LESSON XXXII.—INTERJECTIONS.
1. Are all interjections to be parsed as being put absolute? 2. What is said of O and the vocative case? 3. What do Nixon and Kirkham erroneously teach about cases governed by interjections? 4. What say Murray, Ingersoll, and Lennie, about interjections and cases? 5. What is shown of the later teaching to which Murray's erroneous and unoriginal remark about "O, oh, and ah," has given rise? 6. What notice is taken of the application of the rule for "O, oh, and ah," to nouns of the second person? 7. What is observed concerning the further extension of this rule to nouns and pronouns of the third person? 8. What authors teach that interjections are put absolute, and have no government? 9. What is the construction of the pronoun in "Ah me!" "Ah him!" or any similar exclamation? 10. Is the common rule for interjections, as requiring certain cases after them, sustained by any analogy from the Latin syntax? 11. Can it be shown, on good authority, that O in Latin may be followed by the nominative of the first person or the accusative of the second? 12. What errors in the construction and punctuation of interjectional phrases are quoted from Fisk, Smith, and Kirkham? 13. What is said of those sentences in which an interjection is followed by a preposition or the conjunction that? 14. What is said of the place of the interjection? 15. What says O. B. Peirce about the name and place of the interjection? 16. What is offered in refutation of Peirce's doctrine?
[Now parse the six lessons of the Thirteenth Praxis; taking, if the teacher please, the Italic or difficult words only; and referring to the exceptions or observations under the rules, as often as there is occasion. Then proceed to the correction of the eighteen lessons of False Syntax contained in Chapter Twelfth, or the General Review.]