Читать книгу The Grammar of English Grammars - Goold Brown - Страница 267

OBS. 1.—In English, and also in Latin, most adjectives that denote place or situation, not only form the superlative irregularly, but are also either defective or redundant in comparison. Thus:

I. The following nine have more than one superlative: far, farther, farthest, farmost, or farthermost; near, nearer, nearest or next; fore, former, foremost or first; hind, hinder, hindmost or hindermost; in, inner, inmost or innermost; out, outer, or utter, outmost or utmost, outermost or uttermost; up, upper, upmost or uppermost; low, lower, lowest or lowermost; late, later or latter, latest or last.

II. The following five want the positive: [aft, adv.,] after, aftmost or aftermost; [forth, adv., formerly furth,[180]] further, furthest or furthermost; hither, hithermost; nether, nethermost; under, undermost.

III. The following want the comparative: front, frontmost; rear, rearmost; head, headmost; end, endmost; top, topmost; bottom, bottommost; mid or middle, midst,[181] midmost or middlemost; north, northmost; south, southmost; east, eastmost; west, westmost; northern, northernmost; southern, southernmost; eastern, easternmost; western, westernmost.

OBS. 2.—Many of these irregular words are not always used as adjectives, but oftener as nouns, adverbs, or prepositions. The sense in which they are employed, will show to what class they belong. The terms fore and hind, front and rear, right and left, in and out, high and low, top and bottom, up and down, upper and under, mid and after, all but the last pair, are in direct contrast with each other. Many of them are often joined in composition with other words; and some, when used as adjectives of place, are rarely separated from their nouns: as, _in_land, _out_house, mid-sea, after-ages. Practice is here so capricious, I find it difficult to determine whether the compounding of these terms is proper or not. It is a case about which he that inquires most, may perhaps be most in doubt. If the joining of the words prevents the possibility of mistaking the adjective for a preposition, it prevents also the separate classification of the adjective and the noun, and thus in some sense destroys the former by making the whole a noun. Dr. Webster writes thus: "FRONTROOM, n. A room or apartment in the forepart of a house. BACKROOM, n. A room behind the front room, or in the back part of the house."—Octavo Dict. So of many phrases by which people tell of turning things, or changing the position of their parts; as, _in_side out, _out_side _in; up_side _down, down_side up; wrong end foremost, but-end foremost; fore-part back, fore-end aft; hind side _before, back_side before. Here all these contrasted particles seem to be adjectives of place or situation. What grammarians in general would choose to call them, it is hard to say; probably, many would satisfy themselves with calling the whole "an adverbial phrase,"—the common way of disposing of every thing which it is difficult to analyze. These, and the following examples from Scott, are a fair specimen of the uncertainty of present usage:

"The herds without a keeper strayed,

The plough was in mid-furrow staid."—Lady of the Lake.

"The eager huntsman knew his bound,

And in mid chase called off his hound."—Ibidem.

OBS. 3.—For the chief points of the compass, we have so many adjectives, and so many modes of varying or comparing them, that it is difficult to tell their number, or to know which to choose in practice. (1.) North, south, east, and west, are familiarly used both as nouns and as adjectives. From these it seems not improper to form superlatives, as above, by adding most; as, "From Aroar to Nebo, and the wild of southmost Abarim."—Milton. "There are no rivulets or springs in the island of Feror, the westmost of the Canaries."—White's Nat. Hist. (2.) These primitive terms may also be compared, in all three of the degrees, by the adverbs farther and farthest, or further and furthest; as, "Which is yet farther west."—Bacon. (3.) Though we never employ as separate words the comparatives norther, souther, easter, wester, we have northerly, southerly, easterly, and westerly, which seem to have been formed from such comparatives, by adding ly; and these four may be compared by the adverbs more and most, or less and least: as, "These hills give us a view of the most easterly, southerly, and westerly parts of England."—GRAUNT: in Joh. Dict. (4.) From these supposed comparatives likewise, some authors form the superlatives northermost, southermost, eastermost, and westermost; as, "From the westermost part of Oyster bay."—Dr. Webster's Hist. U. S., p. 126. "And three miles southward of the southermost part of said bay."—Trumbull's Hist. of Amer., Vol. i, p. 88. "Pockanocket was on the westermost line of Plymouth Colony."—Ib., p. 44. "As far as the northermost branch of the said bay or river."—Ib., p. 127. The propriety of these is at least questionable; and, as they are neither very necessary to the language, nor recognized by any of our lexicographers, I forbear to approve them. (5.) From the four primitives we have also a third series of positives, ending in ern; as, northern, southern, eastern, western. These, though they have no comparatives of their own, not only form superlatives by assuming the termination most, but are sometimes compared, perhaps in both degrees, by a separate use of the adverbs: as, "Southernmost, a. Furthest towards the south."—Webster's Dict. "Until it shall intersect the northernmost part of the thirty-first degree of north latitude."—Articles of Peace. "To the north-westernmost head of Connecticut river."—Ib. "Thence through the said lake to the most north-western point thereof."—Ib.

