tively, it may be put in the possessive case, but if it be used objectively it must be put in the objective case with "of." Thus we may speak of "Irving's visit to Stratford," but not of "the strike's beginning," or we may say, “a good story of Lincoln's" (one that he told) and "a good story of Lincoln" (one told about him). The objective genitive was an admissible construction in the Anglo-Saxon, but it has now become obsolete.

We must distinguish carefully between the verbal noun in "ing" and the present participle in "ing." The former is used as a noun and the latter as an adjective; consequently when the verbal noun is used the substantive which precedes it, and which is used as the active agent, should be in the possessive case. Thus we may say, "We looked for his coming," but such common sentences as "The probability of him helping them was small," are not correct. Helping" as here used is an adjective modifying "him;" consequently the sentence has no meaning; but if we think of "helping" as a verbal noun, as the meaning shows it to be, and change "him " to "his," the sentence becomes clear.

66

Pronouns.

Mistakes are frequently made in the use of the nominative and the objective cases. Nouns present nc difficulties in this respect, but as pronouns retain their inflectional forms, we are liable to become careless in the use of the two cases. After prepositions we should be especially careful to use the objective form. We must say "between you and me," not "between you and I," 66 an invitation for you and me," not "an invitation for you and I.”

It is sometimes difficult to decide which case of the pronoun to use after the verb to be, but if we remember that the verb to be is followed by the same case as that which precedes it, we shall have little trouble. Thus when the pronoun follows the finite verb it should be in the nominative case; as, "If I were he," or "if I had been he." When it follows the infinitive it should usually be in the objective case, as "I supposed it to be him."

Who and Whom. Even the most careful writers and speakers often find difficulty in deciding promptly upon the proper case of the relative and the interrogative. When whom, either relative or interrogative, precedes the verb of which it is the object, the natural tendency is to use the nominative in its place; thus, "Who did you see last night?" or "He could not remember who he had given it to," are typical examples of the use of who for whom. Occasionally the verb of the subordinate clause to which the pronoun belongs is omitted, leaving it doubtful whether a finite verb or an infinitive is to be supplied. In such cases it is usually better to assume that the omitted verb is an infinitive; thus, "We left the valuables with Mr. Blockley, whom we thought (to be) a thoroughly honest man,' ," is better than "We left the valuables with Mr. Blockley, who we thought (was) a thoroughly honest man."

2. Errors in Number.

Nouns. - That nouns in English usually form their plurals in "s" has become so impressed upon our minds that we are apt to associate all nouns ending in “s " with the plural and all nouns not ending in " S "' with the singular. This gives rise to many errors. We must remember that not all nouns form their plural in "s." Nouns of foreign origin usually retain the plural form which they have in their own language: thus, alumni, radii, analyses, data, phenomena, and tableaux are plural. On the other hand, we have many nouns ending in "s" which are singular, for example, news, means (an instrument), and pains. Nouns in "ics," such as ethics, mathematics, politics, and tactics are usually treated as singular, while headquarters, measles, and alms are treated sometimes as singular, sometimes as plural. "The United

States" is properly regarded as singular, although some very good authorities use it as plural. Collective nouns may be regarded as singular or plural according to their signification. Pronouns.

- A pronoun must agree with its antecedent

(the noun which it represents) in number: "Let each take his turn," "Nobody should praise himself."

When the antecedent consists of two or more nouns in the singular, connected by and, expressed or implied, the pronoun should be in the plural; when the nouns are separated by or, nor, or any other disjunctive, the pronoun should be in the singular; thus, "James, John, and William are on their way to school," and "James, John, or William is on his way to school." If the antecedent is qualified by each or every the pronoun should be in the singular.

Such expressions as any one, each, every, either, neither, anybody, everybody, and nobody, when used as antecedents, require a singular pronoun; thus, "Has anybody a pencil in his pocket?" " Every one has his troubles."

