OBSERVATIONS.
OBS. 1.—By some writers, the words, also, since, too, then, therefore, and wherefore, are placed among the copulative conjunctions; and as, so, still, however, and albeit, among the disjunctive; but Johnson and Webster have marked most of these terms as adverbs only. It is perhaps of little moment, by which name they are called; for, in some instances, conjunctions and conjunctive adverbs do not differ very essentially. As, so, even, then, yet, and but, seem to belong sometimes to the one part of speech, and sometimes to the other. I call them adverbs when they chiefly express time, manner, or degree; and conjunctions when they appear to be mere connectives. As, yet, and but, are generally conjunctions; but so, even, and then, are almost always adverbs. Seeing and provided, when used as connectives, are more properly conjunctions than any thing else; though Johnson ranks them with the adverbs, and Webster, by supposing many awkward ellipses, keeps them with the participles. Examples: "For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day."—Acts, ii, 15. "The senate shall have power to adjourn themselves, provided such adjournment shall not exceed two days at a time."—Constitution of New Hampshire.
OBS. 2.—Since, when it governs a noun after it, is a preposition: as, "Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days?"—Job. Albeit is equivalent in sense to although, and is properly a conjunction; but this old compound is now nearly or quite obsolete. As is sometimes a relative pronoun, sometimes a conjunctive adverb, and sometimes a copulative conjunction. Example of the last: "We present ourselves as petitioners." If as is ever disjunctive, it is not so here; nor can we parse it as an adverb, because it comes between two words that are essentially in apposition. The equivalent Latin term quasi is called an adverb, but, in such a case, not very properly: as, "Et colles quasi pulverem pones;"—"And thou shalt make the hills as chaff."—Isaiah, xli, 15. So even, which in English is frequently a sign of emphatic repetition, seems sometimes to be rather a conjunction than an adverb: as, "I, even I, am the Lord."—Isaiah, xliii, 11.
OBS. 3.—Save and saving, when they denote exception, are not adverbs, as Johnson denominates them, or a verb and a participle, as Webster supposes them to be, or prepositions, as Covell esteems them, but disjunctive conjunctions; and, as such, they take the same case after as before them; as, "All the conspirators, save only he, did that they did, in envy of great Cæsar."—Shak. "All this world's glory seemeth vain, and all their shows but shadows, saving she."—Spenser. "Israel burned none of them, save Hazor only."—Joshua. xi, 13. "And none of them was cleansed, saving Naaman the Syrian."—Luke, iv, 27. Save is not here a transitive verb, for Hazor was not saved in any sense, but utterly destroyed; nor is Naaman here spoken of as being saved by an other leper, but as being cleansed when others were not. These two conjunctions are now little used; and therefore the propriety of setting the nominative after them and treating them as conjunctions, is the more apt to be doubted. The Rev. Matt. Harrison, after citing five examples, four of which have the nominative with save, adds, without naming the part of speech, or assigning any reason, this decision, which I think erroneous: "In all these passages, save requires after it the objective case." His five examples are these: "All, save I, were at rest, and enjoyment."— Frankenstein. "There was no stranger with us, in the house, save we two."—1 Kings, iii, 18.
"And nothing wanting is, save she, alas!"
—DRUMMOND of Hawthornden.
"When all slept sound, save she, who bore them both."
—ROGERS, Italy, p. 108.
"And all were gone, save him, who now kept guard."
—Ibid., p. 185.
OBS. 4.—The conjunction if is sometimes used in the Bible to express, not a supposition of what follows it, but an emphatic negation: as, "I have sworn in my wrath, if they shall enter into my rest."—Heb., iv, 3. That is, that they shall not enter. The same peculiarity is found in the Greek text, and also in the Latin, and other versions. Or, in the obsolete phrase, "or ever," is not properly a conjunction, but a conjunctive adverb of time, meaning before. It is supposed to be a corruption of ere: as, "I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or ever the earth was."—Prov., viii, 23. "And we, or ever he come near, are ready to kill him."—Acts, xxiii, 15. This term derives no support from the original text.
