  A Preposition is a word used to express some relation of different things or thoughts to each other, and is generally placed before a noun or a pronoun: as, "The paper lies before me on the desk." OBSERVATIONS.OBS. 1.—The relations of things to things in nature, or of words to words in discourse, are infinite in number, if not also in variety. But just classification may make even infinites the subjects of sure science. Every relation of course implies more objects, and more terms, than one; for any one thing, considered merely in itself, is taken independently, abstractly, irrelatively, as if it had no relation or dependence. In all correct language, the grammatical relation of the words corresponds exactly to the relation of the things or ideas expressed; for the relation of words, is their dependence, or connexion, according to the sense. This relation is oftentimes immediate, as of one word to an other, without the intervention of a preposition; but it is seldom, if ever, reciprocally equal; because dependence implies subordination; and mere adjunction is a sort of inferiority. OBS. 2.—To a preposition, the prior or antecedent term may be a noun, an adjective, a pronoun, a verb, a participle, or an adverb; and the subsequent or governed term may be a noun, a pronoun, a pronominal adjective, an infinitive verb, or a participle. In some instances, also, as in the phrases, in vain, on high, at once, till now, for ever, by how much, until then, from thence, from above, we find adjectives used elliptically, and adverbs substantively, after the preposition. But, in phrases of an adverbial character, what is elsewhere a preposition often becomes an adverb. Now, if prepositions are concerned in expressing the various relations of so many of the different parts of speech, multiplied, as these relations must be, by that endless variety of combinations which may be given to the terms; and if the sense of the writer or speaker is necessarily mistaken, as often as any of these relations are misunderstood, or their terms misconceived; how shall we estimate the importance of a right explanation, and a right use, of this part of speech? OBS. 3.—The grammarian whom Lowth compliments, as excelling all others, in "acuteness of investigation, perspicuity of explication, and elegance of method;" and as surpassing all but Aristotle, in the beauty and perfectness of his philological analysis; commences his chapter on conjunctions in the following manner: "Connectives are the subject of what follows; which, according as they connect either Sentences or Words, are called by the different Names of Conjunctions OR Prepositions. Of these Names, that of the Preposition is taken from a mere accident, as it commonly stands in connection before the Part, which it connects. The name of the Conjunction, as is evident, has reference to its essential character. Of these two we shall consider the Conjunction first, because it connects, not Words, but Sentences."—Harris's Hermes, p. 237. OBS. 4.—In point of order, it is not amiss to treat conjunctions before prepositions; though this is not the method of Lowth, or of Murray. But, to any one who is well acquainted with these two parts of speech, the foregoing passage cannot but appear, in three sentences out of the four, both defective in style and erroneous in doctrine. It is true, that conjunctions generally connect sentences, and that prepositions as generally express relations between particular words: but it is true also, that conjunctions often connect words only; and that prepositions, by governing antecedents, relatives, or even personal pronouns, may serve to subjoin sentences to sentences, as well as to determine the relation and construction of the particular words which they govern. Example: "The path seems now plain and even, but there are asperities and pitfalls, over which Religion only can conduct you."—Dr. Johnson. Here are three simple sentences, which are made members of one compound sentence, by means of but and over which; while two of these members, clauses, or subdivisions, contain particular words connected by and. OBS. 5.—In one respect, the preposition is the simplest of all the parts of speech: in our common schemes of grammar, it has neither classes nor modifications. Every connective word that governs an object after it, is called a preposition, because it does so; and in etymological parsing, to name the preposition as such, and define the name, is, perhaps, all that is necessary. But in syntactical parsing, in which we are to omit the definitions, and state the construction, we ought to explain what terms the preposition connects, and to give a rule adapted to this office of the particle. It is a palpable defect in nearly all our grammars, that their syntax contains NO SUCH RULE. "Prepositions govern the objective case," is a rule for the objective case, and not for the syntax of prepositions. "Prepositions show the relations of words, and of the things or thoughts expressed by them," is the principle for the latter; a principle which we cannot neglect, without a shameful lameness in our interpretation;—that is, when we pretend to parse syntactically. OBS. 6.—Prepositions and their objects very often precede the words on which they depend, and sometimes at a great distance. Of this we have an example, at the opening of Milton's Paradise Lost; where "Of," the first word, depends upon "Sing," in the sixth line below; for the meaning is—"Sing of man's first disobedience," &c. To find the terms of the relation, is to find the meaning of the passage; a very useful exercise, provided the words have a meaning which is worth knowing. The following text has for centuries afforded ground of dispute, because it is doubtful in the original, as well as in many of the versions, whether the preposition in (i. e., "in the regeneration") refers back to have followed, or forward to the last verb shall sit: "Verily I say unto you that ye who have followed me, in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel."—Matt., xix, 28. The second in is manifestly wrong: the Greek word is [Greek: epi], on or upon; i. e., "upon the throne of his glory." OBS. 7.—The prepositions have, from their own nature, or from custom, such an adaptation to particular terms and relations, that they can seldom be used one for an other without manifest impropriety. Example of error: "Proper seasons should be allotted for retirement."