by the water's edge," is a passive verb, and that the water's edge, as the agent, causes her "passion, suffering, or receiving of the action," is false and ridiculous, for she

placed

herself there.

"We

are seated

on our seats by the stove." What power is

now

operating on us to make us suffer or receive the action of being seated on our seats? Does the stove perform this action? This is a passive verb,

present tense

, which requires an "object acted upon, and an

agent

by which it is acted upon." But we came in and

seated ourselves

here an hour ago.

The man

is acquitted

. He

stands acquitted

before the public. He

is learned

, wise, and happy, very much

improved

within a few years. He

always active, studious, and

engaged

in his own affairs. He

is renowned

, and

valorous

. She

is respected

. She

lives respected

If there is such a thing as a passive verb, it can never be used in the present tense, for the action expressed by the principal verb which is produced by the agent operating upon the object, is always

past

tense, and the auxiliary, or helping verb

to be

, is always present. Let this verb be analyzed, and the true meaning of each word understood, little difficulty will be found in giving it an explanation.

I will not spend more time in exposing the futility of this attempted distinction. It depends solely on a verbal form, but can never

be explained

so as

to be understood

by any scholar. Most grammarians have seen the fallacy of attempting to give the meaning of this verb. They can show its

form

, but

are

frequently

compelled

, as in the cases above, to sort out the "

passed

participles" from a host of adjectives, and it will

be found

exceeding troublesome to make scholars perceive any difference in the use of the words, or in the construction of a sentence. But it may be they have never thought that duty belonged to them; that they have nothing to do but to show them what the book says. Suppose they should teach arithmetic on the same principles, and learn the scholars to set down 144 as the product of 12 times 12. Let them look at the form of the figures, observe just how they appear, and make some more like them, and thus go thro the book. What would the child know of arithmetic? Just as much as they do of grammar, and no more. They would understand nothing of the science of numbers, of proportion, or addition. They would exercise the power of imitation, and make one figure look like another. Beyond that, all would be a

terra incognita

, a land unknown. So in the science of language; children may learn that the verb

to be

, joined with the past participle of an active verb, makes

a passive verb

; but what that passive verb is when made, or how to apply it, especially in the present tense, they have no means of knowing. Their knowledge is all taken on trust, and when thrown upon their own resources, they have none on which to rely.

LECTURE XII.

ON VERBS

Mood. – Indicative. – Imperative. – Infinitive. – Former distinctions. – Subjunctive mood. – Time. – Past. – Present. – Future. – The future explained. – How formed. – Mr. Murray's distinction of time. – Imperfect. – Pluperfect. – Second future. – How many tenses. – Auxiliary Verbs. – Will. – Shall. – May. – Must. – Can. – Do. – Have.

We are now come to consider the different relations of action in reference to

manner

and

time

. We shall endeavor to be as brief as possible upon this subject, keeping in view meanwhile that candor and perspicuity which are indispensable in all our attempts to explain new views.

Mood

signifies

manner

. Applied to verbs it explains

how

, in

what manner

, by what means, under what circumstances, actions are performed.

There are

three

moods, the

indicative

or declarative, the

imperative

or commanding, and the

infinitive

or unlimited.

The indicative mood declares an action to be

done

doing

not done

, or

not doing

. It is always in the past or present tense; as, David

killed

Goliath; scholars

learn

knowledge; I

spoke not

a word; they

sing not

The imperative mood denotes a command given from the first

person

to the

second

to do

not do

an action. It expresses the wish or desire of the first person to have a certain action performed which depends on the agency of the second. The command is

present

, but the action signified by the word is

future

to the giving of the command. The second person cannot comply with the will of the first till such will is made known; as, bring me a book; go to the door.

The

infinitive

mood has no direct personal agent, but is produced as a necessary consequence, growing out of a certain condition of things. It is always

future

to such condition; that is, some prior arrangement must be had before such consequences will follow. It is always

future

; as, they are collecting a force

to besiege

the city. We study grammar

to acquire

a knowledge of language. Windows are made

to admit

light. The act of besieging the city depends on the previous circumstance, the collection of a force

to do

it. Were there no windows, the light would not be admitted to the room.

