OBS. 25.—The same may be said of soever or soe'er, which is considered as only a part of an other word even when it is written separately; as, "On which side soever I cast my eyes." In Mark, iii, 28th, wherewithsoever is commonly printed as two words; but Alger, in his Pronouncing Bible, more properly makes it one. Dr. Webster, in his grammars, calls soever a WORD; but, in his dictionaries, he does not define it as such. "The word soever may be interposed between the attribute and the name; 'how clear soever this idea of infinity,'—'how remote soever it may seem.'—LOCKE."—Webster's Philosophical Gram., p. 154; Improved Gram., p. 107. "SOEVER, so and ever, found in compounds, as in whosoever, whatsoever, wheresoever. See these words."—Webster's Dict., 8vo.
OBS. 26.—The word only, (i.e., onely, or onelike,) when it relates to a noun or a pronoun, is a definitive adjective, meaning single, alone, exclusive of others; as, "The only man,"—"The only men,"—"Man only,"—"Men only,"—"He only,"—"They only." When it relates to a verb or a participle, it is an adverb of manner, and means simply, singly, merely, barely; as, "We fancy that we hate flattery, when we only hate the manner of it."—Art of Thinking, p. 38. "A disinterested love of one's country can only subsist in small republics."—Ib., p. 56. When it stands at the head of a clause, it is commonly a connective word, equivalent to but, or except that; in which sense, it must be called a conjunction, or at least a conjunctive adverb, which is nearly the same thing; as, "Only they would that we should remember the poor."—Gal., ii, 10. "For these signs are prepositions, only they are of more constant use than the rest."—Ward's Gram., p. 129.
OBS. 27.—Among our grammarians, the word "only" often passes for an adverb, when it is in fact an adjective. Such a mistake in this single word, has led Churchill to say of the adverb in general, "It's place is for the most part before adjectives, after nouns, and after verbs;" &c.—New Gram., p. 147. But, properly, the placing of adverbs has nothing to do with "nouns," because adverbs do not relate to nouns. In this author's example, "His arm only was bare," there is no adverb; and, where he afterwards speaks of the latitude allowable in the placing of adverbs, alleging, "It is indifferent whether we say, 'He bared his arm only;' or, 'He bared only his arm,'" the word only is an adjective, in one instance, if not in both. With this writer, and some others, the syntax of an adverb centres mainly in the suggestion, that, "It's propriety and force depend on it's position."—Ib., p. 147. Illustration: "Thus people commonly say; 'I only spoke three words:' which properly implies, that I, and no other person, spoke three words: when the intention of the speaker requires: 'I spoke only three words; that is, no more than three words.'"—Ib., p. 327. One might just as well say, "I spoke three words only." But the interpretation above is hypercritical, and contrary to that which the author himself gives in his note on the other example, thus: "Any other situation of the adverb would make a difference. 'He only bared his arm;' would imply, that he did nothing more than bare his arm. 'Only he bared his arm;' must refer to a preceding part of the sentence, stating something, to which the act of baring his arm was an exception; as, 'He did it in the same manner, only he bared his arm.' If only were placed immediately before arm; as, 'He bared his only arm;' it would be an adjective, and signify, that he had but one arm."—Ib., p. 328. Now are not, "I only spoke three words," and, "He only bared his arm," analogous expressions? Is not the former as good English as the latter? Only, in both, is most naturally conceived to belong to the verb; but either may be read in such a manner as to make it an adjective belonging to the pronoun.
OBS. 28.—The term not but is equivalent to two negatives that make an affirmative; as, "Not but that it is a wide place."—Walker's Particles, p. 89. "Non quo non latus locus sit."—Cic. Ac., iv, 12. It has already been stated, that cannot but is equal to must; as, "It is an affection which cannot but be productive of some distress."—Blair's Rhet., p. 461. It seems questionable, whether but is not here an adverb, rather than a conjunction. However this may be, by the customary (but faulty) omission of the negative before but, in some other sentences, that conjunction has acquired the adverbial sense of only; and it may, when used with that signification, be called an adverb. Thus, the text, "He hath not grieved me but in part." (2 Cor., ii, 5,) might drop the negative not, and still convey the same meaning: "He hath grieved me but in part;" i.e., "only in part." In the following examples, too, but appears to be an adverb, like only: "Things but slightly connected should not be crowded into one sentence."—Murray's Octavo Gram., Index. "The assertion, however, serves but to show their ignorance."—Webster's Essays, p. 96.
