CHAPTER IV

GRAMMATICAL PHASES OF WRITING ENGLISH

The present chapter reviews only those grammatical principles that are sometimes violated by students who have had a year of formal grammar.

=Clearness.=—If composition is the art of communicating one’s ideas in words, it is certain that clearness is the first requisite of good writing. Clearness, perfect intelligibility, is secured by means innumerable. One secret however of being clear is to regard grammatical usages. If a man is to be understood exactly, he must be grammatical. No one is excepted. “Grammar,” said Molière, “knows how to lord it even over kings.”

=Ambiguity.=—When an expression is open to two interpretations, it is said to be ambiguous. In the sentence, “He is a fair man,” _fair_ is an ambiguous word. In the sentence, “He was arrested by two officers, who were about to board a West Madison street car, in possession of a large amount of stolen property,” the phrase _in possession_, etc., holds an ambiguous position. Grammatical errors often produce this fault.

=Solecisms.=—Infringements of grammatical rules are called _solecisms_.[14] Never losing sight of the fact that writing English is largely the art of telling some one else just what one means, let us note a few solecisms that hinder a writer from giving his exact meaning.

=Coherence by placing Modifiers rightly.=—I. The rhetorics are fond of quoting droll sentences in which, from being wrongly placed, ideas fail to _cohere_, stick together. A favorite sentence is that from an epitaph in an Ulster churchyard: “Erected to the memory of John Phillips, accidently shot, as a mark of affection by his brother.” Mr. Bardeen (“Sentence-Making”) quotes the following, which sounds like a manufactured joke, but is nevertheless to the point. “Is there a gentleman with one eye named Walker in the club?” “I don’t know; what was the name of his other eye?” Another much quoted and startling sentence reads thus: “In one evening I counted twenty-seven meteors sitting on my back piazza.” Remedy the incoherence of these sentences. _Put close together on the paper ideas that belong close together in the mind._ Do not let adverbs and modifying clauses stray from the thought to which they belong.

=Oral Exercise.=—The order of words in the following sentences should so be changed as to increase the logical coherence of the thoughts.

1. The tops of the French ships were filled with riflemen, like those of the enemy’s ships.

2. The killing by Orlando, of the wrestler, was indirectly due to a plot against his brother, which Oliver invented.

3. I hardly ever remember to have heard such music.

4. I never remember to have seen him. [Here it is better to recast the sentence than to change the position of _never_.]

5. The lad managed a bronco pony, very vicious and dangerous, when only thirteen.

6. Wanted, a hostler to take care of a horse, of a religious turn of mind.

7. After a brief rest Blondin set out again with “Tom Sayers,” and accomplished the feat he had undertaken without a hitch.

This week will see the last times of “The Rogue’s Comedy,” as next season Mr. Willard will play the new play of Henry Arthur Jones entitled “The Physician” exclusively.

II. _Only_, and _not only_, usually belong directly before the word modified.

=Oral Exercise.=—Insert _only_ in the proper blank.

1. Browning —— wrote —— a few poems for boys.

2. She —— breathed —— the name; but we heard it.

3. We —— received his letter, —— this morning.

4. He —— gave —— five cents —— to the church.

III. Avoid the Janus-clause; the Janus-phrase; the Janus-adverb or adjective. The Latin god Janus had two faces, one looking back, the other ahead. Avoid putting a modifier where it becomes double-faced,—where it may be taken either with the preceding idea or with the following idea.

=Oral Exercise.=—So change the position of the double-faced modifiers that their allegiance will be known.

1. There is no doubt that Milton gave Dryden permission to paraphrase Paradise Lost; Dryden did imitate Milton as a matter of fact not very cleverly.

2. There can be no doubt that he quarrelled,—that he fought indeed vigorously. He reappeared at least with a black eye.

3. She will sing in any case charmingly; her training has been admirable.

4. As Hazlitt says, in his book of English proverbs, where no fault is, there needs no pardon.

IV. Avoid putting an adverb between the parts of an infinitive,—between the _to_ and the verb. Some reputable writers approve this construction; still, the better order is to place the modifier before or after the whole infinitive. “Clearly to see,” or “To see clearly,” is better than “To clearly see.” This error is called the _cleft infinitive_.

