confined to the language of common life. Examples might be cited from our most approved writers:

"Fetch me that flower: the herb I show'd thee once."
SHAKSPEARE.

"And if I give thee honour due,

Mirth, admit me of thy crew."

MILTON.

This two-fold method of expressing the Dative, by prepositive particles or by position, is peculiarly advantageous. It gives always a choice with regard to the harmony, and often directs the emphasis to the most effective part of the sentence.

The analysis of sentences, so as to detect latent deviation from grammatical propriety, requires considerable critical acumen. General rules are difficult to form, and collected examples are easily forgotten. The study of the pronouns will be found particularly useful, by comparing their cases with the various states of the noun, which are less obvious on account of their want of declensions. We shall here give an instance of a very general error in syntax which may be so corrected: 'I heard of my ship being lost.' To discover in what case the word ship is to be understood in the sentence, let us change the noun to one of the masculine gender thus, 'I heard of my brother being lost.'. If the word brother were supposed to be in the nominative, the assertion would be equivalent to 'I heard of he being lost,' which is obviously wrong. I heard of him being lost,' would be equally incorrect; because the phrase 'being lost' would be thrown loose in the sentence, and might be connected with the pronoun I; as if it were said, 'I, being lost, heard of him,'

which would be absurd. The meaning of the word lost would prevent this construction; but suppose it were said, 'I heard of him being married,' the transposition I, being married, heard of him,' would show nothing of impropriety, but the speaker's meaning would be at least doubtful. The genitive only remains, and should, therefore, be written in all similar phrases: 'I heard of his being lost,' 'I heard of my brother's being lost,' and, I heard of the ship's being lost.' It was not simply of the ship, or of my brother that I heard, but of the circumstance of their being lost.

The Personal Pronouns form several compounds with the word self. The substantive SELF, with a slight variation of orthography, is common to all the Gothic languages. It represents, emphatically, the essence,the very being of which we speak. The French même (formerly mesme) takes a similar part in that language, and in some of its usages is translated by even, or same, equivalent to our tautological adjective selfsame, — the Latin ipse. Were we to hazard a conjecture, we should say that self (as well as its synonymes in other languages) has arisen from the duplication of some ancient form of the personal pronouns; but, be that as it may, it coalesces easily with this class of words. MySELF, THYSELF or YOURSELF, HIMSELF, HERSELF, ITself; OurselVES, YOURSELVES, and THEMSELVES, are the my, thy, &c. particular being, as distinguished from every other. These compounds are only used in the oblique cases; for, when they are required to be in the nominative, they are preceded by I, we, &c. as, 'I myself,' 'we ourselves,' &c. did so and so. Some

times the preceding pronoun is suppressed, but in such cases it is understood. In old English, self was always a separate word, and was both singular and plural. Sir Thomas More, and others since his time, wrote my self, thy self; our self, them self, &c. A remnant of this practice still remains: for OURSELF (not ourselves) appears in the addresses of kings.

It has been observed that the pronouns, preceding the noun self, are generally in the genitive; and the apparent exceptions of himself and themselves have puzzled the grammarians, from the time of Dr. Wallis until the present day. Nevertheless this change, from the genitive to the accusative, appears to us to have proceeded from design, and not, as is usually supposed, from accidental corruption. Her is an accusative as well as a genitive, and it should be noticed that we write itself not its-self: in fact, the possessive, its, is of very modern introduction into the language. The anomaly then, if it be one, runs through all the pronouns of the third person; himself, herself, itself and themselves.

71

CHAPTER X.

OF DEMONSTRATIVES, RELATIVES, AND OTHER
SPECIES OF PRONOUNS.

We have said that Pronouns are Adjectives or qualities, but this requires explanation. It were better to compare them to numerals, of which we can speak without regard to the things numbered. All Adjectives, when viewed abstractedly, may be considered as Substantives; but they are of different species, and therefore are not always comparable with one another. White has no relation to large. Colour and magnitude are incommensurable. It is otherwise with Numbers and with Pronouns. Three and twelve are qualities of any system of bodies that can be numbered; but, even in the abstract, they are capable of comparison, -the one is four times the other. In a similar manner, I and thou are not only, each, applicable to any person whatever; but they also have a relation between themselves,- of a speaker and a person spoken to. Neither numbers nor pronouns constitute complete conceptions until they are conjoined with material objects. They are shapeless spirits, ready to enter into any body whose form we wish them to assume.

The (the Article) This, That and Yon, are termed DEMONSTRATIVES, and by some Grammarians, DEFINITIVES, because they point out and limit the extent of general terms. The Saxon Articles and Pronouns

were declined with gender, number and case; and besides, on account of the different dialects, they appear, in the few writings that are preserved, under various orthographies, or synonymes. From those several forms have arisen certain derivatives of the definitive article which have restricted applications.

THIS and THAT with their plurals THESE and THOSE are more definite than THE, being the species of which The is the genus. This and These designate what are present either in time or in place. That and Those are applied to such objects as are further off. 'This house,' and These houses' are at hand; but That house' and 'Those houses' are to be pointed to, so as they may be observed. YoN (which is both singular and plural) is what we can just descry, and consequently refers to very distant objects. The synonyme Yond is now out of use, but Yonder is still preserved by the poets, although the pronominal is thereby apt to be confounded with the adverbial usage. Beyond is both a preposition and an adverb.

This and that (as well as their plurals) are used, with nice discrimination, in the construction of sentences: this referring to the noun, or to the phrase, last spoken, and that to the first mentioned: thus,

"Self-love, the spring of motion, acts the soul;
Reason's comparing balance rules the whole;
Man, but for that, no action could attend,
And, but for this, were active to no end."

РОРЕ.

"Some place the bliss in action, some in ease;
Those call it pleasure, and contentment these."

Ibid.