—Murray's Key, p. 173. We do not say "allotted for," but "allotted to:" hence for is either wrong in itself or misplaced. Such errors always vex an intelligent reader. He sees the terms mismatched, the intended connection doubtful, the sense obscured, and wishes the author could have valued his own meaning enough to have made it intelligible;—that is, (to speak technically,) enough to have made it a certain clew to his syntax. We can neither parse nor correct what we do not understand. Did the writer mean, "Proper seasons should be allotted to retirement?"—or, "Proper seasons for retirement should be allotted?"—or, "Seasons proper for retirement should be alloted?" [sic—KTH] Every expression is incorrigibly bad, the meaning of which cannot be known. Expression? Nay, expression it is not, but only a mock utterance or an abortive attempt at expression. OBS. 8.—Harris observes, in substance, though in other words, that almost all the prepositions were originally formed to denote relations of place; that this class of relations is primary, being that which natural bodies maintain at all times one to an other; that in the continuity of place these bodies form the universe, or visible whole; that we have some prepositions to denote the contiguous relation of bodies, and others for the detached relation; and that both have, by degrees, been extended from local relations, to the relations of subjects incorporeal. He appears also to assume, that, in such examples as the following,—"Caius walketh with a staff; "—"The statue stood upon a pedestal;"—"The river ran over a sand;"—"He is going to Turkey;"—"The sun is risen above the hills;"—"These figs came from Turkey;"—the antecedent term of the relation is not the verb, but the noun or pronoun before it. See Hermes, pp. 266 and 267. Now the true antecedent is, unquestionably, that word which, in the order of the sense, the preposition should immediately follow: and a verb, a participle, or an adjective, may sustain this relation, just as well as a substantive. "The man spoke of colour," does not mean, "The man of colour spoke;" nor does, "The member from Delaware replied," mean, "The member replied from Delaware" OBS. 9.—To make this matter more clear, it may be proper to observe further, that what I call the order of the sense, is not always that order of the words which is fittest to express the sense of a whole period; and that the true antecedent is that word to which the preposition, and its object would naturally be subjoined, were there nothing to interfere with such an arrangement. In practice it often happens, that the preposition and its object cannot be placed immediately after the word on which they depend, and which they would naturally follow. For example: "She hates the means by which she lives." That is, "She hates the means which she lives by." Here we cannot say, "She hates the means she lives by which;" and yet, in regard to the preposition by, this is really the order of the sense. Again: "Though thou shouldest bray a fool in a mortar among wheat with a pestle, yet will not his foolishness depart from him."—Prov., xxvii, 23. Here is no transposition to affect our understanding of the prepositions, yet there is a liability to error, because the words which immediately precede some of them, are not their true antecedents: the text does not really speak of "a mortar among wheat" or of "wheat with a pestle." To what then are the mortar, the wheat, and the pestle, to be mentally subjoined? If all of them, to any one thing, it must be to the action suggested by the verb bray, and not to its object fool; for the text does not speak of "a fool with a pestle," though it does seem to speak of "a fool in a mortar, and among wheat." Indeed, in this instance, as in many others, the verb and its object are so closely associated that it makes but little difference in regard to the sense, whether you take both of them together, or either of them separately, as the antecedent to the preposition. But, as the instrument of an action is with the agent rather than with the object, if you will have the substantives alone for antecedents, the natural order of the sense must be supposed to be this: "Though thou with a pestle shouldest bray a, fool in a mortar [and] among wheat, yet will not his foolishness from him depart." This gives to each of the prepositions an antecedent different from that which I should assign. Sanborn observes, "There seem to be two kinds of relation expressed by prepositions,—an existing and a connecting relation."—Analyt. Gram., p. 225. The latter, he adds, "is the most important."—Ib., p. 226. But it is the former that admits nothing but nouns for antecedents. Others besides Harris may have adopted this notion, but I have never been one of the number, though a certain author scruples not to charge the error upon me. See O. B Peirce's Gram., p. 165. OBS. 10.—It is a very common error among grammarians, and the source of innumerable discrepancies in doctrine, as well as one of the chief means of maintaining their interminable disputes, that they suppose ellipses at their own pleasure, and supply in every given instance just what words their fancies may suggest. In this work, I adopt for myself, and also recommend to others, the contrary course of avoiding on all occasions the supposition of any needless ellipses. Not only may the same preposition govern more than one object, but there may also be more than one antecedent word, bearing a joint relation to that which is governed by the preposition. (1.) Examples of joint objects: "There is an inseparable connection BETWEEN piety and virtue."—Murray's Key, 8vo, p. 171. "In the conduct of Parmenio, a mixture OF wisdom and folly was very conspicuous."—Ib., p. 178. "True happiness is an enemy TO pomp and noise"—Ib., p. 171. (2.) Examples of joint antecedents: "In unity consist the welfare and security OF every society."—Ib., p. 182. "It is our duty to be just and kind TO our fellow—creatures, and to be pious and faithful TO Him that made us."—Ib., p. 181. If the author did not mean to speak of being pious to God as well as faithful to Him, he has written incorrectly: a comma after pious, would alter both the sense and the construction. So the text, "For I am meek, and lowly in heart," is commonly perverted in our Bibles, for want of a comma after meek. The Saviour did not say, he was meek in heart: the Greek may be very literally rendered thus: "For gentle am I, and humble in heart." OBS. 11.