The Grammar of English Grammars by Goold Brown (read books for money TXT) 📖
- Author: Goold Brown
- Performer: -
Book online «The Grammar of English Grammars by Goold Brown (read books for money TXT) 📖». Author Goold Brown
19. Does a singular antecedent ever admit of a plural pronoun? 20. Can a pronoun agree with its antecedent in one sense and not in an other? 21. If the antecedent is a collective noun conveying the idea of plurality, must the pronoun always be plural? 22. If there are two or more antecedents connected by and, must the pronoun always be plural? 23. If there are antecedents connected by or or nor, is the pronoun always to take them separately? 24. Must a finite verb always agree with its nominative in number and person? 25. If the nominative is a collective noun conveying the idea of plurality, must the verb always be plural? 26. If there are two or more nominatives connected by and, must the verb always be plural? 21. If there are nominatives connected by or or nor, is the verb always to refer to them separately? 28. Does the preposition to before the infinitive always govern the verb? 29. Can the preposition to govern or precede any other mood than the infinitive? 30. Is the preposition to "understood" after bid, dare, feel, and so forth, where it is "superfluous and improper?" 31. How many and what exceptions are there to rule 20th, concerning participles? 32. How many and what exceptions are there to the rule for adverbs? 33. How many and what exceptions are there to the rule for conjunctions? 34. How many and what exceptions are there to the rule for prepositions? 35. Is there any exception to the 24th rule, concerning interjections?
LESSON XI.—THE OBSERVATIONS.1. How many of the ten parts of speech in English are in general incapable of any agreement? 2. Can there be a syntactical relation of words without either agreement or government? 3. Is there ever any needful agreement between unrelated words? 4. Is the mere relation of words according to the sense an element of much importance in English syntax? 5. What parts of speech have no other syntactical property than that of simple relation? 6. What rules of relation are commonly found in grammars? 7. Of what parts is syntax commonly said to consist? 8. Is it common to find in grammars, the rules of syntax well adapted to their purpose? 9. Can you specify some that appear to be faulty? 10. Wherein consists the truth of grammatical doctrine, and how can one judge of what others teach? 11. Do those who speak of syntax as being divided into two parts, Concord and Government, commonly adhere to such division? 12. What false concords and false governments are cited in Obs. 7th of the first chapter? 13. Is it often expedient to join in the same rule such principles as must always be applied separately? 14. When one can condense several different principles into one rule, is it not expedient to do so? 15. Is it ever convenient to have one and the same rule applicable to different parts of speech? 16. Is it ever convenient to have rules divided into parts, so as to be double or triple in their form? 17. What instance of extravagant innovation is given in Obs. 12th of the first chapter?
LESSON XII.—THE OBSERVATIONS.18. Can a uniform series of good grammars, Latin, Greek, English, &c., be produced by a mere revising of one defective book for each language? 19. Whose are "The Principles of English Grammar" which Dr. Bullions has republished with alterations, "on the plan of Murray's Grammar?" 20. Can praise and success entitle to critical notice works in themselves unworthy of it? 21. Do the Latin grammarians agree in their enumeration of the concords in Latin? 22. What is said in Obs. 16th, of the plan of mixing syntax with etymology? 23. Do not the principles of etymology affect those of syntax? 24. Can any words agree, or disagree, except in something that belongs to each of them? 25. How many and what parts of speech are concerned in government? 26. Are rules of government to be applied to the governing words, or to the governed? 27. What are gerundives? 28. How many and what are the principles of syntax which belong to the head of simple relation? 29. How many agreements, or concords, are there in English syntax? 30. How many rules of government are there in the best Latin grammars? 31. What fault is there in the usual distribution of these rules? 32. How many and what are the governments in English syntax? 33. Can the parsing of words be varied by any transposition which does not change their import? 34. Can the parsing of words be affected by the parser's notion of what constitutes a simple sentence? 35. What explanation of simple and compound sentences is cited from Dr. Wilson, in Obs. 25? 36. What notion had Dr. Adam of simple and compound sentences? 37. Is this doctrine consistent either with itself or with Wilson's? 38. How can one's notion of ellipsis affect his mode of parsing, and his distinction of sentences as simple or compound?
LESSON XIII.—ARTICLES.1. Can one noun have more than one article? 2. Can one article relate to more than one noun? 3. Why cannot the omission of an article constitute a proper ellipsis? 4. What is the position of the article with respect to its noun? 5. What is the usual position of the article with respect to an adjective and a noun? 6. Can the relative position of the article and adjective be a matter of indifference? 7. What adjectives exclude, or supersede, the article? 8. What adjectives precede the article? 9. What four adverbs affect the position of the article and adjective? 10. Do other adverbs come between the article and the adjective? 11. Can any of the definitives which preclude an or a, be used with the adjective one? 12. When the adjective follows its noun, where stands the article? 13. Can the article in English, ever be placed after its noun? 14. What is the effect of the word the before comparatives and superlatives? 15. What article may sometimes be used in lieu of a possessive pronoun? 16. Is the article an or a always supposed to imply unity? 17. Respecting an or a, how does present usage differ from the usage of ancient writers? 18. Can the insertion or omission of an article greatly affect the import of a sentence? 19. By a repetition of the article before two or more adjectives, what other repetition is implied? 20. How do we sometimes avoid such repetition? 21. Can there ever be an implied repetition of the noun when no article is used?
