The Grammar of English Grammars

by Goold Brown

IMPROPRIETIES FOR CORRECTION. FALSE SYNTAX UNDER RULE XVIII.

INFINITIVES DEMANDING THE PARTICLE TO.

"William, please hand me that pencil."—R. C. Smith's New Gram., p. 12.

[FORMULE—Not proper, because the infinitive verb hand is not preceded by the preposition to. But, according to Rule 18th, "The preposition to governs the infinitive mood, and commonly connects it to a finite verb." Therefore, to should be here inserted; thus, "William, please to hand me that pencil.">[

"Please insert points so as to make sense."—Davis's Gram., p. 123. "I have known Lords abbreviate almost the half of their words."—Cobbett's English Gram., ¶ 153. "We shall find the practice perfectly accord with the theory."—Knight, on the Greek Alphabet, p. 23. "But it would tend to obscure, rather than elucidate the subject."—L. Murray's Gram., p. 95. "Please divide it for them as it should be."—Willett's Arith., p. 193. "So as neither to embarrass, nor weaken the sentence."—Blair's Rhet., p. 116; Murray's Gram., 322. "Carry her to his table, to view his poor fare,[413] and hear his heavenly discourse."—SHERLOCK: Blair's Rhet., p. 157; Murray's Gram., 347. "That we need not be surprised to find this hold in eloquence."—Blair's Rhet., p. 174. "Where he has no occasion either to divide or explain."—Ib., p. 305. "And they will find their pupils improve by hasty and pleasant steps."—Russell's Gram., Pref., p. 4. "The teacher however will please observe," &c.—Infant School Gram., p. 8. "Please attend to a few rules in what is called syntax."—Ib., p. 128. "They may dispense with the laws to favor their friends, or secure their office."—Webster's Essays, p. 39. "To take back a gift, or break a contract, is a wanton abuse."—Ib., p. 41. "The legislature has nothing to do, but let it bear its own price."—Ib., p. 315. "He is not to form, but copy characters."—Rambler, No. 122. "I have known a woman make use of a shoeing-horn."—Spect., No. 536. "Finding this experiment answer, in every respect, their wishes."—Sandford and Merton, p. 51. "In fine let him cause his argument conclude in the term of the question."—Barclay's Works, Vol. iii, p. 443.

"That he permitted not the winds of heaven
Visit her face too roughly."—Shakspeare, Hamlet.

RULE XIX.—INFINITIVES. The active verbs, bid, dare, feel, hear, let, make, need, see, and their participles, usually take the Infinitive after them without the preposition to: as, "If he bade thee depart, how darest thou stay?"—"I dare not let my mind be idle as I walk in the streets."—Cotton Mather.

"Thy Hector, wrapt in everlasting sleep,
Shall neither hear thee sigh, nor see thee weep."
—Pope's Homer.

OBSERVATIONS ON RULE XIX.

OBS. 1.—Respecting the syntax of the infinitive mood when the particle to is not expressed before it, our grammarians are almost as much at variance, as I have shown them to be, when they find the particle employed. Concerning verbs governed by verbs, Lindley Murray, and some others, are the most clear and positive, where their doctrine is the most obviously wrong; and, where they might have affirmed with truth, that the former verb governs the latter, they only tell us that "the preposition TO is sometimes properly omitted,"—or that such and such verbs "have commonly other verbs following them without the sign TO."—Murray's Gram., p. 183; Alger's, 63; W. Allen's, 167, and others. If these authors meant, that the preposition to is omitted by ellipsis, they ought to have said so. Then the many admirers and remodellers of Murray's Grammar might at least have understood him alike. Then, too, any proper definition of ellipsis must have proved both them and him to be clearly wrong about this construction also. If the word to is really "understood," whenever it is omitted after bid, dare, feel, &c., as some authors, affirm, then is it here the governing word, if anywhere; and this nineteenth rule, however common, is useless to the parser.[414] Then, too, does no English verb ever govern the infinitive without governing also a preposition, "expressed or understood." Whatever is omitted by ellipsis, and truly "understood," really belongs to the grammatical construction; and therefore, if inserted, it cannot be actually improper, though it may be unnecessary. But all our grammarians admit, that to before the infinitive is sometimes "superfluous and improper."—Murray's Gram., p. 183. I imagine, there cannot be any proper ellipsis of to before the infinitive, except in some forms of comparison; because, wherever else it is necessary, either to the sense or to the construction, it ought to be inserted. And wherever the to is rightly used, it is properly the governing word; but where it cannot be inserted without impropriety, it is absurd to say, that it is "understood." The infinitive that is put after such a verb or participle as excludes the preposition to, is governed by this verb or participle, if it is governed by any thing: as,

"To make them do, undo, eat, drink, stand, move,
Talk, think, and feel, exactly as he chose."—Pollok, p. 69.