OBS. 4.—It may be remarked of the comparatives former and latter or hinder, upper and under or nether, inner and outer or utter, after and hither; as well as of the Latin superior and inferior, anterior and posterior, interior and exterior, prior and ulterior, senior and junior, major and minor; that they cannot, like other comparatives, be construed with the conjunction than. After all genuine English comparatives, this conjunction may occur, because it is the only fit word for introducing the latter term of comparison; but we never say one thing is former or latter, superior or inferior, than an other. And so of all the rest here named. Again, no real comparative or superlative can ever need an other superadded to it; but inferior and superior convey ideas that do not always preclude the additional conception of more or less: as, "With respect to high and low notes, pronunciation is still more inferior to singing."—Kames, Elements of Criticism, Vol. ii, p. 73. "The mistakes which the most superior understanding is apt to fall into."—West's Letters to a Young Lady, p. 117.

OBS. 5.—Double comparatives and double superlatives, being in general awkward and unfashionable, as well as tautological, ought to be avoided. Examples: "The Duke of Milan, and his more braver daughter, could control thee."—Shak., Tempest. Say, "his more gallant daughter." "What in me was purchased, falls upon thee in a more fairer sort."—Id., Henry IV. Say, "fairer," or, "more honest;" for "purchased" here means stolen. "Changed to a worser shape thou canst not be."—Id., Hen. VI. Say, "a worse shape"—or, "an uglier shape." "After the most straitest sect of our religion, I lived a Pharisee."—Acts, xxvi, 5. Say, "the strictest sect." "Some say he's mad; others, that lesser hate him, do call it valiant fury."—Shak. Say, "others, that hate him less." In this last example, lesser is used adverbially; in which construction it is certainly incorrect. But against lesser as an adjective, some grammarians have spoken with more severity, than comports with a proper respect for authority. Dr. Johnson says, "LESSER, adj. A barbarous corruption of less, formed by the vulgar from the habit of terminating comparatives in er; afterward adopted by poets, and then by writers of prose, till it has all the authority which a mode originally erroneous can derive from custom."—Quarto Dict. With no great fairness, Churchill quotes this passage as far as the semicolon, and there stops. The position thus taken, he further endeavours to strengthen, by saying, "Worser, though not more barbarous, offends the ear in a much greater degree, because it has not been so frequently used."—New Gram., p. 232. Example: "And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night."—Gen., i, 16. Kirkham, after making an imitation of this passage, remarks upon it: "Lesser is as incorrect as badder, gooder, worser."—Gram., p. 77. The judgement of any critic who is ignorant enough to say this, is worthy only of contempt. Lesser is still frequently used by the most tasteful authors, both in verse and prose: as, "It is the glowing style of a man who is negligent of lesser graces."—Blair's Rhet., p. 189.

"Athos, Olympus, Ætna, Atlas, made

These hills seem things of lesser dignity."—Byron.

OBS. 6.—The adjective little is used in different senses; for it contrasts sometimes with great, and sometimes with much. Lesser appears to refer only to size. Hence less and lesser are not always equivalent terms. Lesser means smaller, and contrasts only with greater. Less contrasts sometimes with greater, but oftener with more, the comparative of much; for, though it may mean not so large, its most common meaning is not so much. It ought to be observed, likewise, that less is not an adjective of number,[182] though not unfrequently used as such. It does not mean fewer, and is therefore not properly employed in sentences like the following: "In all verbs, there are no less than three things implied at once."—Blair's Rhet., p. 81. "Smaller things than three," is nonsense; and so, in reality, is what the Doctor here says. Less is not the proper opposite to more, when more is the comparative of many: few, fewer, fewest, are the only words which contrast regularly with many, more, most. In the following text, these comparatives are rightly employed: "And to the more ye shall give the more inheritance, and to the fewer ye shall give the less inheritance."—Numbers, xxxiii, 54. But if writers will continue to use less for fewer, so that "less cattle," for instance, may mean "fewer cattle;" we shall be under a sort of necessity to retain lesser, in order to speak intelligibly: as, "It shall be for the sending-forth of oxen, and for the treading of lesser cattle."—Isaiah, vii, 25. I have no partiality for the word lesser, neither will I make myself ridiculous by flouting at its rudeness. "This word," says Webster, "is a corruption, but [it is] too well established to be discarded. Authors always write the Lesser Asia."—Octavo Dict. "By the same reason, may a man punish the lesser breaches of that law."—Locke. "When we speak of the lesser differences among the tastes of men."—Blair's Rhet., p. 20. "In greater or lesser degrees of complexity."—Burke, on Sublime, p. 94. "The greater ought not to succumb to the lesser."—Dillwyn's Reflections, p. 128. "To such productions, lesser composers must resort for ideas."—Gardiner's Music of Nature, p. 413.

