Are _negligence_, _falsehood_, and _mendacity_, in 5, used as subjects?

Explain their use and punctuation. (See Remark, Lesson 45.)

In 3, paragraph 3, how are the words borrowed from Paul marked? Change the quotation from Paul so as to give his thought but not his exact words. Are the quotation marks now needed? In 3 and 4 find clauses introduced by _that_, _which_, and _who_, and used like adjectives.

+The Grouping of Sentences into Paragraphs+.--You can easily learn the sub-topic, or thought, each of these paragraphs develops. See whether you can find it in the first sentence of each. Give the three sub-topics. Put together the three thoughts established in these paragraphs and tell what they prove. What they prove is that for which Mr. Beecher is contending; it may be written at the head of the extract as the general topic. What merits of the paragraph, already treated, are admirably ill.u.s.trated in this extract?

+The Style of the Author+.--This selection is neither descriptive nor narrative; it is +Argumentative+. Mr. Beecher is trying to establish a certain proposition, and in the three paragraphs is giving three reasons, or arguments, to prove its truth. But the argument is not all thought, is not purely intellectual. It is suffused with feeling, is impa.s.sioned. Mr.

Beecher's heart is in his work. This feeling warms and colors his style, and stimulates his fancy. As a consequence, figures of speech abound.

Notice that in 1, paragraph 1, the thought is repeated by means of the infinitive phrases. Read the words _Indolence inclines a man_ with each of the four infinitive phrases that follow. You will see that the thought is repeated. It is first expressed in a general way; by the aid of the second phrase we see the same thought from the negative side; the third phrase makes the statement more specific; the fourth puts the specific statement negatively. The needless repet.i.tion of the same thought in different words is one of the worst faults in writing. But Mr. Beecher's repet.i.tion is not needless. By every repet.i.tion here, Mr. Beecher makes his thought clearer and stronger. Examine the other sentences of this paragraph and see whether they enforce the leading thought by ill.u.s.tration, example, or consequence.

In what sentence is the style made +energetic+ by the aid of short predicates? How does the alternation of short sentences with long throughout the extract affect you? The alternation of plain with figurative sentences? Can you show that the author's style has +Variety+? Pick out the metaphors in 1, 2, 3, and 5, paragraph 2; and in 1 and 2, paragraph 3. Pick out the comparisons, or similes, in 3, paragraph 1, and in 3, paragraph 2.

Figures of speech should add clearness and force. If you think these do, tell how. _Indolence_ in 1 and 3, paragraph 2, and _laziness_ in 2, introduce us to another figure. Something belonging to the men, a quality, is made to represent the men themselves. Such a figure is called +Metonymy+.

SUGGESTIONS FOB COMPOSITION WORK.

TO THE TEACHER.--Exercises in argumentative writing may be continued by making selections from the discussion of easy topics.

For original work we suggest debates on current topics. Compositions should be short.

Exercises on the Composition of the Sentence and the Paragraph.

EXTRACT FROM DANIEL WEBSTER.

1. The a.s.sa.s.sin enters, through the window already prepared, into an unoccupied apartment. 2. With noiseless foot he paces the lonely hall, half lighted by the moon; he winds up the ascent of the stairs and reaches the door of the chamber. 3. Of this he moves the lock, by soft and continued pressure, till it turns on its hinges without noise; and he enters, and beholds his victim before him.

1. The face of the innocent sleeper is turned from the murderer, and the beams of the moon, resting on the gray locks of his aged temple, show him where to strike. 2. The fatal blow is given! and the victim pa.s.ses, without a struggle or a motion, from the repose of sleep to the repose of death. 3.

It is the a.s.sa.s.sin's purpose to make sure work; and he plies the dagger, though it is obvious that life has been destroyed by the blow of the bludgeon. 4. He even raises the aged arm that he may not fail in his aim at the heart, and places it again over the wounds of the poniard. 5. To finish the picture, he explores the wrist for the pulse. 6. He feels for it, and ascertains that it beats no longer. 7. It is accomplished. 8. The deed is done.

1. He retreats, retraces his steps to the window, pa.s.ses out through it as he came in, and escapes. 2. He has done the murder. No eye has seen him, no ear has heard him. 3. The secret is his own, and it is safe.

1. Ah! gentlemen, that was a dreadful mistake. 2. Such a secret can be safe nowhere. 3. The whole creation of G.o.d has neither nook nor corner where the guilty can bestow it, and say it is safe. 4. Not to speak of that eye which pierces through all disguises and beholds everything as in the splendor of noon, such secrets of guilt are never safe from detection even by men. 5.

True it is, generally speaking, that "Murder will out." 6. True it is that Providence hath so ordained, and doth so govern things, that those who break the great law of heaven by shedding man's blood seldom succeed in avoiding discovery.

