Chapter V: Pronouns (1)

The rules for the agreement of Pronouns with their antecedents are four; hence this chapter extends from the tenth rule to the thirteenth, inclusively. The _cases_ of Pronouns are embraced with those of nouns, in the seven rules of the third chapter.

RULE X.--PRONOUNS.

A Pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or pronoun which it represents, in person, number, and gender:[379] as, "This is the friend _of whom I spoke_; he has just arrived."--"This is the book _which I_ bought; it is an excellent work."--"_Ye_, therefore, _who_ love mercy, teach _your_ sons to love _it_ too."--_Cowper._

"Speak _thou, whose_ thoughts at humble peace repine,
Shall Wolsey's wealth with Wolsey's end be _thine_?"--_Dr. Johnson_.

EXCEPTION FIRST.

When a pronoun stands for some person or thing _indefinite_, or _unknown to the speaker_, this rule is not _strictly_ applicable; because the person, number, and gender, are rather assumed in the pronoun, than regulated by an antecedent: as, "I do not care _who_ knows it."--_Steele_. "_Who_ touched me? Tell me _who_ it was."--"We have no knowledge how, or by _whom_, it is inhabited."--ABBOT: _Joh. Dict._

EXCEPTION SECOND.

The neuter pronoun _it_ may be applied to a young child, or to other creatures masculine or feminine by nature, when they are not obviously distinguishable with regard to sex; as, "Which is the real friend to the _child_, the person who gives _it_ the sweetmeats, or the person who, considering only _its_ health, resists _its_ importunities?"--_Opis._ "He loads the _animal_ he is showing me, with so many trappings and collars, that I cannot distinctly view _it_"--_Murray's Gram._, p. 301. "The _nightingale_ sings most sweetly when _it_ sings in the night."--_Bucke's Gram._, p. 52.

EXCEPTION THIRD.

The pronoun _it_ is often used without a definite reference to any antecedent, and is sometimes a mere expletive, and sometimes the representative of an action expressed afterwards by a verb; as, "Whether she grapple _it_ with the pride of philosophy."--_Chalmers._ "Seeking to lord _it_ over God's heritage."--_The Friend_, vii, 253. "_It_ is not for kings, O Lemuel, _it_ is not for kings _to drink_ wine, nor for princes strong drink."--_Prov._, xxxi, 4. "Having no temptation to _it_, God cannot _act unjustly_ without defiling his nature."--_Brown's Divinity_, p. 11.

"Come, and trip _it_ as you go, On the light fantastic toe."--_Milton._

EXCEPTION FOURTH.

A singular antecedent with the adjective _many_, sometimes admits a plural pronoun, but never in the same clause; as, "Hard has been the fate of _many_ a great _genius_, that while _they_ have conferred immortality on others, _they_ have wanted themselves some friend to embalm their names to posterity."--_Welwood's Pref. to Rowe's Lucan._

"In Hawick twinkled _many a light_,
Behind him soon _they_ set in night."--_W. Scott._

EXCEPTION FIFTH.

When a plural pronoun is put by enallagè for the singular, it does not agree with its noun in number, because it still requires a plural verb; as, "_We_ [Lindley Murray] _have followed_ those authors, who appear to have given them the most natural and intelligible distribution."--_Murray's Gram._, 8vo, p. 29. "_We shall close our_ remarks on this subject, by introducing the sentiments of Dr. Johnson respecting it."--_Ib._ "My lord, _you know_ I love _you_"--_Shakspeare._

EXCEPTION SIXTH.

The pronoun sometimes disagrees with its antecedent in one sense, because it takes it in an other; as, "I have perused Mr. Johnson's _Grammatical Commentaries_, and find _it_[380] a very laborious, learned, and useful Work."--_Tho. Knipe_, D. D. "_Lamps_ is of the plural number, because _it_ means more than one."--_Smith's New Gram._, p. 8. "_Man_ is of the masculine gender, because _it_ is the name of a male."--_Ib._ "The _Utica Sentinel_ says _it_ has not heard whether the wounds are dangerous."--_Evening Post_. (Better: "The _editor_ of the Utica Sentinel says, _he_ has not heard," &c.) "There is little _Benjamin_ with _their_ ruler."--_Psalms_, lxviii, 27.

"_Her_ end when _emulation_ misses,
_She_ turns to envy, stings, and hisses."--_Swift's Poems_, p. 415.

OBSERVATIONS ON RULE X.

OBS. 1.--Respecting a pronoun, the main thing is, that the reader perceive clearly _for what it stands_; and next, that he do not misapprehend _its relation of case_. For the sake of completeness and uniformity in parsing, it is, I think, expedient to apply the foregoing rule not only to those pronouns which have obvious antecedents expressed, but also to such as are not accompanied by the nouns for which they stand. Even those which are put for persons or things unknown or indefinite, may be said to agree with whatever is meant by them; that is, with such nouns as their own properties indicate. For the reader will naturally understand something by every pronoun, unless it be a mere expletive, and without any antecedent. For example: "It would depend upon _who_ the forty were."--_Trial at Steubenville_, p. 50. Here _who_ is an indefinite relative, equivalent to _what persons_; of the third person, plural, masculine; and is in the nominative case after were, by Rule 6th. For the full construction seems to be this: "It would depend upon _the persons who_ the forty were." So _which_, for _which person_, or _which thing_, (if we call it a pronoun rather than an adjective,) may be said to have the properties of the noun _person_ or _thing_ understood; as,

"His notions fitted things so well,
That _which_ was _which_ he could not tell."--_Hudibras_.

OBS. 2.--The pronoun _we_ is used by the speaker or writer to represent himself and others, and is therefore plural. But it is sometimes used, by a sort of fiction, in stead of the singular, to intimate that the speaker or writer is not alone in his opinions; or, perhaps more frequently, to evade the charge of egotism; for this modest assumption of plurality seems most common with those who have something else to assume: as, "And so lately as 1809, Pope Pius VII, in excommunicating his 'own dear son,' Napoleon, whom he crowned and blessed, says: '_We_, unworthy as _we_ are, represent the God of peace.'"--_Dr. Brownlee_. "The coat fits _us_ as well as if _we_ had been melted and poured into it."--_Prentice_. Monarchs sometimes prefer _we_ to _I_, in immediate connexion with a singular noun; as, "_We Alexander_, Autocrat of all the Russias."--"_We the Emperor_ of China," &c.--_Economy of Human Life_, p. vi. They also employ the anomalous compound _ourself_, which is not often used by other people; as, "Witness _ourself_ at Westminster, 28 day of April, in the tenth year of _our_ reign. CHARLES."