"The larger here, and there the lesser lambs, The new-fall'n young herd bleating for their dams."—Pope.

OBS. 7.—Our grammarians deny the comparison of many adjectives, from a false notion that they are already superlatives. Thus W. Allen: "Adjectives compounded with the Latin preposition per, are already superlative: as, perfect, perennial, permanent, &c."—Elements of E. Gram., p. 52. In reply to this, I would say, that nothing is really superlative, in English, but what has the form and construction of the superlative; as, "The most permanent of all dyes." No word beginning with per, is superlative by virtue of this Latin prefix. "Separate spirits, which are beings that have perfecter knowledge and greater happiness than we, must needs have also a perfecter way of communicating their thoughts than we have."—Locke's Essay, B. ii, Ch. 24, §36, This mode of comparison is not now good, but it shows that perfect is no superlative. Thus Kirkham: "The following adjectives, and many others, are always in the superlative degree; because, by expressing a quality in the highest degree, they carry in themselves a superlative signification: chief, extreme, perfect, right, wrong, honest, just, true, correct, sincere, vast, immense, ceaseless, infinite, endless, unparalleled, universal, supreme, unlimited, omnipotent, all-wise, eternal." [183]—Gram., p. 73. So the Rev. David Blair: "The words perfect, certain, infinite, universal, chief, supreme, right, true, extreme, superior, and some others, which express a perfect and superlative sense in themselves, do not admit of comparison."—English Gram., p. 81. Now, according to Murray's definition, which Kirkham adopts, none of these words can be at all in the superlative degree. On the contrary, there are several among them, from which true superlatives are frequently and correctly formed. Where are the positives which are here supposed to be "increased to the highest degree?" Every real superlative in our language, except best and worst, most and least, first and last, with the still more irregular word next, is a derivative, formed from some other English word, by adding est or most; as, truest, hindmost. The propriety or impropriety of comparing the foregoing words, or any of the "many others" of which this author speaks, is to be determined according to their meaning, and according to the usage of good writers, and not by the dictation of a feeble pedant, or upon the supposition that if compared they would form "double superlatives."

OBS. 8.—Chief is from the French word chef, the head: chiefest is therefore no more a double superlative than headmost: "But when the headmost foes appeared."—Scott. Nor are chief and chiefest equivalent terms: "Doeg an Edomite, the chiefest of the herdsmen."—1 Samuel, xxi, 7. "The chief of the herdsmen," would convey a different meaning; it would be either the leader of the herdsmen, or the principal part of them. Chiefest, however, has often been used where chief would have been better; as, "He sometimes denied admission to the chiefest officers of the army."—Clarendon, let us look further at Kirkham's list of absolute "superlatives."

OBS. 9.—Extreme is from the Latin superlative extremus, and of course its literal signification is not really susceptible of increase. Yet extremest has been used, and is still used, by some of the very best writers; as, "They thought it the extremest of evils."—Bacon. "That on the sea's extremest border stood."—Addison. "How, to extremest thrill of agony."—Pollok, B. viii, l. 270. "I go th' extremest remedy to prove."—Dryden. "In extremest poverty."—Swift. "The hairy fool stood on th' extremest verge of the swift brook, augmenting it with tears."—Shak. "While the extremest parts of the earth were meditating submission."—Atterbury. "His writings are poetical to the extremest boundaries of poetry."—Adams's Rhetoric, i, 87. In prose, this superlative is not now very common; but the poets still occasionally use it, for the sake of their measure; and it ought to be noticed that the simple adjective is not partitive. If we say, for the first example, "the extreme of evils;" we make the word a noun, and do not convey exactly the same idea that is there expressed.