OBS. 2.—Ingersoll, who converted Murray's Grammar into "Conversations," says, "I will just remark to you that the verbs in the infinitive mood, that follow make, need, see, bid, dare, feel, hear, let, and their participles, are always GOVERNED by them."—Conv. on Eng. Gram., p. 120. Kirkham, who pretended to turn the same book into "Familiar Lectures," says, "To, the sign of the infinitive mood, is often understood before the verb; as, 'Let me proceed;' that is, Let me to proceed."—Gram. in Fam. Lect., p. 137. The lecturer, however, does not suppose the infinitive to be here governed by the preposition to, or the verb let, but rather by the pronoun me. For, in an other place, he avers, that the infinitive may be governed by a noun or a pronoun; as, "Let him do it."—Ib., p. 187. Now if the government of the infinitive is to be referred to the objective noun or pronoun that intervenes, none of those verbs that take the infinitive after them without the preposition, will usually be found to govern it, except dare and need; and if need, in such a case, is an auxiliary, no government pertains to that. R. C. Smith, an other modifier of Murray, having the same false notion of ellipsis, says, "To, the usual sign of this mood, is sometimes understood; as, 'Let me go,' instead of, 'Let me to go.'"—Smith's New Gram., p. 65. According to Murray, whom these men profess to follow, let, in all these examples, is an auxiliary, and the verb that follows it, is not in the infinitive mood, but in the imperative. So they severally contradict their oracle, and all are wrong, both he and they! The disciples pretend to correct their master, by supposing "Let me to go," and "Let me to proceed," good English!

OBS. 3.—It is often impossible to say by what the infinitive is governed, according to the instructions of Murray, or according to any author who does not parse it as I do. Nutting says, "The infinitive mode sometimes follows the comparative conjunctions, as, than, and how, WITHOUT GOVERNMENT."—Practical Gram., p. 106. Murray's uncertainty[415] may have led to some part of this notion, but the idea that how is a "comparative conjunction," is a blunder entirely new. Kirkham is so puzzled by "the language of that eminent philologist," that he bolts outright from the course of his guide, and runs he knows not whither; feigning that other able writers have well contended, "that this mood IS NOT GOVERNED by any particular word." Accordingly he leaves his pupils at liberty to "reject the idea of government, as applied to the verb in this mood;" and even frames a rule which refers it always "To some noun or pronoun, as its subject or actor."—Kirkham's Gram., p. 188. Murray teaches that the object of the active verb sometimes governs the infinitive that follows it: as, "They have a desire to improve."—Octavo Gram., p. 184. To what extent, in practice, he would carry this doctrine, nobody can tell; probably to every sentence in which this object is the antecedent term to the preposition to, and perhaps further: as, "I have a house to sell"—Nutting's Gram., p. 106. "I feel a desire to excel." "I felt my heart within me die."—Merrick.

OBS. 4.—Nutting supposes that the objective case before the infinitive always governs it wherever it denotes the agent of the infinitive action; as, "He commands me to write a letter."—Practical Gram., p. 96. Nixon, on the contrary, contends, that the finite verb, in such a sentence, can govern only one object, and that this object is the infinitive. "The objective case preceding it," he says, "is the subject or agent of that infinitive, and not governed by the preceding verb." His example is, "Let them go."—English Parser, p. 97. "In the examples, 'He is endeavouring to persuade them to learn,'—'It is pleasant to see the sun,'—the pronoun them, the adjective pleasant, and the participle endeavouring, I consider as governing the following verb in the infinitive mode."—Cooper's Plain and Pract. Gram., p. 144. "Some erroneously say that pronouns govern the infinitive mode in such examples as this: 'I expected him to be present.' We will change the expression: 'He was expected to be present.' All will admit that to be is governed by was expected. The same verb that governs it in the passive voice, governs it in the active."—Sanborn's Gram., p. 144. So do our professed grammarians differ about the government of the infinitive, even in the most common constructions of it! Often, however, it makes but little difference in regard to the sense, which of the two words is considered the governing or antecedent term; but where the preposition is excluded, the construction seems to imply some immediate influence of the finite verb upon the infinitive.

