The Grammar of English Grammars by Goold Brown (free ebook reader .txt) 📕

one may conceive it to mean, "such as follow." But some critical writers, it appears, prefer the singular verb, "as follows" Hear Campbell: "When a verb is used impersonally, it ought undoubtedly to be in the singular number, whether the neuter pronoun be expressed or understood: and when no nominative in the sentence can regularly be construed with the verb, it ought to be considered as impersonal. For this reason, analogy as well as usage favour [say favours] this mode of expression, 'The conditions of the agreement were as follows;' and not 'as follow.' A few late writers have inconsiderately adopted this last form through a mistake of the construction. For the same reason we ought to say, 'I shall consider his censures so far only as concerns my friend's conduct;' and not 'so far as concern.'"—Philosophy of Rhet., p. 229. It is too much to say, at least of one of these sentences, that there is no nominative with which the plural verb can be regularly construed. In the former, the word as may be said to be a plural nominative; or, if we will have this to be a conjunction, the pronoun they, representing conditions, may be regularly supplied, as above. In the latter, indeed, as is not a pronoun; because it refers to "so far," which is not a noun. But the sentence is bad English; because the verb concern or concerns is improperly left without a nominative. Say therefore, 'I shall consider his censures so far only as they concern my friend's conduct;'—or, 'so far only as my friend's conduct is concerned.' The following is an other example which I conceive to be wrong; because, with an adverb for its antecedent, as is made a nominative: "They ought therefore to be uttered as quickly as is consistent with distinct articulation."—Sheridan's Elocution, p. 76. Say rather, "They ought therefore to be uttered with as much rapidity as is consistent with distinct articulation."

OBS. 11.—Lindley Murray was so much puzzled with Tooke's notion of as, and Campbell's doctrine of the impersonal verb, that he has expressly left his pupils to hesitate and doubt, like himself, whether one ought to say "as follows" or "as follow," when the preceding noun is plural; or—to furnish an alternative, (if they choose it,) he shows them at last how they may dodge the question, by adopting some other phraseology. He begins thus: "Grammarians differ in opinion, respecting the propriety of the following modes of expression: 'The arguments advanced were nearly as follows;' 'the positions were, as appears, incontrovertible.'"— Murray's Gram., 8vo, p. 146. Then follows a detail of suggestions from Campbell and others, all the quotations being anonymous, or at least without definite references. Omitting these, I would here say of the two examples given, that they are not parallel instances. For, "as follows," refers to what the arguments were,—to the things themselves, considered plurally, and immediately to be exhibited; wherefore the expression ought rather to have been, "as follow," or, "as they here follow." But, "as appears" means "as it appears," or "as the case now appears;" and one of these plain modes of expression would have been much preferable, because the as is here evidently nothing but a conjunction.

OBS. 12.—"The diversity of sentiment on this subject," says L. Murray, "and the respectability of the different opponents, will naturally induce the readers to pause and reflect, before they decide."—Octavo Gram., p. 147. The equivalent expressions by means of which he proposes to evade at last the dilemma, are the following: "The arguments advanced were nearly such as follow;"—"The arguments advanced were nearly of the following nature;"—"The following are nearly the arguments which were advanced;"— "The arguments advanced were nearly those which follow:"—"These, or nearly these, were the arguments advanced;"—"The positions were such as appear incontrovertible;"—"It appears that the positions were incontrovertible;" —"That the positions were incontrovertible, is apparent;"—"The positions were apparently incontrovertible;"—"In appearance, the positions were incontrovertible."—Ibid. If to shun the expression will serve our turn, surely here are ways enough! But to those who "pause and reflect" with the intention to decide, I would commend the following example: "Reconciliation was offered, on conditions as moderate as were consistent with a permanent union."—Murray's Key, under Rule 1. Here Murray supposes "was" to be wrong, and accordingly changes it to "were," by the Rule, "A verb must agree with its nominative case in number and person." But the amendment is a pointed rejection of Campbell's "impersonal verb," or verb which "has no nominative;" and if the singular is not right here, the rhetorician's respectable authority vouches only for a catalogue of errors. Again, if this verb must be were in order to agree with its nominative, it is still not clear that as, is, or ought to be, the nominative; because the meaning may perhaps be better expressed thus:—"on conditions as moderate as any that were consistent with a permanent union."

OBS. 13.—A late writer expresses his decision of the foregoing question thus: "Of all the different opinions on a grammatical subject, which have arisen in the literary world, there scarcely appears one more indefensible than that of supposing as follows to be an impersonal verb, and to be correctly used in such sentences as this. 'The conditions were as follows.' Nay, we are told that, "A few late writers have adopted this form, 'The conditions were as follow,' inconsiderately;" and, to prove this charge of inconsiderateness, the following sentence is brought forward: 'I shall consider his censure [censures is the word used by Campbell and by Murray] so far only as concern my friend's conduct.' which should be, it is added, 'as concerns, and not as concern.' If analogy, simplicity, or syntactical authority, is of any value in our resolution of the sentence, 'The conditions were as follows,' the word as is as evident a relative as language can afford. It is undoubtedly equivalent to that or which, and relates to its antecedent those or such understood, and should have been the nominative to the verb follow; the sentence, in its present form, being inaccurate. The second sentence is by no means a parallel one. The word as is a conjunction; and though it has, as a relative, a reference to its antecedent so, yet in its capacity of a mere conjunction, it cannot possibly be the nominative case to any verb. It should be, 'it concerns.' Whenever as relates to an adverbial antecedent; as in the sentence, 'So far as it concerns me,' it is merely a conjunction; but when it refers to an adjective antecedent; as in the sentence, 'The business is such as concerns me;' it must be a relative, and susceptible of case, whether its antecedent is expressed or understood; being, in fact, the nominative to the verb concerns."—Nixon's Parser, p. 145. It will be perceived by the preceding remarks, that I do not cite what is here said, as believing it to be in all respects well said, though it is mainly so. In regard to the point at issue, I shall add but one critical authority more: "'The circumstances were as follows.' Several grammarians and critics have approved this phraseology: I am inclined, however, to concur with those who prefer 'as follow.'"—Crombie, on Etym. and Synt., p. 388.