—Many writers seem to suppose, that no preposition can govern more than one object. Thus L. Murray, and his followers: "The ellipsis of the preposition, as well as of the verb, is seen in the following instances: 'He went into the abbeys, halls, and public buildings;' that is, 'He went into the abbeys, he went into the halls, and he went into the public buildings.'—'He also went through all the streets, and lanes of the city;' that is, 'Through all the streets, and through all the lanes,' &c."—Murray's Gram., 8vo, p. 219. See the same interpretations in Ingersoll's Gram., p. 155; Merchant's, 100; Picket's, 211; Alger's, 73; Fish's, 147; Guy's, 91; Adams's, 82; R. C. Smith's, 183; Hamlin's, 105; Putnam's, 139; Weld's, 292. Now it is plain, that in neither of these examples is there any such ellipsis at all. Of the three prepositions, the first governs three nouns; the second, two; and the third, one only. But the last, (which is of,) has two antecedents, streets and lanes, the comma after streets being wrong; for the author does not speak of all the streets in the world, but of all the streets and lanes of a particular city. Dr. Ash has the same example without the comma, and supposes it only an ellipsis of the preposition through, and even that supposition is absurd. He also furnished the former example, to show an ellipsis, not of the verb went, but only of the preposition into; and in this too he was utterly wrong. See Ash's Gram., p. 100. Bicknell also, whose grammar appeared five years before Murray's, confessedly copied the same examples from Ash; and repeated, not the verb and its nominative, but only the prepositions through and into, agreeably to Ash's erroneous notion. See his Grammatical Wreath, Part i, p. 124. Again the principles of Murray's supposed ellipses, are as inconsistent with each other, as they are severally absurd. Had the author explained the second example according to his notion of the first, he should have made it to mean, 'He also went through all the streets of the city, and he also went through all the lanes of the city.' What a pretty idea is this for a principle of grammar! And what a multitude of admirers are pretending to carry it out in parsing! One of the latest writers on grammar says, that, "Between him and me" signifies, "Between him, and between me!"—Wright's Philosophical Gram., p. 206. And an other absurdly resolves a simple sentence into a compound one, thus: "'There was a difficulty between John, and his brother.' That is, there was a difficulty between John, and there was a difficulty between his brother."—James Brown's English Syntax, p. 127; and again, p. 130. OBS. 12.—Two prepositions are not unfrequently connected by a conjunction, and that for different purposes, thus: (1.) To express two different relations at once; as, "The picture of my travels in and around Michigan."—Society in America, i, 231. (2.) To suggest an alternative in the relation affirmed; as, "The action will be fully accomplished at or before the time."—Murray's Gram., i, 72. Again: "The First Future Tense represents the action as yet to come, either with or without respect to the precise time."—Ib.; and Felton's Gram., p. 23. With and without being direct opposites, this alternative is a thing of course, and the phrase is an idle truism. (3.) To express two relations so as to affirm the one and deny the other; as, "Captain, yourself are the fittest to live and reign not over, but next and immediately under the people."—Dryden. Here, perhaps, "the people" may be understood after over. (4.) To suggest a mere alternative of words; as, "NEGATIVELY, adv. With or by denial."—Webster's Dict. (5.) To add a similar word, for aid or force; as, "Hence adverbs of time were necessary, over and above the tenses."—See Murray's Gram., p. 116. "To take effect from and after the first day of May."—Newspaper. OBS. 13.—In some instances, two prepositions come directly together, so as jointly to express a sort of compound relation between what precedes the one and what follows the other: as, "And they shall sever the wicked from among the just."—Matt., xiii, 49. "Moses brought out all the rods from before the Lord."—Numb., xvii, 9. "Come out from among them."—2 Cor., vi, 17. "From Judea, and from beyond Jordan."—Matt. iv, 25. "Nor a lawgiver from between his feet."—Gen., xlix, 10. Thus the preposition from, being itself adapted to the ideas of motion and separation, easily coincides with any preposition of place, to express this sort of relation; the terms however have a limited application, being used only between a verb and a noun, because the relation itself is between motion and the place of its beginning: as, "The sand slided from beneath my feet."—Dr. Johnson. In this manner, we may form complex prepositions beginning with from, to the number of about thirty; as, from amidst, from around, from before, from behind, &c. Besides these, there are several others, of a more questionable character, which are sometimes referred to the same class; as, according to, as to, as for, because of, instead of, off of, out of, over against, and round about. Most or all of these are sometimes resolved in a different way, upon the assumption that the former word is an adverb; yet we occasionally find some of them compounded by the hyphen: as, "Pompey's lieutenants, Afranius and Petreius, who lay over-against him, decamp suddenly."—Rowe's Lucan, Argument to B. iv. But the common fashion is, to write them separately; as, "One thing is set over against an other."—Bible. OBS. 14.—It is not easy to fix a principle by which prepositions may in all cases be distinguished from adverbs. The latter, we say, do not govern the objective case; and if we add, that the former do severally require some object after them, it is clear that any word which precedes a preposition, must needs be something else than a preposition. But this destroys all the doctrine of the preceding paragraph, and admits of no such thing as a complex preposition; whereas that doctrine is acknowledged, to some extent or other, by every one of our grammarians, not excepting even those whose counter-assertions leave no room for it. Under these circumstances, I see no better way, than to refer the student to the definitions of these parts of speech, to exhibit examples in all needful variety, and then let him judge for himself what disposition ought to be made of those words which different grammarians parse differently. OBS. 15.