OBS. 5.—The extent of this influence, or of such government, has never yet been clearly determined. "This irregularity," says Murray, "extends only to active or neuter verbs: ['active and neuter verbs,' says Fisk:] for all the verbs above mentioned, when made passive, require the preposition to before the following verb: as, 'He was seen to go;' 'He was heard to speak;' 'They were bidden to be upon their guard.'"—Murray's Gram., p. 183. Fisk adds with no great accuracy "In the past and future tenses of the active voice also, these verbs generally require the sign to, to be prefixed to the following verbs; as, 'You have dared to proceed without authority;' 'They will not dare to attack you.'"—Gram. Simplified, p. 125. What these gentlemen here call "neuter verbs," are only the two words dare and need, which are, in most cases, active, though not always transitive; unless the infinitive itself can make them so—an inconsistent doctrine of theirs which I have elsewhere refuted. (See Obs. 3rd on Rule 5th.) These two verbs take the infinitive after them without the preposition, only when they are intransitive; while all the rest seem to have this power, only when they are transitive. If there are any exceptions, they shall presently be considered. A more particular examination of the construction proper for the infinitive after each of these eight verbs, seems necessary for a right understanding of the rule.

OBS. 6.—Of the verb BID. This verb, in any of its tenses, when it commands an action, usually governs an object and also an infinitive, which come together; as, "Thou bidst the world adore."—Thomson. "If the prophet had bid thee do some great thing."—2 Kings, v, 13. But when it means, to promise or offer, the infinitive that follows, must be introduced by the preposition to; as, "He bids fair to excel them all"—"Perhaps no person under heaven bids more unlikely to be saved."—Brown's Divinity, p. vii. "And each bade high to win him."—GRANVILLE: Joh. Dict. After the compound forbid, the preposition is also necessary; as, "Where honeysuckles forbid the sun to enter."—Beauties of Shak.. p. 57. In poetry, if the measure happens to require it, the word to is sometimes allowed after the simple verb bid, denoting a command; as,

"Bid me to strike my dearest brother dead, To bring my aged father's hoary head."—Rowe's Lucan, B. i, l. 677.

OBS. 7.—Of the verb DARE. This verb, when used intransitively, and its irregular preterit durst, which is never transitive, usually take the infinitive after them without to; as, "I dare do all that may become a man: Who dares do more, is none."—Shakspeare. "If he durst steal any thing adventurously."—Id. "Who durst defy th' Omnipotent to arms."—Milton. "Like one who durst his destiny control."—Dryden. In these examples, the former verbs have some resemblance to auxiliaries, and the insertion of the preposition to would be improper. But when we take away this resemblance, by giving dare or dared, an objective case, the preposition is requisite before the infinitive; as, "Time! I dare thee to discover Such a youth or such a lover."—Dryden. "He dares me to enter the lists."—Fisk's Gram., p. 125. So when dare itself is in the infinitive mood, or is put after an auxiliary, the preposition is not improper; as, "And let a private man dare to say that it will."—Brown's Estimate, ii, 147. "Would its compiler dare to affront the Deity?"—West's Letters, p. 151. "What power so great, to dare to disobey?"—Pope's Homer. "Some would even dare to die."—Bible. "What would dare to molest him?"—Dr. Johnson. "Do you dare to prosecute such a creature as Vaughan?"—Junius, Let. xxxiii. Perhaps these examples might be considered good English, either with or without the to; but the last one would be still better thus: "Dare you prosecute such a creature as Vaughan?" Dr. Priestley thinks the following sentence would have been better with the preposition inserted: "Who have dared defy the worst."—HARRIS: Priestley's Gram., p. 132. To is sometimes used after the simple verb, in the present tense; as, "Those whose words no one dares to repeat."—Opie, on Lying, p. 147.

