Chapter 152

ON CONJUNCTIONS.

§ 503. A conjunction is a part of speech which connects _propositions_,--_the day is bright_, is one proposition. _The sun shines_, is another. _The day is bright_ because _the sun shines_ is a pair of propositions connected by the conjunction, _because_.

From this it follows, that whenever there is a conjunction, there are two subjects, two copulas, and two predicates: i.e., two propositions in all their parts.

But this may be expressed compendiously. _The sun shines, and the moon shines_ may be expressed by the _sun and moon shine_.

Nevertheless, however compendious may be the expression, there are always two propositions wherever there is one conjunction. A part of speech that merely combines two words is a preposition,--_the sun along with the moon shines_.

It is highly important to remember that conjunctions connect propositions.

It is also highly important to remember that many double propositions may be expressed so compendiously as to look like one. When this takes place, and any question arises as to the construction, they must be exhibited in their fully expanded form, i.e., the second subject, the second predicate, and the second copula must be supplied. This can always be done from the first proposition,--_he likes you better than me_ = _he likes you better than he likes me_. The compendious expression of the second proposition is the first point of note in the syntax of conjunctions.

§ 504. The second point in the syntax of conjunctions is the fact of their great convertibility. Most conjunctions have been developed out of some other part of speech.

The conjunction of comparison, _than_, is derived from the adverb of time, _then_: which is derived from the accusative singular of the demonstrative pronoun.

The conjunction, _that_, is derived also from a demonstrative pronoun.

The conjunction, _therefore_, is a demonstrative pronoun + a preposition.

The conjunction, _because_, is a substantive governed by a preposition.

One and the same word, in one and the same sentence, may be a conjunction or preposition, as the case may be.

_All fled but John_.--If this mean _all fled_ except _John_, the word _but_ is a preposition, the word _John_ is an accusative case, and the proposition is single. If instead of _John_, we had a personal pronoun, we should say _all fled but_ him.

_All fled but John_.--If this mean _all fled but John did not fly_, the word _but_ is a conjunction, the word _John_ is a nominative case, and the propositions are two in number. If, instead of _John_, we had a personal pronoun, we should say, _all fled but_ he.

From the fact of the great convertibility of conjunctions it is often necessary to determine whether a word be a conjunction or not. _If it be a conjunction, it cannot govern a case. If it govern a case it is no conjunction but a preposition._ A conjunction cannot govern a case, for the following reasons,--the word that follows it _must_ be the subject of the second proposition, and as such, a nominative case.

§ 505. The third point to determine in the syntax of conjunctions is the certainty or uncertainty in the mind of the speaker as to the facts expressed by the propositions which they serve to connect.

1. Each proposition may contain a certain, definite, absolute fact--_the day is clear_ because _the sun shines_. Here there is neither doubt nor contingency of either the _day being clear_, or of the _sun shining_.

Of two propositions one may be the condition of the other--_the day will be clear_ if _the sun shine_. Here, although it is certain that _if the sun shine the day will be clear_, there is no certainty of _the sun shining_. Of the two propositions one only embodies a certain fact, and that is certain only conditionally.

Now an action, wherein there enters any notion of uncertainty, or indefinitude, and is at the same time connected with another action, is expressed, not by the indicative mood, but by the subjunctive. _If the sun_ shine (not _shines_) _the day will be clear._

Simple uncertainty will not constitute a subjunctive construction,--_I am_, perhaps, _in the wrong_.

Neither will simple connection.--_I am wrong_, because _you are right_.

But, the two combined constitute the construction in question,--_if I _be_ wrong, you are right_.

Now, a conjunction that connects two certain propositions may be said to govern an indicative mood.

And a conjunction that connects an uncertain proposition with a certain one, may be said to govern a subjunctive mood.

_The government of mood is the only form of government of which conjunctions are capable._

§ 506. Previous to the question of the government of conjunctions in the way of mood, it is necessary to notice certain points of agreement between them and the relative pronouns; inasmuch as, in many cases, the relative pronoun exerts the same government, in the way of determining the mood of the verb, as the conjunction.