LESSON XIV.—NOUNS, OR CASES.1. In how many different ways can the nominative case be used? 2. What is the usual position of the nominative and verb, and when is it varied? 3. With what nominatives of the second person, does the imperative verb agree? 4. Why is it thought improper to put a noun in two cases at once? 5. What case in Latin and Greek is reckoned the subject of the infinitive mood? 6. Can this, in general, be literally imitated in English? 7. Do any English authors adopt the Latin doctrine of the accusative (or objective) before the infinitive? 8. Is the objective, when it occurs before the infinitive in English, usually governed by some verb, participle, or preposition? 9. What is our nearest approach to the Latin construction of the accusative before the infinitive? 10. What is apposition, and from whom did it receive this name? 11. Is there a construction of like cases, that is not apposition? 12. To which of the apposite terms is the rule for apposition to be applied? 13. Are words in apposition always to be parsed separately? 14. Wherein are the common rule and definition of apposition faulty? 15. Can the explanatory word ever be placed first? 16. Is it ever indifferent, which word be called the principal, and which the explanatory term? 17. Why cannot two nouns, each having the possessive sign, be put in apposition with each other? 18. Where must the sign of possession be put, when two or more possessives are in apposition? 19. Is it compatible with apposition to supply between the words a relative and a verb; as, "At Mr. Smith's [who is] the bookseller?" 20. How can a noun be, or seem to be, in apposition with a possessive pronoun? 21. What construction is produced by the repetition of a noun or pronoun? 22. What is the construction of a noun, when it emphatically repeats the idea suggested by a preceding sentence?
LESSON XV.—NOUNS, OR CASES.23. Can words differing in number be in apposition with each other? 24. What is the usual construction of each other and one an other? 25. Is there any argument from analogy for taking each other and one an other for compounds? 26. Do we often put proper nouns in apposition with appellatives? 27. What preposition is often put between nouns that signify the same thing? 28. When is an active verb followed by two words in apposition? 29. Does apposition require any other agreement than that of case? 30. What three modes of construction appear like exceptions to Rule 4th? 31. In the phrase, "For David my servant's sake," which word is governed by sake, and which is to be parsed by the rule of apposition? 32. In the sentence, "It is man's to err," what is supposed to govern man's? 33. Does the possessive case admit of any abstract sense or construction? 34. Why is it reasonable to limit the government of the possessive to nouns only, or to words taken substantive? 35. Does the possessive case before a real participle denote the possessor of something? 36. What two great authors differ in regard to the correctness of the phrases, "upon the rule's being observed," and "of its being neglected?" 37. Is either of them right in his argument? 38. Is the distinction between the participial noun and the participle well preserved by Murray and his amenders? 39. Who invented the doctrine, that a participle and its adjuncts may be used as "one name" and in that capacity govern the possessive? 40. Have any popular authors adopted this doctrine? 41. Is the doctrine well sustained by its adopters, or is it consistent with the analogy of general grammar? 42. When one doubts whether a participle ought to be the governing word or the adjunct,—that is, whether he ought to use the possessive case before it or the objective,—what shall he do? 43, What is objected to the sentences in which participles govern the possessive case, and particularly to the examples given by Priestley, Murray, and others, to prove such a construction right? 44. Do the teachers of this doctrine agree among themselves? 45. How does the author of this work generally dispose of such government? 46. Does he positively determine, that the participle should never be allowed to govern the possessive case?
LESSON XVI.—NOUNS, OR CASES.47. Are the distinctions of voice and of time as much regarded in participial nouns as in participles? 48. Why cannot an omission of the possessive sign be accounted a true ellipsis? 49. What is the usual position of the possessive case, and what exceptions are there? 50. In what other form can the meaning of the possessive case be expressed? 51. Is the possessive often governed by what is not expressed? 52. Does every possessive sign imply a separate governing noun? 53. How do compounds take the sign of possession? 54. Do we put the sign of possession always and only where the two terms of the possessive relation meet? 55. Can the possessive sign be ever rightly added to a separate adjective? 56. What is said of the omission of s from the possessive singular on account of its hissing sound? 57. What errors do Kirkham, Smith, and others, teach concerning the possessive singular? 58. Why is Murray's rule for the possessive case objectionable? 59. Do compounds embracing the possessive case appear to be written with sufficient uniformity? 60. What rules for nouns coming together are inserted in Obs. 31st on Rule 4th? 61. Does the compounding of words necessarily preclude their separate use? 62. Is there a difference worth notice, between such terms or things as heart-ease and heart's-ease; a harelip and a hare's lip; a headman and a headsman; a lady's-slipper and a lady's slipper? 63. Where usage is utterly unsettled, what guidance should be sought? 64. What peculiarities are noticed in regard to the noun side? 65. What peculiarities has the possessive case in regard to correlatives? 66.
Comments (0)