"_Cæs._ What touches _us ourself_, shall be last serv'd."
--_Shak., J. C._, Act iii, Sc. 1.

"_Ourself_ to hoary Nestor will repair."
--_Pope, Iliad_, B. x, l. 65.

OBS. 3.--The pronoun _you_, though originally and properly plural, is now generally applied alike to one person or to more. Several observations upon this fashionable substitution of the plural number for the singular, will be found in the fifth and sixth chapters of Etymology. This usage, however it may seem to involve a solecism, is established by that authority against which the mere grammarian has scarcely a right to remonstrate. Alexander Murray, the schoolmaster, observes, "When language was plain and simple, the English always said _thou_, when speaking to a single person. But when an affected politeness, and a fondness for continental manners and customs began to take place, persons of rank and fashion said _you_ in stead of _thou_. The innovation gained ground, and custom gave sanction to the change, and stamped it with the authority of law."--_English Gram._, Third Edition, 1793, p. 107. This respectable grammarian acknowledged both _thou_ and _you_ to be of the second person singular. I do not, however, think it necessary or advisable to do this, or to encumber the conjugations, as some have done, by introducing the latter pronoun, and the corresponding form of the verb, as singular.[381] It is manifestly better to say, that the plural is used _for the singular_, by the figure _Enallagè_. For if _you_ has literally become singular by virtue of this substitution, _we_ also is singular for the same reason, as often as it is substituted for _I_; else the authority of innumerable authors, editors, compilers, and crowned, heads, is insufficient to make it so. And again, if _you_ and the corresponding form of the verb are _literally of the second person singular_, (as Wells contends, with an array of more than sixty names of English grammarians to prove it,) then, by their own rule of concord, since _thou_ and its verb are still generally retained in the same place by these grammarians, a verb that agrees with one of these nominatives, must also agree with the other; so that _you hast_ and _thou have, you seest_ and _thou see_, may be, so far as appears from _their_ instructions, as good a concord as can be made of these words!

OBS. 4.--The putting of you for thou has introduced the anomalous compound _yourself_, which is now very generally used in stead of _thyself_. In this instance, as in the less frequent adoption of _ourself_ for _myself_, Fashion so tramples upon the laws of grammar, that it is scarcely possible to frame an intelligible exception in her favour. These pronouns are essentially singular, both in form and meaning; and yet they cannot be used with _I_ or _thou_, with _me_ or _thee_, or with any verb that is literally singular; as, "_I ourself am._" but, on the contrary, they must be connected only with such plural terms as are put for the singular; as, "_We ourself are_ king."--"Undoubtedly _you yourself become_ an innovator."--_L. Murray's Gram._, p. 364; _Campbell's Rhet._, 167.

"Try touch, or sight, or smell; try what you will,
_You_ strangely _find_ nought but _yourself_ alone."
--_Pollok, C. of T._, B. i, l. 162.

OBS. 5.--Such terms of address, as _your Majesty, your Highness, your Lordship, your Honour_, are sometimes followed by verbs and pronouns of the second person plural, substituted for the singular; and sometimes by words literally singular, and of the third person, with no other figure than a substitution of _who_ for _which_: as, "Wherein _your Lordship, who shines_ with so much distinction in the noblest assembly in the world, peculiarly _excels_"--_Dedication of Sale's Koran_. "We have good cause to give _your Highness_ the first place; _who_, by a continued series of favours _have obliged_ us, not only while _you moved_ in a lower orb, but since the Lord hath called _your Highness_ to supreme authority."--_Massachusetts to Cromwell_, in 1654.

OBS. 6.--The general usage of the French is like that of the English, _you_ for _thou_; but Spanish, Portuguese, or German politeness requires that the third person be substituted for the second. And when they would be very courteous, the Germans use also the plural for the singular, as _they_ for _thou_. Thus they have a fourfold method of addressing a person: as, _they_, denoting the highest degree of respect; _he_, a less degree; _you_, a degree still less; and _thou_, none at all, or absolute reproach. Yet, even among them, the last is used as a term of endearment to children, and of veneration to God! _Thou_, in English, still retains its place firmly, and without dispute, in all addresses to the Supreme Being; but in respect to the _first person_, an observant clergyman has suggested the following dilemma: "Some men will be pained, if a minister says _we_ in the pulpit; and others will quarrel with him, if he says _I_."--_Abbott's Young Christian_, p. 268.

OBS. 7.--Any extensive perversion of the common words of a language from their original and proper use, is doubtless a matter of considerable moment. These changes in the use of the pronouns, being some of them evidently a sort of complimentary fictions, some religious people have made it a matter of conscience to abstain from them, and have published their reasons for so doing. But the _moral objections_ which may lie against such or any other applications of words, do not come within the grammarian's province. Let every one consider for himself the moral bearing of what he utters: not forgetting the text, "But I say unto you, that _every idle word_ that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgement: for _by thy words_ thou shalt be justified, and _by thy words_ thou shalt be condemned."--_Matt._, xii, 36 and 37. What scruples this declaration _ought to_ raise, it is not my business to define. But if such be God's law, what shall be the reckoning of those who make no conscience of uttering continually, or when they will, not idle words only, but expressions the most absurd, insignificant, false, exaggerated, vulgar, indecent, injurious, wicked, sophistical, unprincipled, ungentle, and perhaps blasphemous, or profane?

OBS. 8.--The agreement of pronouns with their antecedents, it is necessary to observe, is liable to be controlled or affected by several of the figures of rhetoric. A noun used figuratively often suggests two different senses, the one literal, and the other tropical; and the agreement of the pronoun must be sometimes with this, and sometimes with that, according to the nature of the trope. If the reader be unacquainted with tropes and figures, he should turn to the explanation of them in Part Fourth of this work; but almost every one knows something about them, and such as must here be named, will perhaps be made sufficiently intelligible by the examples. There seems to be no occasion to introduce under this head more than four; namely, personification, metaphor, metonymy, and synecdoche.