OBS. 10.—Perfect, if taken in its strictest sense, must not be compared; but this word, like many others which mean most in the positive, is often used with a certain latitude of meaning, which renders its comparison by the adverbs not altogether inadmissible; nor is it destitute of authority, as I have already shown. (See Obs. 8th, p. 280.) "From the first rough sketches, to the more perfect draughts."—Bolingbroke, on Hist., p. 152. "The most perfect."—Adams's Lect. on Rhet., i, 99 and 136; ii, 17 and 57: Blair's Lect., pp. 20 and 399. "The most beautiful and perfect example of analysis."—Lowth's Gram., Pref., p. 10. "The plainest, most perfect, and most useful manual."—Bullions's E. Gram., Rev., p. 7. "Our sight is the most perfect, and the most delightful, of all our senses."—Addison, Spect., No. 411; Blair's Lect., pp. 115 and 194; Murray's Gram., i, 322. Here Murray anonymously copied Blair. "And to render natives more perfect in the knowledge of it."—Campbell's Rhet., p. 171; Murray's Gram., p. 366. Here Murray copied Campbell, the most accurate of all his masters. Whom did he copy when he said, "The phrases, more perfect, and most perfect, are improper?"—Octavo Gram., p. 168. But if these are wrong, so is the following sentence: "No poet has ever attained a greater perfection than Horace."—Blair's Lect., p. 398. And also this: "Why are we brought into the world less perfect in respect to our nature?"—West's Letters to a Young Lady, p. 220.

OBS. 11.—Right and wrong are not often compared by good writers; though we sometimes see such phrases as more right and more wrong, and such words as rightest and wrongest: "'Tis always in the wrongest sense."—Butler. "A method of attaining the rightest and greatest happiness."—PRICE: Priestley's Gram., p. 78. "It is no more right to steal apples, than it is to steal money."—Webster's New Spelling-Book, p. 118. There are equivalent expressions which seem preferable; as, more proper, more erroneous, most proper, most erroneous.

OBS. 12.—Honest, just, true, correct, sincere, and vast, may all be compared at pleasure. Pope's Essay on Criticism is more correct than any thing this modest pretender can write; and in it, he may find the comparative juster, the superlatives justest, truest, sincerest, and the phrases, "So vast a throng,"—"So vast is art:" all of which are contrary to his teaching. "Unjuster dealing is used in buying than in selling."—Butler's Poems, p. 163. "Iniquissimam pacem justissimo bello antefero."—Cicero. "I prefer the unjustest peace before the justest war."—Walker's English Particles, p. 68. The poet Cowley used the word honestest; which is not now very common. So Swift: "What honester folks never durst for their ears."—The Yahoo's Overthrow. So Jucius: "The honestest and ablest men."—Letter XVIII. "The sentence would be more correct in the following form."—Murray's Gram., i, p. 223. "Elegance is chiefly gained by studying the correctest writers."—Holmes's Rhetoric, p. 27. Honest and correct, for the sake of euphony, require the adverbs; as, more honest, "most correct."—Lowth's Gram., Pref., p. iv. Vast, vaster, vastest, are words as smooth, as fast, faster, fastest; and more vast is certainly as good English as more just: "Shall mortal man be more just than God?"—Job, iv, 17. "Wilt thou condemn him that is most just?"—Ib., xxxiv, 17. "More wise, more learn'd, more just, more-everything."—Pope. Universal is often compared by the adverbs, but certainly with no reënforcement of meaning: as, "One of the most universal precepts, is, that the orator himself should feel the passion."—Adams's Rhet., i, 379. "Though not so universal."—Ib., ii, 311. "This experience is general, though not so universal, as the absence of memory in childhood."—Ib., ii, 362. "We can suppose no motive which would more universally operate."—Dr. Blair's Rhet., p. 55. "Music is known to have been more universally studied."—Ib., p. 123. "We shall not wonder, that his grammar has been so universally applauded."—Walker's Recommendation in Murray's Gram., ii, 306. "The pronoun it is the most universal of all the pronouns."—Cutler's Gram., p. 66. Thus much for one half of this critic's twenty-two "superlatives." The rest are simply adjectives that are not susceptible of comparison: they are not "superlatives" at all. A man might just as well teach, that good is a superlative, and not susceptible of comparison, because "there is none good but one."

OBS. 13.—Pronominal adjectives, when their nouns are expressed, simply relate to them, and have no modifications: except this and that, which form the plurals these and those; and much, many, and a few others, which are compared. Examples: "Whence hath this man this wisdom, and these mighty works?"—Matt., xiii, 54. "But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?"—1 Cor., xv, 35. "The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit."—Ib., 45. So, when one pronominal adjective "precedes an other, the former must be taken simply as an adjective;" as,

"Those suns are set. O rise some other such!"—Cowper's Task, B. ii, l. 252.