Between the relative pronouns and conjunctions in general there is this point of connection,--both join propositions. Wherever there is a relative, there is a second proposition. So there is wherever there is a conjunction.

Between certain relative pronouns and those particular conjunctions that govern a subjunctive mood there is also a point of connection. Both suggest an element of uncertainty or indefinitude. This the relative pronouns do, through the logical elements common to them and to the interrogatives: these latter essentially suggesting the idea of doubt. Wherever the person, or thing, connected with an action, and expressed by a relative is indefinite, there is room for the use of a subjunctive mood. Thus--"he that troubled you shall bear his judgment, _whosoever_ he _be_."

§ 507. By considering the nature of such words as _when_, their origin as relatives on the one hand, and their conjunctional character on the other hand, we are prepared for finding a relative element in words like _till_, _until_, _before_, _as long as_, &c. These can all be expanded into expressions like _until the time when_, _during the time when_, &c. Hence, in an expression like _seek out his wickedness till thou_ find (not _findest_) _none_, the principle of the construction is nearly the same as in _he that troubled you_, &c., or _vice versâ_.[64]

§ 508. In most conditional expressions the subjunctive mood should follow the conjunction. All the following expressions are conditional.

1. _Except_ I _be_ by Silvia in the night, There is no music in the nightingale.--SHAKSPEARE.

2. Let us go and sacrifice to the Lord our God, _lest_ he _fall_ upon us with pestilence.--_Old Testament._

3. ----Revenge back on itself recoils. Let it. I reck not, _so_ it _light_ well aimed.--J. MILTON.

4. _If_ this _be_ the case.

5. _Although_ my house _be_ not so with God.--_Old Testament._

6. He shall not eat of the holy thing _unless_ he _wash_ his flesh with water.--_Old Testament._

Expressions like _except_ and _unless_ are equally conditional with words like _if_ and _provided that_, since they are equivalent to _if--not_.

Expressions like _though_ and _although_ are peculiar. They join propositions, of which the one is a _primâ facie_ reason against the existence of the other: and this is the conditional element. In the sentence, _if the children be so badly brought-up, they are not to be trusted_, the _bad bringing-up_ is the reason for their being _unfit to be trusted_; and, as far as the expression is concerned, _is admitted to be so_. The only uncertainty lies in the question as to the degree of the badness of the education. The inference from it is unequivocal.

But if, instead of saying _if_, we say _although_, and omit the word _not_, so that the sentence run _although the children be so badly brought-up they are to be trusted_, we do two things: we indicate the general relation of cause and effect that exists between _bad bringing-up_ and _unfitness for being trusted_, but we also, at the same time, take an exception to it in the particular instance before us. These remarks have been made for the sake of showing the extent to which words like _though_, &c., are conditional.

It must be remembered, however, that conjunctions, like the ones lately quoted, do not govern subjunctive moods because they are conditional, but because, in the particular condition which they accompany, there is an element of uncertainty.

§ 509. This introduces a fresh question. Conditional conjunctions are of two sorts:--

1. Those which express a condition as an actual fact, and one admitted as such by the speaker.

2. Those which express a condition as a possible fact, and one which the speaker either does not admit, or admits only in a qualified manner.

Since _the children_ are _so badly brought-up_, &c.--This is an instance of the first construction. The speaker admits as an actual fact the _bad bringing-up of the children_.

If _the children_ be _so badly brought-up_, &c.--This is an instance of the second construction. The speaker admits as a possible (perhaps, as a probable) fact the _bad bringing-up of the children_: but he does not adopt it as an indubitable one.

§ 510. Now, if every conjunction had a fixed unvariable meaning, there would be no difficulty in determining whether a condition was absolute, and beyond doubt, or possible, and liable to doubt. But such is not the case.

_Although_ may precede a proposition which is admitted as well as one which is doubted.

a. Although _the children_ are, &c. b. Although _the children_ be, &c.

_If_, too, may precede propositions wherein there is no doubt whatever implied: in other words it may be used instead of _since_.