"Dare I to leave of humble prose the shore?"
—Young, p. 377.

"Against heaven's endless mercies pour'd, how dar'st thou to rebel?"
—Id., p. 380.

"The man who dares to be a wretch, deserves still greater pain."
—Id., p. 381.

OBS. 8.—Of the verb FEEL. This verb, in any of its tenses, may govern the infinitive without the sign to; but it does this, only when it is used transitively, and that in regard to a bodily perception: as, "I feel it move."—"I felt something sting me." If we speak of feeling any mental affection, or if we use the verb intransitively, the infinitive that follows, requires the preposition; as, "I feel it to be my duty."—"I felt ashamed to ask."—"I feel afraid to go alone."—"I felt about, to find the door." One may say of what is painful to the body, "I feel it to be severe."

OBS. 9.—Of the verb HEAR. This verb is often intransitive, but it is usually followed by an objective case when it governs the infinitive; as. "To hear a bird sing."—Webster. "You have never heard me say so." For this reason, I am inclined to think that those sentences in which it appears to govern the infinitive alone, are elliptical; as, "I have heard tell of such things."—"And I have heard say of thee, that thou canst understand a dream to interpret it."—Gen, xli, 15. Such examples may be the same as. "I have heard people tell,"—"I have heard men say," &c.

OBS. 10.—Of the verb LET. By many grammarians this verb has been erroneously called an auxiliary of the optative mood; or, as Dr. Johnson terms it, "a sign of the optative mood:" though none deny, that it is sometimes also a principal verb. It is, in fact, always a principal verb; because, as we now apply it, it is always transitive. It commonly governs an objective noun or pronoun, and also an infinitive without the sign to; as, "Rise up, let us go."—Mark. "Thou shalt let it rest."—Exodus. But sometimes the infinitive coalesces with it more nearly than the objective, so that the latter is placed after both verbs; as, "The solution lets go the mercury."—Newton. "One lets slip out of his account a good part of that duration."—Locke. "Back! on your lives; let be, said he, my prey."—Dryden. The phrase, let go, is sometimes spoken for, let go your hold; and let be, for let him be, let it be, &c. In such instances, therefore, the verb let is not really intransitive. This verb, even in the passive form, may have the infinitive after it without the preposition to; as, "Nothing is let slip."—Walker's English Particles, p. 165. "They were let go in peace."—Acts, xv, 33. "The stage was never empty, nor the curtain let fall."—Blair's Rhet., p. 459. "The pye's question was wisely let fall without a reply."—L'Estrange. With respect to other passives, Murray and Fisk appear to be right; and sometimes the preposition is used after this one: as, "There's a letter for you, sir, if your name be Horatio, as I am let to know it is."—Shakspeare. Let, when used intransitively, required the preposition to before the following infinitive; as, "He would not let [i. e. forbear] to counsel the king."—Bacon. But this use of let is now obsolete.

OBS. 11.—Of the verb MAKE. This verb, like most of the others, never immediately governs an infinitive, unless it also governs a noun or a pronoun which is the immediate subject of such infinitive; as, "You make me blush."—"This only made the youngster laugh"—Webster's Spelling-Book. "Which soon made the young chap hasten down."—Ib. But in very many instances it is quite proper to insert the preposition where this verb is transitive; as, "He maketh both the deaf to hear, and the dumb to speak."—Mark, vii, 37. "He makes the excellency of a sentence to consist in four things."—Blair's Rhet., p. 122; Jamieson's, 124. "It is this that makes the observance of the dramatic unities to be of consequence."—Blair's Rhet., p. 464. "In making some tenses of the English verb to consist of principal and auxiliary."—Murray's Gram., p. 76. "When make is intransitive, it has some qualifying word after it, besides the sign of the infinitive; as,—I think he will make out to pay his debts." Formerly, the preposition to was almost always inserted to govern the infinitive after make or made; as, "Lest I make my brother to offend."—1 Cor., viii, 13. "He made many to fall."—Jer., xlvi, 16. Yet, in the following text, it is omitted, even where the verb is meant to be passive: "And it was lifted up from the earth, and made stand upon the feet as a man."—Dan., vii, 4. This construction is improper, and not free from ambiguity; because stand may be a noun, and made, an active verb governing it. There may also be uncertainty in the meaning, where the insertion of the preposition leaves none in the construction; for made may signify either created or compelled, and the infinitive after it, may denote either the purpose of creation, or the effect of any temporary compulsion: as, "We are made to be serviceable to others."—Murray's Key, 8vo, p. 167. "Man was made to mourn."—Burns. "Taste was never made to cater for vanity."—Blair. The primitive word make seldom, if ever, produces a construction that is thus equivocal. The infinitive following it without to, always denotes the effect of the making, and not the purpose of the maker; as, "He made his son Skjöld be received there as king."—North. Antiq., p. 81. But the same meaning may be conveyed when the to is used; as,