+The Uses of Words and Groups of Words+.--Do the phrases in 1, paragraph 1, stand in their usual order, or are they transposed? In what different places may they stand? Does either phrase need to be transposed for emphasis or for clearness? Explain the punctuation. Begin 2 with _the lonely hall_, and notice that the sentence is thrown out of harmony with the other sentences, and that the a.s.sa.s.sin is for the moment lost sight of.

Can you tell why? Notice that in the latter part of 2 the door is mentioned, and that 3 begins with _of this_, referring to the door. Can you find any other arrangement by which 3 will follow 2 so naturally? Can you change 3 so as to make the reference of _it_ clearer? What is the office of the _till_ clause? Does the clause following the semicolon modify anything?

Would you call such a clause _dependent_, or would you call it _independent_? Explain the punctuation of 3.

Give the effect of changing _resting_ in 1, paragraph 2, to the a.s.sertive form. Find in 1 a p.r.o.noun used adverbially and a phrase used as object complement. Expand the phrase into a clause. Give the modifiers of _pa.s.ses_ in 2. Read the first part of 3 and put the explanatory phrase in place of _it_. What is the office of the _though_ clause? Find in this a clause doing the work of a noun and tell its office. In 4 would _his_ in place of _the_ before _aged_ and before _heart_ be ambiguous? If so, why? Find in this paragraph an infinitive phrase used independently. Find the object complement of _ascertains_ in 6. Are 7 and 8 identical in meaning?

Give the modifiers of _pa.s.ses_ in paragraph 3. Explain the _as_ clause.

What does _that_ in 1, paragraph 4, stand for? What kind of clause is introduced by _where_ in 3? By _which_ in 4? Expand the _as_ clause in 4 and tell its office. Find in 4 and 5 an infinitive phrase and a participle phrase used independently. Tell the office of the _that_ clauses in 5 and 6, and of the _who_ clause in 6.

+The Grouping of Sentences into Paragraphs+.--Look (1) at the order of the sentences in each paragraph, and (2) at the order of the paragraphs themselves. Neither order could be changed without making the stream of events run up hill, for each order is the order in which the events happened. Look (3) at the unity of each paragraph, and (4) at the larger unity of the four paragraphs--that of each paragraph determined by the relation of each sentence to the sub-topic of the paragraph, and that of the four paragraphs determined by their relation to the general topic of the extract. We add that the obvious reference of the repeated _he_ to the same person, and of _that_ and _secret_ in paragraph 4 demonstrates both unities. Look (5), and lastly, at the fact that the sub-topic of each paragraph is found in the first line of each paragraph. Could Webster have done more to make his thought seen and felt?

+The Style of the Author.+--This selection is largely +Narrative.+ Its leading facts were doubtless supplied by the testimony given in the case; but much of the matter must have come from the imagination of Mr. Webster.

Everything is so skillfully and vividly put that the story, touched with description, has all the effect of an argument. One quality of it is its clearness, its perspicuity. It is noticeable also that very little imagery is used, that the language is plain language. But it is impossible to read these paragraphs without being most profoundly impressed with their energy, their force.

The style is forcible because (1) the +subject-matter+ is +easily grasped+; (2) because +simple words+ are +used+, words understood even by children; because (3) these +words+ are +specific+ and +individual+, not generic; because (4) of the grateful +variety of sentences+; (5) because of the +prevalence of short sentences+; because (6) of the +repet.i.tion of the thought+ in successive sentences; because (7), though the murder took place some time before, Webster speaks as if it were +now taking place+ in our very sight. Find proof of what we have just said--proof of (2), in paragraphs 1 and 3; proof of (3), in sentences 3, 4, and 5, paragraph 2; proof of (4), throughout; of (5) and (6), in paragraphs 3 and 4; and of (7), in the first three paragraphs.

In paragraph 3, a remarkable sameness prevails. The sentences here are framed largely on one plan. They are mostly of the same length. The order of the words in them is the same; often the words are the same; and, even when they are not, those in one clause or sentence seem to suggest those in the next. This sameness is not accidental. The more real the murderer's fancied security is made in this paragraph to appear, the more startling in the next paragraph will be the revelation of his mistake. Hence no novelty in the words or in their arrangement is allowed to distract our attention from the dominant thought. The sentences are made to look and sound alike and to be alike that their effect may be c.u.mulative. The principle of +Parallel Construction+, the principle that sentences similar in thought should be similar in form, is here allowed free play.

TO THE TEACHER.--Do not be discouraged should your pupils fail to grasp at first all that is here taught. They probably will not fully comprehend it till they have returned to it several times. It will, however, be impossible for them to study it without profit. The meaning will grow upon them. In studying our questions and suggestions the pupils should have the "Extract" before them, and should try to verify in it all that is taught concerning it.