In some languages this interchange goes farther than in others; in the Greek, for instance, such is the case with [Greek: ei], to a very great extent indeed.

Hence we must look to the meaning of the sentence in general, rather than to the particular conjunction used.

It is a philological fact that _if_ may stand instead of _since_.

It is also a philological fact that when it does so it should be followed by the indicative mood.

This is written in the way of illustration. What applies to _if_ applies to other conjunctions as well.

§ 511. As a point of practice, the following method of determining the amount of doubt expressed in a conditional proposition is useful:--

Insert, immediately after the conjunction, one of the two following phrases,--(1.) _as is the case_; (2.) _as may or may not be the case_. By ascertaining which of these two supplements expresses the meaning of the speaker, we ascertain the mood of the verb which follows.

When the first formula is the one required, there is no element of doubt, and the verb should be in the indicative mood. _If_ (_as is the case_), _he _is_ gone, I must follow him_.

When the second formula is the one required, there _is_ an element of doubt, and the verb should be in the subjunctive mood. _If_ (_as may or may not be the case_) _he _be_ gone, I must follow him_.

§ 512. The use of the word _that_ in expressions like _I eat that I may live_, &c., is a modification of the subjunctive construction, that is conveniently called _potential_. It denotes that one act is done for the sake of supplying the _power_ or opportunity for the performance of another.

The most important point connected with the powers of _that_ is the so-called _succession of tenses_.

§ 513. _The succession of tenses._--Whenever the conjunction _that_ expresses intention, and consequently connects two verbs, the second of which takes place _after_ the first, the verbs in question must be in the same tense.

I _do_ this _that_ I _may_ gain by it I _did_ this _that_ I _might_ gain by it.

In the Greek language this is expressed by a difference of mood; the subjunctive being the construction equivalent to _may_, the optative to _might_. The Latin idiom coincides with the English.

A little consideration will show that this rule is absolute. For a man _to be doing_ one action (in present time) in order that some other action may _follow_ it (in past time) is to reverse the order of cause and effect. To do anything in A.D. 1851, that something may result from it in 1850 is a contradiction; and so it is to say _I _do_ this_ that _I _might_ gain by it_.

The reasons against the converse construction are nearly, if not equally cogent. To have done anything at any _previous_ time in order that a _present_ effect may follow, is, _ipso facto_, to convert a past act into a present one, or, to speak in the language of the grammarian, to convert an aorist into a perfect. To say _I _did_ this_ that _I may gain by it_, is to make, by the very effect of the expression, either _may_ equivalent to _might_, or _did_ equivalent to _have done_.

_I _did_ this_ that _I _might_ gain_. _I _have done_ this_ that _I _may_ gain_.

§ 514. _Disjunctives._--Disjunctives (_or_, _nor_) are of two sorts, real and nominal.

_A king or queen always rules in England_. Here the disjunction is real; _king_ or _queen_ being different names for different objects. In all _real_ disjunctions the inference is, that if one out of two (or more) individuals (or classes) do not perform a certain action, the other does.

_A sovereign or supreme ruler always rules in England_. Here the disjunction is nominal; _sovereign_ and _supreme governor_ being different names for the same object. In all nominal disjunctives the inference is, that if an agent (or agents) do not perform a certain action under one name, he does (or they do) it under another.

Nominal disjunctives are called by Harris _sub_disjunctives.

In the English language there is no separate word to distinguish the nominal from the real disjunctive. In Latin, _vel_ is considered by Harris to be disjunctive, _sive_ subdisjunctive. As a periphrasis, the combination _in other words_ is subdisjunctive.

Both nominal and real disjunctives agree in this,--whatever may be the number of nouns which they connect, the construction of the verb is the same as if there were but one--Henry, _or_ John, _or_ Thomas, _walks_ (not _walk_); the sun, _or_ solar luminary, _shines_ (not _shine_). The disjunctive _isolates_ the subject, however much it may be placed in juxtaposition with other nouns.

* * * * *