=Concord of Subject and Predicate.=

1. A collective noun takes a singular verb if the group of objects is thought of as a whole: “The United States is coining gold and silver.” The collective noun takes a plural verb if each separate member of the group is thought of: “The United States are firmly bound together in one union.”

2. When two subject nouns are so closely related in thought that they seem to mean one thing, the verb is in the singular: “His courage and bravery is well approved.”

3. In writing a long sentence, glance back at the number of the subject before you write the verb. A plural near the verb often leads one to forget that the subject is singular. Thus: “The great number of the crows that settle nightly in the grove and fill the air with their cries, makes [not _make_] the place a bedlam.”

4. When a singular subject precedes a parenthetical phrase, the former reaches over the head of the latter, and makes the verb singular. This rule holds even when the parenthesis is introduced by _with_. Thus: “Napoleon, with all his army, was on the march.”

5. _Either_, _neither_, when used as distributive conjunctions, take a singular verb. Mr. Carpenter[15] gives this instance of the error: “Neither Senators Dawes nor Hoar were in their seats to-day.” How shall the sentence be changed to distribute the senators properly?

6. If two subjects connected by _either—or_, etc., differ in person, it is possible to make the verb agree with the subject nearest; as “Neither she nor you are to blame in this; either I or he is to blame.” But this construction is awkward. Avoid the difference in person, or else say, “Neither she is to blame, nor are you; either he is to blame, or I am.”

7. _Each_, _every_, _either_, _neither_, when used as pronouns, always take a singular verb. “Each of us knows; neither of us is ignorant.”

8. _None_ takes either a singular or a plural verb. It is originally _no one_, and many careful writers prefer to keep the singular with it.

=Concord of Adjective (or Participle) and Noun.=

1. There is an old phrase, _these kind_, which, though permitted a century ago, was essentially ungrammatical, and is not allowed to-day. Say, _this kind_, _that kind_, etc.

2. (_a_) Every participle, like every adjective, must agree with its noun in person and number. But furthermore, every participle has an indisputable right to have something to agree with. Too often the poor word is left dangling in mid air. _Shun the unrelated participle and the misrelated participle._ The best of us are only too prone to such slips as this: “Coming up stairs, it was seen that the great window fell,” instead of, “Coming up stairs, we saw the great window fall.” Or this: “Coming up stairs, the window fell on him,” where the _coming_ may belong to the _window_ or to the _him_. In the first of the two incorrect sentences the participle is unrelated; in the second it is misrelated, or at least ambiguously related.

(_b_) Care should be taken not to use a participle when a verbal noun in _ing_ is needed. “The fact of _Poe being_ intemperate should not blind us to the fact of his genius,” is wrong for “The fact of _Poe’s being_ intemperate,” etc.

3. Particularly avoid a singular adjective with a plural noun, in such expressions as, “A long way” [not _ways_]. Note here that _sidewise_, not _sideways_, is correct.

=Concord of Pronoun and Antecedent.=

1. It should be remembered that every singular antecedent takes a singular pronoun. “Everybody came forward and laid _his_ contribution on the table”—not “_their_ contribution.”

2. Before writing the verb of a relative clause, think whether the antecedent is singular or plural. “Her voice is one of the sweetest that have [not _has_] been heard in this town.”

3. When a number of persons, men and women, are spoken of distributively, the pronouns _he_ and _his_ are proper forms of reference—not _their_, not _his or her_. “The audience rose and each person waved _his_ applause” would be correct, even if there were ten ladies to each man. The _he_ or _his_ may here be called the _neutral_ pronoun. What pronouns should fill the blanks in the following sentence? “Let every man and woman who would like to join our picnic betake —— to the pier at three o’clock, and give —— no anxiety about —— lunch; —— will find plenty of sandwiches and cake and coffee on the picnic-boat.”

Such expressions as “every man and woman” are however undesirable whenever the neutral pronoun is to be used. A neutral antecedent, like _every person_, _everybody_, _every one_, is preferable.

4. When the indefinite pronoun _one_ is used, there is often ambiguity in referring to it later by _he_, _his_, etc. Repeat the _one_. Thus, “One does not always know one’s own mind.” Better still, use an expression like the indefinite _you_, or, _a person_, which has its own representative among the pronouns. Thus, “A person doesn’t always know his own mind.”

5. Use sparingly, if at all, the Latin construction—_which fact_, _which idea_, etc. Say rather, _a fact which_, etc. E.g. “He was slightly deaf, _a misfortune which_ he bore without whimpering.”

