FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2354   2355   2356   2357   2358   2359   2360   2361   2362   2363   2364   2365   2366   2367   2368   2369   2370   2371   2372   2373   2374   2375   2376   2377   2378  
2379   2380   2381   2382   2383   2384   2385   2386   2387   2388   2389   2390   2391   2392   2393   2394   2395   2396   2397   2398   2399   2400   2401   2402   2403   >>   >|  
contained in his statement!_"--_Principles of E. Grammar_, p. 131. And the teacher is to ask questions as numerous as the reasons! Such is the parsing of a text-book which has been pronounced "superior to any other, for use in our common schools"--"a _complete_ grammar of the language, and _available for every purpose_ for which Mr. Brown's can possibly be used."--_Ralph K. Finch's Report_, p, 12. [63] There are many other critics, besides Murray and Alger, who seem not to have observed the import of _after_ and _before_ in connexion with the tenses. Dr. Bullions, on page 139th of his English Grammar, copied the foregoing example from Lennie, who took it from Murray. Even Richard Hiley, and William Harvey Wells, grammarians of more than ordinary tact, have been obviously misled by the false criticism above cited. One of Hiley's Rules of Syntax, with its illustration, stands thus: "In _the use of the different tenses_, we must particularly _observe to use that tense_ which clearly and properly conveys the sense intended; thus, instead of saying, 'After I _visited_ Europe, I returned to America;' we should say, 'After I _had visited_ Europe, I returned to America."--_Hiley's Gram._, p. 90. Upon this he thought it needful to comment thus: "'After I _visited_ Europe, I returned to America;' _this sentence is incorrect_; _visited_ ought to be _had visited_, because the action _implied_ by the verb _visited_ WAS COMPLETED _before_ the other past action _returned_."--_Ib._, p. 91. See nearly the same thing in _Wells's School Grammar, 1st Edition_, p. 151; but his later editions are wisely altered. Since "_visited_ and _was completed_" are of the same tense, the argument from the latter, if it proves any thing, proves the former to be _right_, and the proposed change needless, or perhaps worse than needless. "I _visited_ Europe _before_ I _returned_ to America," or, "I _visited_ Europe, _and afterwards returned_ to America," is good English, and not to be improved by any change of tense; yet here too we see the _visiting_ "_was completed before_" the return, or HAD BEEN COMPLETED _at the time_ of the return. I say, "The Pluperfect Tense is that which expresses what _had taken_ place _at_ some past time mentioned: as, 'I _had seen_ him, _when_ I met you.'" Murray says, "The Pluperfect Tense represents a _thing_ not only as past, but also as prior to some _other point of time_ specified in the sentence: as, I _had finished_ my let
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   2354   2355   2356   2357   2358   2359   2360   2361   2362   2363   2364   2365   2366   2367   2368   2369   2370   2371   2372   2373   2374   2375   2376   2377   2378  
2379   2380   2381   2382   2383   2384   2385   2386   2387   2388   2389   2390   2391   2392   2393   2394   2395   2396   2397   2398   2399   2400   2401   2402   2403   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
visited
 

returned

 

Europe

 
America
 

Murray

 
Grammar
 

proves

 

change

 

needless

 

action


COMPLETED

 
sentence
 

tenses

 

completed

 

English

 

Pluperfect

 

return

 

comment

 

incorrect

 
mentioned

implied

 

needful

 
finished
 

thought

 

represents

 

argument

 

visiting

 
proposed
 

improved

 
School

expresses

 

Edition

 

altered

 

wisely

 
editions
 

possibly

 

language

 
purpose
 

critics

 

Report


grammar

 
complete
 

teacher

 

questions

 

numerous

 

contained

 

statement

 

Principles

 

reasons

 

superior