OBSERVATIONS ON RULE I.
OBS. 1.—The article is a kind of index, usually pointing to some noun; and it is a general, if not a universal, principle, that no one noun admits of more than one article. Hence, two or more articles in a sentence are signs of two or more nouns; and hence too, by a very convenient ellipsis, an article before an adjective is often made to relate to a noun understood; as, "The grave [people] rebuke the gay [people], and the gay [people] mock the grave" [people].—Maturin's Sermons, p. 103. "The wise [persons] shall inherit glory."—Prov., iii, 35. "The vile [person] will talk villainy."—Coleridge's Lay Sermons, p. 105: see Isaiah, xxxii, 6. "The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple" [ones].—Psal., xix, 7. "The Old [Testament] and the New Testament are alike authentic."—"The animal [world] and the vegetable world are adapted to each other."—"An epic [poem] and a dramatic poem are the same in substance."—Ld. Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 274. "The neuter verb is conjugated like the active" [verb].—Murray's Gram., p. 99. "Each section is supposed to contain a heavy [portion] and a light portion; the heavy [portion] being the accented syllable, and the light [portion] the unaccented" [syllable].—Rush, on the Voice, p. 364.
OBS. 2.—Our language does not, like the French, require a repetition of the article before every noun in a series; because the same article may serve to limit the signification of several nouns, provided they all stand in the same construction. Hence the following sentence is bad English: "The understanding and language have a strict connexion."—Murray's Gram., i, p. 356. The sense of the former noun only was meant to be limited. The expression therefore should have been, "Language and the understanding have a strict connexion," or, "The understanding has a strict connexion with language." In some instances, one article seems to limit the sense of several nouns that are not all in the same construction, thus: "As it proves a greater or smaller obstruction to the speaker's or writer's aim."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 200. That is—"to the aim of the speaker or the writer." It is, in fact, the possessive, that limits the other nouns; for, "a man's foes" means, "the foes of a man;" and, "man's wisdom," means, "the wisdom of man." The governing noun cannot have an article immediately before it. Yet the omission of articles, when it occurs, is not properly by ellipsis, as some grammarians declare it to be; for there never can be a proper ellipsis of an article, when there is not also an ellipsis of its noun. Ellipsis supposes the omitted words to be necessary to the construction, when they are not so to the sense; and this, it would seem, cannot be the case with a mere article. If such a sign be in any wise necessary, it ought to be used; and if not needed in any respect, it cannot be said to be understood. The definite article being generally required before adjectives that are used by ellipsis as nouns, we in this case repeat it before every term in a series; as, "They are singled out from among their fellows, as the kind, the amiable, the sweet-tempered, the upright."—Dr. Chalmers.
"The great, the gay, shall they partake The heav'n that thou alone canst make?"—Cowper.
OBS. 3.—The article precedes its noun, and is never, by itself, placed after it; as, "Passion is the drunkenness of the mind."—Southey. When an adjective likewise precedes the noun, the article is usually placed before the adjective, that its power of limitation may extend over that also; as, "A concise writer compresses his thoughts into the fewest possible words."—Blair's Rhet., p. 176.
"The private path, the secret acts of men, If noble, far the noblest of their lives."—Young.
OBS. 4.—The relative position of the article and the adjective is seldom a matter of indifference. Thus, it is good English to say, "both the men," or, "the two men;" but we can by no means say, "the both men" or, "two the men." Again, the two phrases, "half a dollar," and "a half dollar," though both good, are by no means equivalent. Of the pronominal adjectives, some exclude the article; some precede it; and some follow it, like other adjectives. The word same is seldom, if ever used without the definite article or some stronger definitive before it; as, "On the same day,"—"in that same hour,"—"These same gentlemen." After the adjective both, the definite article may be used, but it is generally unnecessary, and this is a sufficient reason for omitting it: as, "The following sentences will fully exemplify, to the young grammarian, both the parts of this rule."—Murray's Gram., i, p. 192. Say, "both parts." The adjective few may be used either with or without an article, but not with the same import: as, "The few who were present, were in the secret;" i. e., All then present knew the thing. "Few that were present, were in the secret;" i.e., Not many then present knew the thing. "When I say, 'There were few men with him,' I speak diminutively, and mean to represent them as inconsiderable; whereas, when I say, 'There were a few men with him,' I evidently intend to make the most of them."—Murray's Gram., p. 171. See Etymology, Articles, Obs. 28.