OBS. 14.—The conjunction that is frequently understood; as, "It is seldom [that] their counsels are listened to."—Robertson's Amer., i, 316. "The truth is, [that] grammar is very much neglected among us."—Lowth's Gram., Pref., p. vi. "The Sportsman believes [that] there is Good in his Chace [chase.]"—Harris's Hermes, p. 296.

   "Thou warnst me [that] I have done amiss;
    I should have earlier looked to this."—Scott.

OBS. 15.—After than or as, connecting the terms of a comparison, there is usually an ellipsis of some word or words. The construction of the words employed may be seen, when the ellipsis is supplied; as, "They are stronger than we" [are.]—Numb., xiii. 31. "Wisdom is better than weapons of war" [are.]—Eccl., ix, 18. "He does nothing who endeavours to do more than [what] is allowed to humanity."—Dr. Johnson. "My punishment is greater than [what] I can bear."—Gen., iv, 13. "Ralph gave him more than I" [gave him.]—Churchill's Gram., p. 351. "Ralph gave him more than [he gave] me."—Ibid. "Revelation, surely, was never intended for such as he" [is.]—Campbell's Four Gospels, p. iv. "Let such as him sneer if they will."—Liberator, Vol. ix, p. 182. Here him ought to be he, according to Rule 2d, because the text speaks of such as he is or was. "'You were as innocent of it as me:' 'He did it as well as me.' In both places it ought to be I: that is, as I was, as I did."—Churchill's Gram., p. 352.

   "Rather let such poor souls as you and I
    Say that the holidays are drawing nigh."—Swift.

OBS. 16.—The doctrine above stated, of ellipses after than and as, proceeds on the supposition that these words are conjunctions, and that they connect, not particular words merely, but sentences, or clauses. It is the common doctrine of nearly all our grammarians, and is doubtless liable to fewer objections than any other theory that ever has been, or ever can be, devised in lieu of it. Yet as is not always a conjunction; nor, when it is a conjunction, does it always connect sentences; nor, when it connects sentences, is there always an ellipsis; nor, when there is an ellipsis, is it always quite certain what that ellipsis is. All these facts have been made plain, by observations that have already been bestowed on the word: and, according to some grammarians, the same things may severally be affirmed of the word than. But most authors consider than to be always a conjunction, and generally, if not always, to connect sentences. Johnson and Webster, in their dictionaries, mark it for an adverb; and the latter says of it, "This word signifies also then, both in English and Dutch."—Webster's Amer. Dict., 8vo, w. Than. But what he means by "also," I know not; and surely, in no English of this age, is than equivalent to then, or then to than. The ancient practice of putting then for than, is now entirely obsolete;[434] and, as we have no other term of the same import, most of our expositors merely explain than as "a particle used in comparison."—Johnson, Worcester, Maunder. Some absurdly define it thus: "THAN, adv. Placed in comparison."—Walker, (Rhym. Dict.,) Jones, Scott. According to this definition, than would be a participle! But, since an express comparison necessarily implies a connexion between different terms, it cannot well be denied that than is a connective word; wherefore, not to detain the reader with any profitless controversy, I shall take it for granted that this word is always a conjunction. That it always connects sentences, I do not affirm; because there are instances in which it is difficult to suppose it to connect anything more than particular words: as, "Less judgement than wit is more sail than ballast."—Penn's Maxims. "With no less eloquence than freedom. 'Pari eloquentiâ ac libertate.' Tacitus."—Walker's Particles, p. 200. "Any comparison between these two classes of writers, cannot be other than vague and loose."—Blair's Rhet., p. 347. "This far more than compensates all those little negligences."—Ib., p. 200.

   "Remember Handel? Who that was not born
    Deaf as the dead to harmony, forgets,
    Or can, the more than Homer of his age?"—Cowper.

OBS. 17.—When any two declinable words are connected by than or as, they are almost always, according to the true idiom of our language, to be put in the same case, whether we suppose an ellipsis in the construction of the latter, or not; as, "My Father is greater than I."—Bible. "What do ye more than others?"—Matt., v, 47. "More men than women were there."—Murray's Gram., p. 114. "Entreat him as a father, and the younger men as brethren."—1 Tim., v, 1. "I would that all men were even as I myself."—1 Cor., vii, 7. "Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these?"—John, xxi, 15. This last text is manifestly ambiguous; so that some readers will doubt whether it means—"more than thou lovest these," or—"more than these love me." Is not this because there is an ellipsis in the sentence, and such a one as may be variously conceived and supplied? The original too is ambiguous, but not for the same reason: "[Greek: Simon Iona, agapas me pleion touton];"—And so is the Latin of the Vulgate and of Montanus: "Simon Jona, diligis me plus his?" Wherefore Beza expressed it differently: "Simon fili Jonæ, diligis me plus quâm hi?" The French Bible has it: "Simon, fils de Jona, m'aimes-tu plus que ne font ceux-ci?" And the expression in English should rather have been, "Lovest thou me more than do these?"

OBS. 18.—The comparative degree, in Greek, is said to govern the genitive case; in Latin, the ablative: that is, the genitive or the ablative is sometimes put after this degree without any connecting particle corresponding to than, and without producing a compound sentence. We have examples