|
In regard to this distinguished author, I would observe that, except the substantive verb, there is in his Rambler but a single instance of the subjunctive form of the verb in conditional sentences. In all other cases the use of the indicative is uniform.
Such also is the language of the most distinguished men in the United States, particularly of those who wrote their native language as they received it from tradition, and before grammars had made any impression on its genuine construction.
“The prince that acquires new territory, if he finds it vacant.” “If we are industrious we shall never starve.” “If one has more corn than he can consume, and another has less.” Such is the language of Franklin.
“If any persons thus qualified are to be found.” “If it is thought proper.” “ If the Congress does not choose to point out the particular regiment.” “If I am rightly informed.” “If the army has not removed.” “If a proposition has not been made.” Such is the language of Washington.
“If any philosopher pretends.” “If he has food for the present day.” “If a revelation is not impossible.” “If the Christian system contains a real communication to mankind,” “If the former of these facts opposes our reception of the miraculous history of the gospel.” “If the preceding reflections are just.” Such is the language of the late President Smith.18
“If any government deems the introduction of foreigners or their merchandise injurious.” “Unless he violates the law of nations.” “If a person has a settlement in a hostile country.” “If he resides in a belligerent country.” “If a foreign consul carries on trade as a merchant.” Such is the language of the ex-Chancellor Kent.
But neither the authors here mentioned, nor most others, even the most distinguished for erudition, are uniform and consistent with themselves in the use of the tenses. In one sentence we find the indicative used, “If it is to be discovered only by the experiment.” “ If other indications are to be found.” In the next sentence, “If to miscarry in an attempt be a proof of having mistaken the direction of genius.” Johnson.
“If the former be refined — if those virtues are accompanied with equal abilities.” Gibbon.
“If love reward him, or if vengeance strike.” Cowper.
“Or if it does not brand him to the last.” Cowper.
“If he is a pagan — if endeavors are used — if the person hath a liberal education — if man be subject to these miseries.” Milner.
The following expressions occur in Pope’s Preface to Homer’s Iliad, in the compass of thirteen lines.
“If he has given a regular catalogue of an army.”
“If he has funeral games for Patroclus.”
“If Ulysses visit the shades.”
“If he be detained from his return.”
“If Achilles be absent.”
“If he gives his hero a suit of celestial armor.”
I recollect one English author only, who has been careful to avoid this inconsistency; this is Gregory, who, in his Economy of Nature, has uniformly used the indicative form of the verb in conditional sentences of this kind.
The like inconsistency occurs in almost all American writings. “If moral disposition lie here.” “If preference necessarily involves the knowledge of obligation.” “If the proposition is true.” “If the proposition be confirmed.” “If he refutes any thing.”
In a pamphlet now before me, there are no less than fifty of these inconsistencies in the compass of ninety pages; and three of them in one sentence.
How, in this case, is a foreigner to understand the author? and how can such sentences be translated into another language without a deviation from the original?
The propriety of using the indicative form of the verb to express a present or past event conditionally, does not rest solely on usage; it is most correct upon principle. It is well known that most of the words which are used to introduce a condition or hypothesis, and called, most improperly, conjunctions, are verbs, having not the least affinity to the class of words used to connect sentences. If is the Saxon gif, give, having lost its first letter; if for the ancient gif. Though is also a verb now obsolete, except in the imperative mode. Now let us analyze this conditional tense of the verb. “If the man knows his true interest, he will avoid a quarrel.” Here is an omission of the word that after if. The true original phrase was, “If that the man knows his true interest, he will avoid a quarrel” — that is, give that [admit the fact which is expressed in the following clause,] the man knows his true interest, then the consequence follows, he will avoid a quarrel. That in this sentence is a relative or demonstrative substitute for the following clause. This will more plainly appear by transposing the clauses. “The man knows his true interest; give that [admit that;] he will then avoid a quarrel.” Now let the subjunctive form be used. “The man know his true interest; give that; he will avoid a quarrel.”
Here the impropriety of this form of the verb appears in a strong light. It will appear more clearly by the use of other words of equivalent signification. Grant the man know his true interest, he will avoid a quarrel. Allow the man know his true interest. Suppose the man know his true interest. We never use the subjunctive form after the three last verbs which introduce the condition. Though is sometimes followed by the indicative; sometimes by the subjunctive; but it ought always to be followed by the indicative, for it supposes the fact to be given; and so does admit, when used in hypothetical sentences. Admit that the man knows his interest. We have then decisive proof that the use of the indicative form of the verb after if, when it expresses a conditional event in present time, is most correct; indeed it is the only correct form. This remark is equally applicable to the past tense conditional.
