s argument, he considers only the objections offered by Lowth, which
indeed he sufficiently refutes. Now to me there appear to be other
objections, which are better founded. In the first place, the two sentences
are not equivalent in meaning; hence the preference suggested by this
critic and others, is absurd. Secondly, a compound noun formed of two or
three words without any hyphen, is at best such an anomaly, as we ought
rather to avoid than to prefer. If these considerations do not positively
condemn the former construction, they ought at least to prevent it from
displacing the latter; and seldom is either to be preferred to the regular
noun, which we can limit by the article or the possessive at pleasure: as,
"Much depends on _an observance_ of the rule."--"Much depends on _their
observance_ of the rule." Now these two sentences are equivalent to the two
former, but not to each other; and, _vice versa_: that is, the two former
are equivalent to these, but not to each other.[347]

OBS. 9.--From Dr. Campbell's commendation of Lowth, as having "given some
excellent directions for preserving a proper distinction between the noun
and the gerund,"--that is, between the participial noun and the
participle,--it is fair to infer that he meant to preserve it himself; and
yet, in the argument above mentioned, he appears to have carelessly framed
one ambiguous or very erroneous sentence, from which, as I imagine, his
views of this matter have been misconceived, and by which Murray and all
his modifiers have been furnished with an example wherewith to confound
this distinction, and also to contradict themselves. The sentence is this:
"Much will depend on _your pupil's composing_, but more on _his reading_
frequently."--_Philos. of Rhet._, p. 235. Volumes innumerable have gone
abroad, into our schools and elsewhere, which pronounce this sentence to be
"correct and proper." But after all, what does it mean? Does the adverb
"_frequently_" qualify the verb "_will depend_" expressed in the sentence?
or "_will depend_" understood after _more_? or both? or neither? Or does
this adverb qualify the action of "_reading_?" or the action of
"_composing_?" or both? or neither? But _composing_ and _reading_, if they
are mere _nouns_, cannot properly be qualified by any adverb; and, if they
are called participles, the question recurs respecting the possessives.
Besides, _composing_, as a participle, is commonly _transitive_; nor is it
very fit f