"The fear of God is freedom, joy, and peace;
And makes all ills that vex us here to cease."—Waller, p. 56.

OBS. 12.—Of the verb NEED. I incline to think, that the word need, whenever it is rightly followed by the infinitive without to, is, in reality an auxiliary of the potential mood; and that, like may, can, and must, it may properly be used, in both the present and the perfect tense, without personal inflection: as, "He need not go, He need not have gone;" where, if need is a principal verb, and governs the infinitive without to, the expressions must be, "He needs not go, He needed not go, or, He has not needed go." But none of these three forms is agreeable; and the last two are never used. Wherefore, in stead of placing in my code of false syntax the numerous examples of the former kind, with which the style of our grammarians and critics has furnished me, I have exhibited many of them, in contrast with others, in the eighth and ninth observations on the Conjugation of Verbs; in which observations, the reader may see what reasons there are for supposing the word need to be sometimes an auxiliary and sometimes a principal verb. Because no other author has yet intentionally recognized the propriety of this distinction, I have gone no farther than to show on what grounds, and with what authority from usage, it might be acknowledged. If we adopt this distinction, perhaps it will be found that the regular or principal verb need always requires, or, at least, always admits, the preposition to before the following infinitive; as, "They need not to be specially indicated."—Adams's Rhet., i, 302. "We need only to remark."—Ib., ii, 224. "A young man needed only to ask himself," &c.—Ib., i, 117. "Nor is it conceivable to me, that the lightning of a Demosthenes could need to be sped upon the wings of a semiquaver."—Ib., ii, 226. "But these people need to be informed."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 220. "No man needed less to be informed."—Ib., p. 175. "We need only to mention the difficulty that arises."—Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 362. "Can there need to be argument to prove so plain a point?"—Graham's Lect. "Moral instruction needs to have a more prominent place."—Dr. Weeks. "Pride, ambition, and selfishness, need to be restrained."—Id. "Articles are sometimes omitted, where they need to be used."—Sanborn's Gram., p. 197. "Whose power needs not to be dreaded."—Wilson's Hebrew Gram., p. 93. "A workman that needeth not to be ashamed."—2 Tim., ii, 15. "The small boys may have needed to be managed according to the school system."—T. D. Woolsey. "The difficulty of making variety consistent, needs not to disturb him."—Rambler, No. 122. "A more cogent proof needs not to be introduced."—Wright's Gram., p. 66. "No person needs to be informed, that you is used in addressing a single person."—Wilcox's Gram., p. 19. "I hope I need not to advise you further."—Shak., All's Well.

"Nor me, nor other god, thou needst to fear,
For thou to all the heavenly host art dear."—Congreve.

OBS. 13.—If need is ever an auxiliary, the essential difference between an auxiliary and a principal verb, will very well account for the otherwise puzzling fact, that good writers sometimes inflect this verb, and sometimes do not; and that they sometimes use to after it, and sometimes do not. Nor do I see in what other way a grammarian can treat it, without condemning as bad English a great number of very common phrases which he cannot change for the better. On this principle, such examples as, "He need not proceed," and "He needs not to proceed," may be perfectly right in either form; though Murray, Crombie,[416] Fisk, Ingersoll, Smith, C. Adams, and many others, pronounce both these forms to be wrong; and unanimously, (though contrary to what is perhaps the best usage,) prefer, "He needs not proceed."—Murray's Key, 8vo, p. 180.