OBS. 5.—There are some peculiar phrases, or combinations of words, which have the force of conjunctions, and which it is not very easy to analyze satisfactorily in parsing: as, "And for all there were so many, yet was not the net broken."—John, xxi, 11. Here for all is equivalent to although, or notwithstanding; either of which words would have been more elegant. Nevertheless is composed of three words, and is usually reckoned a conjunctive adverb; but it might as well be called a disjunctive conjunction, for it is obviously equivalent to yet, but, or notwithstanding; as, "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me."—Gal., ii, 20. Here, for nevertheless and but, we have in the Greek the same particle [Greek: de]. "Each man's mind has some peculiarity, as well as his face."—Locke. "Relative pronouns, as well as conjunctions, serve to connect sentences."—Murray's Gram., p. 124. Here the first as corresponds to the second, but well not being used in the literal sense of an adverb, some judicious grammarians take the whole phrase as a conjunction. It is, however, susceptible of division: as, "It is adorned with admirable pieces of sculpture, as well modern as ancient."—Addison.
OBS. 6.—So the phrases, for as much as, in as much as, in so much that, if taken collectively, have the nature of conjunctions; yet they contain within themselves correspondent terms and several different parts of speech. The words are sometimes printed separately, and sometimes partly together. Of late years, forasmuch, inasmuch, insomuch, have been usually compounded, and called adverbs. They might as well, perhaps, be called conjunctions, as they were by some of our old grammarians; for two conjunctions sometimes come together: as, "Answering their questions, as if[314] it were a matter that needed it."—Locke. "These should be at first gently treated, as though we expected an imposthumation,"—Sharp. "But there are many things which we must acknowledge to be true, notwithstanding that we cannot comprehend them."—Beattie's Moral Science, p. 211. "There is no difference, except that some are heavier than others."—"We may be playful, and yet innocent; grave, and yet corrupt."—Murray's Key, p. 166.
OBS. 7.—Conjunctions have no grammatical modifications, and are consequently incapable of any formal agreement or disagreement with other words; yet their import as connectives, copulative or disjunctive, must be carefully observed, lest we write or speak them improperly. Example of error: "Prepositions are generally set before nouns and pronouns."—Wilbur's Gram., p. 20. Here and should be or; because, although a preposition usually governs a noun or a pronoun, it seldom governs both at once. And besides, the assertion above seems very naturally to mean, that nouns and pronouns are generally preceded by prepositions—as gross an error as dullness could invent! L. Murray also says of prepositions: "They are, for the most part, put before nouns and pronouns."—Gram., p. 117. So Felton: "They generally stand before nouns and pronouns."—Analytic and Prac. Gram., p. 61. The blunder however came originally from Lowth, and out of the following admirable enigma: "Prepositions, standing by themselves in construction, are put before nouns and pronouns; and sometimes after verbs; but in this sort of composition they are chiefly prefixed to verbs: as, to outgo, to overcome."—Lowth's Gram., p. 66.
OBS. 8.—The opposition suggested by the disjunctive particle or, is sometimes merely nominal, or verbal: as, "That object is a triangle, or figure contained under three right lines."—Harris. "So if we say, that figure is a sphere, or a globe, or a ball."—Id., Hermes, p. 258. In these cases, the disjunction consists in nothing but an alternative of words; for the terms connected describe or name the same thing. For this sense of or, the Latins had a peculiar particle, sive, which they called Subdisjunctiva, a Subdisjunctive: as, "Alexander sive Paris; Mars sive Mavors."—Harris's Hermes, p. 258. In English, the conjunction or is very frequently equivocal: as, "They were both more ancient than Zoroaster or Zerdusht."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 250; Murray's Gram., p. 297. Here, if the reader does not happen to know that Zoroaster and Zerdusht mean the same person, he will be very likely to mistake the sense. To avoid this ambiguity, we substitute, (in judicial proceedings,) the Latin adverb alias, otherwise; using it as a conjunction subdisjunctive, in lieu of or, or the Latin sive: as, "Alexander, alias Ellick."—"Simson, alias Smith, alias Baker."—Johnson's Dict.