OBS. 9.--When a pronoun represents the name of an inanimate object _personified_, it agrees with its antecedent in the figurative, and not in the literal sense; as, "There were others whose crime it was rather to neglect _Reason_ than to disobey _her_."--_Dr. Johnson_. "_Penance_ dreams her life away."--_Rogers_. "Grim _Darkness_ furls _his_ leaden shroud."--_Id._ Here if the pronoun were made neuter, the personification would be destroyed; as, "By the progress which _England_ had already made in navigation and commerce, _it_ was now prepared for advancing farther."--_Robertson's America_, Vol. ii, p. 341. If the pronoun _it_ was here intended to represent England, the feminine _she_ would have been much better; and, if such was not the author's meaning, the sentence has some worse fault than the agreement of a pronoun with its noun in a wrong sense.

OBS. 10.--When the antecedent is applied _metaphorically_, the pronoun usually agrees with it in its literal, and not in its figurative sense; as, "Pitt was the _pillar which_ upheld the state."--"The _monarch_ of mountains rears _his_ snowy head."--"The _stone which_ the builders rejected."--_Matt._, xxi, 42. According to this rule, _which_ would be better than _whom_, in the following text: "I considered the horns, and, behold, there came up among them an other _little horn_, before _whom_ there were three of the first horns plucked up by the roots."--_Daniel_, vii, 8. In _Rom._, ix, 33, there is something similar: "Behold, I lay in Sion a _stumbling-stone_ and _rock_ of offence: and whosoever believeth _on him_ shall not be ashamed." Here the _stone_ or _rock_ is a metaphor for _Christ_, and the pronoun _him_ may be referred to the sixth exception above; but the construction is not agreeable, because it is not regular: it would be more grammatical, to change _on him_ to _thereon_. In the following example, the noun "_wolves_," which literally requires _which_, and not _who_, is used metaphorically for _selfish priests_; and, in the relative, the figurative or personal sense is allowed to prevail:

"_Wolves_ shall succeed for teachers, grievous _wolves_,
_Who_ all the sacred mysteries of Heaven
To their own vile advantages shall turn."
--_Milton, P. L._, B. xii, l. 508.

This seems to me somewhat forced and catachrestical. So too, and worse, the following; which makes a _star_ rise and _speak_:

"So _spake_ our _Morning Star_ then in _his rise_,
And _looking_ round on every side _beheld_
A pathless desert, dusk with horrid shades."
--_Id., P. R._, B. i, l. 294.

OBS. 11.--When the antecedent is put by _metonymy_ for a noun of different properties, the pronoun sometimes agrees with it in the figurative, and sometimes in the literal sense; as, "When _Israel_ was a child, then I loved _him_, and called my son out of Egypt. As they called _them_, so _they_ went from them: [i. e., When Moses and the prophets called the _Israelites_, they often refused to hear:] _they_ sacrificed unto Baalim, and burnt incense to graven images. I taught _Ephraim_ also to go, taking _them_ by _their_ arms; but _they_ knew not that I healed _them_."--_Hosea_, xi, 1, 2, 3. The mixture and obscurity which are here, ought not to be imitated. The name of a man, put for the nation or tribe of his descendants, may have a pronoun of either number, and a nation may be figuratively represented as feminine; but a mingling of different genders or numbers ought to be avoided: as, "_Moab_ is spoiled, and gone up out of _her_ cities, and _his_ chosen young men are gone down to the slaughter."--_Jeremiah_, xlviii, 15.

"The wolf, who [say _that_] from the nightly fold,
Fierce drags the bleating _prey_, ne'er drunk _her_ milk,
Nor wore _her_ warming fleece."--_Thomson's Seasons_.

"That each may fill the circle mark'd by _Heaven_,
_Who_ sees with equal eye, as God of all,
A hero perish or a sparrow fall."--_Pope's Essay on Man_.

"And _heaven_ behold _its_ image in his breast."--_Ib._

"Such fate to suffering _worth_ is given,
_Who_ long with wants and woes has striven."--_Burns_.

OBS. 12.--When the antecedent is put by _synecdoche_ for more or less than it literally signifies, the pronoun agrees with it in the figurative, and not in the literal sense; as,

"A dauntless _soul_ erect, _who_ smiled on death."--_Thomson_

"But to the generous still improving _mind_,
_That_ gives the hopeless heart to sing for joy,
To _him_ the long review of ordered life
Is inward rapture only to be felt."--_Id. Seasons_.

OBS. 13.--Pronouns usually _follow_ the words which they represent; but this order is sometimes reversed: as, "_Whom_ the cap fits, let _him_ put it on."--"Hark! _they_ whisper; angels say," &c.--_Pope_. "_Thou, O Lord_, art a God full of compassion."--_Old Test_. And in some cases of apposition, the pronoun naturally comes first; as, "_I Tertius_"--"_Ye lawyers_." The pronoun _it_, likewise, very often precedes the clause or phrase which it represents; as, "Is _it_ not manifest, that the generality of people speak and write very badly?"--_Campbell's Rhet._, p. 160; _Murray's Gram._, i, 358. This arrangement is too natural to be called a transposition. The most common form of the real inversion is that of the antecedent and relative in poetry; as,

"_Who_ stops to plunder at this signal hour,
The birds shall tear _him_, and the dogs devour."
--POPE: _Iliad_, xv, 400.

OBS. 14.--A pronoun sometimes represents a _phrase_ or a _sentence_; and in this case the pronoun is always in the third person singular neuter: as, "Surely the Lord is in this place, and I knew _it_ not."--_Gen._, xxviii, 10. "Yet men can go on to vilify or disregard Christianity; _which_ is to talk and act as if they had a demonstration of its falsehood."--_Butler's Analogy_, p. 269. "When _it_ is asked wherein personal identity consists, the answer should be the same as if _it_ were asked, wherein consists similitude or equality."--_Ib._, p. 270. "Also, that the soul be without knowledge, _it_ is not good."--_Prov._, xix, 2. In this last example, the pronoun is not really necessary. "That the soul be without knowledge, _is_ not good."--_Jenks's Prayers_, p. 144. Sometimes an infinitive verb is taken as an antecedent; as, "He will not be able _to think_, without _which it_ is impertinent _to read_; nor _to act_, without _which it_ is impertinent _to think_."--_Bolingbroke, on History_, p. 103.