OBS. 14.—Pronominal adjectives, when their nouns are not expressed, may be parsed as representing them in person, number, gender, and case; but those who prefer it, may supply the ellipsis, and parse the adjective, simply as an adjective. Example: "He threatens many, who injures one."—Kames. Here it may be said, "Many is a pronominal adjective, meaning many persons; of the third person, plural number, masculine gender, and objective case." Or those who will take the word simply as an adjective, may say, "Many is a pronominal adjective, of the positive degree, compared many, more, most, and relating to persons understood." And so of "one," which represents, or relates to, person understood. Either say, "One is a pronominal adjective, not compared," and give the three definitions accordingly; or else say, "One is a pronominal adjective, relating to person understood; of the third person, singular number, masculine gender, and objective case," and give the six definitions accordingly.

OBS. 15.—Elder for older, and eldest for oldest, are still frequently used; though the ancient positive, eld for old, is now obsolete. Hence some have represented old as having a two-fold comparison; and have placed it, not very properly, among the irregular adjectives. The comparatives elder and better, are often used as nouns; so are the Latin comparatives superior and inferior, interior and exterior, senior and junior, major and minor: as, The elder's advice—One of the elders—His betters—Our superiors—The interior of the country—A handsome exterior—Your seniors—My juniors—A major in the army—He is yet a minor. The word other, which has something of the nature of a comparative, likewise takes the form of a noun, as before suggested; and, in that form, the reader, if he will, may call it a noun: as, "What do ye more than others?"—Bible. "God in thus much is bounded, that the evil hath he left unto an other; and that Dark Other hath usurped the evil which Omnipotence laid down."—Tupper's Book of Thoughts, p. 45. Some call it a pronoun. But it seems to be pronominal, merely by ellipsis of the noun after it; although, unlike a mere adjective, it assumes the ending of the noun, to mark that ellipsis. Perhaps therefore, the best explanation of it would be this: "'Others is a pronominal adjective, having the form of a noun, and put for other men; in the third person, plural number, masculine gender, and nominative case." The gender of this word varies, according to that of the contrasted term; and the case, according to the relation it bears to other words. In the following example, it is neuter and objective: "The fibres of this muscle act as those of others."—Cheyne. Here, "as those of others," means, "as the fibres of other muscles."

OBS. 16.—"Comparatives and superlatives seem sometimes to part with their relative nature, and only to retain their intensive, especially those which are formed by the superlative adverb most; as, 'A most learned man,'—'A most brave man:' i.e. not the bravest or the most learned man that ever was, but a man possessing bravery or learning in a very eminent degree."—See Alexander Murray's Gram., p. 110. This use of the terms of comparison is thought by some not to be very grammatical.

OBS. 17.—Contractions of the superlative termination est, as high'st for highest, bigg'st for biggest, though sometimes used by the poets, are always inelegant, and may justly be considered grammatically improper. They occur most frequently in doggerel verse, like that of Hudibras; the author of which work, wrote, in his droll fashion, not only the foregoing monosyllables, but learned'st for most learned, activ'st for most active, desperat'st for most desperate, epidemical'st for most epidemical, &c.

"And th' activ'st fancies share as loose alloys, For want of equal weight to counterpoise."—Butler's Poems.

"Who therefore finds the artificial'st fools Have not been chang'd i th' cradle, but the schools."—Ib., p. 143.

OBS. 18.—Nouns used adjectively are not varied in number to agree with the nouns to which they relate, but what is singular or plural when used substantively, is without number when taken as an adjective: as, "One of the nine sister goddesses."—Webster's Dict., w. Muse. "He has money in a savings bank." The latter mode of expression is uncommon, and the term savings-bank is sometimes compounded, but the hyphen does not really affect the nature of the former word. It is doubtful, however, whether a plural noun can ever properly assume the character of an adjective; because, if it is not then really the same as the possessive case, it will always be liable to be thought a false form of that case. What Johnson wrote "fullers earth" and "fullers thistle;" Chalmers has "fullers earth" and "fuller's thistle;" Webster, "fuller's-earth" and "fuller's-thistle;" Ainsworth, "fuller's earth" and "fuller's thistle;" Walker has only "fullers-earth;" Worcester, "fuller's-earth;" Cobb, "fullers earth;" the Treasury of Knowledge, "fullers'-earth." So unsettled is this part of our grammar, that in many such cases it is difficult cult to say whether we ought to use the apostrophe, or the hyphen, or both, or neither. To insert neither, unless we make a close compound, is to use a plural noun adjectively; which form, I think, is the most objectionable of all. See "All souls day,"—"All-fools-day,"—"All-saints'-day," &c., in the dictionaries. These may well be written "All Souls' Day" &c.