Page:The grammar of English grammars.djvu/446



OBS. 15.--If our prepositions were to be divided into classes, the most useful distinction would be, to divide them into Single and Double. The distinction which some writers make, who divide them into "Separable and Inseparable," is of no use at all in parsing, because the latter are mere syllables; and the idea of S. R. Hall, who divides them into "Possessive and Relative," is positively absurd; for he can show us only one of the former kind, and that one, (the word of,) is not always such. A ''Double Preposition'', if such a thing is admissible, is one that consists of two words which in syntactical parsing must be taken together, because they jointly express the relation between two other terms; as, "The waters were dried up from off the earth."--Gen., viii, 13. "The clergy kept this charge from off us."--Leslie, on Tithes, p. 221. "Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble, is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint."--Prov., xxv, 19. "The beam out of the timber shall answer it."--Hab., ii, 11. Off and out are most commonly adverbs, but neither of them can be called an adverb here.

OBS. 16.--Again, if according to or as to is a preposition, then is according or as a preposition also, although it does not of itself govern the objective case. As, thus used, is called a conjunction by some, an adverb by others. Dr. Webster considers according to be always a participle, and expressly says, "It is never a preposition."--''Octavo Dict.'' The following is an instance in which, if it is not a preposition, it is a participle: "This is a construction not according to the rules of grammar."--Murray's Gram., Vol. ii, p. 22. But according to and contrary to are expressed in Latin and Greek by single prepositions; and if to alone is the preposition in English, then both according and contrary must, in many instances, be adverbs. Example: "For dost thou sit as judging me according to the law, and contrary to law command me to be smitten?" (See the Greek of Acts, xxiii, 3.) Contrary, though literally an adjective, is often made either an adverb, or a part of a complex preposition, unless the grammarians are generally in error respecting it: as, "Ha dares not act contrary to his instructions."-- Murray's Key, p. 179.

OBS. 17.--J. W. Wright, with some appearance of analogy on his side, but none of usage, everywhere adds ly to the questionable word according; as, "We are usually estimated accordingly to our company."-- Philosophical Gram., p. 127. "Accordingly to the forms in which they are employed."--Ib., p. 137. "Accordingly to the above principles, the adjective ACCORDING (or agreeable) is frequently, but improperly, substituted for the adverb ACCORDINGLY (or agreeably.)"--Ib., p. 145. The word contrary he does not notice; but, on the same principle, he would doubtless say, "He dares not act contrarily to his instructions." We say indeed, "He acted agreeably to his instructions;"--and not, "He acted agreeable to his instructions." It must also be admitted, that the adverbs accordingly and contrarily are both of them good English words. If these were adopted, where the character of according and contrary is disputable, there would indeed be no longer any occasion to call these latter either adverbs or prepositions. But the fact is, that ''no good writers have yet preferred them'', in such phrases; and the adverbial ending ly gives an additional syllable to a word that seems already quite too long.

OBS. 18.--Instead is reckoned an adverb by some, a preposition by others; and a few write instead-of with a needless hyphen. The best way of settling the grammatical question respecting this term, is, to write the noun stead as a separate word, governed by in. Bating the respect that is due to anomalous usage, there would be more propriety in compounding in quest of, in lieu of, and many similar phrases. For stead is not always followed by of, nor always preceded by in, nor always made part of a compound. We say, in our stead, in your stead, in their stead, &c.; but lieu, which has the same meaning as stead, is much more limited in construction. Examples: "In the stead of sinners, He, a divine and human person, suffered."--Barnes's Notes. "Christ suffered in the place and stead of sinners."--Ib. "For, in its primary sense, is pro, loco alterius, in the stead or place of another."--Lowth's Gram., p. 65.

"If it may stand him more in stead to lie." --Milt., P. L., B. i, l. 473.

"But here thy sword can do thee little stead." --Id., Comus, l. 611.

OBS. 19.--From forth and from out are two poetical phrases, apparently synonymous, in which there is a fanciful transposition of the terms, and perhaps a change of forth and out from adverbs to prepositions. Each phrase is equivalent in meaning to out of or ''out from. Forth'', under other circumstances, is never a preposition; though out, perhaps, may be. We speak as familiarly of going out doors, as of going up stairs, or down cellar. Hence from out may be parsed as a complex preposition, though the other phrase should seem to be a mere example of hyperbaton:

"I saw from out the wave her structures rise."--Byron.

"Peeping from forth their alleys green."--Collins.

OBS. 20.--"Out of and as to," says one grammarian, "are properly prepositions, although they are double words. They may be called compound prepositions."--Cooper's Gram., p. 103. I have called the complex prepositions double rather than compound, because several of the single prepositions are compound words; as, ''into, notwithstanding, overthwart, throughout, upon, within, without''. And even some of these may follow the preposition from; as, "If he shall have removed from within the limits of this state." But in and to, up and on, with and in, are not always compounded when they come together, because the sense may positively demand that the former be taken as an adverb, and the latter only as a preposition: as, "I will come in to him, and will sup with him."--Rev., iii, 20. "A statue of Venus was set up on Mount Calvary."--M'Ilvaine's Lectures, p. 332. "The troubles which we meet with in the world."--Blair. And even two prepositions may be brought together without union or coalescence; because the object of the first one may be expressed or understood before it: as, "The man whom you spoke ''with