Page:The grammar of English grammars.djvu/646

 thing more than an index of the mood. But the critic ought to have told us how he would make these corrections. For in neither case does the participle alone appear to be a fit substitute for the infinitive, either with or without the to; and the latter text will scarcely bear the participle at all, unless we change the former verb; as, "Hast thou, spirit, done pointing the tempest?" The true meaning of the other example seems somewhat uncertain. The Vulgate has it, "Laboravi sustinens," "I have laboured bearing them;" the French Bible, "Je suis las de les souffrir," "I am tired of bearing them;" the Septuagint, "[Greek: Ouketi anæso tas hamartias humon,]" "I will no more forgive your sins."

OBS. 17.--In the following text, the infinitive is used improperly, nor would the participle in its stead make pure English: "I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices or thy burnt-offerings, to have been continually before me."--Ps. 1. 8. According to the French version, "to have been" should be "which are;" but the Septuagint and the Vulgate take the preceding noun for the nominative, thus: "I will not reprove thee for thy sacrifices, but thy burnt-offerings are continually before me."

OBS. 18.--As the preposition to before the infinitive shows the latter to be "that towards which the preceding verb is directed," verbs of desisting, omitting, preventing, and avoiding, are generally found to take the participle after them, and not the infinitive; because, in such instances, the direction of effort seems not to be so properly to, or towards, as from the action.[419] Where the preposition from is inserted, (as it most commonly is, after some of these verbs.) there is no irregularity in the construction of the participle; but where the participle immediately follows the verb, it is perhaps questionable whether it ought to be considered the object of the verb, or a mere participle relating to the nominative which precedes. If we suppose the latter, the participle may be parsed by the common rule; if the former, it must be referred to the third exception above. For example:

1. After verbs of DESISTING; as, "The Cryer used to proclaim, DIXERUNT, i. e. They have done speaking."--Harris's Hermes, p. 132. "A friend is advised to put off making love to Lalage."--Philological Museum, i, 446. "He forbore doing so, on the ground of expediency."--The Friend, iv, 35. "And yet architects never give over attempting to reconcile these two incompatibles."--''Kames, El. of Crit.'', ii, 338. "Never to give over seeking and praying for it."--N. Y. Observer. "Do not leave off seeking."--President Edwards. "Then Satan hath done flattering and comforting."--Baxter. "The princes refrained talking."--Job, xxix, 9. "Principes cessabant loqui."--Vulgate. Here it would be better to say, "The princes refrained from talking." But Murray says, "From seems to be superfluous after forbear: as, 'He could not forbear from appointing the pope,' &c."--Octavo Gram., p. 203. But "forbear to appoint" would be a better correction; for this verb is often followed by the infinitive; as, "Forbear to insinuate."--West's Letters, p. 62. "And he forbare to go forth."--1 Sam., xxiii, 13. The reader will observe, that, "never to give over" or "not to leave off," is in fact the same thing as to continue; and I have shown by the analogy of other languages, that after verbs of continuing the participle is not an object of government; though possibly it may be so, in these instances, which are somewhat different. 2. After verbs of OMITTING; as, "He omits giving an account of them."--Tooke's Diversions of Purley, i, 251. I question the propriety of this construction; and yet, "omits to give" seems still more objectionable. Better, "He omits all account of them." Or, "He neglects to give, or forbears to give, any account of them." L. Murray twice speaks of apologizing, "for the use he has made of his predecessors' labours, and for omitting to insert their names."--Octavo Gram., Pref., p. vii; and Note, p. 73. The phrase, "omitting to insert," appears to me a downright solecism; and the pronoun their is ambiguous, because there are well-known names both for the men and for their labours, and he ought not to have omitted either species wholly, as he did. "Yet they absolutely refuse doing so, one with another."--Harris's Hermes, p. 264. Better, "refuse to do so." "I had as repeatedly declined going."--Leigh Hunt's Byron, p. 15.

3. After verbs of PREVENTING; as, "Our sex are happily prevented from engaging in these turbulent scenes."--West's Letters to a Lady, p. 74. "To prevent our frail natures from deviating into bye paths [write by-paths] of error."--Ib., p. 100. "Prudence, prevents our speaking or acting improperly."--Blair's Rhet., p. 99; Murray's Gram., p. 303; Jamieson's Rhet., p. 72. This construction, though very common, is palpably wrong: because its most natural interpretation is, "Prudence improperly prevents our speech or action." These critics ought to have known enough to say, "Prudence prevents us from speaking or acting improperly." "This, however, doth not hinder pronunciation to borrow from singing."--''Kames, El. of Crit.'', ii, 70. Here the infinitive is used, merely because it does not sound well to say, "from borrowing from singing;" but the expression might very well be changed thus, "from being indebted to singing." "'This by no means hinders the book to be a useful one.'--Geddes. It should be, from being."--Churchill's Gram., p. 318.

4. After verbs of AVOIDING: as, "He might have avoided treating of the origin of ideas."--Tooke's Diversions, i, 28. "We may avoid talking nonsense on these subjects."--Campbell's Rhet., p. 281. "But carefully avoid being at any time ostentatious and affected."--Blair's Rhet.,