LESSON XVII.—NOUNS, OR CASES.
68. Are there any exceptions or objections to the old rule, "Active verbs govern the objective case?" 69. Of how many different constructions is the objective case susceptible? 70. What is the usual position of the objective case, and what exceptions are there? 71. Can any thing but the governing of an objective noun or pronoun make an active verb transitive? 72. In the sentence, "What have I to do with thee?" how are have and do to be parsed? 73. Can infinitives, participles, phrases, sentences, and parts of sentences, be really "in the objective case?" 74. In the sentence, "I know why she blushed," how is know to be parsed? 75. In the sentence, "I know that Messias cometh," how are know and that to be parsed? 76. In the sentence, "And Simon he surnamed Peter", how are Simon and Peter to be parsed? 77. In such sentences as, "I paid him the money,"—"He asked them the question," how are the two objectives to be parsed? 78. Does any verb in English ever govern two objectives that are not coupled? 79. Are there any of our passive verbs that can properly govern the objective case? 80. Is not our language like the Latin, in respect to verbs governing two cases, and passives retaining the latter? 81. How do our grammarians now dispose of what remains to us of the old Saxon dative case? 82. Do any reputable writers allow passive verbs to govern the objective case? 83. What says Lindley Murray about this passive government? 84. Why is the position, "Active verbs govern the objective case," of no use to the composer? 85. On what is the construction of same cases founded? 86. Does this construction admit of any variety in the position of the words? 87. Does an ellipsis of the verb or participle change this construction into apposition? 88. Is it ever right to put both terms before the verb? 89. What kinds of words can take different cases after them? 90. Can a participle which is governed by a preposition, have a case after it which is governed by neither? 91. How is the word man to be parsed in the following example? "The atrocious crime of being a young man, I shall neither attempt to palliate, nor deny."
LESSON XVIII.—NOUNS, OR CASES.
92. In what kinds of examples do we meet with a doubtful case after a participle? 93. Is the case after the verb reckoned doubtful, when the subject going before is a sentence, or something not declinable by cases? 94. In the sentence, "It is certainly as easy to be a scholar, as a gamester," what is the case of scholar and gamester, and why? 95. Are there any verbs that sometimes connect like cases, and sometimes govern the objective? 96. What faults are there in the rules given by Lowth, Murray, Smith, and others, for the construction of like cases? 97. Can a preposition ever govern any thing else than a noun or a pronoun? 98. Is every thing that a preposition governs, necessarily supposed to have cases, and to be in the objective? 99. Why or wherein is the common rule, "Prepositions govern the objective case," defective or insufficient? 100. In such phrases as in vain, at first, in particular, how is the adjective to be parsed? 101. In such expressions as, "I give it up for lost,"—"I take it for granted," how is the participle to be parsed? 102. In such phrases as, at once, from thence, till now, how is the latter word to be parsed? 103. What peculiarity is there in the construction of nouns of time, measure, distance, or value? 104. What is observed of the words like, near, and nigh? 105. What is observed of the word worth? 106. According to Johnson and Tooke, what is worth, in such phrases as, "Wo worth the day?" 107. After verbs of giving, paying, and the like, what ellipsis is apt to occur? 108. What is observed of the nouns used in dates? 109. What defect is observable in the common rules for "the case absolute," or "the nominative independent?" 110. In how many ways is the nominative case put absolute? 111. What participle is often understood after nouns put absolute? 112. In how many ways can nouns of the second person be employed? 113. What is said of nouns used in exclamations, or in mottoes and abbreviated sayings? 114. What is observed of such phrases as, "hand to hand,"—"face to face?" 115. What authors deny the existence of "the case absolute?"
LESSON XIX.—ADJECTIVES.
1. Does the adjective frequently relate to what is not uttered with it? 2. What is observed of those rules which suppose every adjective to relate to some noun? 3. To what does the adjective usually relate, when it stands alone after a finite verb? 4. Where is the noun or pronoun, when an adjective follows an infinitive or a participle? 5. What is observed of adjectives preceded by the and used elliptically? 6. What is said of the position of the adjective? 7. In what instances is the adjective placed after its noun? 8. In what instances may the adjective either precede or follow the noun? 9. What are the construction and import of the phrases, in particular, in general, and the like? 10. What is said of adjectives as agreeing or disagreeing with their nouns in number? 11. What is observed of this and that as referring to two nouns connected? 12. What is remarked of the use of adjectives for adverbs? 13. How can one determine whether an adjective or an adverb is required? 14. What is remarked of the placing of two or more adjectives before one noun? 15. How can one avoid the ambiguity which Dr. Priestley notices in the use of the adjective no?
LESSON XX.—PRONOUNS.
1. Can such pronouns as stand for things not named, be said to agree with the nouns for which they are substituted? 2. Is the pronoun we singular when it is used in lieu of I? 3. Is the pronoun you singular when used in lieu of thou or thee? 4. What is there remarkable in the construction of ourself and yourself? 5. Of what person, number, and gender, is the relative, when put after such terms of address as, your Majesty, your Highness, your Lordship, your Honour? 6. How does the English fashion of putting you for thou, compare with the usage of the French, and of other nations? 7. Do any imagine these fashionable substitutions to be morally objectionable? 8. What figures of rhetoric are liable to affect the agreement of pronouns with their antecedents? 9. How does the pronoun agree with its noun in cases of personification? 10. How does the pronoun agree with its noun in cases of metaphor? 11. How does the pronoun agree with its noun in cases of metonymy? 12. How does the pronoun agree with its noun in cases of synecdoche? 13. What is the usual position of pronouns, and what exceptions are there? 14. When a pronoun represents a phrase or sentence, of what person, number, and gender is it? 15. Under what circumstances can a pronoun agree with either of two antecedents? 16. With what does the relative agree when an other word is introduced by the pronoun it? 17. In the sentence, "It is useless to complain," what does it represent? 18. How are relative and interrogative pronouns placed? 19. What are the chief constructional peculiarities of the relative pronouns? 20. Why does the author discard the two special rules commonly given for the construction of relatives?
LESSON XXI.—PRONOUNS.
21. To what part of speech is the greatest number of rules applied in parsing? 22. Of the twenty-four rules in this work, how many are applicable to pronouns? 23. Of the seven rules for cases, how many are applicable to relatives and interrogatives? 24. What is remarked of the ellipsis or omission of the relative? 25. What is said of the suppression of the antecedent? 26. What is noted of the word which, as applied to persons? 27. What relative is applied to a proper noun taken merely as a name? 28. When do we employ the same relative in successive clauses? 29. What odd use is sometimes made of the pronoun your? 30. Under what figure of syntax did the old grammarians rank the plural construction of a noun of multitude? 31. Does a collective noun with a singular definitive before it ever admit of a plural verb or pronoun? 32. Do collective nouns generally admit of being made literally plural? 33. When joint antecedents are of different persons, with which person does the pronoun agree? 34. When joint antecedents differ in gender, of what gender is the pronoun? 35. Why is it wrong to say, "The first has a lenis, and the other an asper over them?" 36. Can nouns without and be taken jointly, as if they had it? 37. Can singular antecedents be so suggested as to require a plural pronoun, when only one of them is uttered? 38. Why do singular antecedents connected by or or nor appear to require a singular pronoun? 39. Can different antecedents connected by or be accurately represented by differing pronouns connected in the same way? 40. Why are we apt to use a plural pronoun after antecedents of different genders? 41. Do the Latin grammars teach the same doctrine as the English, concerning nominatives or antecedents connected disjunctively?