Page:The grammar of English grammars.djvu/729

 ously different in kind from the other notes; but they all are such as could not well have been placed in any of the earlier chapters of the book. The General Rule of Syntax, since it is not a canon to be used in parsing, but one that is to be applied only in the correcting of false syntax, might seem perhaps to belong rather to this order of notes; but I have chosen to treat it with some peculiar distinction, because it is not only more comprehensive than any other rule or note, but is in one respect more important; it is the rule which will be cited for the correction of the greatest number and variety of errors. Being designed to meet every possible form of inaccuracy in the mere construction of sentences,—or, at least, every corrigible solecism by which any principle of syntax can be violated,—it necessarily includes almost all the other rules and notes. It is too broad to convey very definite instruction, and therefore ought not in general to be applied where a more particular rule or note is clearly applicable. A few examples, not properly fitting under any other head, will serve to show its use and application: such examples are given, in great abundance, in the false syntax below. If, in some of the instances selected, this rule is applied to faults that might as well have been corrected by some other, the choice, in such cases, is deemed of little or no importance.

OBS. 4.—The imperfection of ancient writing, especially in regard to division and punctuation, has left the syntactical relation of words, and also the sense of passages, in no few instances, uncertain; and has consequently made, where the text has been thought worthy of it, an abundance of difficult work for translators, critics, and commentators. Rules of grammar, now made and observed, as they ought to be, may free the compositions of this, or a future age, from similar embarrassments; and it is both just and useful, to test our authors by them, criticising or correcting their known blunders according to the present rules of accurate writing. But the readers and expounders of what has come to us from remote time, can be rightly guided only by such principles and facts as have the stamp of creditable antiquity. Hence there are, undoubtedly, in books, some errors and defects which have outlived the time in which, and the authority b which, they might have been corrected. As we have no right to make a man say that which he himself never said or intended to say, so we have in fact none to fix a positive meaning upon his language, without knowing for a certainty what he meant by it. Reason, or good sense, which, as I have suggested, is the foundation of grammar and of all good writing, is indeed a perpetual as well as a universal principle; but, since the exercises of our reason must, from the very nature of the faculty, be limited to what we know and understand, we are not competent to the positive correction, or to the sure translation, of what is obscure and disputable in the standard books of antiquity.

OBS. 5.—Let me cite an example: "For all this I considered in my heart, even to declare all this, that the righteous, and the wise, and their works, are in the hand of God: no man knoweth either love or hatred by all that is before them. All things come alike to all."— Ecclesiastes, ix, 1. Here is, doubtless, one error which any English scholar may point out or correct. The pronoun "them" should be him, because its intended antecedent appears to be "man," and not "the righteous and the wise," going before. But are there not other faults in the version? The common French Bible, in this place, has the following import: "Surely I have applied my heart to all that, and to unfold all this; to wit, that the righteous and the wise, and their actions, are in the hand of God and love and hatred; and that men know nothing of all that which is before them. All happens equally to all." The Latin Vulgate gives this sense: "All these things have I considered in my heart, that I might understand them accurately: the righteous and the wise, and their works, are in the hand of God; and yet man doth not know, whether by love or by hatred lie may be worthy: but all things in the future are kept uncertain, so that all may happen alike to the righteous man and to the wicked." In the Greek of the Septuagint, the introductory members of this passage are left at the end of the preceding chapter, and are literally thus: "that all this I received into my heart, and my heart understood all this." The rest, commencing a new chapter, is as follows: "For the righteous and the wise and their works are in the hand of God, and indeed both love and hatred man knoweth not: all things before their face are vanity to all." Now, which of these several readings is the nearest to what Solomon meant by the original text, or which is the farthest from it, and therefore the most faulty, I leave it to men more learned than myself to decide; but, certainly, there is no inspired authority in any of them, but in so far as they convey the sense which he really intended. And if his meaning had not been, by some imperfection in the oldest expression we have of it, obscured and partly lost, there could be neither cause nor excuse for these discrepancies. I say this with no willingness to depreciate the general authority of the Holy Scriptures, which are for the most part clear in their import, and very ably translated into English, as well as into other languages.

IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION.

FALSE SYNTAX UNDER THE GENERAL RULE.

LESSON I.—ARTICLES.

(1.) "An article is a part of speech placed before nouns."—Comly's Gram., p. 11.

[FORMULE.—Not proper, because the article an is here inconsistent with the term "part of speech;" for the text declares one thing of a kind to be the whole kind. But, according to the General Rule of Syntax, "In the formation of sentences, the consistency and adaptation of all the words should be carefully observed; and a regular, clear, and correspondent construction should be preserved throughout." The sentence may be corrected