These distinctions in regard to action must be obvious to every hearer. You all are aware of the fact that action necessarily implies an actor, as every effect must have an efficient cause; and such action clearly or distinctly

indicated

, must have such an agent to produce it. 2d. You are acquainted with the fact that one person can express his will to the second, directing him to do or avoid some thing. 3d. From an established condition of things, it is easy to deduce a consequence which will follow, in the nature of things, as an unavoidable result of such a combination of power, cause, and means.

With these principles you are all familiar, whether you have studied grammar or not. They are clearly marked, abundantly simple, and must be obvious to all. They form the only necessary, because the only real, distinction, in the formation and use of the verb to express action. Any minor distinctions are only calculated to perplex and embarrass the learner.

But some grammarians have passed these natural barriers, and built to themselves schemes to accord with their own vain fancies. The remarks of Mr. Murray upon this point are very appropos. He says:

"Some writers have given our moods a much greater extent than we have assigned to them. They assert that the english language may be said, without any great impropriety, to have as many moods as it has auxiliary verbs; and they allege, in support of their opinion, that the compound expression which they help to form, point out those various dispositions and actions, which, in other languages, are expressed by moods. This would be to multiply the moods without advantage. It is, however, certain, that the conjugation or variation of verbs, in the english language, is effected, almost entirely, by the means of auxiliaries. We must, therefore, accommodate ourselves to this circumstance; and do that by their assistance, which has been done in the learned languages (a few instances to the contrary excepted) in another manner, namely, by varying the form of the verb itself. At the same time, it is necessary to set proper bounds to this business, so as not to occasion obscurity and perplexity, when we mean to be simple and perspicuous. Instead, therefore, of making a separate mood for every auxiliary verb, and introducing moods

interrogative

optative

promissive

hortative

precative

, &c., we have exhibited such only as are obviously distinct; and which, whilst they are calculated to unfold and display the subject intelligibly to the learner, seem to be sufficient, and not more than sufficient, to answer all the purposes for which moods were introduced.

"From grammarians who form their ideas, and make their decisions, respecting this part of english grammar, on the principles and constructions of languages which, in these points, do not suit the peculiar nature of our own, but differ considerably from it, we may naturally expect grammatical schemes that are not very perspicuous nor perfectly consistent, and which will tend more to perplex than to inform the learner."

Had he followed this rule, he would have saved weeks and months to every student in grammar in the community. But his remarks were aimed at Mr. Harris, who was by far the most popular writer on language in England at that time. He has adopted the very rules of Mr. Murray, and carried them out. By a careful observance of the different forms and changes of the verb and its auxiliaries, he makes out quite evidently to his own mind,

fourteen

moods, which I forbear to name.

Most grammarians contend for

five

moods, two of which, the

potential

or powerful, and the

subjunctive

, are predicated on the same principles as Mr. Harris' optative, interrogative, etc., which they condemn. It is impossible to explain the character of these moods so as to be understood.

, it is said, is the sign of the subjunctive, and

may

and

can

of the potential; and yet they are often found together; as, "I will go

if I can

." No scholar can determine in what mood to put this last verb. It of right belongs to both the potential and subjunctive.

may

be allowed to speak my mind, I

should

say that such distinctions were false.

I will not go into an exposure of these useless and false distinctions, which are adopted to help carry out erroneous principles. The only pretence for a subjunctive mood is founded on the fact that

and

were

were formerly used in a character different from what they are at present.

was used in the indicative mood, present tense, when doubt or supposition was implied; as, If I

there; if they

wise.

I a man, and

receive

such treatment?

Were

was also used instead of

was

in the past tense; as, "

Were

I an American I would fight for liberty. If I

were

to admit the fact." In this character these words are rapidly becoming obsolete. We now say, "If I

there; am I a man, and

receive

such abuses?

was

I an American; if I was to admit," etc.

