having accessories in which the verb is modified by the conjunctive pronoun and a preposition.

(23) Of the conjunctive pronoun employed as a dative modification in the accessory proposition it is more difficult to find satisfactory examples. We can readily find examples in which the pronoun is really a dative, as, The master WHOм you serve; the laws WHICH we obey. But the pronoun thus used is now recognised as an accusative and the verbs as active verbs; though this recognition cannot well be reconciled with the history of the use of these verbs in our language.

OF EXPLICATIVE, or EPITHETIC ADJECTIVE ACCESSORY PROPOSITIONS.—(24) The adjective accessory propositions so far presented in our examples serve as essential modifications of the antecedent noun. They all express something indispensably necessary to the enunciation of the thought declared in the main assertion of the compound proposition. (25) Thus, when we say The youth WHO STUDIES DILIGENTLY deserves praise, the accessory proposition who studies diligently, is an essential part of the subject of the principal proposition. It is not youth, but the youth described in the accessory, that deserves praise.

(26) But an accessory proposition is sometimes employed as merely explicative of the antecedent, similarly to an adjective employed as a mere epithet and not essential to the assertion in which it is used. We may first, for the sake of perspicuity, and because we have not alluded to this matter in treating of the descriptive adjective modification, give an example of the adjective employed as a mere epithet. (27) Socrates THE WISE, THE GOOD, fell a victim to the préjudices of his fellow-citizens. Here wise and good are not essential to render the subject capable of having the predicate in the proposition asserted of it: they merely serve as epithets. (28) Adjectives thus employed to indicate something without which the proposition would stand grammatically complete and logically true, are called EPITHETS, that is (attributes), superadded or put to, because they express something beyond what is absolutely requisite to the completion of the assertion. (29) All these epithets may be regarded as expressing a kind of parenthetic thoughts-thoughts introduced within a construction intended mainly and formally to express another and distinct thought.

(30) So of what has been named the explicative accessory proposition

[(23) Repeat the substance of what is said of the conjunctive pronoun employed as dative modification in the accessory.

(24) Repeat the introductory remark. (25) Illustrate it by an example.

(26) In what other way are adjective accessories sometimes employed? (27) Give an example of an adjective used as an epithet. (28) Tell what is said in reference to the name given to adjectives thus used. (29) How may all these epithets be regarded?

(30) Apply what has been said to the explicative or epithetic accessory. (81) What

(it might with great propriety be called the epithetic accessory); it is thrown parenthetically within another proposition in the form, but without the force, of a modifying accessory. (31) In fact, if regarded strictly as a completing accessory, it would often change, or injure, or destroy the sense of the compound proposition. (32) Let us illustrate this by an example, "Man, that is born of a woman, is of few days." Here the accessory, "That is born of a woman," is merely explicative or epithetic. It expresses a thought of the subject man, having connection with the general train or drift of the discourse, that is to say, with the representation of man's frailty and transiency. But it does not express an essential complement of the word man as subject of the proposition, "Man is of few days." In this assertion the word man is used unmodified in its unlimited sense, as including all mankind. It is not limited or restricted by the words, "That is born of a woman," as by a strictly modifying accessory proposition essential to the sense of the principal proposition. To limit the word man by this accessory we must place before it the sign (THE) which in our language indicates limitation or determinateness, and thus we change, or, rather, we destroy the sense. In fact, by treating this as an essential modifying accessory, we obtain a compound proposition which implies an absurdity. Both THE man that is born of a woman is of few days; and THE men that are born of women are of few days, are absurd assertions; since they imply, according to the laws of our language, that only some men are so born, and only such are of few days. This is manifestly not the meaning of the words as they stand in the original quotation.

(33) We may here remark that in the written language this kind of explicative or epithetic proposition is distinguished by the punctuation. The ordinary modifying accessory proposition connected with the antecedent by a conjunctive pronoun, being essential to complete it, is not separated from the principal proposition by commas in the generality of modern printed books, whereas the explicative accessory proposition is, or ought to be, always separated by commas from the principal proposition.

87. WHAT EMPLOYED AS A CONJUNCTIVE PRONOUN.-(1) WHAT (really the neuter form of who, and originally, like it, interrogative) is also employed as a conjunctive pronoun, but with this peculiarity, that it performs the functions of a noun both in the accessory, and in the principal pro

would often be the consequence if the explicative accessory should be considered as a completing accessory? (32) Repeat the example, and the substance of the illustration.

(33) Describe the manner in which the completing and explicative accessory are distinguished by punctuation in written discourse.]

87. [(1) State the peculiar manner in which what is employed as a conjunctive pro

position, or, in the usual language of grammarians, includes both the relative and the antecedent. (2) It is thus equivalent to the determinative that employed substantively in the principal proposition, and which in the accessory. (3) In analysis some resolve every what of this kind into the words that which as the first step, and then substitute the analysis of that which for the analysis of what. (4) This mode of proceeding seems to us improper as well as unnecessary, since it implies that what is a substitute for these two words, or used instead of them, and therefore that the use of it is secondary and later in origin. This substitution is not proved, perhaps, cannot be proved.

We submit a few examples for the purpose of illustrating the use of what. Keeping these in view, the learner will more readily comprehend our remarks on the form of accessory in which what is employed.

(a) “WHAT the weak head with strongest bias rules,

Is pride, the never-failing vice of fools."

(b) "WHAT obeys reason is free."

(c) "WHAT Wounds his virtue wounds his peace."

(d) "WHAT thou biddest unargued I obey."

(e) "What He admired and loved, his vital smile unfolded into being." "What you call wisdom they esteem madness."

(f)

(g) "In what I have done I have consulted your interest."

