo omitted; as, In hearing the philosopher.'"-Ib., p. 94. If this principle is right, my second noto below, and most of the corrections under it, are wrong. But I am persuaded that the adopters of this rule did not observe how common is the phraseology which it condemns; as, "For if the casting-away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead ?"-Rom., xi, 15. Finally, this author rejects the of which most critics insert when a possessive precedes the verbal noun; justifies and prefers the mixed or double construction of the participle; and, consequently, neither wishes nor attempts to distinguish the participle from the verbal noun. Yet he does not fail to repeat, with some additional inaccuracy, the notion, that, "What do you think of my horse's running? is different to [say from,] What do you think of my horse running?"—Ib., p. 94.

OBS. 47.-That English books in general, and the style of even our best writers, should seldom be found exempt from errors in the construction of participles, will not be thought wonderful, when we consider the multiplicity of uses to which words of this sort are put, and the strango inconsistencies into which all our grammarians have fallen in treating this part of syntax. It is useless, and worse than useless, to teach for grammar any thing that is not true; and no doctrine can be true of which one part palpably oversets an other. What has been taught on the present topic, has led me into a multitude of critical remarks, designed both for the refutation of the principles which I reject, and for the elucidation and defence of those which are presently to bo summed up in notes, or special rules, for the correction of false syntax. If my decisions do not agree with the teaching of our common grammarians, it is chiefly because these authors contradict themselves. Of this sort of teaching I shall here offer but one example more, and then bring these strictures to a close: "When present participles are preceded by an article, or pronoun adjective, they become nouns, and must not be followed by objective pronouns, or nouns without a preposition; as, the reading of many books wastes the health. But such nouns, like all others, may be used without an article, being sufficiently discovered by the following preposition; as, he was sent to prepare the way, by preaching of repentance. Also an article, or pronoun adjective, may precede a clause, used as a noun, and commencing with a participle; as, his teaching children vas necessary."—Dr. Wilson's Syllabus of English Gram., p. xxx. Here the last position of the learned doctor, if it be true, completely annuls the first; or, if the first be true, the last must needs be false. And, according to Lowth, L. Murray, and many others, the second is as bad as either. The bishop says, concerning this very example, that by the use of the preposition of after the participle preaching, "the phrase is rendered obscure and ambiguous: for the obvious meaning of it, in its present form, is, 'by preaching concerning repentance, or on that subject;' whereas the sense intended is, 'by publishing the covenant of repentance, and declaring repentance to be a condition of acceptance with God.'"-Lowth's Gram., p. 82. "It ought to be, 'by the preaching of repentance;' or, by preaching repentance."-Murray's Gram., p. 193.

NOTES TO RULE XX.

NOTE I.-Active participles have the same government as the verbs from which they are derived; the preposition of, therefore, should never be used after the participle, when the verb does not require it. Thus, in phrases like the following, of is improper: "Keeping of one day in seven ;"-" By preaching of repentance;""They left beating of Paul."

NOTE II-When a transitive participle is converted into a noun, of must be inserted to govern the object following; as, "So that there was no withstanding of him."-Walker's Particles, P. 252. "The cause of their salvation doth not so much arise from their embracing of mercy, as from God's exercising of it."-Penington's Works, Vol. ii, p. 91. "Faith is the receiving of Christ with the whole soul." -Baxter. "In thy pouring-out of thy fury upon Jerusalem."-Ezekiel, ix, 8.

NOTE III.-When the insertion of the word of, to complete the conversion of the transitive participle into a noun, produces ambiguity or harshness, some better phraseology must be chosen. Example: "Because the action took place prior to the taking place of the other past action."—Kirkham's Gram., p. 140. Here the words prior and place have no regular construction; and if we say, "prior to the taking of place of the other," we make the jumble still worse. Say therefore, "Because the action took place before the other past action ;"—or, "Because the action took place previously to the other past action."