OBS. 15.--When a pronoun follows two words, having a neuter verb between them, and both referring to the same thing, it may represent either of them, but not often with the same meaning: as, 1. "I am the man, who command." Here, _who command_ belongs to the subject _I_, and the meaning is, "I who command, am the man." (The latter expression places the relative nearer to its antecedent, and is therefore preferable.) 2. "I am the man who commands." Here, _who commands_ belongs to the predicate _man_, and the meaning is, "I am the commander." Again: "I perceive thou art a pupil, _who possessest_ good talents."--_Cooper's Pl. and Pract. Gram._, p. 136. Here the construction corresponds not to the perception, which is, of the pupil's talents. Say, therefore, "I perceive thou art a _pupil possessing_ (or, _who possesses_) good talents."

OBS. 16.--After the expletive _it_, which may be employed to introduce a noun or a pronoun of any person, number, or gender, the above-mentioned distinction is generally disregarded; and the relative is most commonly made to agree with the latter word, especially if this word be of the first or the second person: as, "_It_ is no more _I that do it_."--_Rom._, vii, 20. "For _it_ is not _ye that speak_."--_Matt._, x, 20. The propriety of this construction is questionable. In the following examples, the relative agrees with the _it_, and not with the subsequent nouns: "_It_ is the combined _excellencies_ of all the denominations _that_ gives to her her winning beauty and her powerful charms."--_Bible Society's Report_, 1838, p. 89. "_It_ is _purity and neatness_ of expression _which is_ chiefly to be studied."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 271. "_It_ is _not the difficulty_ of the language, but on the contrary the _simplicity and facility_ of it, _that occasions_ this neglect."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. vi. "_It_ is _a wise head and a good heart that constitutes_ a great man."--_Child's Instructor_, p. 22.

OBS. 17.--The pronoun _it_ very frequently refers to something mentioned subsequently in the sentence; as, "_It_ is useless _to complain_ of what is irremediable." This pronoun is a necessary expletive at the commencement of any sentence in which the verb is followed by a phrase or a clause which, by transposition, might be made the subject of the verb; as, "_It is impossible_ _to please every one_."--_W. Allen's Gram._ "_It_ was requisite _that the papers should be_ sent."--_Ib._ The following example is censured by the Rev. Matt. Harrison: "_It is really curious, the course_ which balls will sometimes take."--_Abernethy's Lectures_. "This awkward expression," says the critic, "might have been avoided by saying, 'The course which balls will sometimes take is really curious.'"--_Harrison, on the English Language_, p. 147. If the construction is objectionable, it may, in this instance, be altered thus: "It is really curious, _to observe_ the course which balls will sometimes take!" So, it appears, we may avoid a _pleonasm_ by an _addition_. But he finds a worse example: saying, "Again, in an article _from_ the 'New Monthly,' No. 103, we meet with the same form of expression, _but with an aggravated aspect_:--'It is incredible, the number of apothecaries' shops, presenting themselves.' It would be quite as easy to say, 'The number of apothecaries' shops, presenting themselves, is incredible.' "--_Ib._, p. 147. This, too, may take an infinitive, "_to tell_," or "_to behold_;" for there is no more extravagance in doubting one's eyes, than in declaring one's own statement "incredible." But I am not sure that the original form is not allowable. In the following line, we seem to have something like it:

"It curled not Tweed alone, that breeze."--_Sir W. Scott_.

OBS. 18.--_Relative_ and _interrogative_ pronouns are placed at or near the beginning of their own clauses; and the learner must observe that, through all their cases, they almost invariably retain this situation in the sentence, and are found before their verbs even when the order of the construction would reverse this arrangement: as, "He _who_ preserves me, to _whom_ I owe my being, _whose_ I am, and _whom_ I serve, is eternal."--_Murray_, p. 159. "He _whom_ you seek."--_Lowth_.

"The good must merit God's peculiar care;
But _who_, but God, can tell us _who_ they are?"--_Pope_.

OBS. 19.--A _relative_ pronoun, being the representative of some antecedent word or phrase, derives from this relation its person, number, and gender, but not its case. By taking an other relation of case, it helps to form an other clause; and, by retaining the essential meaning of its antecedent, serves to connect this clause to that in which the antecedent is found. No relative, therefore, can ever be used in an independent simple sentence, or be made the subject of a subjunctive verb, or be put in apposition with any noun or pronoun; but, like other connectives, this pronoun belongs at the head of a clause in a compound sentence, and excludes conjunctions, except when two such clauses are to be joined together, as in the following example: "I should be glad, at least, of an easy companion, _who_ may tell me his thoughts, _and_ to _whom_ I may communicate mine."--_Goldsmith's Essays_, p. 196.

OBS. 20.--The two _special_ rules commonly given by the grammarians, for the construction of relatives, are not only unnecessary,[382] but faulty. I shall notice them only to show my reasons for discarding them. With whom they originated, it is difficult to say. Paul's Accidence has them, and if Dean Colet, the supposed writer, did not take them from some earlier author, they must have been first taught by _him_, about the year 1510; and it is certain that they have been copied into almost every grammar published since. The first one is faulty, because, "_When there cometh no nominative case between the relative and the verb, the relative shall_ [not always] _be the nominative case to the verb_;" as may be seen by the following examples: "Many are the works of human industry, _which_ to begin and finish are [say _is_] hardly granted to the same man."--_Dr. Johnson's Adv. to Dict._ "They aim at his removal; _which_ there is reason to fear they will effect."--"_Which_ to avoid, I cut them off."--_Shak., Hen. IV_. The second rule is faulty, because, "_When there cometh a nominative case between the relative and the verb, the relative shall_ [not always] _be such case as the verb will have after it_;" as may be seen by the following examples: "The author has not advanced any instances, _which_ he does not think _are_ pertinent."--_Murray's Gram._, i, 192. "_Which_ we have reason to think _was_ the case with the Greek and Latin."--_Ib._, 112. "Is this your son, _who_ ye say _was born_ blind?"--_John_, ix, 19. The case of the relative cannot be accurately determined by any rules of mere location. It may be nominative to a verb afar off, or it may be objective with a verb immediately following; as, "_Which_ I do not find that there ever _was_."--_Knight, on the Greek Alphabet_, p. 31. "And our chief reason for believing _which_ is that our ancestors did so before us."--_Philological Museum_, i, 641. Both these particular rules are useless, because the general rules for the cases, as given in chapter third above, are applicable to relatives, sufficient to all the purpose, and not liable to any exceptions.

