« PreviousContinue »
The ministry, who were divided among themselves, were
obliged to resign. Care must be taken not to combine the two constructions: as,
That ingenious nation, who have done so much for modern
literature, possesses in an eminent degree the talent of
narration.-Blair. 250. In older English, which and that are frequently found after such : as,
Avoid such games, which require much time or long
attendance. -Jeremy Taylor. But with such words that are but rooted in your
tongue. 251. Instead of a relative pronoun, we more commonly use the relative adverb as, after the antecedents such, same: as, Tears, such as angels weep, burst forth.
Milton, Paradise Lost, i. 620. i. e. ' tears like those which angels weep.'
Art thou afeard
Macbeth, i. 7. In like manner but is fréquently equivalent to a relative and a negative:
There is no vice so simple, but assumes
Merchant of Venice, iii. 2. 252. But although as, after such and same, has the force of a relative, we cannot admit that it is a relative pronoun. Dr. Adams (English Grammar, 253) and Professor Bain (English Grammar, p. 24) are careful to use the term relative, and not relative pronoun.' So too Dr. Angus (Handbook, § 227). But the latter adds, 'The use of as and so with a pronominal force, is justified by analogous forms in the Gothic languages.'
No doubt there is a tendency in the Germánic languages to employ an adverb where other languages would use a pronoun. We say wherein,' whereby,' for 'in which,' by which; ' and the Germans are fond of using such forms as dazu,' dabei,' dadurch,' equivalent to 'thereto,' thereby,' therethrough.
Compare also the following passages :
I have heard
many of the best respect in Rome,
Julius Cæsar, i. 2.
Ibid. ii. 1. But it is one thing to say that an adverb is used where we might expect a pronoun, or where other languages would employ a pronoun; and it is another thing to maintain that an adverb is a pronoun. I have sometimes suspected that, in an older stage of the language, the phrases as that, but that' may have occurred in such constructions; but I have not yet been able to find instances.
Omission of the Antecedent.
253. When the antecedent is he, they, or those, it is often
omitted : as,
Who steals my purse, steals trash.
Othello, iii. 3. When the neuter antecedent that is omitted, the relative form is what and not which : as, 'He knows what he wants. In older English, that sometimes stands alone in such constructions: as, 'we speak that we do know;' and grammarians generally regard that in such instances as an antecedent, with omission of the relative. Hence, Dr. Angus lays down the following rule : These sentences are best read by pausing after “ that,” and before " what,” thus treating them as antecedent and relative respectively: as, .
We speak-what we know.
Angus, Handbook, $ 227. This is a good practical rule; but the theory might be matter of controversy.
The antecedent is very seldom omitted when governed by a preposition ; but Milton writes,
Paradise Lost, ii. 247. i. e. ' to him whom.'
Dr. Adams remarks (English Grammar, $ 546), that the antecedent is sometimes implied in a possessive pronoun:' as,
And do you now strew flowers in his way,
Julius Cæsar, i. 1. But this passage is capable of another interpretation : his may be taken as the genitive of the personal pronoun : of him: and then the construction would be in the way of him that comes, &c.'
Omission of the Relative. 254. The relative is frequently omitted, when, if expressed, it would stand in the objective case : as The man I saw,' for • the man whom I saw : so the horse I bought,' the book
But where the omitted relative would, if expressed, be dependent upon a preposition, there is an awkwardness in omit ting the preposition as well as the relative : so,
Had I but served my God with half the zeal
Henry VIII. iii. 2.
Spectator, 54. for that he was in,' or ' in which he was.'
The omission of the relative, when, if expressed, it would stand in the nominative case, is much less frequent: as,
In this 'tis God directs, in that 'tis man ; i. e. ''tis God who directs.'
In some few instances, where the relative is omitted, the antecedent is attracted into the case of the relative; that is,
it is put into the case in which the relative would have stood : as,
Him I accuse
Coriolanus, v. 5. i. e. 'he, whom I accuse . . hath entered.'
POSITION. 255. The relative pronoun usually stands immediately after the antecedent; but when the sense of the passage clearly indicates the antecedent, qualifying words, or phrases, are sometimes interposed.
But here there is great risk of error. A careless writer often introduces qualifying phrases, and then employs a relative pronoun referring to some word in the former part of the sentence, but without considering whether the reader may not apply the pronoun to some word in the qualifying phrase. Classical scholars are liable to errors of this kind. For they have been accustomed to the construction of the Greek and Latin languages, in which the varieties of termination, the concords of gender and number, are a guide to the sense ; hence, when composing in English, they are apt to forget that the position of words is the great safeguard.
Therefore, as a general rule, it is well to place qualifying phrases in some other part of the sentence, and not between the relative and its antecedent; unless those qualifying phrases have exclusive reference to the antecedent, and do not involve a new subject.
256. The order of words, in the government of a relative pronoun by a preposition, demands attention, as showing a remarkable difference between that and who.
We can use a preposition before 'whom' and which,' but not before that. We cannot say, the man of that I told you;' but the preposition must be thrown to the end of the clause, the man that I told you of. The same construction may be found with whom : ' as,
Horace is an author whom I am much delighted with.
which generally their booksellers are the first that in
form them of.-Pope, Preface to Poems. But there is this distinction : the preposition may stand before whom,''which,' or it may be thrown to the end of the clause: with that' there is no choice; the preposition must be thrown to the end.
This is an idiom which prevails in common conversation, and accords with similar constructions in German ; but, about two hundred years ago, an opinion began to prevail that this usage was inelegant, if not incorrect. Dryden published two editions of his Essay on Dramatic Poesy,' the first in 1668, and the second sixteen years afterwards, in 1684. The alterations made by Dryden in the second edition are carefully noted by Malone, and are very suggestive. Among other changes, the idiom of ending a sentence with a preposition is rejected. Thus, 'I cannot think so contemptibly of the age I live in,' is altered to the age in which I live.'-Šee 88 483-485.
257. When the antecedent is governed by a preposition, it often happens that the preposition is not repeated after that, although such repetition would be necessary before whom or
which : as,
In the day that thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die.
-Genesis, ii. 17. i. e. 'in the day in which.'
REFLECTIVE PRONOUNS. 258. A Reflective pronoun refers to the subject of the preposition in which it stands.—Matthiæ, Greek Grammar, § 117.
Reflective pronouns refer to the person or thing expressed in the nominative case. In English the word self is used for this purpose.—Key, Latin Grammar, § 278.
Professor Key argues ($ 279) that Reflective pronouns, from their very nature, can have no nominative or vocative. But for the sake of emphasis, the Greek avróc and the English self are constantly found in opposition with the subjectnominative.
259. There is no distinct reflective pronoun in AngloSaxon, or in modern English:
that folk hit reste;
the folk it rested ; i.e. rested itself.'
tha theowas wyrmdon hig;
the servants warmed them ; i.e. warmed themselves.'