The language of Addison, Johnson, and other distinguished writers of the last century, in the use of the indicative, is therefore, more correct than the language of the writers in the age of Elizabeth; and their practice is principally the common usage of our country at this day.
I have, therefore, constructed a Grammar on this usage; bringing down the standard of writing a century and a half later than Bishop Lowth. I have done this, first, on the authority of strict analogical principles, as above stated; secondly, on the authority of the best usage of that cluster of distinguished writers who adorned the beginning of the last century; and, thirdly, on the authority of universal colloquial practice, which I consider as the real and only genuine language. I repeat this remark, that general and respectable usage in speaking, is the genuine or legitimate language of a country, to which the written language ought to be conformed. Language is that which is uttered by the tongue, and if men do not write the language as it is spoken by the great body of respectable people, they do not write the real language. Now, in colloquial usage, the subjunctive form of the verb, in conditional sentences, is rarely used, and perhaps never, except when the substantive verb is employed. Our students are taught in school the subjunctive form, if thou have, if he come, &c.;, and some of them continue, in after life, to write in that manner; but in the course of more than forty years, I have not known three men who have ventured to use that form of the verb in conversation. We toil in school to learn a language which we dare not introduce into conversation, but which the force of custom compels us to abandon. In this respect, the present study of grammar is worse than useless.
This colloquial custom accords with other languages. The French say and write s'il est, if he is. The Latins often used the same form, “si quid est in me ingenii, judices;” but the use of the Latin subjunctive depends on certain other words which precede; as “cum sit civis,” as he is a citizen, or, since he is a citizen; and the present tense is often used to express what we express by an auxiliary. That the Greeks used the indicative to express a conditional present tease, we have seen by citations above.
By this arrangement of the verb, the indicative form after if and other verbs introducing a condition or hypothesis, may be used uniformly to express a fact or event under a condition or supposition, either in the present or past tenses; the speaker being uncertain respecting the fact, or representing it as doubtful.
“If the man is honest, he will return what he has borrowed.” “If the ship has arrived, we shall be informed of it to-morrow.” “ If the bill was presented, it was doubtless paid.” “If the law has been passed, we are precluded from further opposition.”
On the other hand, when it is intended to speak of a future contingent event, I would always use the auxiliaries that are proper for the purpose. “If it shall or should rain to-morrow, we shall not ride to town.” I would never use the subjunctive form, if it rain, in prose; and in poetry, only from necessity, as an abridged phrase, for if it shall or should rain. In this manner the distinction between the tenses, which are now constantly confounded, may be preserved and made obvious, both to natives and foreigners.
The effect of the study of Lowth’s principles, which has been greatly extended by the popularity of Murray’s Grammar,19 has been to introduce or establish a form of the verb in writing, which is obsolete in colloquial language; to fill our books with a confusion of tenses, and thus to keep the language unsettled. Nothing can be more perplexing to the student, than every where to meet with discrepancies between rules and practice.
There is another erroneous manner of writing, common to the best authors in the language, which seems to have escaped notice. This is, to connect a verb in the past tense with a preceding one in the same tense, when the latter verb is intended to express a very different time from the former. Thus, “Then Manasseh knew that the Lord, he was God.” 2 Chron. xxxiii. 13.
The Latins, in this case, would probably have used the infinitive; “Manasseh novit Jehovam Deum esse.” In English we ought to write and say, “Manasseh knew Jehovah to be God,” or, “Manasseh knew that Jehovah he is God.” In most similar cases the use of the infinitive in English is as elegant as in Latin. But there are many cases where the infinitive can not be used. We can not use it after say; “he said him to be a good man,” is not English; though “he declared, or affirmed, or believed him to be a good man,” is elegant.
In order to understand the impropriety of the common mode of using the latter verb, as in the example above cited, it may be remarked, that the present tense is that which is used to express what exists at all times. Thus we say, God is or exists, whenever we speak of his permanent existence; we say, Gold is yellow or ductile; iron is a most valuable metal; it is not convertible into silver; plants and animals are very distinct living beings. We do not say, Gold was yellow; iron was a valuable metal; for we mean to express permanent qualities. Hence, in the passage cited from Chronicles, the first verb knew, referring to a fact past, is correct; but the last, which is intended to express the permanent being or character of God, should be in the infinitive or the indicative present tense. The following are examples of correct language: “His master had taught him that happiness consists in virtue.” Anacharsis, ii. 120.
