Page:The grammar of English grammars.djvu/679

 there be no strife, I pray thee, between me and thee, and between my herdmen and thy herdmen; for we are brethren."—Gen., xiii, 8.  "Ah! if she lend not arms as well as rules. What can she more than tell us we are fools?"—Pope.

EXCEPTION FIRST.

The conjunction that sometimes serves merely to introduce a sentence which is made the subject or the object of a finite verb;[433] as, "That mind is not matter, is certain." "That you have wronged me, doth appear in this."—Shak.

"That time is mine, O Mead! to thee, I owe."—Young.

EXCEPTION SECOND.

When two corresponding conjunctions occur, in their usual order, the former should generally be parsed as referring to the latter, which is more properly the connecting word; as, "Neither sun nor stars in many days appeared."—Acts, xxvii, 20. "Whether that evidence has been afforded [or not,] is a matter of investigation."—Keith's Evidences, p. 18.

EXCEPTION THIRD. Either, corresponding to or, and neither, corresponding to nor or not, are sometimes transposed, so as to repeat the disjunction or negation at the end of the sentence; as, "Where then was their capacity of standing, or his either?"—Barclay's Works, iii, 359. "It is not dangerous neither."—Bolingbroke, on Hist., p. 135. "He is very tall, but not too tall neither."—Spect., No. 475.

OBSERVATIONS ON RULE XXII.

OBS. 1.—Conjunctions that connect particular words, generally join similar parts of speech in a common dependence on some other term. Hence, if the words connected be such as have cases, they will of course be in the same case; as, "For me and thee"—Matt., xvii, 27. "Honour thy father and thy mother."—Ib., xviii, 19. Here the latter noun or pronoun is connected by and to the former, and governed by the same preposition or verb. Conjunctions themselves have no government, unless the questionable phrase "than whom" may be reckoned an exception. See Obs. 17th below, and others that follow it.

OBS. 2.—Those conjunctions which connect sentences or clauses, commonly unite one sentence or clause to an other, either as an additional assertion, or as a condition, a cause, or an end, of what is asserted. The conjunction is placed between the terms which it connects, except there is a transposition, and then it stands before the dependent term, and consequently at the beginning of the whole sentence: as, "He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second."—Heb., x, 9. "That he may establish the second, he taketh away the first."

OBS. 3.—The term that follows a conjunction, is in some instances a phrase of several words, yet not therefore a whole clause or member, unless we suppose it elliptical, and supply what will make it such: as, "And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, AS to the Lord, AND not unto men"—Col., iii, 23. If we say, this means, "as doing it to the Lord, and not as doing it unto men," the terms are still mere phrases; but if we say, the sense is, "as if ye did it to the Lord, and not as if ye did it unto men," they are clauses, or sentences. Churchill says, "The office of the conjunction is, to connect one word with an other, or one phrase with an other."—New Gram., p. 152. But he uses the term phrase in a more extended sense than I suppose it will strictly bear: he means by it, a clause, or member; that is, a sentence which forms a part of a greater sentence.

OBS. 4.—What is the office of this part of speech, according to Lennie, Bullions, Brace, Hart, Hiley, Smith, M'Culloch, Webster, Wells, and others, who say that it "joins words and sentences together," (see Errors on p. 434 of this work,) it is scarcely possible to conceive. If they imagine it to connect "words" on the one side, to "sentences" on the other; this is plainly absurd, and contrary to facts. If they suppose it to join sentence to sentence, by merely connecting word to word, in a joint relation; this also is absurd, and self-contradictory. Again, if they mean, that the conjunction sometimes connects word with word, and sometimes, sentence with sentence; this sense they have not expressed, but have severally puzzled their readers by an ungrammatical use of the word "and." One of the best among them says, "In the sentence, 'He and I must go,' the word and unites two sentences, and thus avoids an unnecessary repetition; thus instead of saying, 'He must go,' 'I must go,' we connect the words He, I, as the same thing is affirmed of both, namely, must go."—Hiley's Gram., p. 53. Here is the incongruous suggestion, that by connecting words only, the conjunction in fact connects sentences; and the stranger blunder concerning those words, that "the same thing is affirmed of both, namely, [that they] must go." Whereas it is plain, that nothing is affirmed of either: for "He and I must go," only affirms of him and me, that "we must