The English Language Part 77

{404}

CHAPTER III.

SYNTAX OF ADJECTIVES.

-- 492. _Pleonasm._--Pleonasm can take place with adjectives only in the expression of the degrees of comparison. Over and above the etymological signs of the comparative and superlative degrees, there may be used the superlative words _more_ and _most_.

And this pleonasm really occurs--

_The_ more serener _spirit_.

_The_ most straitest _sect_.

These are instances of pleonasm in the strictest sense of the term.

-- 493. _Collocation._--As a general rule, the adjective precedes the substantive--_a good man_, not _a man good_.

When, however, the adjective is qualified by either the expression of its degree, or accompanied by another adjective, it may follow the substantive--

A man _just and good_.

A woman _wise and fair_.

A hero _devoted to his country_.

A patriot _disinterested to a great degree_.

_Single simple_ adjectives thus placed after their substantive, belong to the poetry of England, and especially to the ballad poetry--_sighs profound_--_the leaves green_.

-- 494. _Government._--The only adjective that governs a case, is the word _like_. In the expression, _this is like him_, &c., the original power of the dative remains. This we infer--

1. From the fact that in most languages which have {405} inflections to a sufficient extent, the word meaning _like_ governs a dative case.

2. That if ever we use in English any preposition at all to express similitude, it is the preposition _to_--_like to me_, _like to death_, &c.

Expressions like _full of meat_, _good for John_, are by no means instances of the government of adjectives; the really governing words being the prepositions _to_ and _for_ respectively.

The most that can be said, in cases like these, is that particular adjectives determine the use of particular prepositions--thus the preposition _of_, generally follows the adjective _full_, &c.

-- 495. The positive degree preceded by the adjective more, is equivalent to the comparative form--_e. g._, _more wise_=_wiser_.

The reasons for employing one expression in preference to the other, depend upon the nature of the particular word used.

When the word is, at one and the same time, of Anglo-Saxon origin and monosyllabic, there is no doubt about the preference to be given to the form in _-er_. Thus, _wis-er_ is preferable to _more wise_.

When, however, the word is compound, or trisyllabic, the combination with the word _more_, is preferable.

_more fruitful_ _fruitfuller_.

_more villanous_ _villanouser_.

Between these two extremes, there are several intermediate forms wherein the use of one rather than another, will depend upon the taste of the writer. The question, however, is a question of euphony, rather than of aught else. It is also ill.u.s.trated by the principle of not multiplying secondary elements. In such a word as _fruit-full-er_, there are two additions to the root. The same is the case with the superlative, _fruit-full-est_.

-- 496. The 9th Chapter of Part IV., should be read carefully. There, there is indicated a refinement upon the current notions as to the power of the comparative degree, {406} and reasons are given for believing that the fundamental notion expressed by the comparative inflexion is the idea of comparison or contrast between _two_ objects.

In this case, it is better in speaking of only two objects to use the comparative degree rather than the superlative--even when we use the definite article _the_. Thus--

This is _the better_ of the two

is preferable to

This is _the best_ of the two.

This principle is capable of an application more extensive than our habits of speaking and writing will verify. Thus, to go to other parts of speech, we should logically say--

Whether of the two

rather than

Which of the two.

Either the father or the son,

but not

Either the father, the son, or the daughter.

This statement may be refined on. It is chiefly made for the sake of giving fresh prominence to the idea of duality expressed by the terminations _-er_ and _-ter_.

-- 497. The absence of inflection simplifies the syntax of adjectives.

Violations of concord are impossible. We could not make an adjective disagree with its substantive if we wished.

{407}

CHAPTER IV.

SYNTAX OF p.r.o.nOUNS.

-- 498. The syntax of substantives is, in English, simple, from the paucity of its inflections, a condition which is unfavourable towards the evolution of constructional complexities; the most remarkable exception being the phenomenon of convertibility noticed above.

The same is the case with adjectives. The want of inflexion simplifies their syntax equally with that of the substantives.

But with the p.r.o.nouns this is not the case. Here we have--

1. Signs of gender; 2. Signs of case; 3. Signs of number, to a greater extent, and with more peculiarities, than elsewhere.

Furthermore, the p.r.o.nouns exhibit in a great degree the phenomena of conversion indicated in p. 400.

-- 499. _Pleonasm in the syntax of p.r.o.nouns._--In the following sentences the words in italics are pleonastic.

1. The king _he_ is just.