OBS. 14.—On questions of grammar, the practice of authors ought to be of more weight, than the dogmatism of grammarians; but it is often difficult to decide well by either; because errors and contradictions abound in both. For example: Dr. Blair says, (in speaking of the persons represented by I and thou,) "Their sex needs not be marked."—Rhet., p. 79. Jamieson abridges the work, and says, "needs not to be marked."—Gram. of Rhet., p. 28. Dr. Lowth also says, "needs not be marked."—Gram., p. 21. Churchill enlarges the work, and says, "needs not to be marked."—New Gram., p. 72. Lindley Murray copies Lowth, and says, "needs not be marked."—Gram., 12mo, 2d Ed., p. 39; 23d Ed., p. 51; and perhaps all other editions. He afterwards enlarges his own work, and says, "needs not to be marked."—Octavo Gram., p. 51. But, according to Greenleaf they all express the idea ungrammatically; the only true form being, "Their sex need not be marked." See Gram. Simplified, p. 48. In the two places in which the etymology and the syntax of this verb are examined, I have cited from proper sources more than twenty examples in which to is used after it, and more than twenty others in which the verb is not inflected in the third person singular. In the latter, need is treated as an auxiliary; in the former, it is a principal verb, of the regular construction. If the principal verb need can also govern the infinitive without to, as all our grammarians have supposed, then there is a third form which is unobjectionable, and my pupils may take their choice of the three. But still there is a fourth form which nobody approves, though the hands of some great men have furnished us with examples of it: as, "A figure of thought need not to detort the words from their literal sense."—J. Q. Adams's Lectures, Vol. ii, p. 254. "Which a man need only to appeal to his own feelings immediately to evince."—Clarkson's Prize-Essay on Slavery, p. 106.

OBS. 15.—Webster and Greenleaf seem inclined to justify the use of dare, as well as of need, for the third person singular. Their doctrine is this: "In popular practice it is used in the third person, without the personal termination. Thus, instead of saying, 'He dares not do it;' WE generally say, 'He dare not do it.' In like manner, need, when an active verb, is regular in its inflections; as, 'A man needs more prudence.' But when intransitive, it drops the personal terminations in the present tense, and is followed by a verb without the prefix to; as, 'A man need not be uneasy.'"—Greenleaf s Grammar Simplified, p. 38; Webster's Philosophical Gram., p. 178; Improved Gram., 127. Each part of this explanation appears to me erroneous. In popular practice, one shall oftener hear, "He dares n't do it," or even, "You dares n't do it," than, "He dare not do it." But it is only in the trained practice of the schools, that he shall ever hear, "He needs n't do it," or, "He needs not do it." If need is sometimes used without inflection, this peculiarity, or the disuse of to before the subsequent infinitive, is not a necessary result of its "intransitive" character. And as to their latent nominative, "whereof there is no account," or, "whereof there needs no account;" their fact, of which "there is no evidence," or of which "there needs no evidence;" I judge it a remarkable phenomenon, that authors of so high pretensions, could find, in these transpositions, a nominative to "is," but none to "needs!" See a marginal note under Rule 14th, at p. 570.

OBS. 16.—Of the verb SEE. This verb, whenever it governs the infinitive without to, governs also an objective noun or pronoun; as, "See me do it."—"I saw him do it."—Murray. Whenever it is intransitive, the following infinitive must be governed by to; as, "I will see to have it done."—Comly's Gram., p. 98; Greenleaf's, 38. "How could he see to do them?"—Beauties of Shak., p. 43. In the following text, see is transitive, and governs the infinitive; but the two verbs are put so far apart, that it requires some skill in the reader to make their relation apparent: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place," &c.—Matt., xxiv, 15. An other scripturist uses the participle, and says—"standing where it ought not," &c.—Mark, xiii, 14. The Greek word is the same in both; it is a participle, agreeing with the noun for abomination. Sometimes the preposition to seems to be admitted on purpose to protract the expression: as,

"Tranio, I saw her coral lips to move,
And with her breath she did perfume the air."—Shak.