“Sabellius, who openly taught that there is but one person in the Godhead.” Encyclopedia.
“Our Savior taught that eternal death is the proper punishment of sin.” Emmons.
But very different is the following: “Having believed for many years, that water was [is] an elastic fluid.” The following would be still better: “Having believed water to be an elastic fluid.”
So the following: “We know not the use of the epidermis of shells. Some authors have supposed that it secured [secures] the shells from being covered with vermes.” Edin. Encyc.
“It was just remarked, that marine fossils did not [do not] comprise vegetable remains.” Ib.
“If my readers will turn their thoughts back on their old friends, they will find it difficult to call a single man to remembrance who appeared to know that life was short [is short,] till he was about to lose it.” Rambler, No. 71.
“They considered the body as a hydraulic machine, and the fluids as passing through a series of chimical changes; forgetting that animation was [is] its essential characteristic.” Darwin.
“It was declared by Pompey, that if the Commonwealth was [should be] violated, he could stamp with his foot and raise an army out of the ground.” Rambler, No. 10.
In the foregoing sentence, the past tense is used for the future contingent.
“It was affirmed in the last discourse, that much of the honorable practice of the world rested [rests] on the substratum of selfishness; that society was [is] held together, in the exercise of its relative virtues, mainly by the tie of reciprocal advantage; that a man’s own interest bound [binds] him to all those average equities which obtained [obtain] in the neighborhood around him; and in which if he proved [should prove] himself glaringly deficient, lie would be abandoned by the respect, and the confidence, and the good will of the people with whom he had [might have, or should have] to do.” Chalmer’s Com. Dis. 4.
“In the last discourse, I observed that love constituted [constitutes] the whole moral character of God.” Dwight’s Theology.
“And he said, Nay, father Abraham; but if one went [shall or should go] to them from the dead, they will repent And he said to him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose [shall or should rise] from the dead.” Luke xvi. 30, 31.
“Independent of parties in the national legislature itself, as often as the period of discussion arrived, the state legislatures, who will always be not only vigilant, but suspicious and jealous guardians of the rights of the citizens, against encroachments from the federal government, will constantly have their attention awake to the conduct of the national rulers, and will be ready enough, if any thing improper appears, to sound the alarm to the people.”
Let any man attempt to resolve the foregoing sentence, if he can, or render it into another language.
“Cicero vindicated the truth, and inculcated the value of the precept, that nothing was [is] truly useful which was [is] not honest.”
“He undertook to show that justice was [is] of perpetual obligation.”
“The author concedes much of his argument, and admits that the sea was [is] susceptible of dominion.” [Better still; he admits the sea to be susceptible of dominion.]
“A nation would be condemned by the impartial voice of mankind, if it voluntarily went [should go] to war, on a claim of which it doubted [should doubt] the legality.”
“The Supreme Court observed that they were not at liberty to depart from the rule, whatever doubt might have been entertained, if the case was [had been] entirely new.”
“He held that the law of nations prohibited [prohibits] the use of poisoned arms.”
“He insisted that the laws of war gave [give] no other power over a captive than to keep him safely.”
“The general principle on the subject is, that, if a commander makes a compact with the enemy, and it be of such a nature that the power to make it could be reasonably implied from the nature of the trust, it would be valid and binding, though he abused his trust.” Let any man translate this sentence into another language; if he can, without reducing the verbs to some consistency.
“Congress have declared by law, that the United States were [are] entitled to priority of payment over private creditors, in cases of insolvency.”
“The Supreme Court decided, that the acts of Congress, giving that general priority to the United States, were [are] constitutional.”
“It was admitted that the government of the United States was [is] one of enumerated powers.”
“From his past designs and administrations, we could never argue at all to those which were future.” [This is an odd combination of words.]
“Jesus knowing that the father had given all things into his hands, and that he was come from God and went to God.” John xiii. 3.
“Alexander dispatched Eumenes with three hundred horse to two free cities — with assurance that if they submitted and received him [should or would submit and receive] as a friend, no evil should befall them.”
“The apostle knew that the present season was [is] the only time allowed for this preparation.”