6. Avoid the Latin construction that makes _which_ refer to the idea of a whole clause; it is a clumsy fashion. Example, “He said that he always doted on Shakespeare—_which_ I, for one, didn’t believe, because I know the fellow.” There is nothing here for _which_ to tie to; it is a relative without anything to which to relate. Rather a better way is to discard the relative clause, substituting _and_ with a demonstrative. Thus, “He bowed politely, _which_ set us all at ease,” becomes, “He bowed politely, _and this_ set us all at ease.” The _this_ is allowed by our idiom to refer to the clause, though the construction is still vague. It is best to hunt up a good synonym for the idea of the preceding clause: “He bowed politely, and this _courtesy_ set us all at ease.” But it is not necessary to discard the relative clause. A little ingenuity will enable one to find and insert just before the relative an appositive to the clause. Into each of the following sentences slip an appropriate appositive chosen from the following list: _a fact_, _an idea_, _a task_, _a statement_, _an assertion_, _a notion_, _an excuse_, _a fancy_, _a belief_, _a hyperbole_, _a prevarication_, _a remedy_.

(_a_) Mr. Ignatius Donnelly thinks that Bacon wrote Shakespeare, —— which ought not to bother the student who likes Romeo and Juliet.

(_b_) Mame told father that there were a thousand cats in the back yard, —— which, according to father, meant our cat and another.

(_c_) He has undertaken to learn two hard lessons in one hour, —— which will probably prove too much for the lad.

(_d_) He proposes to cut the hand off, —— which seems rather cruel.

=Concord of Cases.=

Subject and complement of an intransitive verb agree in case.

1. The complement of an intransitive verb in a finite mode is in the nominative case. “It’s I” [not _me_]. “I am he.” “I thought it was he.”

2. If the subject of an infinitive is in the objective case, the complement is in the same case. “I thought it to be him” [not _he_]. But, “It was thought to be he.”

=Concord of Tenses.=

1. In writing the verb of a subordinate clause, be sure that its tense shall show just what you wish it to show—whether the _same_ time as that of the principal verb, or _earlier_ time, or _later_ time. For example:—

_The same time._—“He did not think himself to be much of a poet.”

_Earlier time._—“He did not think that he had been much of a poet.” “He was sorry not to have been much of a poet.” “Yesterday, when John spoke of the matter, I should have liked to have had some experience that I might have used in advising him.”

_Later time._—“I wanted to go” [not _to have gone_]. “I had intended to go.” “I should have liked to go.”

=Oral Exercise.=—Correct the errors in concord of tenses, explaining each emendation.

1. Where did you say St. Peter’s was?

2. Is it warm out of doors? I should say it was.

3. I fully intended to have met you at the concert.

=Government.=

1. “He invited him and _I_,” is not an unheard-of blunder. People often needlessly shrink from saying a correct sentence like this—“He invited him and me”—and will even insert the full names of _him_ and _me_ rather than out with the right case of the pronoun.

2. In asking a question, think whether _who_ or _whom_ is required. “_Whom_ did you see?” but, “_Who_ was it that you saw?”

3. _Let_ governs the objective case, quite as any other active verb. “Let John and me go.”

4. An error often occurs in the case of the relative after a verb of saying, thinking, telling, and the like. “Franklin’s Autobiography is the work of a man _whom_ I should think would be known to every American.” The _whom_ is wrong for _who_. Had the writer set off “I should think” by commas, he would have seen the mistake.

5. How should the following newspaper sentence be corrected? “He stated that the offering was $101,500, an amount upon which he would stake his honor would all be paid up.”

=On the Reference of Pronouns.=

1. In the use of pronouns one cannot be too careful that each refers to the right person. “Farmer Jones called on his neighbor and told him that his cows were in his pasture,” leaves us in doubt whether Farmer Jones came to make a complaint or an apology. How should the sentence be constructed to remove the ambiguity? The following delicious error has been much quoted: “If fresh milk does not seem to agree with the child, boil it.” How change the sentence to save the child’s life?

2. Sometimes a demonstrative can be used to better advantage than a personal pronoun. “They lent us their horses for the afternoon and these [not _they_] took us a long way out into the country.”