OBS. 21.--In syntactical parsing, each word, in general, is to be resolved by some _one_ rule; but the parsing of a pronoun commonly requires _two_; one for its agreement with the noun or nouns for which it stands, and an other for its case. The rule of agreement will be one of the four which are embraced in this present chapter; and the rule for the case will be one of the seven which compose chapter third. So that the whole syntax of pronouns requires the application of eleven different rules, while that of nouns or verbs is embraced in six or seven, and that of any other part of speech, in one only. In respect to their cases, relatives and interrogatives admit of every construction common to nouns, or to the personal pronouns, except apposition. This is proved by the following examples:

1. Nominatives by Rule 2d: "I _who_ write;--Thou _who_ writest;--He _who_ writes;--The animal _which_ runs."--_Dr. Adam_. "He _that spareth_ his rod, hateth his son."--_Solomon_. "He _who_ does any thing _which_ he knows is wrong, ventures on dangerous ground."--"_What_ will become of us without religion?"--_Blair_. "Here I determined to wait the hand of death; _which_, I hope, when at last it comes, _will fall_ lightly upon me."--_Dr. Johnson_. "_What is_ sudden and unaccountable, _serves_ to confound."--_Crabb_. "They only are wise, _who are_ wise to salvation."--_Goodwin_.

2. Nominatives by Rule 6th: (i.e., words parsed as nominatives after the verbs, though mostly transposed:) "_Who_ art thou?"--_Bible_. "_What_ were we?"--_Ib._ "Do not tell them _who_ I am."--"Let him be _who_ he may, he is not the honest fellow _that_ he seemed."--"The general conduct of mankind is neither _what_ it was designed, nor _what_ it ought to be."

3. Nominatives absolute by Rule 8th: "There are certain bounds to imprudence, _which being transgressed_, there remains no place for repentance in the natural course of things."--_Bp. Butler_. "_Which being so_, it need not be any wonder, why I should."--_Walker's Particles, Pref._, p. xiv. "He offered an apology, _which not being admitted_, he became submissive."--_Murray's Key_, p. 202. This construction of the relative is a Latinism, and very seldom used by the best _English_ writers.

4. Possessives by Rule 4th: "The chief man of the island, _whose_ name was Publius."--_Acts_. "Despair, a cruel tyrant, from _whose_ prisons none can escape."--_Dr. Johnson_. "To contemplate on Him _whose_ yoke is easy and _whose_ burden is light."--_Steele_.

5. Objectives by Rule 5th: "Those _whom_ she persuaded."--_Dr. Johnson_. "The cloak _that_ I left at Troas."--_St. Paul_. "By the things _which_ he suffered."--_Id._ "A man _whom_ there is reason to suspect."--"_What_ are we to do?"--_Burke_. "Love refuses nothing _that_ love sends."--_Gurnall_. "The first thing, says he, is, to choose some maxim or point of morality; to inculcate _which_, is to be the design of his work."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 421. "_Whomsoever_ you please to appoint."--_Lowth_. "_Whatsover_ [sic--KTH] he doeth, shall prosper."--_Bible_. "_What_ we are afraid to do before men, we should be afraid to think before God."--_Sibs_. "Shall I hide from Abraham that thing _which_ I do?"--_Gen._, xviii, 32. "Shall I hide from Abraham _what_ I am going to do?"--"Call imperfection _what_ thou fanciest such."--_Pope_.

6. Objectives by Rule 6th: (i.e., pronouns parsed as objectives after neuter verbs, though they stand before them:) "He is not the man _that_ I took him to be."--"_Whom_ did you suppose me to be?"--"If the lad ever become _what_ you wish him to be."

7. Objectives by Rule 7th: "To _whom_ shall we go?"--_Bible_. "The laws by _which_ the world is governed, are general."--_Bp. Butler_. "_Whom_ he looks upon as his defender."--_Addison_. "That secret heaviness of heart _which_ unthinking men are subject to."--_Id._ "I cannot but think the loss of such talents as the man of _whom_ I am speaking was master of, a more melancholy instance."--_Steele_. "Grammar is the solid foundation upon _which_ all other science rests."--_Buchanan's Eng. Synt._, p. xx.

OBS. 22.--In familiar language, the relative of the objective case is frequently understood; as, "The man [_whom_] I trust."--_Cowper_. "Here is the letter [_which_] I received." So in the following sentences: "This is the man they hate. These are the goods they bought. Are these the Gods they worship? Is this the woman you saw?"--_Ash's Gram._, p. 96. This ellipsis seems allowable only in the familiar style. In grave writing, or deliberate discourse, it is much better to express this relative. The omission of it is often attended with some obscurity; as, "The next error [_that_] I shall mention [,] is a capital one."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 157. "It is little [_that_] we know of the divine perfections."--_Scougal_, p. 94. "The faith [_which_] we give to memory, may be thought, on a superficial view, to be resolvable into consciousness, as well as that [_which_] we give to the immediate impressions of sense."--_Campbell's Rhet._, p. 53. "We speak that [_which_] we do know, and testify that [_which_] we have seen."--_John_, iii, 11. The omission of a relative in the nominative case, is almost always inelegant; as, "This is the worst thing [_that_] could happen."--"There were several things [_which_] brought it upon me."--_Pilgrim's Progress_, p. 162. The latter ellipsis may occur after _but_ or _than_, and it is also sometimes allowed in poetry; as, [There is] "No person of reflection but [who] must be sensible, that an incident makes a stronger impression on an eye-witness, than when heard at second hand."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 257.

"In this 'tis God directs, in that 'tis man."--_Pope, on Man_.

"Abuse on all he lov'd, or lov'd him, spread."--_Id., to Arbuthnot_.

"There's nothing blackens like the ink of fools."--_Id., to Augustus_.

OBS. 23.--The _antecedent_ is sometimes suppressed, especially in poetry; as, "Who will, may be a judge."--_Churchill_. "How shall I curse [_him_ or _them_] whom God hath not cursed?"--_Numbers_, xxiii, 8. "There are, indeed, [some persons] who seem disposed to extend her authority much farther."--_Campbell's Philosophy of Rhet._, p. 187.

[He] "Who lives to nature, rarely can be poor;
[He] Who lives to fancy, never can be rich."--_Young_.