All the round about, perplexing, and tedious affair of conjugating verbs thro the different modes and tenses will appear in its true character, when we come to give you a few brief examples, according to truth and plain sense. But before doing that it will be necessary to make some remarks on time.

Tense

means

time

. We distinguish time according to certain events which are generally observed. In the use of the verb we express action in reference to periods of time when it is performed.

There are three tenses, or divisions of time;

past

present

, and

future

Past tense

applies to actions which are accomplished; as, I

wrote

a book; he

recited

his lesson.

Present tense

denotes actions commenced, but not finished, and now in operation; as, he

reads

his book; we

sit

on our seats and

hear

the lecture.

Future tense

refers to actions, which are

to take

place hereafter; as, I am

to go

from the Institute; we desire

to learn

grammar correctly.

Every body can mark three plain distinctions of time, past, present, and future. With the past we have been acquainted. It has ceased to be. Its works are ended. The present is a mere line—, nothing as it were—which is constantly passing unchecked from the past to the future. It is a mere division of the past and future. The Hebrew, which is strictly a philosophic language, admits no present; only a

past

and

future

. We speak of the present as denoting an action begun and not finished. In the summer, we say the trees grow, and bear fruit. But when the fruit is fallen, and the leaves seared by the frost, we change the expression, and say, it

grew

and

bore

fruit.

Of the

future

we can know nothing definitely. Heaven has hung before all human eyes an impenetrable veil which obscures all future events. No man without prophetic vision bestowed by Him who "sees the end from the beginning," can know what is

to be

, and no expression can be made, no words employed which will positively declare a future action. We may see a present condition of things, and from it argue what is

to be

, or take place hereafter; but all that knowledge is drawn from the past and deduced from a review of the present relation and tendencies of things.

I hold the paper near the fire and you say it

will

burn, and you say truly, for it has a

will

, or what is the same, an inherent tendency

to burn

. It is made of combustible matter, like paper which we have seen burn, and hence we argue this has the same tendency to be consumed. But how does your mind arrive at that fact? If you had never seen a substance like it burn, why should you conclude this

will

? Does the child know it

will

burn? No; for it has not yet learned the quality of the paper. It is not till the child has been burned that it dreads the fire. Suppose I take some asbestus, of the kind called amianthus, which is a mineral, and is formed of slender flexible fibres like flax; and in eastern countries, especially in Savoy and Corsica, is manufactured into cloth, paper, and lamp wicks. It was used in making winding sheets for the dead, in which the bodies were burned, and the ashes, retained in the incombustible sheet, were gathered into an urn, and revered as the manes of the dead. Suppose I take some of this incombustible paper or cloth, and present to you. You say it

will

burn. Why do you say thus? Because you have seen other materials which appear like this, consume to ashes. Let us put it into the fire. It

will not

burn. It has no

tendency

to burn; no quality which will consume. But this is a new idea to you and hence your mistake. You did not know it

would

burn, nor could you

indicate

such a fact. You only told your opinion derived from the present appearance of things, and hence you made an assertion in the

indicative

mood, present tense, and added to it an

infinitive

mood, in order to deduce the consequence of this future action—it

wills

, or has a

tendency

to burn. But you were mistaken, because ignorant of the

nature

of things. This amianthus looks like flax, and to a person unacquainted with it, appears to be as truly combustible; but the mineralogist, and all who know its properties, know very well that it

will

not—wills nothing, has no inclination, or tendency, to burn.

Take another example. Here is a steel needle. I hold it before you. You say, "if I let go of it, it

will

fall," and you say correctly, for it has such a tendency. But suppose a magnet, as great as that which is said to have drawn the iron coffin of Mohammed to the roof of the temple at Mecca, should be placed in the room above us. The needle, instead of falling to the floor, would be drawn in the nearest direction to that magnet. The

will

tendency

of the needle, as generally understood, would be overcome, the natural law of gravitation would lose its influence, by the counteracting power of the loadstone.