NOTE IV. When participles become nouns, their adverbs should either become adjectives, or be taken as parts of such nouns, written as compound words: or, if neither of these methods be agreeable, a greater change should be made. Examples of error: 1. "Rightly understanding a sentence, depends very much on a knowledge of its grammatical construction."-Comly's Gram., 12th Ed., p. 3. Say," The right understanding of a sentence," &c. 2. "Elopement is a running away, or private departure."-Webster's El. Spelling-Book, p. 102. Write "running-away" as one word. 3. "If they [Milton's descriptions] have any faults, it is their alluding too frequently to matters of learning, and to fables of antiquity."-Blair's Rhet., p. 451. Say, "If they have any fault, it is that they allude too frequently," &c.

NOTE V. When the participle is followed by an adjective, its conversion into a noun appears to be improper; because the construction of the adjective becomes anomalous, and its relation doubtful: as, "When we speak of 'ambition's being restless,' or, a disease's being deceitful."-Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 346; Kirkham's, p. 224. This ought to be, "When we speak of ambition as being restless, or a disease as being deceitful;" but Dr. Blair, from whom the text originally came, appears to have written it thus: "When we speak of ambition's being restless, or a disease being deceitful."―LECT. xvi, p. 155. This is inconsistent with itself; for one noun is possessive, and the other, objective.

NOTE VI.-When a compound participle is converted into a noun, the hyphen seems to be necessary, to prevent ambiguity; but such compound nouns are never elegant, and it is in general better to avoid them, by some change in the expression. Example: "Even as the being healed of a wound, presupposeth the plaster or salve: but not, on the contrary; for the application of the plaster presupposeth not the being healed."-Barclay's Works, Vol. i, p. 143. The phrase," the being healed," ought to mean only, the creature healed; and not, the being-healed, or the healing received, which is what the writer intended. But the simple word healing might have been used in the latter sense; for, in participial nouns, the distinction of voice and of tense are commonly disregarded.

NOTE VII.-A participle should not be used where the infinitive mood, the verbal noun, a common substantive, or a phrase equivalent, will better express the meaning. Examples: 1. "But placing an accent on the second syllable of these words, would entirely derange them."-Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 239. Say rather, "But, to place an accent-But the placing of an accent-or, But an accent placed on the second syllable of these words, would entirely derange them." 2. "To require their being in that case.”—Ib., Vol. ii, p. 21. Say, "To require them to be in that case."

3. "She regrets not having read it."— West's Letters, p. 216. Say, "She regrets that she has not read it." Or, "She does not regret that she has read it." For the text is equivocal, and admits either of these senses.

NOTE VIII-A participle used for a nominative after be, is, was, &c., produces a construction which is more naturally understood to be a compound form of the verb; and which is therefore not well adapted to the sense intended, when one tells what something is, was, or may be. Examples: 1. "Whose business is shoeing animals." -0. B. Peirce's Gram., p. 365. Say, "Whose business it is, to shoe animals ;"— or, "Whose business is the shoeing of animals." 2. "This was in fact converting the deposite to his own use."-Murray's Key, ii, p. 200. Say rather, “This was in fact a converting of the deposite to his own use."-Ib.

NOTE IX.-Verbs of preventing should be made to govern, not the participle in ing, nor what are called substantive phrases, but the objective case of a noun or pronoun; and if a participle follow, it ought to be governed by the preposition from: as, "But the admiration due to so eminent a poet, must not prevent us from remarking some other particulars in which he has failed."-Blair's Rhet., p. 438. Examples of error: 1. "I endeavoured to prevent letting him escape."-Ingersoll's Gram., p. 150. Say, “to prevent his escape." 2. To prevent its being connected with the nearest noun."-Churchill's Gram., p. 367. Say, "To prevent it from being connected," &c. 3. "To prevent it bursting out with open violence."-Robertson's America, Vol. ii, p. 146. Say, "To prevent it from bursting out," &c. 4. "To prevent their injuring or murdering of others."-Brown's Divinity, p. 26. Say rather, "To prevent them from injuring or murdering others."