OBS 17.—A few other verbs, besides the eight which are mentioned in the foregoing rule and remarks, sometimes have the infinitive after them without to. W. Allen teaches, that, "The sign to is generally omitted," not only after these eight, but also after eight others; namely, "find, have, help, mark, observe, perceive, watch, and the old preterit gan, for began; and sometimes after behold and know."—Elements of Gram., p. 167. Perhaps he may have found some instances of the omission of the preposition after all these, but in my opinion his rule gives a very unwarrantable extension to this "irregularity," as Murray calls it. The usage belongs only to particular verbs, and to them not in all their applications. Other verbs of the same import do not in general admit the same idiom. But, by a license for the most part peculiar to the poets, the preposition to is occasionally omitted, especially after verbs equivalent to those which exclude it; as, "And force them sit."—Cowper's Task, p. 46. That is, "And make them sit." According to Churchill, "To use ought or cause in this manner, is a Scotticism: [as,] 'Won't you cause them remove the hares?'—'You ought not walk.' SHAK."—New Gram., p. 317. The verbs, behold, view, observe, mark, watch, and spy, are only other words for see; as, "There might you behold one joy crown an other."—Shak. "There I sat, viewing the silver stream glide silently towards the tempestuous sea."—Walton. "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven."—Luke, x, 18.

"Thy drowsy nurse hath sworn she did them spy
Come tripping to the room where thou didst lie."—Milton.

———"Nor with less dread the loud
Ethereal trumpet from on high 'gan blow."—Id., P. L., vi, 60.

OBS. 18.—After have, help, and find, the infinitive sometimes occurs without the preposition to, but much oftener with it; as, "When enumerating objects which we wish to have appear distinct."—Kirkham's Gram., p. 222. "Certainly, it is heaven upon earth, to have a man's mind move in charity, rest in Providence, and turn upon the poles of truth."—Ld. Bacon. "What wilt thou have me to do?"—Acts, ix, 6. "He will have us to acknowledge him."—Scougal, p. 102. "I had to walk all the way."—Lennie's Gram., p. 85. "Would you have them let go then? No."—Walker's Particles, p. 248. According to Allen's rule, this question is ambiguous; but the learned author explains it in Latin thus: "Placet igitur eos dimitti? Minimé." That is, "Would you have them dismissed then? No." Had he meant, "Would you have them to let go then?" he would doubtless have said so. Kirkham, by adding help to Murray's list, enumerates nine verbs which he will have to exclude the sign of the infinitive; as, "Help me do it."—Gram., p. 188. But good writers sometimes use the particle to after this verb; as, "And Danby's matchless impudence helped to support the knave."—DRYDEN: Joh. Dict., w. Help. Dr. Priestley says, "It must, I suppose, be according to the Scotch idiom that Mrs. Macaulay omits it after the verb help: 'To help carry on the new measures of the court.' History, Vol. iv, p. 150."—Priestley's Gram., p. 133. "You will find the difficulty disappear in a short time."—Cobbett's English Gram., ¶ 16. "We shall always find this distinction obtain."—Blair's Rhet., p. 245. Here the preposition to might have been inserted with propriety. Without it, a plural noun will render the construction equivocal. The sentence, "You will find the difficulties disappear in a short time," will probably be understood to mean, "You will find that the difficulties disappear in a short time." "I do not find him reject his authority."—Johnson's Gram. Com., p. 167. Here too the preposition might as well have been inserted. But, as this use of the infinitive is a sort of Latinism, some critics would choose to say, "I do not find that he rejects his authority." "Cyrus was extremely glad to find them have such sentiments of religion."—Rollin, ii, 117. Here the infinitive may be varied either by the participle or by the indicative; as, "to find them having," or, "to find they had." Of the three expressions, the last, I think, is rather the best.

OBS. 19.—When two or more infinitives are connected in the same construction, one preposition sometimes governs them both or all; a repetition of the particle not being always necessary, unless we mean to make the terms severally emphatical. This fact is one evidence that to is not a necessary part of each infinitive verb, as some will have it to be. Examples: "Lord, suffer me first TO go and bury my father."—Matt., viii, 21. "To shut the door, means, TO throw or cast the door to."—Tooke's D. P., ii, 105. "Most authors expect the printer TO spell, point, and digest their copy, that it may be intelligible to the reader."—Printer's Grammar.

"I'll not be made a soft and dull-eyed fool,
To shake the head, relent, and sigh, and yield."—Shak.

OBS. 20.—An infinitive that explains an other, may sometimes be introduced without the preposition to; because, the former having it, the construction of the latter is made the same by this kind of apposition: as, "The most accomplished way of using books at present is, TO serve them as some do lords; learn their titles, and, then brag of their acquaintance."—SWIFT: Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 166.