I say, "I will go home in an hour." But does that expression

indicate

the act of

going

? It is placed in the indicative mood in our grammars; and

is the principal, and

will

the auxiliary verb. May be I shall fall and die before I reach my home. But the expression is correct;

will

present

, go

future

. I

will

, I now

resolve

, am now inclined

to go

home.

You see the correctness of our position, that we can not positively assert a future active in the indicative mood. Try and form to yourselves a phrase by which it can be done. Should you succeed, you would violate a law of nature. You would penetrate the dark curtain of the future, and claim to yourself what you do not possess, a power to declare future actions. Prophets, by the help of the Almighty, had this power conferred upon them. But in the revelation of the sublime truths they were instructed to make known, they were compelled to adopt human language, and make it agree with our manner of speech.

The only method by which we express a future event, is to make an assertion in the indicative mood, present tense, and to that append the natural consequence in the infinitive or unlimited; as, I

am to go

to Boston. He is preparing

to visit

New-York. The infinitive mood is always future to the circumstance on which it depends.

Mr. Murray says, that "tense, being the distinction of time, might seem to admit of only the present, past, and future; but to mark it more

accurately

, it is made to consist of six variations, viz.: the present, imperfect, perfect, pluperfect, first and second future tenses." This

more accurate mark

, only serves to expose the author's folly, and distract the learner's mind. Before, all was plain. The past, present, and future are distinct, natural divisions, easily understood by all. But what idea can a person form of an

imperfect

tense in action. If there was ever such an action in the world, it was when

grammarians

made their grammars, which is, if I mistake not, according to their own authority, in the

im-perfect

tense! I

wrote

a letter. He

read

his piece well. The scholar learn

and recit

his lesson

perfectly

; and yet

learned

, tho made

perfect

by the qualification of an

adverb

, is an

imperfect

action!

But this explains the whole mystery in the business of grammar. We can here discover the cause of all the troubles and difficulties we have encountered in the whole affair. When authors

made

their books, they

did

imperfectly

; when teachers

taught

them, it was

imperfectly

; and when scholars

learned

them, it was

imperfectly

!! So at last, we have found the origin of this whole difficulty, in the grammars themselves; it was all imperfectly done.

But here, again,

mirabile dictu!

wonderful to tell, we are presented with a

plu-perfect

tense; that is,—

plus

means

,—a

than perfect tense! What must that be? If a thing is perfect, we can not easily conceive any thing beyond. That is a

ne plus ultra

to all advancement—there can be no more beyond. If any change is introduced, it must be by falling from

perfect

back to

imperfect

have said

, "many of the distinctions in the grammar books

have proved

mischievous; that they are as false as frivolous;" and this is said

perfectly

, in the perfect tense. If I should say, "they

had been

of some benefit," that would be

than

perfect

—plu-perfect. But when I say, "they

exhibited

great depth of research, and

conveyed

some light on the subject of which they

treated

," it would all be

-perfect.

Next, we are presented with a

second future

tense, which attempts a division of time unbounded and unknown. In the greek, they have what is called a "

paulo post future

," which in plain english, means a "

little after the future

;" that is, I suppose, when futurity has come to an end, this tense will commence! At that time we may expect to meet a "

præter plus quam perfectum

"—a more than perfect tense! But till that period shall arrive, we see little need of making such false and unphilosophic distinctions.

A teacher once told me that he explained the distinctions of time to his scholars from the clock dial which stood in the school room. Suppose

twelve

o'clock represents the

present

tense;

nine

would signify the

perfect

; any thing between nine and twelve would be

imperfect

; any thing beyond,

pluperfect

. On the other hand, any act, forward of twelve, would be

future

; and at

three

the

second future

would commence. I remarked that I thought this a wonderful improvement, especially to those who were able to have clocks by which to teach grammar, but that I could not discover why he did not have

three future

, as well as

three past

tenses. Why, he said, there were no such tenses marked in the books, and hence there was no occasion to explain them. I asked him why he did not have a tense for every hour, and so he could distinguish with Mr. Webster,

twelve

tenses, without any trouble whatever; and, by going three times round the dial, he could easily prove the correctness of Dr. Beattie's division; for he says, in his grammar, there are

thirty-six

tenses, and thinks there can not be less without "introducing confusion in the grammatical

art

." But he thought such a course would serve rather to perplex than enlighten; and so thought I. But he was the teacher of a popular school in the city of –, and had published a duodecimo grammar of over 300 pages, entitled "Murray's Grammar,

improved

, by –." I will not give his name; it would be libellous!