NOTE X.-In the use of participles and of verbal nouns, the leading word in sense should always be made the leading or governing word in the construction; and where there is reason to doubt whether the possessive case or some other ought to come before the participle, it is better to reject both, and vary the expression. Examples: "Any person may easily convince himself of the truth of this, by listening to foreigners conversing in a language [which] he does not understand."-Churchill's Gram., p. 361. "It is a relic of the ancient style abounding with negatives."—Ib., p. 367. These forms are right; though the latter might be varied, by the insertion f" which abounds," for " abounding." But the celebrated examples before cited, about the "lady holding up her train," or the "lady's holding up her train,"-the "person dismissing his servant," or the "person's dismissing his servant,"-the "horse running to-day," or the "horse's running to-day,”—and many others which some grammarians suppose to be interchangeable, are equally bad in both forms.

NOTE XI.-Participles, in general, however construed, should have a clear reference to the proper subject of the being, action, or passion. The following sentence is therefore faulty: "By establishing good laws, our peace is secured."-Russell's Gram., p. 88; Folker's, p. 27. Peace not being the establisher of the laws, these authors should have said," By establishing good laws, we secure our peace." "There will be no danger of spoiling their faces, or of gaining converts.”—Murray's Key, ii, p. 201. This sentence is to me utterly unintelligible. If the context were known, there might possibly be some sense in saying, " They will be in no danger of spoiling their faces," &c. "The law is annulled, in the very act of its being made."O. B. Peirce's Gram., p. 267. "The act of MAKING a law," is a phrase intelligible; but," the act of its BEING MADE," is a downright solecism-a positive absurdity.

NOTE XII.-A needless or indiscriminate use of participles for nouns, or of nouns for participles, is inelegant, if not improper, and ought therefore to be avoided. Examples: "Of denotes possession or belonging."-Murray's Gram., Vol. i, p. 118; Ingersoll's, 71. "The preposition of, frequently implies possession, property, or belonging to."-Cooper's Pl. and Pr. Gram., p. 137. Say," Of frequently denotes possession, or the relation of property." "England perceives the folly of the denying of such concessions."-Nixon's Parser, p. 149. Expunge the and the last of, that denying may stand as a participle.

NOTE XIII.-Perfect participles being variously formed, care should be taken to express them agreeably to the best usage, and also to distinguish them from the

preterits of their verbs, where there is any difference of form. Example: "It would be well, if all writers who endeavour to be accurate, would be careful to avoid a corruption at present so prevalent, of saying, it was wrote, for, it was written; he was drove, for, he was driven; I have went, for, I have gone, &c., in all which instances a verb is absurdly used to supply the proper participle, without any necessity from the want of such word."-Harris's Hermes, p. 186.

IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.

FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XX.

EXAMPLES UNDER NOTE I.-EXPUNGE OF.

"In forming of his sentences, he was very exact."-Error noticed by Murray, Vol. i, p. 194. [FORMULE-Not proper, because the preposition of is used after the participle forming, whose verb does not require it. But, according to Note 1st under Rule 20th, "Active participles have the same government as the verbs from which they are derived; the preposition of, therefore, should not be used after the participle, when the verb does not require it." Therefore, of should be omitted; thus, "In forming his sentences, he was very exact."]

