.

CHAPTER XXVI.

SYNTAX OF ADVERBS, CONJUNCTIONS, AND PREPOSITIONS.

267. THERE are some words which are variously used as Prepositions, as Adverbs, and as Conjunctions. The following sentences illustrate this threefold use of but, before, since.

How are such words to be distinguished?

If the word in question governs a noun or pronoun, it is a Preposition. Bear in mind the fact that the preposition frequently comes after the relative pronoun which it governs: 'I gave the book that he asked for to the man whom I spoke to'; 'This is the place which you told me of.' And this relative pronoun is often dropped out altogether: the words that, whom, and which, would probably be omitted from these sentences in conversation. Nevertheless, for, to, and of are still prepositions, for they govern these pronouns understood.

But to distinguish Adverbs from Conjunctions is often a difficult matter, for there are many adverbs which join sentences and therefore do the work of conjunctions. For identifying an adverb there is a rule-of-thumb which directs us to move the word about and observe whether the grammatical structure of the passage in which it occurs is destroyed by the process: if it is not destroyed, we are to conclude, according to this rule, that the word is an adverb. Thus the sentence ‘Meanwhile the mob continued shouting' would retain its grammatical structure unimpaired, if the word meanwhile were placed after mob, or after continued, or after shouting. But though this freedom of movement on the part of adverbs is a feature which deserves notice, it is quite useless as a practical test in precisely those instances in which the student might find a difficulty in deciding whether the word in question is to be called an adverb or a conjunction, for in those instances the word cannot be moved about, and yet it would frequently be rightly described as an adverb. Take the sentences 'I know where he lives,' 'I saw him when he called,' 'I ascertained how he escaped.' The words where, when, how, cannot be shifted to other places in the sentence without making nonsense of the whole. Hence a student applying this test in his uncertainty would say they were not adverbs. Yet they are adverbs: where qualifies lives, when qualifies called, how qualifies escaped, just as much as the adverbs there, then, and so qualify these verbs when we say 'He lives there,' 'He called then,' 'He escaped so.' It is true that where, when, and how also join the clauses 'I know...he lives,' 'I saw him...he called,' 'I ascertained...he escaped.' But though they join clauses, they do not therefore cease to be adverbs, any more than the relative pronouns cease to be pronouns because they also join clauses. The coordinate clauses 'I know the man...he did it,' are united in one complex sentence by who, when we say 'I know

the man who did it'; still we do not call who a conjunction. Conjunctive' or 'connective' pronouns we might indeed call them, and the name would be more appropriate than 'relative' pronouns; and 'conjunctive' or 'connective' adverbs is the proper name for words which, while acting as adverbs, also join clauses.

Ask the question therefore,-Does the word about which I am in doubt not only join two clauses but also qualify some verb or adjective in the clause which it introduces? If it does, it is a conjunctive adverb: if it does not, it is a conjunction. Thus in the sentences 'I will go if you wish,' 'I know that he died,' the words if and that connect two clauses without modifying any word which follows them; but in the sentences 'I will go when you wish,' 'I know where he died,' when and where connect two clauses and also modify the verbs wish and died respectively.

However, the student, who finds this distinction too subtle to serve him as a practical criterion, will commit no serious error if he describes a conjunctive-adverb as an adverbial-conjunction, and writers on grammar can be quoted in his support, whichever term he adopts'.

268. The meaning affected by the position of the Adverb.

Though the grammatical structure of the sentence may be unimpaired by the shifting of the adverb from one place to another, the meaning will often be affected by the change of position. Consider the difference in the information conveyed when we say 'Only John passed in Latin,' 'John only passed in Latin' and 'John passed only in Latin.' Errors in the position of only are of constant occurrence. At one of the large London Clubs, members are informed

1 Cf. Mason's English Grammar, § 263, and Bain's Higher English Grammar, p. 10г.

that 'Smoking is only allowed in this room after 8 o'clock.' This notice, strictly interpreted, implies that the authorities go so far as to allow, but would by no means encourage, smoking after 8 o'clock.

269. Construction with 'Than.' Than is classed in some books as an Adverb, in others as a Conjunction. In an earlier stage of the language it was an adverb and meant 'when': so, 'He is bigger than you' originally meant 'He is bigger when you are big.' But it may now be treated as a conjunction simply. As a conjunction it should be followed by the same case as the case of the word denoting the thing with which the comparison is made. Thus, 'I like you better than he,' and 'I like you better than him' are both correct, but with different meanings. Supplying the ellipses, we get in the former sentence 'I like you better than he likes you'; in the latter 'I like you better than I like him.'

'Than' and a Relative. When than is followed by the relative who, we generally find the objective case whom: Milton's 'Beelzebub, than whom none higher sat, perceived' is the classical example, and we should probably employ the same form of expression to-day: 'Grace, than whom nobody can speak with more authority on cricket, says so'; 'Gibbon, than whom a more laborious student cannot be found, maintains.' Is it right? Before answering the question we may put another-Is it right to say 'It is me'? If whatever nearly everybody concurs in saying is grammatically right, we must admit that whom and me are right. Defensible however from the standpoint of grammatical principles they are not. If they were, we might say 'It is her,' 'Nobody can speak better than him.' Yet we condemn these expressions as ungrammatical.

270. Construction of 'As.' As is a conjunctive adverb: it not only joins clauses but qualifies a word in the clause which it introduces. 'He is not such a fool as he looks' means 'He is not to so great an extent a fool to what extent he looks a fool.' As is used also as a demonstrative antecedent to this conjunctive as. 'He is as good as (he is) clever.' Another antecedent to as is so: 'You are not

W. E. G.

17

so silly as you seem.' So is only a demonstrative adverb, not a conjunctive adverb like as.

.

The nouns or pronouns connected by as must be in the same case. 'Is she as tall as me?' is therefore wrong: it should be 'Is she as tall as I (am tall)?' 'You could have Idone it as well as him' should be 'You could have done it as well as he (could have done it).'

271. 'As follows' or 'As follow'? Ought we to say 'The words are as follows' or 'The words are as follow'?

If as is here a relative pronoun, the relative should agree with its antecedent in number. Now the antecedent to as is words, therefore as requires a verb in the plural, follow, not follows. Yet we always say as follows, regardless of the number of the antecedent. Perhaps however as is here a conjunctive adverb, and there is an ellipsis of the subject it before follows: 'The words are as it follows.' At any rate, the phrase as follows has now become an adverbial expression. In like manner we say 'Your remarks so far as concerns me,' where concern would be the right form if the ellipsis after the conjunctive adverb as is to be supplied by they, 'Your remarks so far as they concern me.' In this instance again, we may maintain that the construction is really impersonal, and that it, not they, is the word omitted: 'Your remarks so far as it concerns me.' Similarly as regards is used in the singular whatever the number of the noun to which reference is made: 'Your intentions as regards me.'

272. Construction of 'No.' No is both an adjective and an adverb. As an adjective it is the equivalent of none, as an adverb, of not. Now it is contrary to English idiom to qualify verbs with the adverb no. We say 'I will not go,' 'Do not say so,' not 'I will no go,' 'Do no say so.' Hence the expression 'whether or no' admits of defence only when there is an ellipsis of a noun: 'Whether he is a knave or no I cannot say ' may be explained as an abridgment of 'Whether he is a knave or no knave,' whereas 'Whether he is a knave or not' is an abridgment of 'Whether he is a knave or is not a knave.' When a verb is suppressed, 'whether or not' is the only admissible expression. That it is wrong to say 'Whether or no he did it,' we may see by