Mr. Murray thinks because certain things which he asserts, but does not prove, are found in greek and latin, "we may doubtless apply them to the english verb; and extend the principle

as far as convenience

, and the idiom of our language require." He found it to his "convenience" to note

six

principal, and as many

indefinite

tenses. Mr. Webster does the same. Dr. Beattie found it "convenient" to have

thirty-six

. In the greek they have

nine

. Mr. Bauzee distinguishes in the french

twenty

tenses; and the royal academy of Spain present a very learned and elaborate treatise on

seven future tenses

in that language. The clock dial of my friend would be found quite "

convenient

" in aiding the "convenience" of such distinctions.

The fact is, there are only three real divisions of time in any language, because there are only three in nature, and the ideas of all nations must agree in this respect. In framing language it was found impossible to mark any other distinctions, without introducing other words than those which express simple action. These words became compounded in process of time, till they are now used as changes of the same verb. I would here enter into an examination of the formation of the tenses of greek, latin, french, spanish, and german verbs, did I conceive it necessary, and show you how, by compounding two words, they form the various tenses found in the grammars. But it will be more edifying to you to confine my remarks to our own language. Here it will be found impossible to distinguish more than three tenses, or find the verb in any different form, except by the aid of other words, wholly foreign from those that express the action under consideration.

It is by the aid of auxiliary verbs that the perfect, pluperfect, or future tenses are formed. But when it is shown you that these are principal verbs, and like many other words, are used before the infinitive mood without the word

prefixed to them, you will perceive the consistency of the plan we propose. That such is the fact we have abundant evidence to show, and with your consent we will introduce it in this place. I repeat, all the words long considered auxiliaries, are

principal

verbs, declarative of positive action, and as such are in extensive use in our language. We can hardly agree that the words

will

shall

may

must

can

could

would

should

, etc. have no meaning, as our grammars and dictionaries would teach us; for you may look in vain for a definition of them, as principal verbs, with a few exceptions.

The reason these words are not found in the same relation to other words, with a

after them, is because they are so often used that we are accustomed to drop that word. The same may be said of all small words in frequent use; as,

bid

dare

feel

hear

have

let

make

see

, and sometimes

needs

tell

, and a few others. Bid him go. I

dare say

so. I

feel

move

. We

hear

him

sing

Let

Make

him

it. He

must go

thro Samaria.

Tell

him

it immediately.

It is a singular fact, but in keeping with neuter verb systems, that all the

neuter

verbs as well as the active, take these auxiliary or

helping

verbs, which, according to their showing

help them do nothing

—"express neither action or passion." A wonderful

help

indeed!

Will. This verb signifies to

wish

, to

resolve

, to

exercise volition

, in reference to a certain thing or action. "I will go." I

now resolve

to perform the act of going. When applied to inanimate things incapable of volition, it signifies what is analogous to it,

inherent tendency

; as, paper

will

burn; iron

will

sink; water

will

run. All these things have an inherent or active tendency to change. Water is composed of minute particles of a round form, piled together. While on a level they do not move; but let a descent be made, and these particles, under the influence of gravitation,

will

change position, and roll one over another with a rapidity equalled to the condition in which they are placed. The same may be observed in a quantity of shot opened at one side which

will

run thro the aperture; but the particles being larger, they will not find a level like water. Grain, sand, and any thing composed of small particles,

will

exhibit the same tendency. Iron, lead, or any mineral, in a state of igneous solution,

will

run, has the same

inclination

to run as water, or any other liquid. In oil, tallow, and lard, when expanded by heat, the same tendency is observed; but severely chilled with the cold, it congeals, and

will

not, has no such

tendency

, to run.