OBS. 5.—The pronominal adjectives which exclude the article, are any, each, either, every, much, neither, no, or none, some, this, that, these, those. The pronominal adjectives which precede the article, are all, both, many, such, and what; as, "All the world,"—"Both the judges,"—"Many a[336] mile,"—"Such a chasm,"—"What a freak." In like manner, any adjective of quality, when its meaning is limited by the adverb too, so, as, or how, is put before the article; as, "Too great a study of strength, is found to betray writers into a harsh manner."—Blair's Rhet., p. 179. "Like many an other poor wretch, I now suffer all the ill consequences of so foolish an indulgence." "Such a gift is too small a reward for so great a labour."—Brightland's Gram., p. 95. "Here flows as clear a stream as any in Greece. How beautiful a prospect is here!"—Bicknell's Gram., Part ii, p. 52. The pronominal adjectives which follow the article, are few, former, first, latter, last, little, one, other, and same; as, "An author might lean either to the one [style] or to the other, and yet be beautiful."—Blair's Rhet., p. 179. Many, like few, sometimes follows the article; as, "The many favours which we have received."—"In conversation, for many a man, they say, a many men."—Johnson's Dict. In this order of the words, a seems awkward and needless; as,
"Told of a many thousand warlike French."—Shak.
OBS. 6.—When the adjective is preceded by any other adverb than too, so, as, or how, the article is almost always placed before the adverb: as, "One of the most complete models;"—"An equally important question;"—"An exceedingly rough passage;"—"A very important difference." The adverb quite, however, may be placed either before or after the article, though perhaps with a difference of construction: as, "This is quite a different thing;"—or, "This is a quite different thing." "Finding it quite an other thing;"—or, "Finding it a quite other thing."—Locke, on Ed., p. 153. Sometimes two adverbs intervene between the article and the adjective; as, "We had a rather more explicit account of the Novii."—Philol. Museum, i, 458. But when an other adverb follows too, so, as, or how, the three words should be placed either before the article or after the noun; as, "Who stands there in so purely poetical a light."—Ib., i, 449. Better, perhaps: "In a light so purely poetical."
OBS. 7.—The definitives this, that, and some others, though they supersede the article an or a, may be followed by the adjective one; for we say, "this one thing," but not, "this a thing." Yet, in the following sentence, this and a being separated by other words, appear to relate to the same noun: "For who is able to judge this thy so great a people?"—1 Kings, iii, 9. But we may suppose the noun people to be understood after this. Again, the following example, if it is not wrong, has an ellipsis of the word use after the first a:
"For highest cordials all their virtue lose,
By a too frequent and too bold a use."—Pomfret.
OBS. 8.—When the adjective is placed after the noun, the article generally retains its place before the noun, and is not repeated before the adjective: as, "A man ignorant of astronomy;"—"The primrose pale." In Greek, when an adjective is placed after its noun, if the article is applied to the noun, it is repeated before the adjective; as, "[Greek: Hæ polis hæ megalæ,]"—"The city the great;" i.e., "The great city." [337]
OBS. 9.—Articles, according to their own definition and nature, come before their nouns; but the definite article and an adjective seem sometimes to be placed after the noun to which they both relate: as, "Section the Fourth;"—"Henry the Eighth." Such examples, however, may possibly be supposed elliptical; as, "Section, the fourth division of the chapter;"—"Henry, the eighth king of that name:" and, if they are so, the article, in English, can never be placed after its noun, nor can two articles ever properly relate to one noun, in any particular construction of it. Priestley observes, "Some writers affect to transpose these words, and place the numeral adjective first; [as,] 'The first Henry.' Hume's History, Vol. i, p. 497. This construction is common with this writer, but there seems to be a want of dignity in it."—Rudiments of E. Gram., p. 150. Dr. Webster cites the word Great, in "Alexander the Great" as a name, or part of a name; that is, he gives it as an instance of "cognomination." See his American Dict., 8vo. And if this is right, the article may be said to relate to the epithet only, as it appears to do. For, if the word is taken substantively, there is certainly no ellipsis; neither is there any transposition in putting it last, but rather, as Priestley suggests, in putting it first.