PARTS OF SPEECH SUBDIVIDED

LESSON 85.

CLa.s.sES OF NOUNS AND p.r.o.nOUNS.

+Introductory Hints+.--You have now reached a point where it becomes necessary to divide the eight great cla.s.ses of words into subcla.s.ses.

You have learned that nouns are the names of things; as, _girl_, _Sarah_.

The name _girl_ is held in common by all girls, and hence does not distinguish one girl from another. The name _Sarah_ is not thus held in common; it does distinguish one girl from other girls. Any name which belongs in common to all things of a cla.s.s we call a +Common Noun+; and any particular name of an individual, distinguishing this individual from others of its cla.s.s, we call a +Proper Noun+. The "proper, or individual, names" which in Rule 1, Lesson 8, you were told to begin with capital letters are proper nouns.

Such a word as _wheat_, _music_, or _architecture_ does not distinguish one thing from others of its cla.s.s; there is but one thing in the cla.s.s denoted by each, each thing forms a cla.s.s by itself; and so we call these words common nouns.

In Lesson 8 you learned that p.r.o.nouns are not names, but words used instead of names. Any one speaking of himself may use _I_, _my_, etc., instead of his own name; speaking to one, he may use _you_, _thou_, _your_, _thy_, etc., instead of that person's name; speaking of one, he may use _he_, _she_, _it_, _him_, _her_, etc., instead of that one's name. These little words that by their form denote the speaker, the one spoken to, or the one spoken of are called +Personal p.r.o.nouns+.

By adding _self_ to _my_, _thy_, _your_, _him_, _her_, and _it_, and _selves_ to _our_, _your_, and _them_, we form what are called +Compound Personal p.r.o.nouns+, used either for emphasis or to reflect the action of the verb back upon the actor; as, _Xerxes himself_ was the last to cross the h.e.l.lespont; The _mind_ cannot see _itself_.

If a noun, or some word or words used like a noun, is to be modified by a clause, the clause is introduced by _who_, _which_, _what_, or _that_; as, I know the man _that_ did that. These words, relating to words in another clause, and binding the clauses together, are called +Relative p.r.o.nouns+.

By adding _ever_ and _soever_ to _who_, _which_, and _what_, we form what are called the +Compound Relative p.r.o.nouns+ _whoever_, _whosoever_, _whichever_, _whatever_, etc., used in a general way, and without any word expressed to which they relate.

If the speaker is ignorant of the name of a person or a thing and asks for it, he uses _who_, _which_, or _what_; as, _Who_ did that? These p.r.o.nouns, used in asking questions, are called +Interrogative p.r.o.nouns+.

Instead of naming things a speaker may indicate them by words pointing them out as near or remote; as, Is _that_ a man? What is _this_? or by words telling something of their number, order, or quant.i.ty; as, _None_ are perfect; The _latter_ will do; _Much_ has been done. Such words we call +Adjective p.r.o.nouns+.

DEFINITIONS.

+A _Noun_ is the name of anything+. [Footnote: Most common nouns are derived from roots that denote qualities. The root does not necessarily denote the most essential quality of the thing, only its most obtrusive quality. The sky, a shower, and sc.u.m, for instance, have this most noticeable feature; they are a cover, they hide, conceal. This the root +sku+ signifies, and _sku_ is the main element in the words _sky_, _shower_ (Saxon _scu:r_), and _sc.u.m_ that name these objects, and in the adjective _obscure_.

A noun denoting at first only a single quality of its object comes gradually, by the a.s.sociation of this quality with the rest, to denote them all.

Herein proper nouns differ from common. However derived, as _Smith_ is from the man's office of smoothing, or _White_ from his color, the name soon ceases to denote quality, and becomes really meaningless.]

+A _Common Noun_ is a name which belongs to all things of a cla.s.s+.

+A _Proper Noun_ is the particular name of an individual+.

+Remark+.--It may be well to note two cla.s.ses of common nouns--_collective_ and _abstract_. A +Collective Noun+ is the name of a number of things taken together; as, _army_, _flock_, _mob_, _jury_. An +Abstract Noun+ is the name of a quality, an action, a being, or a state; as, _whiteness_, _beauty_, _wisdom_, (the) _singing_, _existence_, (the) _sleep_.

+A _p.r.o.noun_ is a word used for a noun+. [Footnote: In our definition and general treatment of the p.r.o.noun, we have conformed to the traditional views of grammarians; but it may be well for the student to note that p.r.o.nouns are something more than mere subst.i.tutes for nouns, and that their primary function is not to prevent the repet.i.tion of nouns.