3. Sometimes it is better to repeat the antecedent, varying it by simple synonyms, than to use any pronoun. Not, “He gave him his word of honor, that whenever he should see his brother in London, he would do all for him that he ought to do for an old comrade’s brother.” Rather thus: “He gave his friend his word of honor, that whenever he should see the latter’s brother in London, he would do for the boy all that a man ought to do for the brother of an old comrade.”

4. Acquire a habit of writing, “It is he,” or “It’s he,” instead of “He is the one.” This latter phrase is permissible in colloquial speech, where its clumsiness is not much felt. The correct expression may sometimes seem over-precise. But a person of tact ought to be able to speak correctly without seeming affected.

=Conjunctions and Prepositions.=

1. Shall we say “as large as,” “not as large as,” etc.? The first expression is right. But after a negative, use _so_ for a correlative to _as_: “not _so_ large as.”

2. In general be careful not to omit necessary conjunctions. What should be supplied in the following sentence? and how should the order be changed? “Henty is better known but not so interesting to older boys as Stevenson.”

3. _And which_, _and who_, etc., are wrong for _which_, _who_, etc., when no relative has previously been used. Correct the following: “Irving, the historian, and whom we honor as our first writer of prose tales, is a prime favorite of us all.”

4. _Like_ is not a conjunction. It is incorrect to say, “Do like I do.” This wrong use of _like_ is habitual in many parts of our country, and a native of any one of these districts has to watch himself narrowly to acquire the habit of using _as_ for _like_. It is, however, correct enough to say, “She talks _like him_.” Here _like_ is an adjective governing what was the dative case, and the phrase _like him_ has the value of an adverb.

5. _Different to_ is wrong for _different from_. This error, though rarely to be found in America, is habitual in England. The commoner American error is _different than_. This mistake frequently occurs when the comparative degree has previously been used. _E.g._ “This last kind of apple is different and sweeter than the first.” The better form is: “This last kind of apple is different from the first, and sweeter.” _Do not split the particles_, by saying, “This kind of apple is different from and sweeter than the first.”

=Adverb or Adjective?=

1. There is a group of words—verbs of sensation and the like, _look_, _sound_, _feel_, _smell_, _taste_, _appear_, _seem_—which take an adjective to complete their meaning. “She looks _sweet_,” “It tastes _sweet_,” “She _seems_ happy,” are common and correct ways of speaking. _Notice that here something of the same idea can be given by saying_, “She _is_ sweet,” “It _is_ sweet,” “She _is_ happy.” The _sweet_ idea or the _happy_ idea describes the subject, the person, not the verb. Of course, one might write a sentence in which the _sweet_ idea would tell the way a given act was done. “She looked sweetly” would imply that she was gazing sweetly at something or somebody.

But here must be noted an exception or two. (_a_) The word _bad_ has two senses: moral badness, and badness that is not moral—badness of health, for instance. If I say “I feel bad,” the bad seems to mean moral badness: _i.e._ “I _am_ bad.” It is therefore permissible to break the rule and apply _badly_ to physical feeling. “I feel badly” is a common expression for “I feel sick”; and by the exception to the rule is correct. Which is better in the following sentence—_bad_ or _badly_? “It sounds —— to hear a young man swear.” (_b_) There are a few cases where the adverb is retained when the verb is not felt as acting. “The report sounds well,” certainly does not mean that the report is in good health; but it is certainly good English. Similarly we have: “She appears well in company.”

It is to be kept in mind that _ill_ and _well_ are not always adverbs. They are often adjectives; and if one says “I feel ill,” or “I feel well,” one is using the adjective _ill_ or the adjective _well_.

=Oral Exercise.=—Which of the italicized words is preferable in the following sentences? (_a_) “This old stern-wheel boat rides over the waves quite as _easy_ (_easily_) as any propeller, if not _easier_ (_more easily_).” (_b_) “This old chaise rides as _easy_ (_easily_) as any modern one.” (_c_) “An old shoe feels _easy_ (_easily_).” (_d_) “As Billings read that passage it sounded _different_ (_differently_) from the way in which the Colonel read it.” (_e_) “Do you feel _good_ (_well_) after your night’s rest?” (_f_) “I’ve been to church and, for me, really feel _good_ (_well_).” (_g_) “He voted _independently_ (_independent_).” (_h_) “Home, sweet home” sounds _well_ (_good_) to the ears of the American abroad.