OBS. 10.—The definite article is often prefixed to comparatives and superlatives; and its effect is, as Murray observes, (in the words of Lowth,) "to mark the degree the more strongly, and to define it the more precisely: as, 'The more I examine it, the better I like it.' 'I like this the least of any.'"—Murray's Gram., p. 33; Lowth's, 14. "For neither if we eat, are we the better; neither if we eat not, are we the worse."—1 Cor., viii, 8. "One is not the more agreeable to me for loving beef, as I do; nor the less agreeable for preferring mutton."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. ii, p. 365. "They are not the men in the nation, the most difficult to be replaced."—Priestley's Gram., p. 148. In these instances, the article seems to be used adverbially, and to relate only to the adjective or adverb following it. (See observation fourth, on the Etymology of Adverbs.) Yet none of our grammarians have actually reckoned the an adverb. After the adjective, the noun might perhaps be supplied; but when the word the is added to an adverb, we must either call it an adverb, or make an exception to Rule 1st above: and if an exception is to be made, the brief form which I have given, cannot well be improved. For even if a noun be understood, it may not appear that the article relates to it, rather than to the degree of the quality. Thus: "The deeper the well, the clearer the water." This Dr. Ash supposes to mean, "The deeper well the well is, the clearer water the water is."—Ash's Gram., p. 107. But does the text specify a particular "deeper well" or "clearer water?" I think not. To what then does the refer, but to the proportionate degree of deeper and clearer?
OBS. 11.—The article the is sometimes elegantly used, after an idiom common in the French language, in lieu of a possessive pronoun; as, "He looked him full in the face; i. e. in his face."—Priestley's Gram., p. 150. "Men who have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal."—Rom., xi, 4. That is, their knees.
OBS. 12.—The article an or a, because it implies unity, is applicable to nouns of the singular number only; yet a collective noun, being singular in form, is sometimes preceded by this article even when it conveys the idea of plurality and takes a plural verb: as, "There are a very great number [of adverbs] ending in ly."—Buchanan's Syntax, p. 63. "A plurality of them are sometimes felt at the same instant."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. 114. In support of this construction, it would be easy to adduce a great multitude of examples from the most reputable writers; but still, as it seems not very consistent, to take any word plurally after restricting it to the singular, we ought rather to avoid this if we can, and prefer words that literally agree in number: as, "Of adverbs there are very many ending in ly"—"More than one of them are sometimes felt at the same instant." The word plurality, like other collective nouns, is literally singular: as, "To produce the latter, a plurality of objects is necessary."—Kames, El. of Crit., Vol. i, p. 224.
OBS. 13.—Respecting the form of the indefinite article, present practice differs a little from that of our ancient writers. An was formerly used before all words beginning with h, and before several other words which are now pronounced in such a manner as to require a: thus, we read in the Bible, "An help,"—"an house,"—"an hundred,"—"an one,"—"an ewer,"—"an usurer;" whereas we now say, "A help,"—"a house,"—"a hundred,"—"a one,"—"a ewer,"—"a usurer."