"Reason itself but gives it edge and power."—Pope.
"Born but to die, and reasoning but to err."—Id.
OBS. 29.—In some constructions of the word but, there is a remarkable ambiguity; as, "There cannot be but one capital musical pause in a line."—Kames, El. of Crit., ii, 92. "A line admits but one capital pause."—Ibid. Thus does a great critic, in the same paragraph, palpably contradict himself, and not perceive it. Both expressions are equivocal. He ought rather to have said: "A line admits no more than one capital pause."—"There cannot be more than one capital musical pause in a line." Some would say—"admits only one"—"there can be only one." But here, too, is some ambiguity; because only may relate either to one, or to the preceding verb. The use of only for but or except that, is not noticed by our lexicographers; nor is it, in my opinion, a practice much to be commended, though often adopted by men that pretend to write grammatically: as, "Interrogative pronouns are the same as relative, ONLY their antecedents cannot be determined till the answer is given to the question."—Comly's Gram., p. 16. "A diphthong is always long; as, Aurum, Cæsar, &c. ONLY præ, in composition before a vowel is commonly short."—Adam's Gram., p. 254; Gould's, 246.
OBS. 30.—It is said by some grammarians, that, "The adverb there is often used as an expletive, or as a word that adds nothing to the sense; in which case, it precedes the verb and the nominative; as, 'There is a person at the door.'"—Murray's Gram., p. 197; Ingersoll's, 205; Greenleaf's, 33; Nixon's Parser, p. 53. It is true, that in our language the word there is thus used idiomatically, as an introductory term, when we tell what is taking, or has taken, place; but still it is a regular adverb of place, and relates to the verb agreeably to the common rule for adverbs. In some instances it is even repeated in the same sentence, because, in its introductory sense, it is always unemphatical; as, "Because there was pasture there for their flocks."—1 Chron., iv, 41. "If there be indistinctness or disorder there, we can have no success."—Blair's Rhet., p. 271. "There, there are schools adapted to every age."—Woodbridge, Lit. Conv., p. 78. The import of the word is more definite, when emphasis is laid upon it; but this is no good reason for saying, with Dr. Webster, that it is "without signification," when it is without emphasis; or, with Dr. Priestley, that it "seems to have no meaning whatever, except it be thought to give a small degree of emphasis."—Rudiments of E. Gram., p. 135.
OBS. 31.—The noun place itself is just as loose and variable in its meaning as the adverb there. For example; "There is never any difference;" i.e., "No difference ever takes place." Shall we say that "place," in this sense, is not a noun of place? To take place, is, to occur somewhere, or anywhere; and the unemphatic word there is but as indefinite in respect to place, as these other adverbs of place, or as the noun itself. S. B. Goodenow accounts it a great error, to say that there is an adverb of place, when it is thus indefinite; and he chooses to call it an "indefinite pronoun," as, "'What is there here?'—'There is no peace.'—'What need was there of it?'" See his Gram., p. 3 and p. 11. In treating of the various classes of adverbs, I have admitted and shown, that here, there, and where, have sometimes the nature of pronouns, especially in such compounds as hereof, thereof, whereof; but in this instance, I see not what advantage there is in calling there a "pronoun:" we have just as much reason to call here and where pronouns—and that, perhaps, on all occasions. Barnard says, "In the sentence, 'There is one glory of the sun,' &c., the adverb there qualifies the verb is, and seems to have the force of an affirmation, like truly"—Analytical Gram., p. 234. But an adverb of the latter kind may be used with the word there, and I perceive no particular similarity between them: as, "Verily there is a reward for the righteous."—Psal., lviii, 11. "Truly there is a glory of the sun."
OBS. 32.—There is a vulgar error of substituting the adverb most for almost, as in the phrases, "most all,"—"most anywhere,"—"most every day,"—which we sometimes hear for "almost all,"—"almost anywhere,"—"almost every day." The fault is gross, and chiefly colloquial, but it is sometimes met with in books; as, "But thinking he had replied most too rashly, he said, 'I won't answer your question.'"—Wagstaff's History of Friends, Vol. i, p. 207.