=Shall or Will.=—Most Americans, like most Scotchmen, use the word _will_ too frequently, to the neglect of _shall_.

_Shall_ is from Old English _sceal_ (skayʹ-al) and once meant _owe_, _be obliged_. It still may mean the same thing, when not used as a mere auxiliary. That is, _should_ often means _ought_, which was once the past tense of _owe_. It still can mean “to be obliged.” “You shall,” “he shall,” are expressions that imply obligation, imposed by the speaker. “I shall at last die” still has in it the idea of being compelled. But this phrase illustrates happily one way by which _shall_ with the first person has come to be felt as a mere future. Nearly always to-day _I shall_ names a voluntary act; but the volition is usually not emphasized; the speaker has usually made up his mind before he says _I shall_, and the words simply foretell the future act. “I shall be there” incidentally announces the speaker’s intention, but the chief thing it announces is that the speaker will _be there_. It is probably the future fact that is of interest to his friends. _Ordinarily, therefore_, shall _in the first person means futurity more than it means volition._

_Will_ is from _wilian_ (wilʹ-yan), meaning _to wish_, _to will_. It frequently means that to-day, though in the second and third persons it is also used for the simple future. “I will” always implies volition. I will _implies either deliberate intention, distinct wish, or distinct willingness_. “I will go” means “I am determined to go,” or, “I wish to go,” or, “I am willing to go.” Frequently such a phrase implies that there is opposition or an obstacle. “You will,” “they will,” usually lack the volitive idea; they simply foretell that which _you_, _they_, are about to do. Yet _you will_, _he will_, _they will_ may still mean _you are determined_, etc., if applied to a being that has the power of choice. Here one has but to emphasize the _will_, and the old meaning is brought back. Thus: “He _will_ persist in doing so, though all his friends deplore it.”

Our first rule will accordingly be as follows: _To indicate mere futurity, use shall in the first person, will in the second and third._ Examples: “I shall be glad to come. You and the others will find me on hand at the pier.” So far, so good. But note that this rule also applies when the speaker is made to report his own words in indirect narrative. “Abner _says_ that he _shall_ be glad to come, and that you and the others _will_ find him on hand at the pier.” Just so if the indirect discourse is in the _past_, and it is still the speaker who reports his own words. “Abner _said_ that he _should_ be glad to come, and that you and the others _would_ find him at the pier.” All this seems sensible enough, for the speaker is merely made to foretell his own future act. The rule is too often broken. “Abner said he was afraid he’d miss the boat.” Here the contraction _he’d_ stands (as always) for _he would_, a form that is wrong in this place for _he should_.

The same rule applies when the indirect narrative is merely implied; that is, when instead of such a word as _say_ we have _think_, or _fear_, or _believe_. “Luke thinks he _shall_ miss his boat,” is correct; so is, “Luke feared he _should_ miss the boat.”

Suppose, now, it is no longer what Luke said about his own future act, but what somebody else said about it. “Evarts remarked that Luke was ready and _would_ hurry to the pier; but Evarts feared that Luke _would_ miss the boat.” The _shall_ gives place naturally enough to _will_. _After verbs of saying, thinking, telling, and the like, shall (or should) is the proper auxiliary if the future act is foretold by the actor._

Now we are ready to ask how these words should be used in questions. A very simple rule is enough for most purposes: _In the second and third persons, use in the question the form you expect in the answer._

“Shall you be at the pier by three, Abner?” Abner replies, “I certainly shall.” “Will you kindly bring my lunch with you? the cook has it ready.” “I will, with great pleasure.”

The rule holds when applied to indirect discourse. Thus: “Abner’s aunt asked him whether he _should_ be at the pier by three. Abner replied that he _should_. Then she wanted to know if he _would_ kindly bring her lunch along; Abner promised that he _would_.”

If a question is put in the first person, _shall_ often asks for instructions. “_Shall_ I go?” But if mere information is asked, _shall_ is still the form: “_Shall_ I be required to do all this?” “Yes, I fear you will.” Briefly, then, _for a question in the first person always use_ shall.

=Oral Exercise.=—Where blanks appear in the following sentences insert the right auxiliary. Correct any misuse of auxiliaries.

1. Sometimes an Irishman, sometimes a Frenchman, is credited with this remark: “I will be drowned; nobody shall help me.”