Each other is used with reference to two persons or things, one another with reference to more than two. "The guests gave one another mementoes of the occasion," is preferable to "The guests gave each other mementoes of the occasion.” Some very good authorities, however, use them interchangeably. Either is one of two, any is one of any number. Neither and none are distinguished in the same way. None is also used in the plural number; as "None are so blind as those who will not see.'

Which and that are often confounded by inexperienced writers. The general rule is to use which as explanatory, that is, to introduce a new fact, and that as restrictive, that is, to limit an idea already expressed. In other words, when and with the personal pronoun it or they can be substituted for the relative, use which. Thus, "He took all the books which were on the table," means that he took all the books, and that they were on the table; but if we say, "He took all the books that were on the table," we mean that he took only those books that were on the table. In some cases, however, euphony demands the use of which instead of that; thus, "That book which you spoke of" sounds better than "That book that you spoke of." That is preferable after same, very, all, the interrogative who, and the superlatives of weight, meas

ure, and value; "the very book that I wished," largest river that I saw," etc.

"the

64. The Parts of Speech. The use of one part of speech for another is a fault against which it would seem that no caution is needed, but even a "liberal education" may not keep a man from using the noun suspicion for the verb suspect, or from saying, "It seemed like the time would never come," for "It seemed as if the time would never come." Countless other errors of a similar kind are to be found in the work of the halfeducated writers of the day and give it the stamp of illiteracy.

Adjectives and Adverbs. Most, which is an adjective or an intensive, is frequently used for the adverb almost (see Section 59. 1. Adjectives and Adverbs, for the distinction between most and almost). This fault is especially disfiguring in such expressions as, “I most always take a walk before breakfast," or "I am most dead, I am so tired.”

The adjective good is often used for the adverb well, as, "I am feeling good" for "I am feeling well."

The adjective real is used for very or really even by those who are otherwise careful in their speech; for example, "We had a real good time," should be “We had a very, or a really, good time."

The predicate adjective is often used for the adverb, or the adverb for the predicate adjective. Even cultivated persons are sometimes in doubt whether to use an adjective or an adverb after certain verbs. We say properly, "He seems happy," but not, "He worked happy," and, "The flower smells sweet," not, "The flower smells sweetly." In general we may have less difficulty if we remember that the qualifying word when referring to the subject of the verb should be an adjective; when re

ferring to the verb, it should be an adverb, thus, we say, "He looked angry " and "He spoke angrily."

In the sentence, "He feels badly over the affair," badly is preferable to bad, as the latter might give rise to ambiguity.

Verbs and Verbals. The indicative mood is often used where the subjunctive is preferable. The distinction between the indicative and subjunctive has been lessening as the language has lost its inflectional forms. The hurried writing of the newspapers has contributed further to this result, but good writers are careful to avail themselves of the subjunctive to express shades of meaning that without it are not easily made clear. When a sentence or a subordinate clause expresses doubt, a wish, indecision, or a future contingency not a question, its verb should be in the subjunctive. A conditional clause which is not future and not contrary to fact, is, however, in the indicative. In the sentence, "If I were he I should not follow that plan," the verb of the subordinate clause is properly subjunctive, since the condition is contrary to fact. "If that was known to him he did wisely in continuing his march," it is assumed that the conditional clause is true, and the verb is therefore indicative.

In

The use of the perfect infinitive after the past tense of the finite verb is a very common error. The boy who says, "I hoped to have gone," really declares that he hoped, after it was too late. The sentence should be, “I hoped to go," since the tense of the infinitive must be determined by its relation to the time of the principal verb, and it is here a future relation. The verb ought may of course take the perfect or present infinitive as the sense requires. He ought to be more careful," "You ought to have looked after him," are both correct. But the error of using an auxiliary with ought, even among educated men, is a common fault. "He hadn't ought to have done that," is ungrammatical, because ought itself is a finite verb and cannot take the auxiliary had, which may be used only with the participle.

66