—If our prepositions were to be divided into classes, the most useful distinction would be, to divide them into Single and Double. The distinction which some writers make, who divide them into "Separable and Inseparable," is of no use at all in parsing, because the latter are mere syllables; and the idea of S. R. Hall, who divides them into "Possessive and Relative," is positively absurd; for he can show us only one of the former kind, and that one, (the word of,) is not always such. A Double Preposition, if such a thing is admissible, is one that consists of two words which in syntactical parsing must be taken together, because they jointly express the relation between two other terms; as, "The waters were dried up from off the earth."—Gen., viii, 13. "The clergy kept this charge from off us."—Leslie, on Tithes, p. 221. "Confidence in an unfaithful man in time of trouble, is like a broken tooth, and a foot out of joint."—Prov., xxv, 19. "The beam out of the timber shall answer it."—Hab., ii, 11. Off and out are most commonly adverbs, but neither of them can be called an adverb here. OBS. 16.—Again, if according to or as to is a preposition, then is according or as a preposition also, although it does not of itself govern the objective case. As, thus used, is called a conjunction by some, an adverb by others. Dr. Webster considers according to be always a participle, and expressly says, "It is never a preposition."—Octavo Dict. The following is an instance in which, if it is not a preposition, it is a participle: "This is a construction not according to the rules of grammar."—Murray's Gram., Vol. ii, p. 22. But according to and contrary to are expressed in Latin and Greek by single prepositions; and if to alone is the preposition in English, then both according and contrary must, in many instances, be adverbs. Example: "For dost thou sit as judging me according to the law, and contrary to law command me to be smitten?" (See the Greek of Acts, xxiii, 3.) Contrary, though literally an adjective, is often made either an adverb, or a part of a complex preposition, unless the grammarians are generally in error respecting it: as, "Ha dares not act contrary to his instructions."— Murray's Key, p. 179. OBS. 17.—J. W. Wright, with some appearance of analogy on his side, but none of usage, everywhere adds ly to the questionable word according; as, "We are usually estimated accordingly to our company."— Philosophical Gram., p. 127. "Accordingly to the forms in which they are employed."—Ib., p. 137. "Accordingly to the above principles, the adjective ACCORDING (or agreeable) is frequently, but improperly, substituted for the adverb ACCORDINGLY (or agreeably.)"—Ib., p. 145. The word contrary he does not notice; but, on the same principle, he would doubtless say, "He dares not act contrarily to his instructions." We say indeed, "He acted agreeably to his instructions;"—and not, "He acted agreeable to his instructions." It must also be admitted, that the adverbs accordingly and contrarily are both of them good English words. If these were adopted, where the character of according and contrary is disputable, there would indeed be no longer any occasion to call these latter either adverbs or prepositions. But the fact is, that no good writers have yet preferred them, in such phrases; and the adverbial ending ly gives an additional syllable to a word that seems already quite too long. OBS. 18.—Instead is reckoned an adverb by some, a preposition by others; and a few write instead-of with a needless hyphen. The best way of settling the grammatical question respecting this term, is, to write the noun stead as a separate word, governed by in. Bating the respect that is due to anomalous usage, there would be more propriety in compounding in quest of, in lieu of, and many similar phrases. For stead is not always followed by of, nor always preceded by in, nor always made part of a compound. We say, in our stead, in your stead, in their stead, &c.; but lieu, which has the same meaning as stead, is much more limited in construction. Examples: "In the stead of sinners, He, a divine and human person, suffered."—Barnes's Notes. "Christ suffered in the place and stead of sinners."—Ib. "For, in its primary sense, is pro, loco alterius, in the stead or place of another."—Lowth's Gram., p. 65. "If it may stand him more in stead to lie." "But here thy sword can do thee little stead." OBS. 19.—From forth and from out are two poetical phrases, apparently synonymous, in which there is a fanciful transposition of the terms, and perhaps a change of forth and out from adverbs to prepositions. Each phrase is equivalent in meaning to out of or out from. Forth, under other circumstances, is never a preposition; though out, perhaps, may be. We speak as familiarly of going out doors, as of going up stairs, or down cellar. Hence from out may be parsed as a complex preposition, though the other phrase should seem to be a mere example of hyperbaton: "I saw from out the wave her structures rise."—Byron. "Peeping from forth their alleys green."—Collins. OBS. 20.—"Out of and as to," says one grammarian, "are properly prepositions, although they are double words. They may be called compound prepositions."—Cooper's Gram., p. 103. I have called the complex prepositions double rather than compound, because several of the single prepositions are compound words; as, into, notwithstanding, overthwart, throughout, upon, within, without. And even some of these may follow the preposition from; as, "If he shall have removed from within the limits of this state." But in and to, up and on, with and in, are not always compounded when they come together, because the sense may positively demand that the former be taken as an adverb, and the latter only as a preposition: as, "I will come in to him, and will sup with him."—Rev., iii, 20. "A statue of Venus was set up on Mount Calvary."—M'Ilvaine's Lectures, p. 332. "The troubles which we meet with in the world."—Blair. And even two prepositions may be brought together without union or coalescence; because the object of the first one may be expressed or understood before it: as, "The man whom you spoke within the street;"—"The treatment you complain of on this occasion;"—"The house that you live in in the summer;"—"Such a dress as she had on in the evening." OBS. 21.