2. I —— be delighted to see you with us.

3. I —— be obliged if you —— lend me your pencil.

4. The director thinks he —— be able to speak well of that student, if the boy —— need a good word.

5. —— you be content if you get to college?

6. —— I be permitted to say that you —— see him before anything is done?

7. Jim Hawkins was mortally afraid that he —— be killed by Long John Silver; and in turn Long John began to fear that Jim —— be the death of him.

8. —— you like some bread? [Here _should_ is the right word; _to like_ is a word of volition, and it does not need the volitive auxiliary _would_.]

9. —— you mind my asking where you bought that jersey?

10. His father insisted that he —— stick to the task; and the son afterwards seemed glad of the fact, and asked whether he —— do some more work of the same sort.

11. If we were better, we —— be happier.

12. In which sentence can a contraction of _he would_ be used? (_a_) He said —— be glad to accept. (_b_) Luther declared —— go to a certain city, though there were as many devils there as tiles on the housetops.

13. —— I be asked to go? Yes, you will.

14. Of whom —— I be afraid?

=Matters of Etymology.=

1. Good usage recommends that we say “the schools of Chicago” rather than “Chicago’s schools”; “the cause of the accident” rather than “the accident’s cause.” In other words, it recommends that we save the possessive in _’s_ (or Saxon genitive) for living beings. For things, for abstract ideas, for cities—everything except beings—the possessive in _of_ (or Norman genitive) is preferred. Thus we say, “Napoleon’s hat,” and “the rim of Napoleon’s hat,” instead of “Napoleon’s hat’s rim.” The newspapers, perhaps to save space, have fallen into the habit of talking about “Chicago’s interests,” “Evanston’s water-works,” “America’s navy,” etc.; but it is better not to imitate these expressions.[16] Such matters are matters, not of right and wrong, but of better and worse.

2. While _got_ is usually better than _gotten_ as a past participle, the two words have, in one case, different meanings. “I have got my lesson” is perhaps preferable to “I have gotten my lesson.” But “I have got to be a scholar” means, “I must be a scholar”; while, “I have gotten to be a scholar” is, well,—perhaps a boast.

3. Good use prescribes _he drank_, but _he has drunk_ [not, _he has drank_].

4. _Anybody else’s_, or _anybody’s else_—which is in better use? For most places, the former. Thus: “Anybody else’s dog would have been shot for his sheep-stealing.” But _anybody’s else_ is often preferable at the end of the clause or sentence. Thus: “If the dog had been anybody else’s it would have been shot; unfortunately it was nobody’s else.” The distinction has ceased to be a matter of logic, and become a matter of euphony. Of course, _else_ is strictly an adjective, and might seem to be exempt from the possessive case. But adjectives have always had a way of growing fast to nouns and becoming part of them: _e.g._ sweetbriar, Redfern, Goodman. Though _else_ is not written as a part of the noun _anybody_ (which is already long enough), it is often felt as a part of the noun. What you _think_ is not always _anybody + else_; it is often, _anybodyelse_. As a matter of fact, the word _anybody_ itself is really two words grown together till we do not think of them as adjective + noun.

=Oral Exercise in Review.=—Below are given a number of sentences from Hughes’s _Tom Brown’s School Days_, a book which every one likes for its racy Saxon style, but which is not always beyond reproach in sentence-structure. Most, however, of the sentences given below were correctly written. _Examine the passages, and decide as to which of the bracketed words should be omitted. When several words are italicized, correct the order of them._

1. Tom’s nurse was one who took in her instruction very slowly—she seemed to have two left hands and no head; and so Mrs. Brown kept her on longer than usual, that [she, the girl] might expend her awkwardness and forgetfulness upon those who would not judge and punish [her, the girl] too strictly for them.

2. It had been the immemorial habit of the village [either] to [either] christen children [either] by Bible names or [by] those of the cardinal and other virtues.

3. He was a hearty, strong boy from the first, given to fighting [with and escaping from his nurse, with his nurse and escaping from her] and fraternizing with all [of] the village boys, with whom he made expeditions all around the neighborhood.

4. You shall hear at once what sort of [a] folk the Browns are, [at least] my branch of them [at least]; and then if you don’t like the sort, why cut the concern at once, and let you and [I, me] cry quits before either of us can grumble at the other.

5. For a short time after a boy has taken up [such] a life [as, like] Arnold would have urged upon him, he has a hard time of it. He finds his judgment often at fault, his body and intellect running away with him into all sorts of pitfalls, and [he, himself] coming down with a crash.