“What would be the real effect of that overpowering evidence which our adversaries required [should require] in a revelation, it is difficult to foretell.”
“It could not otherwise have been known that the word had [has] this meaning.”
“I told him if he went [should go] to-morrow, I would go with him.”
This fault occurs in our hearing every hour in the day.
A like fault prevails in other languages; indeed the English may have been led into it by reading foreign authors. “Mais on a remarqué avec raison, que l'espace conchoidal était infini.” Lunier. It has been remarked with reason, that the conchoidal space was [is] infinite.
But whatever may be the practice of other nations, there would be no difficulty in correcting such improprieties in our own language, if as much attention were given to the study of its true principles, as is given to other subjects of literature and science. But if in this particular, there is a British or American author who writes his vernacular language correctly, his writings have not fallen under my inspection.
There is another fault very common among English writers, though it is less frequent in the United States; this is the conversion of an intransitive verb into a passive one. It is surprising that an error of this kind should have gained such an established use, in some foreign languages, as to be incurable. Barbarous nations may indeed form languages; but it should be the business of civilized men to purify their language from barbarisms.
In the transitive verb, there is an agent that performs some action on an object, or in some way affects it. When this verb becomes passive, the agent and the object change places in the sentence. Thus, John loves Peter, is transitive, but Peter is loved by John, is passive. In the intransitive verb the case is different; for the action is limited to the agent; and when it is stated that a thing is done, there is no agent by which it is done. I perish, is intransitive; I am perished, is the passive form; but the latter neither expresses nor implies an agent by which I perish.
This fault occurs frequently in the common version of the Scriptures.
“Yea, whereto might the strength of their hands profit me, in whom old age was [had] perished.” Job xxx. 2.
“Their memorial is [has] perished with them.” Ps. ix. 6.
“The heathen are [have] perished out of this land.” Ps. x. 16.
“Israel is [has] fled before the Philistines.” 1 Sam. iv. 17.
“David is [has] fed.” 2 Sam. xix. 9.
“The days were [had] not expired.” 1 Sam. xviii.
“And when the year was [had] expired.” 2 Chron. xxvi. 10.
“I only am [have] escaped alone to tell thee.” Job i. 15.
“And it came to pass, when he was [had] returned.” Luke xix. 15.
Return is sometimes a transitive verb, and sometimes intransitive. When a sum of borrowed money is returned, the phrase is correct, for this is the passive form of a transitive verb. But when a man is returned, we may ask, who has returned him? In this case, the man returns by his own act, and he can not be said to be returned.
“He found the Empress was [had] departed.” Coxe.
“They were [had] arrived within three days’ journey of the spice country.” Gibbon, Ch. i. Note.
“Neither Charles nor Diocletian were [had] arrived at a very advanced period of life.” Ib. Ch. xiii.
“The posterity of so many gods and heroes was [had] fallen into the most abject state.” Ib. Ch. ii.
“Silver was [had] grown more common.” Ib.
“He was [had] risen from the dead, and was [had] just ascended to heaven.” Milner, i. 20.
“Hearing that they were [had] arrived.” Ib. 211.
“Claudius — vexed because his wife was [had] become a Christian.” Ib. 274.
“Does not the reader see how much we are [have] already departed from Christian simplicity?” Ib. 299.
“My age is [has] departed.” Isaiah xxxviii. 12.
“The man out of whom the demons were [had] departed.” Luke viii. 35.
“Workmen were [had] arrived to assist them.” Mitford.
“A body of Athenian horse was [had] just arrived.” Ib.
This fault is common in Mitford’s History of Greece. In the writings of Roscoe, which are more elegant, it occurs, but less frequently.
“The time limited for the reception of the cardinal was expired.” Roscoe, Leo X.
“He inquired whether the report was true, that a legate was arrived.” Ib. L. Med.
“The nation being [having] once more got into a course of borrowing.” Price on Liberty.
“When he was [had] retired to his tent.” Coxe’s Russ.
“He was [had] not yet arrived.”20 Ib.
The intransitive verb grow is constantly used by the English as a transitive verb, as, to grow wheat. This is never used in the northern states, unless by persons who have adopted it recently from the English.
It seems almost incredible that such errors should continue, to this time, to disfigure the language of the most distinguished writers, and that they should escape animadversion. The practice has evidently been borrowed from the French or Italian; but surely no lover of correctness can excuse such violation of the best established principles in our language. |