"Serious should be an author's final views;
[They] Who write for pure amusement, ne'er amuse."--_Id._

OBS. 24.--_Which_, as well as _who_, was formerly applied to persons; as, "Our _Father which_ art in heaven."--_Bible_. "Pray for _them which_ despitefully use you."--_Luke_, vi, 28. And, as to the former example here cited, some British critics, still preferring the archaism, have accused "The Americans" of "poor criticism," in that they "have changed _which_ into _who_, as being more consonant to the rules of Grammar." Falsely imagining, that _which_ and _who_, with the same antecedent, can be of different _genders_, they allege, that, "The use of the _neuter_ pronoun carried with it a certain vagueness and sublimity, not inappropriate in reminding us that our worship is addressed to a Being, infinite, and superior to all distinctions applicable to material objects."--_Men and Manners in America_: quoted and endorsed by the REV. MATT. HARRISON, in his treatise on the English Language, p. 191. This is all fancy; and, in my opinion, absurd. It is just like the religious prejudice which could discern "a singular propriety" in "the double superlative _most highest_."--_Lowth's Gram._, p. 28. But _which_ may still be applied to a young child, if sex and intelligence be disregarded; as, "The _child which_ died." Or even to adults, when they are spoken of without regard to a distinct personality or identity; as, "_Which_ of you will go?"--"Crabb knoweth not _which_ is _which_, himself or his parodist."--_Leigh Hunt_.

OBS. 25.--A proper name taken merely as a name, or an appellative taken in any sense not strictly personal, must be represented by _which_, and not by _who_; as, "Herod--_which_ is but an other name for cruelty."--"In every prescription of duty, God proposeth himself as a rewarder; _which_ he is only to those that please him."--_Dr. J. Owen_. _Which_ would perhaps be more proper than _whom_, in the following passage: "They did not destroy the _nations_, concerning _whom_ the Lord commanded them."--_Psalms_, cvi, 34. Dr. Blair has preferred it in the following instance: "My lion and my pillar are sufficiently interpreted by the mention of _Achilles_ and the _minister, which_ I join to them."--_Lectures_, p. 151. He meant, "_whose names I connect with theirs_;" and not, that he joined the _person_ of Achilles to a lion, or that of a minister to a pillar.

OBS. 26.--When two or more relative clauses pertain to the same antecedent, if they are connected by a conjunction, the same relative ought to be employed in each, agreeably to the doctrine of the seventh note below; but if no conjunction is expressed or understood between them, the pronouns ought rather to be different; as, "There are many things _that_ you can speak of, _which_ cannot be seen."--_R W. Green's Gram._, p. 11. This distinction is noticed in the fifth chapter of Etymology, Obs. 29th, on the Classes of Pronouns. Dr. Priestley says, "Whatever relative _be_ used, in a _series_ of clauses, relating to the same antecedent, the same ought to be used in them all. 'It is remarkable, that _Holland_, against _which_ the war was undertaken, _and that_, in the very beginning, was reduced to the brink of destruction, lost nothing.'--_Universal History_, Vol. 25, p. 117. It ought to have been, _and which in the very beginning_."--_Priestley's Gram._, p. 102. L. Murray, (as I have shown in the Introduction, Ch. x, ¶ 22,) assumes all this, without references; adding as a salvo the word "_generally_," which merely impairs the certainty of the rule:--"the same relative ought _generally_ to be used in them all."--_Octavo Gram._, p. 155. And, of _who_ and _that_, Cobbett says: "Either may do; but both _never_ ought to be relatives of the same antecedent in the same sentence."--_Gram._, ¶ 202. The inaccuracy of these rules is as great as that of the phraseology which is corrected under them. In the following sentence, the first relative only is restrictive, and consequently the other may be different: "These were the officers _that_ were called _Homotimoi_, and _who_ signalized themselves afterwards so gloriously upon all occasions."--_Rollin's Hist._, ii, 62. See also in _Rev._, x, 6th, a similar example without the conjunction.

OBS. 27.--In conversation, the possessive pronoun _your_ is sometimes used in a droll way, being shortened into _your_ in pronunciation, and nothing more being meant by it, than might be expressed by the article _an_ or _a_: as, "Rich honesty dwells, like _your_ miser, sir, in a poor house; as, _your_ pearl in _your_ foul oyster."--_Shakspeare_.

NOTES TO RULE X.

NOTE 1.--A pronoun should not be introduced in connexion with words that belong more properly to the antecedent, or to an other pronoun; as, "And then there is good use for _Pallas her_ glass."--_Bacon's Wisdom_, p. 22. Say--"for _Pallas's_ glass."

"My _banks they_ are furnish'd with bees,
Whose murmur invites one to sleep."--_Shenstone_, p. 284.

This last instance, however, is only an example of _pleonasm_; which is allowable and frequent in _animated discourse_, but inelegant in any other. Our grammarians have condemned it too positively. It occurs sundry times in the Bible; as, "Know ye that the LORD _he_ is God."--_Psalms_, c, 3.

NOTE II.--A change of number in the second person, or even a promiscuous use of _ye_ and _you_ in the same case and the same style, is inelegant, and ought to be avoided; as, "_You_ wept, and I for _thee_"--"Harry, said my lord, don't cry; I'll give _you_ something towards _thy_ loss."--_Swift's Poems_, p. 267. "_Ye_ sons of sloth, _you_ offspring of darkness, awake from your sleep."--_Brown's Metaphors_, p. 96. Our poets have very often adopted the former solecism, to accommodate their measure, or to avoid the harshness of the old verb in the second person singular: as, "_Thy_ heart is yet blameless, O fly while _you may_!"--_Queen's Wake_, p. 46.

"Oh! Peggy, Peggy, when _thou_ goest to brew,
Consider well what _you're_ about to do."--_King's Poems_, p. 594.

"As in that lov'd Athenian bower,
You _learn'd_ an all-commanding power,
Thy mimic soul, O nymph endear'd!
Can well recall what then it heard."--_Collins, Ode to Music._

NOTE III.--The relative _who_ is applied only to persons, and to animals or things personified; and _which_, to brute animals and inanimate things spoken of literally: as, "The _judge who_ presided;"--"The old _crab who_ advised the young one;"--"The _horse which_ ran away;"--"The _book which_ was given me."