6. “No, Pompey, I must preach whenever I see a chance of being listened to, [which, and this] I never did before.”

7. And now, my boys, you [who, whom] I want to get for readers, have you had enough? [Will, shall] you give in at once, and say you’re convinced, and let me begin my story, or will you have more of it? Remember, I’ve [only] been over [only] a little bit of a hillside yet—what you could ride round easily on your ponies in an hour.

8. To-day, however, [being, being the day of] the school-house match, none of the school-house præpostors [stay, stays] by the door to watch for truants of their side; there is _carte blanche_ to the school-house fags to go where they like: “They trust to our honor,” as East proudly informs Tom; “they know [very well] that no school-house boy would cut the match [very well]. If he did [we’d, we should] very soon cut him, I can tell you.”

9. Passing along the Ridgeway to the west for about a mile, [we come to, appears] a little clump of young beech and firs, with a growth of thorn and privet underwood.

10. I [only] know [only] two English neighborhoods thoroughly, and [in each] within a circle of five miles, [within each] there is enough of interest and beauty to last any reasonable man his life. I believe this to be the case [almost] throughout the country [almost]; but each has a special attraction, and [neither, none] can be richer than the one I am speaking of and going to [very particularly] introduce to you [very particularly].

11. It’s very odd [how, that] almost all English boys love danger.

12. He wore an old full-bottomed wig, the gift of some dandy old Brown whom he had [in the middle of the last century] valeted [in the middle of the last century], [which habiliment, a habiliment which] Master Tom looked upon with considerable respect, not to say fear.

13. [It was he, He was the one] who bent the first pin with which Tom extracted his first stickleback out of [“Pebbly Brook,”] the little stream which ran through the village, [“Pebbly Brook”]. The first stickleback was a splendid fellow, with fabulous red and blue gills. Tom kept him in a small basin till the day of [his, the fish’s] death, and became a fisherman from that day.

14. His nurse told him that those good-natured looking women were in the constant habit of enticing children into the barges and taking [them, these] up to London and selling them, [which, a story which] Tom wouldn’t believe.

15. “I say,” said East, as soon as he [got, had gotten] his wind, looking with much increased respect at Tom, “you [ain’t, you’re not, aren’t, are not] a bad scud, not by [no, any] means.”

16. But who [shall, will] tell the joy of the next morning, when the church bells were ringing a merry peal, and [in the servants’ hall] old Benjy appeared [in the servants’ hall] resplendent in a long blue coat and brass buttons [in the servants’ hall], and a pair of old yellow buckskins and top-boots, which he had cleaned _for and inherited from Tom’s grandfather_.

17. So, as we are going [to at any rate, at any rate to] see Tom Brown through his boyhood, [supposing, if] we never get any further, [which, though] (if you show a proper sense of the value of this history, there is no knowing but [that, what] we may), let us have a look at the life and environments of the child.

18. He felt [like, as if] he had been severely beaten all down his back, the natural result of his performance at his first match.

19. “And now come in and see my study; we [shall, will] have just time before dinner; and afterwards, before calling over, [we’ll, we shall] do the close.”

20. It [certainly] wasn’t very large [certainly], being about six feet long by four broad. It couldn’t be called light, as there [was, were] bars and a grating to the window; [which] little precautions [which] were necessary in the studies on the ground floor looking out into the close, to prevent the exit of small boys [after locking up], and the entrance of contraband articles [after locking up.]

21. And now, [having broken my resolution never to write a Preface,] there are just two or three things which I [would, should] like to say a word about [having broken my resolution never to write a Preface].

22. My dear boys, old and young, you who have belonged, [or do belong,] to other schools and other houses, don’t begin throwing my poor little book about the room, and abusing [me and it] [it and I], and vowing[17] you’ll read no more when you get to this point. I allow you’ve provocation for it. But, come now, [would, should] you, any of you, give a fig for a fellow who _didn’t believe in, and stand up for his own house and his own school_? You know you [wouldn’t, shouldn’t]. Then don’t object to my cracking up the old school-house, Rugby. Haven’t I a right to do it, when I’m taking all the trouble of writing this true history for all your benefits? If [you’re not, you ain’t] satisfied, go and write the history [of your own houses] in your own times [of your own houses] and say all you know for your own schools and houses, [provided it’s true,] and [I’ll, I shall] read it without abusing you [provided it’s true].