OBS. 21.—After than or as, the sign of the infinitive is sometimes required, and sometimes excluded; and in some instances we can either insert it or not, as we please. The latter term of a comparison is almost always more or less elliptical; and as the nature of its ellipsis depends on the structure of the former term, so does the necessity of inserting or of omitting the sign of the infinitive. Examples: "No desire is more universal than [is the desire] to be exalted and honoured."—Kames, El. of Crit., i, 197. "The difficulty is not so great to die for a friend, as [is the difficulty] to find a friend worth dying for."—Id., Art of Thinking, p. 42. "It is no more in one's power to love or not to love, than [it is in one's power] to be in health or out of order."—Ib., p. 45. "Men are more likely to be praised into virtue, than [they are likely] to be railed out of vice."—Ib., p. 48. "It is more tolerable to be always alone, than [it is tolerable] never to be so."—Ib., p. 26. "Nothing [is] more easy than to do mischief [is easy]: nothing [is] more difficult than to suffer without complaining" [is difficult].—Ib., p. 46. Or: "than [it is easy] to do mischief:" &c., "than [it is difficult] to suffer," &c. "It is more agreeable to the nature of most men to follow than [it is agreeable to their nature] to lead."—Ib., p. 55. In all these examples, the preposition to is very properly inserted; but what excludes it from the former term of a comparison, will exclude it from the latter, if such governing verb be understood there: as, "You no more heard me say those words, than [you heard me] talk Greek." It may be equally proper to say, "We choose rather to lead than follow," or, "We choose rather to lead than to follow."—Art of Thinking, p. 37. The meaning in either case is, "We choose to lead rather than we choose to follow." In the following example, there is perhaps an ellipsis of to before cite: "I need do nothing more than simply cite the explicit declarations," &c.—Gurney's Peculiarities, p. 4. So in these: "Nature did no more than furnish the power and means."—Sheridan's Elocution, p. 147.

"To beg, than work, he better understands;
Or we perhaps might take him off thy hands."
—Pope's Odyssey, xvii, 260.

OBS. 22.—It has been stated, in Obs. 16th on Rule 17th, that good writers are apt to shun a repetition of any part common to two or more verbs in the same sentence; and among the examples there cited is this: "They mean to, and will, hear patiently."—Salem Register. So one might say, "Can a man arrive at excellence, who has no desire to?"—"I do not wish to go, nor expect to."—"Open the door, if you are going to." Answer: "We want to, and try to, but can't." Such ellipses of the infinitive after to, are by no means uncommon, especially in conversation; nor do they appear to me to be always reprehensible, since they prevent repetition, and may contribute to brevity without obscurity. But Dr. Bullions has lately thought proper to condemn them; for such is presumed to have been the design of the following note: "To, the sign of the infinitive, should never be used for the infinitive itself. Thus, 'I have not written, and I do not intend to,' is a colloquial vulgarism for, 'I have not written, and I do not intend to write.'"—Bullions's Analyt. and Pract. Gram., p. 179. His "Exercises to be corrected," here, are these: "Be sure to write yourself and tell him to. And live as God designed me to."—Ib., 1st Ed., p. 180. It being manifest, that to cannot "be used for"—(that is, in place of—)what is implied after it, this is certainly a very awkward way of hinting "there should never be an ellipsis of the infinitive after to." But, from the false syntax furnished, this appears to have been the meaning intended. The examples are severally faulty, but not for the reason suggested—not because "to" is used for "write" or "live"—not, indeed, for any one reason common to the three—but because, in the first, "to write" and "have not written," have nothing in common which we can omit; in the second, the mood of "tell" is doubtful, and, without a comma after "yourself," we cannot precisely know the meaning; in the third, the mood, the person, and the number of "live," are all unknown. See Note 9th to Rule 17th, above; and Note 2d to the General Rule, below.

OBS. 23.—Of some infinitives, it is hard to say whether they are transitive or intransitive; as, "Well, then, let us proceed; we have other forced marches to make; other enemies to subdue; more laurels to acquire; and more injuries to avenge."—BONAPARTE: Columbian Orator, p. 136. These, without ellipsis, are intransitive; but relatives may be inserted.