EXERCISES TO BE CORRECTED. It is me. I did not know it was him. I am certain it could not have been her. It is them that deserve the blame. I would not accept the offer, if I were him. It is not me that he is angry with. I know not whether it was them who managed the affair, but I am certain it was not him. I suppose it to be he. It may have been him. I believed it to be she. It must be her. [Rem. 1.] Whom is he? Whom do you think he is? Who do you suppose him to be? Whom do the people say she is? RULE VII. The nominative case is sometimes used without a verb. This takes place : 1. When an address is made; as, "Plato, thou reasonest well." 2. In mere exclamations; as, "O the times! O the manners!" 3. When the attention is directed to an object before an affirmation is made respecting it; as, "The Pilgrim Fathers, where are they?" · 4. When a noun and a participle are used instead of a dependent clause; as, "Shame being lost, all virtue is lost;" that is, when shame is lost. Remarks.—1. A noun used in this way with a participle is said to be in the nominative case absolute. When an address is made, the name of the object addressed is usually said to be in the nominative case independent. Times, manners, and Fathers may also be said to be in the nominative case independent. What is the rule for the nominative case without a verb? When does this take place? When is a noun said to be in the nomina, tive case absolute? When in the nominative case independent? 2. Being and having been are sometimes omitted, when the nominative is absolute; as, "Her wheel at rest, the matron thrills no more Or won to what may work his utter loss," etc. Being is omitted after which, and having been before destroyed and won. 3. The objective should not be used for the nominative absolute; thus, we should say, he destroyed, not him destroyed. EXERCISES TO BE PARSED. These matters having been arranged, the company separated. He dismounted, his horse being unmanageable. What could they do, a youth being their leader? Good, the more Communicated, more abundant grows, The Author not impaired but honored more.-Milton. Ah, then, what honest triumph flushed my breast; This truth once known-to bless is to be blessed.-Rogers. Soul of the just! companion of the dead! Where is thy home, and whither art thou fled?-Campbell. Those evening bells! those evening bells! How many a tale their music tells, Of youth, and home, and that sweet time When last I heard their soothing chime!-T. Moore. My friends, do they now and then send A wish, or a thought after me?-Cowper. The lady of his love-oh! she was changed As by the sickness of the soul.-Byron. The warlike of the isles, The men of field and wave! Are not the rocks their funeral pile, The seas and shores their grave?—Hemans. "These matters having been arranged,” etc. Matters is a common noun, etc.: nominative case absolute, with the participle having been arranged. Rule vii. What participles are sometimes omit- What case is sometimes improperly used ted? for the nominative absolute? Having been arranged is the perfect passive participle of the verb to arrange; it belongs to the noun matters. Rule ii. "Soul of the just," etc. Soul is a common noun, neuter gender, second person singular, nominative case independent—an address being made. Rule vii. EXERCISES TO BE CORRECTED. [Rem. 3.] Whose gray top shall tremble, him descending. Him whom they justly called the Father of his country, having been taken captive, the whole army surrendered. Them refusing to comply, I withdrew. And me, what shall I do? RULE VIII. A noun in the possessive case limits the meaning of another noun; as, "John's book; his book." Remarks.-1. The name of the object possessed is sometimes omitted, when it may be easily supplied. With the pronouns ours, yours, etc., it is never expressed. [See "Personal Pronouns," Remarks 1, 2.] Thus, "This book is Henry's [book];" "This is a book of Henry's [books];" ;" "This book is yours [book];"*"This is a book of yours [books];" ;" "He is at the governor's [house]." 2. The apostrophe is never used with pronouns. 3. The relation of possession may be denoted by the preposition of, with the objective; thus, "My father's house," and "The house of my father," express the same idea. But of does not always denote possession. "A crown of gold," signifies "A crown made of gold," "A house of representatives," signifies "A house consisting of representatives." In such cases the possessive cannot be used. 4. When the idea may be expressed by either of these forms we should use that by which we may avoid harshness and ambiguity. Thus, instead of "his son's wife's sister," we should say, "the sister of his son's wife;" What is the rule for the possessive | In what other way may the relation of possession be denoted? case? Is the name of the object possessed always! When the idea may be expressed by expressed? either of these forms, which should be used? * If the noun were expressed, yours would be your. instead of "the distress of the son of the king," we should say, "the distress of the king's son." "The love of God," may denote either the love which God feels, or the love which is felt towards God; but "God's love," denotes only the love which God feels. 