(5) In examples (a), (b), (c), what serves as subject of both principal and accessory proposition; in (d), (e), (ƒ), as objective modification of the verbs in both propositions (or rather, perhaps, in (d) as objective in the accessory and dative in the principal); and in (g) it forms with in a noun and preposition modification of the principal and objective modification of the accessory proposition.

(6) There is another and, we think, a better as well as an easier way of treating compound propositions of this kind; namely, to consider what as connected with the accessory alone, and then to regard the accessory including what as a substantive accessory proposition, or, if you please, an adjective accessory proposition employed substantively (in a manner aralogous to the adjective employed substantively), the accessory performing some function of a noun to the principal proposition. (7) By way of illus

noun. (2) To what two words is it equivalent? (3) Mention the mode in which some analyze what thus employed. (4) State the objections to this mode of analysis.

(5) State the purposes which what serves in Example (a), in Example (b), &c. (6) Repeat what is said of another way of treating propositions in which what relative occurs. (7) Illustrate this mode of treatment by a succinct analysis of the above examples.

tration, let us give a succinct analysis of the above examples. In example (a) the accessory, "What the weak head with strongest bias rules," constitutes the subject* of "is" (the verb of the principal proposition). In the same manner, "What obeys reason,” and “What wounds his virtue," are subjects in the compound propositions in which they occur. In example (d) “What thou biddest," modified by "unargued," is the objective (we think, more properly, the dative) modification to "obey" (the verb of the principal proposition). In (e) "What he admired and loved," is objective modification to the verb "unfolded ;" and in (ƒ) "What you call wisdom," is objective modification to "esteem." In example (g) "In what I have done," is noun and preposition modification to "have consulted your interest."

(8) If the reader will attentively consider these and similar examples, and especially the last, in which what is preceded by a preposition, he will, perhaps, find reason for agreeing with us that this last is the preferable method of analysis. It is manifest that the preposition in influences the whole accessory and serves as intermediate between it and "have consulted your interest," and that the whole thought expressed in the accessory stands precisely in the same relation to the principal proposition as a single noun coming after in would in a simple proposition. (9) The analysis of this kind of compound propositions is, if we adopt this mode, to be conducted exactly according to the rules given for conducting the analysis of compound propositions having substantive accessories. (10) If the accessory is subject of the principal proposition, analyze it when the subject comes in regular order to be considered; if the accessory is objective or noun and preposition modification, let it be analyzed in its proper place when it comes under consideration as a part of the predicate of the principal proposition.

§ 88. COMPOUND CONJUNCTIVE PRONOUNS AND THE ACCESSORIES FORMED BY THEIR HELP. (1) The following compounds of who, which, and what, are formed by adding to them the words ever or so, or both so and ever, whoever, whoso, whosoever; whichever, whichsoever; whatever, whatsoever. (2) When substantively employed, these words perform functions similar to what, and

* We speak of the compound proposition grammatically viewed-as presented in the verses above. Logically considered, it is an inverted proposition Pride, the never-failing vice of fools, is what the weak head, &c. When presented in this form, the accessory "What," &c. performs the function of a noun complementary of the neuter verb is.

(8) Repeat the substance of what is said in favor of this mode of analysis. (9) What is said of the order of conducting the analysis? (10) State the order to be observed.]

§ 88. [(1) Enumerate the compounds of who, which, and what, telling how they are formed. (2) State what is said of these compounds substantively employed, and of the ac

=

the accessory in which they occur may be treated in the same manner in analysis, as the examples which we have considered in the last section. (3) Whoever, whoso and whosoever, like the primitive who, are always employed as nouns; whichever, whichsoever, whatever and whatsoever, are frequently used as adjectives accompanied by the noun which they modify, and may sometimes, not always, like which used in the same way, be treated as determinative adjectives. (4) We subjoin some examples of the manner in which these compound conjunctive pronouns are employed in accessory propositions. Whoever told you this is mistaken any one who told you this is mistaken. Here the accessory, "WHOEVER told you this," may be regarded as subject of the verb is, or that of which being mistaken (the predicate) is asserted. "Whoso removeth stones shall be hurt therewith." WHOEVER is always idle is useless and contemptible. "Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin." In all these, as in the first example, the acces sory may be regarded as the subject of the compound proposition. "And giveth it to whomsoever He will." Here the accessory, “to whomsoever He will," serves as noun and preposition modification to the verb "giveth" in the principal proposition. Whichever of these books you prefer is at your service. Whichever of these books you prefer you may take. "Whichever of these books you prefer," is subject in the first, and objective modification of the verb in the main assertion in the second example. Whichever and whichsoever are seldom used, except as determinatives accompanying a noun which they modify. But even in this case the accessory into which they enter may often be most conveniently considered as substantive. Thus, Whichever course suits you will suit me. Here "Whichever course suits you” may be considered the subject of "will suit me." 'Whatever purifies fortifies also the heart." Here "Whatever purifies" (the heart) is subject of the assertion "fortifies also the heart."

"Whate'er adorns

The princely dome," &c.

"His tuneful breast enjoys."

66 en

Here "whate'er adorns," &c. is objective modification to the verb joys." "I will do whatsoever thou sayest to me." The verb "do" has for objective modification the accessory "whatsoever thou sayest to me," as may be perceived by asking the question, what will I do! Ans. "Whatsoever thou sayest to me."

(5) All these compound pronouns may be regarded as having an indefi

nite antecedent.

cessories into which they enter. (8) What is said of the manner in which these pronouns are respectively employed? (4) Illustrate the use of the compounds of who by examples. The compounds of which in like manner. The compounds of what.

(5) How may all these compound pronouns be regarded ?