—Some grammarians assume, that, "Two prepositions in immediate succession require a noun to be understood between them; as, 'Hard by, a cottage chimney smokes, From betwixt two aged oaks.'—'The mingling notes came softened from below.'"—Nutting's Gram., p. 105. This author would probably understand here—"From the space betwixt two aged oaks;"—"came softened from the region below us." But he did not consider all the examples that are included in his proposition; nor did he rightly regard even those which he cites. The doctrine will be found a very awkward one in practice; and an other objection to it is, that most of the ellipses which it supposes, are entirely imaginary. If there were truth in his assumption, the compounding of prepositions would be positively precluded. The terms over-against and round-about are sometimes written with the hyphen, and perhaps it would be well if all the complex prepositions were regularly compounded; but, as I before suggested, such is not the present fashion of writing them, and the general usage is not to be controlled by what any individual may think. OBS. 22.—Instances may, doubtless, occur, in which the object of a preposition is suppressed by ellipsis, when an other preposition follows, so as to bring together two that do not denote a compound relation, and do not, in any wise, form one complex preposition. Of such suppression, the following is an example; and, I think, a double one: "They take pronouns after instead of before them."—Fowler, E. Gram., §521. This may be interpreted to mean, and probably does mean—"They take pronouns after them in stead of taking them before them." OBS. 23.—In some instances, the words in, on, of, for, to, with, and others commonly reckoned prepositions, are used after infinitives or participles, in a sort of adverbial construction, because they do not govern any objective; yet not exactly in the usual sense of adverbs, because they evidently express the relation between the verb or participle and a nominative or objective going before. Examples: "Houses are built to live in, and not to look on; therefore let use be preferred before uniformity, except where both may be had."—Ld. Kames. "These are not mysteries for ordinary readers to be let into."—ADDISON: Joh. Dict., w. Let. "Heaven is worth dying for, though earth is not worth living for."—R. Hall. "What! have ye not houses to eat and to drink in?"—1 Cor., xi, 22. This is a very peculiar idiom of our language; and if we say, "Have ye not houses in which to eat and to drink?" we form an other which is not much less so. Greek: "[Greek: MÆ gar oikias ouk echete eis to esthiein kai pinein];" Latin: "Num enim domos non habetis ad manducandum et bibendum?"—Leusden. "N'avez vous pas des maisons pour manger et pour boire?"—French Bible.[315] OBS. 24.—In OBS. 10th, of Chapter Fourth, on Adjectives, it was shown that words of place, (such as, above, below, beneath, under, and the like,) are sometimes set before nouns in the character of adjectives, and not of prepositions: as, "In the above list,"—"From the above list."—Bullions', E. Gram., p. 70. To the class of adjectives also, rather than to that of adverbs, may some such words be referred, when, without governing the objective case, they are put after nouns to signify place: as, "The way of life is above to the wise, that he may depart from hell beneath."—Prov., xv, 24. "Of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath."—Exod., xx, 4. "Say first, of God above or man below, LIST OF THE PREPOSITIONS.The following are the principal prepositions, arranged alphabetically: Aboard, about, above, across, after, against, along, amid or amidst, among or amongst, around, at, athwart;—Bating, before, behind, below, beneath, beside or besides, between or betwixt, beyond, by;—Concerning;—Down, during;—Ere, except, excepting;—For, from;—In, into;—Mid or midst;—Notwithstanding;—Of, off,[316] on, out, over, overthwart;—Past, pending;—Regarding, respecting, round;—Since;—Through, throughout, till, to, touching, toward or towards;—Under, underneath, until, unto, up, upon;—With, within, without. OBSERVATIONS.OBS. 1.—Grammarians differ considerably in their tables of the English prepositions. Nor are they all of one opinion, concerning either the characteristics of this part of speech, or the particular instances in which the acknowledged properties of a preposition are to be found. Some teach that, "Every preposition requires an objective case after it."—Lennie, p. 50; Bullions, Prin. of E. Gram., p. 69. In opposition to this, I suppose that the preposition to may take an infinitive verb after it; that about also may be a preposition, in the phrase, "about to write;" that about, above, after, against, by, for, from, in, of, and some other prepositions, may govern participles, as such; (i. e. without making them nouns, or cases;) and, lastly, that after a preposition an adverb is sometimes construed substantively, and yet is indeclinable; as, for once, from afar, from above, at unawares. OBS. 2.—The writers just quoted, proceed to say: "When a preposition does not govern an objective case, it becomes an adverb; as, 'He rides about.' But in such phrases as, cast up, hold out, fall on, the words up, out, and on, must be considered as a part of the verb, rather than as prepositions or adverbs."—Lennie's Prin. of E. Gram., p. 50; Bullions's, p. 59; his Analyt. and P. Gram., p. 109. Both these sentences are erroneous: the one, more particularly so, in expression; the other, in doctrine. As the preposition is chiefly distinguished by its regimen, it is absurd to speak of it as governing nothing; yet it does not always govern the objective case, for participles and infinitives have no cases. About, up, out, and on, as here cited, are all of them adverbs; and so are all other particles that thus qualify verbs, without governing any thing. L. Murray grossly errs when ha assumes that, "The distinct component parts of such phrases as, to cast up, to fall on, to bear oat, to give over, &c., are no guide to the sense of the whole." Surely, "to cast up" is to cast somehow, though the meaning of the phrase may be "to compute." By this author, and some others, all such adverbs are absurdly called prepositions, and are also as absurdly declared to be parts of the preceding verbs! See Murray's Gram., p. 117; W. Allen's, 179; Kirkham's, 95; R. G. Smith's, 93; Fisk's, 86; Butler's, 63; Wells's, 146. OBS. 3—In comparing the different English grammars now in use, we often find the primary distinction of the parts of speech, and every thing that depends upon it, greatly perplexed by the fancied ellipses, and forced constructions, to which their authors resort. Thus Kirkham: "Prepositions are sometimes erroneously called adverbs, when their nouns are understood. 