A Handbook of the English Language Part 56

3. _With both infinitives and participles._--_I shall have done_, _I mean to have done_.

D. _Auxiliary verbs may be cla.s.sified according to their effect._--Thus--_have_ makes the combination in which it appears equivalent to a tense; _be_ to a pa.s.sive form; _may_ to a sign of mood, &c.

This sketch of the different lights under which auxiliary verbs may be viewed, has been written for the sake of ill.u.s.trating, rather than exhausting, the subject.

-- 492. The combination of the auxiliary, _have_, with the past participle requires notice. It is, here, advisable to make the following cla.s.sifications.

1. The combination with the participle of a _transitive verb._--_I have ridden the horse_; _thou hast broken the sword_; _he has smitten the enemy_.

2. The combination with the participle of an _intransitive_ verb,--_I have waited_; _thou hast hungered_; _he has slept_.

3. The combination with the participle of the verb substantive, _I have been_; _thou hast been_; _he has been_.

It is by examples of the first of these three divisions that the true construction is to be shown.

For an object of any sort to be in the possession of a person, it must previously have existed. If I possess a horse, that horse must have had a previous existence.

Hence, in all expressions like _I have ridden a horse_, there are two ideas, a past idea in the participle, and a present idea in the word denoting possession.

For an object of any sort, affected in a particular manner, to be in the possession of a person, it must previously have been affected in the manner required. If I possess a horse that has been ridden, the riding must have taken place before I mention the fact of the ridden horse being in my possession; inasmuch as I speak of it as a thing already done,--the participle, _ridden_, being in the past tense.

_I have ridden a horse_ = _I have a horse ridden_ = _I have a horse as a ridden horse_, or (changing the gender and dealing with the word _horse_ as a thing) _I have a horse as a ridden thing_.

In this case the syntax is of the usual sort. (1) _Have_ = _own_ = _habeo_ = _teneo_; (2) _horse_ is the accusative case _equum_; (3) _ridden_ is a past participle agreeing either with _horse_, or _with a word in apposition with it understood_.

Mark the words in italics. The word _ridden_ does not agree with _horse_, since it is of the neuter gender. Neither if we said _I have ridden the horses_, would it agree with _horses_; since it is of the singular number.

The true construction is arrived at by supplying the word _thing_. _I have a horse as a ridden thing_ = _habeo equum equitatum_ (neuter). Here the construction is the same as _triste lupus stabulis_.

_I have horses as a ridden thing_ = _habeo equos equitatum_ (singular, neuter). Here the construction is--

"Triste ... maturis frugibus imbres, Arboribus venti, n.o.bis Amaryllidos irae."

or in Greek--

?e???? ???a???? a? d?' ?d???? ???a?.

The cla.s.sical writers supply instances of this use of _have_. _Compertum habeo_, milites, verba viris virtutem non addere = _I have discovered_ = _I am in possession of the discovery_. Quae c.u.m ita sint, satis de Caesare hoc _dictum habeo_.

The combination of _have_ with an intransitive verb is irreducible to the idea of possession: indeed, it is illogical. In _I have waited_, we cannot make the idea expressed by the word _waited_ the object of the verb _have_ or _possess_. The expression has become a part of language by means of the extension of a false a.n.a.logy. It is an instance of an illegitimate imitation.

The combination of _have_ with _been_ is more illogical still, and is a stronger instance of the influence of an illegitimate imitation. In German and Italian, where even _intransitive_ verbs are combined with the equivalents to the English _have_ (_haben_, and _avere_), the verb substantive is not so combined; on the contrary, the combinations are

Italian; _io sono stato_ = _I am been_.

German; _ich bin gewesen_ = _ditto_.

which is logical.

-- 493. _I am to speak_.--Three facts explain this idiom.

1. The idea of _direction towards an object_ conveyed by the dative case, and by combinations equivalent to it.

2. The extent to which the ideas of necessity, obligation, or intention are connected with the idea of _something that has to be done_, or _something towards which some action has a tendency_.

3. The fact that expressions like the one in question historically represent an original dative case, or its equivalent; since _to speak_ grows out of the Anglo-Saxon form _to sprecanne_, which, although called a gerund, is really a dative case of the infinitive mood.

When Johnson thought that, in the phrase _he is to blame_, the word _blame_ was a noun, if he meant a noun in the way that _culpa_ is a noun, his view was wrong. But if he meant a noun in the way that _culpare_, _ad culpandum_, are nouns, it was right.

-- 494. _I am to blame_.--This idiom is one degree more complex than the previous one; since _I am to blame_ = _I am to be blamed_. As early, however, as the Anglo-Saxon period the gerunds were liable to be used in a pa.s.sive sense: _he is to lufigenne_ = not _he is to love_, but _he is to be loved_.

The principle of this confusion may be discovered by considering that _an object to be blamed_, is _an object for some one to blame_, _an object to be loved_ is _an object for some one to love_.

-- 495. _I am beaten_.--This is a present combination, and it is present on the strength of the verb _am_, not on the strength of the participle _beaten_, which is praeterite.

The following table exhibits the _expedients_ on the part of the different languages of the Gothic stock, since the loss of the proper pa.s.sive form of the Mso-Gothic.

_Language_ LATIN _datur_, LATIN _datus est_.

_Mso-Gothic_ gibada, ist, vas, varth gibans.

_Old High German_ ist, wirdit kepan, was, warth kepan.

_Notker_ wirt keben, ist keben.

_Middle High German_ wirt geben, ist geben.

_New High German_ wird gegeben, ist gegeben worden.

_Old Saxon_ is, wirtheth gebhan, was, warth gebhan.

_Middle Dutch_ es blft ghegheven, waert, blef ghegeven.

_New Dutch_ wordt gegeven, es gegeven worden.

_Old Frisian_ werth ejeven, is ejeven.

_Anglo-Saxon_ weorded gifen, is gifen.

_English_ is given, has been given.

_Old Norse_ er gefinn, hefr verit gefinn.

_Swedish_ gifves, har varit gifven.

_Danish_ bliver, vorder given, har varet given.

"Deutsche Grammatik, iv. 19."

CHAPTER XXIV.

THE SYNTAX OF ADVERBS.

-- 496. The syntax of the adverb is simpler than that of any other part of speech, excepting, perhaps, that of the adjective.

Adverbs have no concord.

Neither have they any government. They _seem_, indeed, to have it, when they are in the comparative or superlative degree; but it is merely apparent. In _this is better than that_, the word _that_ is governed neither by _better_ nor by _than_. It is not governed at all. It is a nominative case; the subject of a separate proposition. _This is better (i.e., more good) than that is good._ Even if we admit such an expression as _he is stronger than me_ to be good English, there is no adverbial government. _Than_, if it govern _me_ at all, governs it as a preposition.

The position of an adverb is, in respect to matters of syntax, pre-eminently parenthetic; i.e., it may be omitted without injuring the construction. _He is fighting--now; he was fighting--then; he fights--bravely; I am almost--tired_, &c.