OBS. 14.—Before the word humble, with its compounds and derivatives, some use an, and others, a; according to their practice, in this instance, of sounding or suppressing the aspiration. Webster and Jameson sound the h, and consequently prefer a; as, "But a humbling image is not always necessary to produce that effect."—Kames, El. of Crit., i, 205. "O what a blessing is a humble mind!"—Christian Experience, p. 342. But Sheridan, Walker, Perry, Jones, and perhaps a majority of fashionable speakers, leave the h silent, and would consequently say, "An humbling image,"—"an humble mind,"—&c.
OBS. 15.—An observance of the principles on which the article is to be repeated or not repeated in a sentence, is of very great moment in respect to accuracy of composition. These principles are briefly stated in the notes below, but it is proper that the learner should know the reasons of the distinctions which are there made. By a repetition of the article before several adjectives in the same construction, a repetition of the noun is implied; but without a repetition of the article, the adjectives, in all fairness of interpretation, are confined to one and the same noun: as, "No figures will render a cold or an empty composition interesting."—Blair's Rhet., p. 134. Here the author speaks of a cold composition and an empty composition as different things. "The metaphorical and the literal meaning are improperly mixed."—Murray's Gram., p. 339. Here the verb are has two nominatives, one of which is expressed, and the other understood. "But the third and the last of these [forms] are seldom used."—Adam's Lat. Gram., p. 186. Here the verb "are used" has two nominatives, both of which are understood; namely, "the third form," and "the last form." Again: "The original and present signification is always retained."—Dr. Murray's Hist. of Lang., Vol. ii, p. 149. Here one signification is characterized as being both original and present. "A loose and verbose manner never fails to create disgust."—Blair's Rhet., p. 261. That is, one manner, loose and verbose. "To give a short and yet clear and plain answer to this proposition."—Barclay's Works, Vol. i, p. 533. That is, one answer, short, clear, and plain; for the conjunctions in the text connect nothing but the adjectives.
OBS. 16.—To avoid repetition, even of the little word the, we sometimes, with one article, join inconsistent qualities to a plural noun;—that is, when the adjectives so differ as to individualize the things, we sometimes make the noun plural, in stead of repeating the article: as, "The north and south poles;" in stead of, "The north and the south pole."—"The indicative and potential moods;" in stead of "The indicative and the potential mood."—"The Old and New Testaments;" in stead of, "The Old and the New Testament." But, in any such case, to repeat the article when the noun is made plural, is a huge blunder; because it implies a repetition of the plural noun. And again, not to repeat the article when the noun is singular, is also wrong; because it forces the adjectives to coalesce in describing one and the same thing. Thus, to say, "The north and south pole" is certainly wrong, unless we mean by it, one pole, or slender stick of wood, pointing north and south; and again, to say, "The north and the south poles," is also wrong, unless we mean by it, several poles at the north and others at the south. So the phrase, "The Old and New Testament" is wrong, because we have not one Testament that is both Old and New; and again, "The Old and the New Testaments," is wrong, because we have not several Old Testaments and several New ones: at least we have them not in the Bible.
OBS. 17.—Sometimes a noun that admits no article, is preceded by adjectives that do not describe the same thing; as, "Never to jumble metaphorical and plain language together."—Blair's Rhet., p. 146. This means, "metaphorical language and plain language;" and, for the sake of perfect clearness, it would perhaps be better to express it so. "For as intrinsic and relative beauty must often be blended in the same building, it becomes a difficult task to attain both in any perfection."—Karnes, El. of Crit., Vol. ii, p. 330. That is, "intrinsic beauty and relative beauty" must often be blended; and this phraseology would be better. "In correspondence to that distinction of male and female sex."—Blair's Rhet., p. 74. This may be expressed as well or better, in half a dozen other ways; for the article may be added, or the noun may be made plural, with or without the article, and before or after the adjectives. "They make no distinction between causes of civil and criminal jurisdiction."— Adams's Rhet., Vol. i, p. 302. This means—"between causes of civil and causes of criminal jurisdiction;" and, for the sake of perspicuity, it ought to have been so written,—or, still better, thus: "They make no distinction between civil causes and criminal."