'He rides about;' that is, about the town, country, or something else. 'She was near [the act or misfortune of] falling;' 'But do not after [that time or event] lay the blame on me.' 'He came down [the ascent] from the hill;' 'They lifted him up [the ascent] out of the pit.' 'The angels above;'—above us—'Above these lower heavens, to us invisible, or dimly seen.'"—Gram., p. 89. The errors of this passage are almost as numerous as the words; and those to which the doctrine leads are absolutely innumerable. That up and down, with verbs of motion, imply ascent and descent, as wisely and foolishly imply wisdom and folly, is not to be denied; but the grammatical bathos of coming "down [the ascent] from the hill" of science, should startle those whose faces are directed upward! Downward ascent is a movement worthy only of Kirkham, and his Irish rival, Joseph W. Wright. The brackets here used are Kirkham's, not mine. OBS. 4.—"Some of the prepositions," says L. Murray, "have the appearance and effect of conjunctions: as, 'After their prisons were thrown open,' &c. 'Before I die;' 'They made haste to be prepared against their friends arrived:' but if the noun time, which is understood, be added, they will lose their conjunctive form: as, 'After [the time when] their prisons,' &c."—Octavo Gram., p. 119. Here, after, before, and against, are neither conjunctions nor prepositions, but conjunctive adverbs of time, referring to the verbs which follow them, and also, when the sentences are completed, to others antecedent. The awkward addition of "the time when," is a sheer perversion. If after, before, and the like, can ever be adverbs, they are so here, and not conjunctions, or prepositions. OBS. 5.—But the great Compiler proceeds: "The prepositions, after, before, above, beneath, and several others, sometimes appear to be adverbs, and may be so considered: as, 'They had their reward soon after;' 'He died not long before;' 'He dwells above;' but if the nouns time and place be added, they will lose their adverbial form: as, 'He died not long before that time,' &c."—Ib. Now, I say, when any of the foregoing words "appear to be adverbs," they are adverbs, and, if adverbs, then not prepositions. But to consider prepositions to be adverbs, as Murray here does, or seems to do; and to suppose "the NOUNS time AND place" to be understood in the several examples here cited, as he also does, or seems to do; are singly such absurdities as no grammarian should fail to detect, and together such a knot of blunders, as ought to be wondered at, even in the Compiler's humblest copyist. In the following text, there is neither preposition nor ellipsis: "Above, below, without, within, around, OBS. 6.—It comports with the name and design of this work, which is a broad synopsis of grammatical criticism, to notice here one other absurdity; namely, the doctrine of "sentential nouns." There is something of this in several late grammars: as, "The prepositions, after, before, ere, since, till, and until, frequently govern sentential nouns; and after, before, since, notwithstanding, and some others, frequently govern a noun or pronoun understood. A preposition governing a sentential noun, is, by Murray and others, considered a conjunction; and a preposition governing a noun understood, an adverb."—J. L. PARKHURST: in Sanborn's Gram., p. 123. "Example: 'He will, before he dies, sway the sceptre.' He dies is a sentential noun, third person, singular number; and is governed by before; before he dies, being equivalent in meaning to before his death."—Sanborn, Gram., p. 176. "'After they had waited a long time, they departed.' After waiting."—Ib. This last solution supposes the phrase, "waiting a long time," or at least the participle waiting, to be a noun; for, upon the author's principle of equivalence, "they had waited," will otherwise be a "sentential" participle—a thing however as good and as classical as the other! OBS. 7.—If a preposition can ever be justly said to take a sentence for its object, it is chiefly in certain ancient expressions, like the following: "For in that he died, he died unto sin once; but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God."—Rom., vi, 10. "My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh."—Gen., vi, 3. "For, after that, in the wisdom of God, the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."—1 Cor., i, 21. Here, in, for, and after, are all followed by the word that; which Tooke, Webster, Frazee, and some others, will have to be "a substitute," or "pronoun," representing the sentence which follows it, and governed by the preposition. But that, in this sense, is usually, and perhaps more properly, reckoned a conjunction. And if we take it so, in, for, and after, (unless the latter be an adverb,) must either be reckoned conjunctions also, or be supposed to govern sentences. The expressions however are little used; because "in that" is nearly equivalent to as; "for that" can be better expressed by because; and "after that," which is equivalent to [Greek: epeide], postquam, may well be rendered by the term, seeing that, or since. "Before that Philip called thee," is a similar example; but "that" is here needless, and "before" may be parsed as a conjunctive adverb of time. I have one example more: "But, besides that he attempted it formerly with no success, it is certain the Venetians keep too watchful an eye," &c.—Addison. This is good English, but the word "besides" if it be not a conjunction, may as well be called an adverb, as a preposition. OBS. 8.—There are but few words in the list of prepositions, that are not sometimes used as being of some other part of speech. Thus bating, excepting, concerning, touching, respecting, during, pending, and a part of the compound notwithstanding, are literally participles; and some writers, in opposition to general custom, refer them always to their original class. Unlike most other prepositions, they do not refer to place, but rather to action, state, or duration; for, even as prepositions, they are still allied to participles. Yet to suppose them always participles, as would Dr. Webster and some others, is impracticable. Examples: "They speak concerning virtue."