5. When two or more nouns are used as the designation of one individual, the possessive termination is added to the last; as, "Paul the apostle's advice;" "General Washington's tent ;" "Smith the bookseller's house;” “The Duke of Wellington's exploits." Here Wellington's is not in the possessive, but in the objective after of; Duke is in the possessive, but the whole is taken as one name, and the possessive termination is placed at the end. 6. When the possessive termination is placed thus, the words are so closely connected as to form but one name. If any thing more is added, the termination must be placed after it. We may say, "Charles Stuart's death," or, "The King of England's death," but not "Charles Stuart, the King of England's death." Here "This fact appears from Dr. Bacon of Birmingham's experiments." "of Birmingham" is added to the name of the individual to designate his place of residence, and the possessive termination should not be placed after Birmingham. 7. When two or more nouns in the possessive case are connected by and, the possessive termination should be added to each of them; as, “These are John's and Eliza's books." It would be better to say, "These books belong to John and Eliza." But, if objects are possessed in common by two or more, and the nouns are closely connected without any intervening words, the possessive termination is added to the last noun only; as, "These are John and Eliza's books." It would be better to say, "These books belong in common to John and Eliza." 8. Mr. Murray says, "But when a pause is proper, and the governing word not expressed; and the latter part of the sentence is extended; it appears to be requisite that the sign should be applied to the first possessive, and understood to the other; as, 'I reside at Lord Stormont's, my old patron and benefactor;' 'Whose glory did he emulate? He emulated Cæsar's, the greatest general of antiquity.' Such constructions should not be used. Instead of the sentences quoted by Mr. Murray, we may say, "I reside at the house (or mansion, or seat) of Lord Stormont, my old patron and benefactor;" "Whose glory did he emu When two or more nouns are used as the sive case are connected by and, where should the possessive termination be placed? What change should be made in such sentences as, "I reside at Lord Stormont's, my old patron and benefactor ?" late? He emulated that (or the glory) of Cæsar, the greatest general of antiquity." So, instead of, "These psalms are David's, the king, priest, and prophet of the Jewish people," we may say, "These psalms were written by David," etc. Instead of, "I left the parcel at Smith's, the bookseller and stationer," we may say, "I left the parcel at the residence (or shop) of Smith, the bookseller and stationer." 9. Nothing, except some necessary modifying word, should come between the possessive case and the name of the object possessed. "She began to extol the farmer's, as she called him, excellent understanding," should be, "She began to extol the excellent understanding of the farmer, as she called him." 10. A participial noun, either alone or modified by other words, may be placed after the possessive case; as, "I am opposed to John's writing;" "I am opposed to his devoting himself so exclusively to one subject." This is one of the most common idioms of the language; and no other case than the possessive should be used in the preceding and similar sentences. Thus, when we wish to express opposition to the performance of the action, it is incorrect to say, "I am opposed to John writing." EXERCISES TO BE PARSED. Earth's serenest prospects fly, Hope's enchantments never die.-Montgomery. Thy father's virtue is not thine. This man was taken by the Duke's officers, who, in obedience to their master's directions, had driven him from all his hiding places. EXERCISES TO BE CORRECTED. His brothers offence is not his. A mothers tenderness, and a fathers care, are natures gifts for mans advantage. John Thomson his book. Lucy Townsend her book. [Rem. 2.] This book is your's. The tree is known by it's fruit. You have left your books, and have taken our's and their's. [Rem. 3.] The bill passed the Lord's house,but was defeated What may come between the possessive | What is said of the participial noun after case and the name of the object pos- the possessive case? sessed? |