23. All the way up to London he had pondered what he [would, should] say to Tom [by way of parting advice], something that the boy could keep in his head ready for use, [by way of parting advice].

24. “I say, Green,” Snooks began one night, “[ain’t, isn’t] that new boy, Harrison, your fag?”

“Yes; why?”

“Oh, I know something of him at home, and [would, should] like to excuse him—will you swap?”

“[Who, Whom] will you give me?”

“Well, let’s see; there’s Willis, Johnson—no, that won’t do. Yes, I have it—there’s young East, I’ll give you him.”

“Don’t you wish you may get it?” replied Green. “I’ll tell you what I’ll do—I’ll give you [if you like] two for Willis [if you like].”

“[Whom, Who] then?” asked Snooks.

“Hall and Brown.”

“[Shouldn’t, Wouldn’t] have ’em at a gift.”

25. By keeping out of bounds [all day], or at all events out of the house and quadrangle, [all day,] and [carefully] barring themselves [carefully] in at night, East and Tom managed to hold on without feeling very [miserably, miserable]; but it was as much as they could do.

26. His friends at home, [hadn’t put him into tails] having regard, I suppose, to his age, and not to his size and place in the school, [hadn’t put him into tails]; and [even] his jackets were always too small [even]; and he had a talent for destroying clothes, and making himself look [shabbily, shabby].

=Oral Review-Exercise.=—Correct the following sentences, after naming each fault.

1. Belonging to the modern realistic school of novelists, his address was an able defence of their tenets.

2. It is not probable that the scholars will yet give him a very lofty place, and they will be disinclined to call his books literature, but the division of sentiment as to their exact standing will not detract from the brilliancy of the future they promise.

3. “Here you are, a great, hulking fellow, endowed by providence with magnificent strength, instead of which you go about stealing nuts.”

4. Cæsar and all his legions was encamped around the city, and the barbarians knew well enough it was them they had to fight, them the soldiers of the Roman god-like man.

5. “It wasn’t us! it wasn’t us! We wasn’t there, we warnt.”

6. Neither of the adventurers, Olson and Lefevre, saw their native land again.

7. He sat the cage down; and the bird cried, between each mouthful, “Polly wants a cracker.”

8. Like Lucretius, his pleasure was in watching the sea fight from a secure place.

9. Masquerading under the stage name of Viola Violet, there was a gasp of astonishment when she made her first entrance and was recognized by her many friends in the audience.

10. Lacking practice in what might be called the technique of acting, there was now and then some restraint in pose and gesture, and the essential element of artistic repose was lacking.

11. Passengers are warned not to get off the train while in motion.

12. Without stopping to fully describe the construction of this aural instrument, suffice it to say, that it is small and compact, and can be carried in the pocket, weighing about two ounces, constructed mostly of aluminum.

13. When I go back to Cuba again I should like to go with 10,000 interpreters instead of one, all in United States uniforms, and who would talk fast and to the point and would not expect or wait for an answer.

14. Passing a field where brother David was sowing rye, several merry voices called out, “How are you, Mr. Newton?”

15. Mr. Adams positively declines to hang cards over the edges of the boxes at the grand opera with the names of those present in large type.

16. Eva picked up the letter from the hall table, looked quickly round at the closed hall door, at the closed dining-room door, and at the baize door that led to the kitchen stairs—and kissed it.

17. Talking the other day with a friend (the late Mr. Keats) about Dante, he observed that whenever so great a poet told us anything in addition or continuation of an ancient story, he had a right to be regarded as classical authority.

18. Alcibiades told the Spartan envoys that if they would say to the Athenians that their power was limited and that they could only listen and then tell the Spartans what they heard that he would see that the Athenians did not join the alliance: so when the ambassadors went there they did as Alcibiades said and Alcibiades got up and said, that they could not tell two things alike and the Athenians would not have anything more to do with them and they joined the alliance.

19. Having given this department-store question much careful thought I have decided a more dangerous monopoly could not be found, for reasons as follows: First, they tend to centralize business, which is dangerous, and should not exist if we wish our city to grow and thereby equalize taxation. Second, the continuous advertising of the entire stock of an unfortunate merchant on sale in these stores at 33 cents on the dollar is not encouraging to strangers who visit us.