—Bullions, Prin. of E. Gram., p. 69. Here concerning cannot be a participle, because its antecedent term is a verb, and the meaning is, "they speak of virtue." "They are bound during life." that is, durante vitÂ, life continuing, or, as long as life lasts. So, "Notwithstanding this," i.e., "hoc non obstante," this not hindering. Here the nature of the construction seems to depend on the order of the words. "Since he had succeeded, notwithstanding them, peaceably to the throne."—Bolingbroke, on Hist., p. 31. "This is a correct English idiom, Dr. Lowth's criticism, to the contrary notwithstanding."—Webster's Improved Gram., p. 85. In the phrase, "notwithstanding them," the former word is clearly a preposition governing the latter; but Dr. Webster doubtless supposed the word "criticism" to be in the nominative case, put absolute with the participle: and so it would have been, had he written not withstanding as two words, like "non obstante;" but the compound word notwithstanding is not a participle, because there is no verb to notwithstand. But notwithstanding, when placed before a nominative, or before the conjunction that, is a conjunction, and, as such, must be rendered in Latin by tamen, yet, quamvis, although, or nihilominus, nevertheless. OBS. 9.—For, when it signifies because, is a conjunction: as, "Boast not thyself of to-morrow; for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth."—Prov., xxvii, 1. For has this meaning, and, according to Dr. Johnson, is a conjunction, when it precedes that; as, "Yet for that the worst men are most ready to remove, I would wish them chosen by discretion of wise men."—Spenser. The phrase, as I have before suggested, is almost obsolete; but Murray, in one place, adopts it from Dr. Beattie: "For that those parts of the verb are not properly called tenses."—Octavo Gram., p. 75. How he would have parsed it, does not appear. But both words are connectives. And, from the analogy of those terms which serve as links to other terms, I should incline to take for that, in that, after that, and besides that, (in which a known conjunction is put last,) as complex conjunctions; and also, to take as for, as to, and because of, (in which a known preposition is put last,) as complex prepositions. But there are other regular and equivalent expressions that ought in general to be preferred to any or all of these. OBS. 10.—Several words besides those contained in the list above, are (or have been) occasionally employed in English as prepositions: as, A, (chiefly used before participles,) abaft, adown, afore, aloft, aloof, alongside, anear, aneath, anent, aslant, aslope, astride, atween, atwixt, besouth, bywest, cross, dehors, despite, inside, left-hand, maugre, minus, onto, opposite, outside, per, plus, sans, spite, thorough, traverse, versus, via, withal, withinside. OBS. 11.—Dr. Lowth says, "The particle a before participles, in the phrases a coming, a going, a walking, a shooting, &c. and before nouns, as a-bed, a-board, a-shore, a-foot, &c. seems to be a true and genuine preposition, a little disguised by familiar use and quick pronunciation. Dr. Wallis supposes it to be the preposition at. I rather think it is the preposition on."—Lowth's Gram., p. 65; Churchill's, 268. There is no need of supposing it to be either. It is not from on; for in Saxon it sometimes accompanied on: as in the phrase, "on Á weoruld;" that is, "on to ages;" or, as Wickliffe rendered it, "into worldis;" or, as our version has it, "for ever." See Luke, i, 55. This preposition was in use long before either a or an, as an article, appeared in its present form in the language; and, for ought I can discover, it may be as old as either on or at. An, too, is found to have had at times the sense and construction of in or on; and this usage is, beyond doubt, older than that which makes it an article. On, however, was an exceedingly common preposition in Saxon, being used almost always where we now put on, in, into, upon, or among, and sometimes, for with or by; so, sometimes, where a was afterwards used: thus, "What in the Saxon Gospel of John, is, 'Ic wylle gan on fixoth,' is, in the English version, 'I go a fishing.' Chap, xxi, ver. 3." See Lowth's Gram., p. 65; Churchill's, 269. And a is now sometimes equivalent to on; as, "He would have a learned University make Barbarisms a purpose."—Bentley, Diss. on Phalaris, p. 223. That is,—"on purpose." How absurdly then do some grammarians interpret the foregoing text!—"I go on a fishing."—Alden's Gram., p. 117. "I go on a fishing voyage or business."—Murray's Gram., p. 221; Merchant's, 101. "It may not be improper," says Churchill in another place, "to observe here, that the preposition on, is too frequently pronounced as if it were the vowel a, in ordinary conversation; and this corruption is [has] become so prevalent, that I have even met with 'laid it a oneside' in a periodical publication. It should have been 'on one side,' if the expression were meant to be particular; 'aside,' if general."—New Gram., p. 345. By these writers, a is also supposed to be sometimes a corruption of of: as, "Much in the same manner, Thomas of Becket, by very frequent and familiar use, became Thomas À Becket; and one of the clock, or perhaps on the clock, is written one o'clock, but pronounced one a clock. The phrases with a before a participle are out of use in the solemn style; but still prevail in familiar discourse. They are established by long usage, and good authority; and there seems to be no reason, why they should be utterly rejected."—Lowth's Gram., p. 66. "Much in the same manner, John of Nokes, and John of Styles, become John a Nokes, and John a Styles: and one of the clock, or rather on the clock, is written one o'clock, but pronounced one a clock. The phrases with a before participles, are out of use in the solemn style; but still prevail in familiar discourse."—Churchill's New Gram., p. 269. OBS. 12.—The following are examples of the less usual prepositions, a, and others that begin with a: "And he set—three thousand and six hundred overseers to set the people a work."—2 Chron., ii, 18. "Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges?"—1 Cor., ix, 7. "And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a lusting."