You have doubtless observed a cask filled with water and nearly tight, (if it is possible, make it quite so,) and when an aperture is made in the side, it

will

run but a trifle before it will stop. Open a vent upon the top of the cask and it

will

run freely. This

will

or tendency was counteracted by other means which I will not stop here to explain.

This is a most important word in science, physical and moral, and may be traced thro various languages where it exerts the same influence in the expression of thought.

"To avoid multiplying of words, I would crave leave here, under the word

action

, to comprehend the

forbearance

too of any action proposed;

sitting still

, or

holding one's peace

, when

walking

speaking

are proposed, tho mere forbearances, requiring as much the determination of the

will

, and being as often weighty in their consequences as the

contrary actions

, may, on that consideration, well enough pass for actions too. For he that shall turn his thoughts inwards upon what passes in his mind when he

wills

, shall see that the

will

or power of volition is conversant about nothing."—

Locke's Essay

, b. II. c. 21. § 30.

It is correctly applied by writers to

matter

as well as mind, as may be seen by consulting their works.

"Meanwhile as nature

wills

, night bids us rest."

Milton.

The

lupulis

, or common hop,

feels

for some elevated object which will assist it in its high aspirations, and

will

climb it by winding from left to right, and

will

not be obliged to go in an opposite direction; while the

phaseolus

, or kidney bean, takes the opposite direction. Neither

will

be compelled to change its course. They

will

have their own way, and grow as they please, or they

will

die in the contest for liberty.

Arsenic has a

tendency

in itself, a latent power, which only requires an opportunity suited to its objects, when it

will act

in the most efficacious manner. It

will

destroy the life of the Emperor, who has

voluntarily

slain his thousand and tens of thousands. This secret power does not reside in the flour of wheat, for that

will not

, has no tendency, to produce such disastrous consequences.

This word is applied in a similar manner to individuals and nations. The man

will

fall, not of intention, but of accident. He

will

kill himself. The man

will

drown, and the boat

will

swim. The water

will

hold up the boat, but it

will

allow the man to sink. The Russians

will

conquer the Turks. If conquest depended solely on the

will

, the Turks would as soon conquer as the Russians. But I have not time to pursue this topic farther. You can follow out these hints at your leisure.

Shall signifies to be

bound

obligated

, or

required

, from external necessity. Its etymology may be traced back thro various languages. It is derived direct from the saxon

scaelan

scylan

, and is found as a principal verb in that language, as well as in ours. In the church homily they say, "To Him alone we

schall us

to devote ourselves;" we

bind

obligate

ourselves. Chaucer, an early english poet, says.

"The faith we

shall

to God."

Great difficulty has been found in distinguishing between

shall

and

will

, and frequent essays have been written, to give arbitrary rules for their use. If the words were well understood, there could be no difficulty in employing them correctly.

Will

signifies

inherent tendency

aptitude

, or

disposition

, and

volition

in beings capable of using it.

Shall

implies

external necessity

, or foreign obligation. The parent says, "You

will

suffer misery if you do evil," for it is in accordance with the nature of things for evil to produce misery. "You

shall

regard my wishes," for you are under

obligation

, from the relation in which you stand to me, to do so. Let these words be clearly explained, and there will be no difficulty in using them correctly.

May, past tense

might

. This verb expresses

power

strength

, or

ability

to perform an action. It is a mistake that it means permission or liberty only. It implies more than that, the delegation of a power to perform the contemplated action. Suppose the scholar should faint, would the teacher say to him you

may

go into the open air? He has no

power

might

, or

strength

, communicated by such liberty, and must receive the

might

or strength of others to carry him out. But to the scholar in health he says you

may

go out, thereby giving to him a power and liberty sufficient to perform the action. This is done on the same principle that one man gives another a "

power

of attorney" to transact his bu

Eelmine 1 ...10 111213 14 15 Järgmine

Lectures on Language, as Particularly Connected with English Grammar.

Selle raamatu lugejad loevad ka