"For not believing of which I condemn them."—Barclay's Works, iii, 354. "To prohibit his hearers from reading of that book.”—Ib., i, 223. "You will please them exceedingly, in crying down of ordinances."-MITCHELL: ib., i, 219. "The war-wolf subsequently became an engino for casting of stones."-Constable's Miscellany, xxi, 117. "The art of dressing of hides and working in leather was practised."-Ib., xxi, 101. "In the choice they had made of him, for restoring of order."-Rollin's Hist., ii, 37. "The Arabians exercised themselves by composing of crations and poems."-Sale's Koran, p. 17. "Behold, the widow-woman was there gathering of sticks."-1 Kings, xvii, 10. "The priests were busied in offering of burnt-offerings."-2 Chron., XXXV, 14. "But Asahel would not turn aside from following of him."-2 Sam., ii, 21. "He left off building of Ramah, and dwelt in Tirzah."—1 Kings, xv, 21. "Those who accuse us of denying of it, belie us."-Barclay's Works, iii, 280. "And breaking of bread from house to hous"-b., i, 192. 'Those that set about repairing of the walls."-Ib., i, 459. "And secretly begetting of divisions."-Ib., i, 521. "Whom he had made use of in gathering of his church.”Ib., i, 535. "In defining and distinguishing of the acceptions and uses of those particles."Walker's Particles, p. 12.

"In punishing of this, we overthrow

The laws of nations, and of nature too."-Dryden, p. 92.

UNDER NOTE II.-ARTICLES REQUIRE OF.

66

"The mixing them makes a miserable jumble of truth and fiction."—Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 357. The same objection lies against the employing statues."-Ib., ii, 358. "More efficacious than the venting opulence upon the Fine Arts."-Ib., Vol. i, p. viii. It is the giving dif ferent names to the same object."-Ib., ii, 19. "When we have in view the erecting a column." —Ib., ii, 56. “The straining an elevated subject beyond due bounds, is a vice not so frequent.” -Ib., i, 206. "The cutting evergreens in the shape of animals is very ancient.”—Ib., ii, 327. "The keeping juries, without meet, drink or fire, can be accounted for only on the same idea.”— Webster's Essays, p. 301. "The writing the verbs at length on his slate, will be a very useful exorcise."-Beck's Gram., p. 20. "The avoiding them is not an object of any moment.”—Sheridan's Lect., p. 180. "Comparison is the increasing or decreasing the Signification of a Word by degrees." -British Gram., p. 97. "Comparison is the Increasing or Decreasing the Quality by Degrees." -Buchanan's English Syntax, p. 27. "The placing a Circumstance before the Word with which it is connected, is the easiest of all Inversion."-Ib., p. 140. "What is emphasis? It is the emitting a stronger and fuller sound of voice," &c.-Bradley's Gram., p. 108. Besides, the varying the terms will render the use of them more familiar."-Alex. Murray's Gram., p. 25. "And yet the confining themselves to this true principle, has misled them!"—Horne Tooke's Diversions, Vol. i, p. 15. "What is here commanded, is merely the relieving his misery."-Wayland's Moral Science, p. 417. "The accumulating too great a quantity of knowledge at random, overloads the mind instead of adorning it."-Formey's Belles-Lettres, p. 5. "For the compassing his point."-Rollin's Hist., ii, 35. "To the introducing such an inverted order of things."-Butler's Analogy, p. 95. "Which require only the doing an external action.”—1b., p. 185. "The imprisoning my body is to satisfy your wills."-GEO. Fox: Sewel's Hist., p. 47. "Who oppose the conferring such extensive command on one person."-Duncan's Cicero, p. 130. “Luxury contributed not a little to the enervating their forces."-Sale's Koran, p. 49. "The keeping one day of the week for a sabbath."-Barclay's Works, i, 202. "The doing a thing is contrary to the forbearing of it."-Ib., i, 527. "The doubling the Sigma is, however, sometimes regular."-Knight, on the Greek Alphabet, p. 29. "The inserting the common aspirate too, is improper."-Ib., p. 134. "But in Spenser's time the pronouncing the ed seems already to have been something of an archaism."-Philological Museum, Vol. i, p. 656. "And to the reconciling the effect of their verses on the eye."-lb., i, 659. "When it was not in their power to hinder the taking the whole."-Brown's Estimate, ii, 155. "He had indeed given the orders himself for the shutting the gates."-Ibid. "So his whole life was a doing the will of the Father."-Penington, iv, 99. "It signifies the suffering or receiving the action expressed."-Priestley's Gram., p. 37. "The