—Num., xi, 4. "And sweet Billy Dimond, a patting his hair up." "The god fell a laughing to see his mistake." "You'd have thought 'twas the bishops or judges a coming." "A place on the lower deck, abaft the mainmast."—Gregory's Dict. "A moment gazed adown the dale."—Scott, L. L., p. 10. "Adown Strath-Gartney's valley broad."—Ib., p. 84. "For afore the harvest, when the bud is perfect," &c.—Isaiah, xviii, 5. "Where the great luminary aloof the vulgar constellations thick,"—See Milton's Paradise Lost, B. iii, l. 576. "The great luminary aloft the vulgar constellations thick."—Johnson's Dict., w. Aloft. "Captain Falconer having previously gone alongside, the Constitution."—Newspaper. "Seventeen ships sailed for New England, and aboard these above fifteen hundred persons."—Robertson's Amer., ii, 429. "There is a willow grows askant the brook:" Or, as in some editions: "There is a willow grows aslant the brook."—SHAK., Hamlet, Act iv, 7. "Aslant the dew-bright earth."—Thomson. "Swift as meteors glide aslope a summer eve."—Fenton. "Aneath the heavy rain."—James Hogg, "With his magic spectacles astride his nose."—Merchant's Criticisms. "Atween his downy wings be furnished, there." —Wordsworth's Poems, p. 147. "And there a season atween June and May." OBS. 13.—The following are examples of rather unusual prepositions beginning with b, c, or d; "Or where wild-meeting oceans boil besouth Magellan."—Burns. "Whereupon grew that by-word, used by the Irish, that they dwelt by-west the law, which dwelt beyond the river of the Barrow."—DAVIES: in Joh. Dict. Here Johnson calls by-west a noun substantive, and Webster, as improperly, marks it for an adverb. No hyphen is needed in byword or bywest. The first syllable of the latter is pronounced be, and ought to be written so, if "besouth" is right. "From Cephalonia cross the surgy main "And cross their limits cut a sloping way, "A fox was taking a walk one night cross a village."—L'Estrange. "The enemy had cut down great trees cross the ways."—Knolles. "DEHORS, prep. [Fr.] Without: as, 'dehors the land.' Blackstone."—Worcester's Dict., 8vo. "You have believed, despite too our physical conformation."—Bulwer. "And Roderick shall his welcome make, OBS. 14.—The following quotations illustrate further the list of unusual prepositions: "And she would be often weeping inside the room while George was amusing himself without."—Anna Ross, p. 81. "Several nuts grow closely together, inside this prickly covering."—Jacob Abbot. "An other boy asked why the peachstone was not outside the peach."—Id. "As if listening to the sounds withinside it."—Gardiner's Music of Nature, p. 214. "Sir Knight, you well might mark the mound, Left hand the town."—Scott's Marmion. "Thus Butler, maugre his wicked intention, sent them home again."—Sewel's Hist., p. 256. "And, maugre all that can be said in its favour."—Stone, on Freemasonry, p. 121. "And, maugre the authority of Sterne, I even doubt its benevolence."—West's Letters, p. 29. "I through the ample air in triumph high "When Mr. Seaman arose in the morning, he found himself minus his coat, vest, pocket-handkerchief, and tobacco-box."—Newspaper. "Throw some coals onto the fire."—FORBY: Worcester's Dict., w. Onto. "Flour, at $4 per barrel."—Preston's Book-Keeping. "Which amount, per invoice, to $4000."—Ib. "To Smiths is the substantive Smiths, plus the preposition to."—Fowler's E. Gram., §33. "The Mayor of Lynn versus Turner."—Cowper's Reports, p. 86. "Slaves were imported from Africa, via Cuba."—Society in America, i, 327. "Pending the discussion of this subject, a memorial was presented."—Gov. Everett. "Darts his experienced eye and soon traverse "Because, when thorough deserts vast OBS. 15.—Minus, less, plus, more, per, by, versus, towards, or against, and viÂ, by the way of, are Latin words; and it is not very consistent with the purity of our tongue, to use them as above. Sans, without, is French, and not now heard with us. Afore for before, atween for between, traverse for across, thorough for through, and withal for with, are obsolete. Withal was never placed before its object, but was once very common at the end of a sentence. I think it not properly a preposition, but rather an adverb. It occurs in Shakspeare, and so does sans; as, "I did laugh, sans intermission, an hour by his dial." "I pr'ythee, whom doth he trot withal?" "Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans every thing." OBS. 16.—Of the propriety and the nature of such expressions as the following, the reader may now judge for himself: "In consideration of what passes sometimes within-side of those vehicles."—Spectator, No. 533. "Watch over yourself, and let nothing throw you off from your guard."—District School, p. 54. "The windows broken, the door off from the hinges, the roof open and leaky."—Ib., p. 71. "He was always a shrewd observer of men, in and out of power."—Knapp's Life of Burr, p. viii. "Who had never been broken in to the experience of sea voyages."—Timothy Flint. "And there came a fire out from before the Lord."—Leviticus, ix, 24. "Because eight readers out of ten, it is believed, forget it."—Brown's Estimate, ii, 32. "Fifty days after the Passover, and their coming out of Egypt."—Watts's Script. Hist., p. 57. "As the mountains are round about Jerusalem, so the Lord is round about his people."—Psal., cxxv, 2. "Literally, 'I proceeded forth from out of God and am come.'"—Gurney's Essays, p. 161. "But he that came down from (or from out of) heaven."—Ibid. "Here none the last funereal rights receive; EXAMPLES FOR PARSING.PRAXIS X.—ETYMOLOGICAL.In the Tenth Praxis, it is required of the pupil—to distinguish and define the different parts of speech, and the classes and modifications of the ARTICLES, NOUNS, ADJECTIVES, PRONOUNS, VERBS, PARTICIPLES, ADVERBS, CONJUNCTIONS, and PREPOSITIONS. The definitions to be given in the Tenth Praxis, are, two for an article, six for a noun, three for an adjective, six for a pronoun, seven for a verb finite, five for an infinitive, two for a participle, two (and sometimes three) for an adverb, two for a conjunction, one for a preposition, and one for an interjection. Thus:— EXAMPLE PARSED."Never adventure on too near an approach to what is evil."—Maxims. Never is an adverb of time. 1. An adverb is a word added to a verb, a participle, an adjective, or an other adverb; and generally expresses time, place, degree, or manner. 2. Adverbs of time are those which answer to the question, When? How long? How soon? or, How often? including these which ask. |
|