NOTE IV.--Nouns of multitude, unless they express persons directly as such, should not be represented by the relative _who_: to say, "The _family whom_ I visited," would hardly be proper; _that_ would here be better. When such nouns are strictly of the neuter gender, _which_ may represent them; as, "The _committees which_ were appointed." But where the idea of rationality is predominant, _who_ or _whom_ seems not to be improper; as, "The conclusion of the Iliad is like the exit of a great man out of _company whom_ he has entertained magnificently."--_Cowper._ "A law is only the expression of the desire of a _multitude who_ have power to punish."--_Brown's Philosophy of the Mind._

NOTE V.--In general, the pronoun must so agree with its antecedent as to present the same idea, and never in such a manner as to confound the name with the thing signified, or any two things with each other. Examples: "_Jane_ is in the nominative case, because _it_ leads the sentence."--_Infant School Gram._, p. 30. Here _it_ represents _the word "Jane"_ and not _the person Jane._ "What mark or sign is put after _master_ to show that _he_ is in the possessive case? Spell _it_"--_Ib._, p. 32. Here _the word "master"_ is most absurdly confounded with _the man_; and that to accommodate grammar to a child's comprehension!

NOTE VI.--The relative _that_ may be applied either to persons or to things. In the following cases, it is more appropriate than _who, whom_, or _which_; and ought to be preferred, unless it be necessary to use a preposition before the relative:--(1.) After an adjective of the superlative degree, when the relative clause is restrictive;[383] as, "He was the _first that_ came."--"He was the _fittest_ person _that_ could then be found."--_Campbell's Rhet._, p. 422. "The Greeks were the _greatest_ reasoners _that_ ever appeared in the world."--BEATTIE: _Murray's Gram._, p. 127. (2.) After the adjective _same_, when the relative clause is restrictive; as, "He is the _same_ man _that_ you saw before."-- _Priestley's Gram._, p. 101; _Murray's_, 156; _Campbell's Rhet._, 422. (3.) After the antecedent _who_; as, "Who that is a sincere friend to it, can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?"--_Washington._ (4.) After two or more antecedents that demand a relative adapted both to persons and to things; as, "He spoke largely of the _men and things that_ he had seen."--"When some particular _person_ or _thing_ is spoken of, _that_ ought to be more distinctly marked."-- _Murray's Gram._, p. 51. (5.) After an unlimited antecedent which the relative clause is designed to restrict; as, "_Thoughts that_ breathe, and _words that_ burn."--_Gray_. "Music _that accords_ with the present tone of mind, is, on that account, doubly agreeable."--_Kames, El. of Crit._, ii, 311. "For Theocritus descends sometimes into _ideas that_ are gross and mean."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 393. (6.) After any antecedent introduced by the expletive _it_; as, "_It_ is _you that_ suffer."--"It was I, and not he, _that_ did it."--_Churchill's Gram._, p. 142. "It was not he[384] _that_ they were so angry with."--_Murray's Exercises_, R. 17. "_It_ was not _Gavius_ alone _that_ Verres meant to insult."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 325. (7.) And, in general, wherever the propriety of _who_ or _which_ is doubtful; as, "The little _child that_ was placed in the midst."

NOTE VII.--When two or more relative clauses connected by a conjunction have a similar dependence in respect to the antecedent, the same pronoun must be employed in each; as, "O thou, _who_ art, and _who_ wast, and _who_ art to come!"--"And they shall spread them before the sun, and the moon, and all the host of heaven, _whom_ they have loved, and _whom_ they have served, and after _whom_ they have walked, and _whom_ they have sought, and _whom_ they have worshiped."--_Jer._, viii, 2. NOTE VIII.--The relative, and the preposition governing it, should not be omitted, when they are necessary to the sense intended, or to a proper connexion of the parts of the sentence; as, "He is still in the situation you saw him." Better thus: "He is still in the situation in _which_ you saw him."

NOTE IX.--After certain nouns, of time, place, manner, or cause, the conjunctive adverbs _when, where, whither, whence, how_, and _why_, are a sort of special relatives; but no such adverb should be used where a preposition and a relative pronoun would better express the relation of the terms: as, "A cause _where_ justice is so much concerned." Say, "A cause _in which_." See Etymology, Obs. 6th, 7th, and 8th, on the Classes of Adverbs.

NOTE X.--Where a pronoun or a pronominal adjective will not express the meaning clearly, the noun must be repeated, or inserted in stead of it: as, "We see the beautiful variety of colour in the rainbow, and are led to consider the cause of _it_." Say,--"the cause of _that variety_;" because the _it_ may mean _the variety, the colour_, or _the rainbow_.

NOTE XI.--To prevent ambiguity or obscurity, the relative should, in general, be placed as near as possible to the antecedent. The following sentence is therefore faulty: "He is like a beast of prey, that is void of compassion." Better thus: "He that is void of compassion, is like a beast of prey."

NOTE XII.--The pronoun _what_ should never be used in stead of the conjunction _that_; as, "Think no man so perfect but _what_ he may err." This is a vulgar fault. Say,--"but _that_ he may err."

NOTE XIII.--A pronoun should never be used to represent an _adjective_,--except the pronominal adjectives, and others taken substantively; because a pronoun can neither express a concrete quality as such, nor convert it properly into an abstract: as, "Be _attentive_; without _which_ you will learn nothing." Better thus: "Be attentive; _for without attention_ you will learn nothing."

NOTE XIV.--Though the relative which may in some instances stand for a phrase or a sentence, it is seldom, if ever, a fit representative of an indicative assertion; as, "The man opposed me, _which_ was anticipated."-- _Nixon's Parser_, p. 127. Say,--"_but his opposition_ was anticipated." Or: "The man opposed me, _as_ was anticipated." Or:--"_as I expected he would_." Again: "The captain disobeys orders, _which_ is punished."--_Ib._, p. 128. This is an other factitious sentence, formed after the same model, and too erroneous for correction: none but a conceited grammatist could ever have framed such a construction.

NOTE XV.--The possessive pronouns, _my, thy, his, her, its_, &c., should be inserted or repeated as often as the sense or construction of the sentence requires them; their omission, like that of the articles, can scarcely in any instance constitute a proper ellipsis: as, "Of Princeton and vicinity."--Say, "Of Princeton and _its_ vicinity." "The man and wife."--Say, "The man and _his_ wife." "Many verbs vary both their signification and construction."--_Adam's Gram._, p. 170; _Gould's_, 171. Say,--"and _their_ construction."

NOTE XVI.--In the correcting of any discord between the antecedent and its pronoun, if the latter for any sufficient reason is most proper as it stands, the former must be changed to accord with it: as, "Let us discuss what relates to _each particular_ in _their_ order:--_its_ order."-- _Priestley's Gram._, p. 193. Better thus: "Let us discuss what relates to _the several particulars_, in _their_ order." For the order of things implies plurality.

IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.

FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE X. UNDER THE RULE ITSELF.--OF AGREEMENT

"The subject is to be joined with his predicate."--BP. WILKINS: _Lowth's Gram._, p. 42.

[FORMULE.--Not proper, because the pronoun _his_ is of the masculine gender, and does not correctly represent its antecedent noun _subject_, which is of the third person, singular, _neuter_. But, according to Rule 10th, "A pronoun must agree with its antecedent, or the noun or pronoun which it represents, in person, number, and gender." Therefore, _his_ should be _its_; thus, "The subject is to be joined with _its_ predicate."]

"Every one must judge of their own feelings."--_Byron's Letters_. "Every one in the family should know their duty."--_Wm. Penn_. "To introduce its possessor into 'that way in which it should go.'"--_Infant School Gram._, p. v. "Do not they say, every true believer has the Spirit of God in them?"--_Barclay's Works_, iii, 388. "There is none in their natural state righteous, no not one."--_Wood's Dict. of Bible_, ii, 129. "If ye were of the world, the world would love his own."--_John_, xv, 19. "His form had not yet lost all her original brightness."--_Milton_. "No one will answer as if I were their friend or companion."--_Steele_, Spect., No. 534. "But in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves."-- _Philippians_, ii, 3. "And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour."--_Zechariah_, viii, 17. "For every tree is known by his own fruit."--_Luke_, vi, 44. "But she fell to laughing, like one out of their right mind."--_Castle Rackrent_, p. 51. "Now these systems, so far from having any tendency to make men better, have a manifest tendency to make him worse."--_Wayland's Moral Science_, p. 128. "And nobody else would make that city their refuge any more."--_Josephus's Life_, p. 158. "What is quantity, as it respects syllables or words? It is that time which is occupied in pronouncing it."--_Bradley's Gram._, p. 108. "In such expressions the adjective so much resembles an adverb in its meaning, that they are usually parsed as such."--_Bullions, E. Gram._, p. 103. "The tongue is like a race-horse; which runs the faster the less weight it carries."--ADDISON: _Joh. Dict.; Murray's Key_, Rule 8. "As two thoughtless boys were trying to see which could lift the greatest weight with their jaws, one of them had several of his firm-set teeth wrenched from their sockets."--_Newspaper_. "Everybody nowadays publishes memoirs; everybody has recollections which they think worthy of recording."--_Duchess D'Abrantes_, p. 25. "Every body trembled for themselves or their friends."--_Goldsmith's Greece_, i, 171.

"A steed comes at morning: no rider is there;
But its bridle is red with the sign of despair."--_Campbell_.

UNDER NOTE I.--PRONOUNS WRONG OR NEEDLESS.

"Charles loves to study; but John, alas! he is very idle."--_Merchant's School Gram._, p. 22. "Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone?"--_Matt._, vii, 9. "Who, in stead of going about doing good, they are perpetually intent upon doing mischief."-- _Tillotson_. "Whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pontius Pilate."--_Acts_, iii, 13. "Whom, when they had washed, they laid her in an upper chamber."--_Acts_, ix, 37. "Then Manasseh knew that the Lord he was God."--_2 Chron._, xxxiii, 13. "Whatever a man conceives clearly, he may, if he will be at the trouble, put it into distinct propositions, and express it clearly to others."--_Murray's Gram._, 8vo, p. 293. "But to that point of time which he has chosen, the painter being entirely confined, he cannot exhibit various stages of the same action."--_Blair's Rhet._, p. 52. "It is without any proof at all what he subjoins."--_Barclay's Works_, i, 301. "George Fox his Testimony concerning Robert Barclay."--_Ib._, i, 111. "According to the author of the Postscript his advice."--_Ib._, iii, 263. "These things seem as ugly to the Eye of their Meditations, as those Æthiopians pictur'd in Nemesis her Pitcher."--_Bacon's Wisdom of the Ancients_, p. 49. "Moreover, there is always a twofold Condition propounded with Sphynx her Ænigma's."--_Ib._, p. 73. "Whoever believeth not therein, they shall perish."--_Sale's Koran_, p. 20. "When, at Sestius his entreaty, I had been at his house."--_Walker's Particles_, p. 59.

"There high on Sipylus his shaggy brow,
She stands, her own sad monument of woe."
--_Pope's Homer_, B. xxiv, l. 777.

UNDER NOTE II.--CHANGE OF NUMBER.

"So will I send upon you famine, and evil beasts, and they shall bereave thee."--_Ezekiel_, v, 17. "Why do you plead so much for it? why do ye preach it up?"--_Barclay's Works_, i, 180. "Since thou hast decreed that I shall bear man, your darling."--_Edward's First Lesson in Gram._, p. 106. "You have my book and I have thine; i.e. thy book."--_Chandler's Gram._, 1821, p. 22. "Neither art thou such a one as to be ignorant of what you are."--_Bullions, Lat. Gram._, p. 70. "Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the Lord, and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you."--_Jeremiah_, iii, 12. "The Almighty, unwilling to cut thee off in the fullness of iniquity, has sent me to give you warning."--_Art of Thinking_, p. 278. "Wert thou born only for pleasure? were you never to do any thing?"--_Collier's Antoninus_, p. 63. "Thou shalt be required to go to God, to die, and give up your account."--BARNES'S NOTES: _on Luke_, xii, 20. "And canst thou expect to behold the resplendent glory of the Creator? would not such a sight annihilate you?"--_Milton_. "If the prophet had commanded thee to do some great thing, would you have refused?"--_Common School Journal_, i, 80. "Art thou a penitent? Evince your sincerity by bringing forth fruits meet for repentance."--_Christian's Vade-Mecum_, p. 117. "I will call thee my dear son: I remember all your tenderness."-- _Classic Tales_, p. 8. "So do thou, my son: open your ears, and your eyes."--_Wright's Athens_, p. 33. "I promise you, this was enough to discourage thee."--_Pilgrim's Progress_, p. 446. "Ere you remark an other's sin, Bid thy own conscience look within."--_Gay_. "Permit that I share in thy woe, The privilege can you refuse?"--_Perfect's Poems_, p. 6. "Ah! Strephon, how can you despise Her who without thy pity dies?"--_Swift's Poems_, p. 340.

"Thy verses, friend, are Kidderminster stuff,
And I must own, you've measur'd out enough."--_Shenstone._

"This day, dear Bee, is thy nativity;
Had Fate a luckier one, she'd give it ye."--_Swift._

UNDER NOTE III.--WHO AND WHICH.