Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1853-10-08


one" This last Is the only true form and legitimate
application Of the subjunctve the others dcclaratye
adcatire assertions, having in them no suuaefioy
whatever The true subjunctiye is that which I" Is
su3oaaea to some other verb in compound sentence"
but that which is snoned to future contingency
pressed in compound sentence The prefxipg Of
conditional particle, IL less, unless though &C., TO the
indicative cannot suffice to change it into the subunc
tive is only difference in form in idea that can
justify distinction in mood; and this difference in idea
between the iadcateey conditional and the suncfioely
conditional should have been obscured by the
fusion of forms and functions that exists between the
indicative and subjunctiye moods. If ID raiaed we
should be obliged seek shelter" Here have the
declaration of contingency in FORM fact for it is
implied that the speaker knows it does not rain
raied is therefore in the delaratyeor indicative mood
" If ii rains shall be obliged TO seek shelter" This
proposition declares contingency not in point OF fact
but of the speakers knowledge he does not know whe
Their it rains not; a rains is therefore Indicative
az shall be obliged to seek shelter" Here we
have Of the real subjunctye II IL ram relates
neither to past time present; 1t predicts future
contingency, and differs in form and meaning from the
"J of the preceding sentence and unless this
difference of form be retained it win be found impossible
to keep up the old and genuine distinction between the
| two moods.
Hence we oppose this tendency towards the oblitera.
ton of the subjunctiye The distinction between j.
il rains" and ss1 IL RAM should be rendered appa-
rent by distinction in photography If no such
distinction existed, should approve Of its being
created if we did have it, should be in favor
Of nyentipg it and much more, having it, do we
oppose its obsolescence This is of those in
which the logic of language has occasion to resist
less innovation, long as III allowable for logic to
sist the drift of usage. 1t is in which the philo
sophca gramaran should accept the dictates of usage
only under protest against its rghtfuness in dspossess
ing the suncpc Of its original form, and then seeking
invest it with functions to the Indicative But
there is point where this resistance must Gram
mar must not tyrannze over language. When Dean
Swift wrote in his Remonstrance" to the Earl of Ok
ford that in many instances it he English language)
offended against every part Of grammar he uttered
very loose and indefinite proposition What he meant
assert, suppose, that the English language
established by approved and popular usage, offended
against his conceptions of logical accuracy and phloso
phical propriey for in fact the grammar of language
being formed from it, cannot be in conflict with it,
There three distinct methods of grammatical study
and investigation each of which has its advantages
and all of which should be combined in order form the
perfect grammarian There is, first, the historical
thod which investigates and exhibits the way in which
words and infections haze been used and still used
is the logical method which treats of the way in
Whcn they De used according TO the ABSTRACT
auctions of logic and, lastly, the psychological method
which seeks point the psychological relations of
language in general to the human mind and particularly
of any one language to the genius of the people who
speak it, Each and all of these methods must be to
extent pursued by the who seeks to write the
pure Of English grammar We need not say that
the last named is the most difficult, and requires the
greatest delicacy Of and keenest of intellect
in order to lead any results solid than ingenious
In the discussion Of such subtetes the mind is prone
fall into specuations specous than substantial We
know of English grammarian who processes to have
followed this method Of grammatical study in the prepa-
ration of system Of English grammar but among the
Germans there many such who have directed their
attention to the discovery and calculation of those psy
Geological elements in the German of speech
which 1t naturally be presumed to possess, the
image and reflex Of the German mind. Mr. Bailey with
out perhaps especially seeking it, has started in the
right direction encounter this line Of grammatical
study in his disquisition dom and Eglis idioms
for he well observes, these peculiar expressions.
conformed phrase to the genius Of the language have
grown partly out Of necessity convenience, partly
suggested by the circumstances surrounding them by the
genius Of the people, their modes Of thinking
ciatng" But, barring the psychology Of grammar, it
is not much to expect at the hands Of every gram
marian judicous observance and combination of both
the historical and the logical method Of grammatical sys
tenn building Neither be followed to the exclusion
of the other and we believe it is still lawful to adhere
to the logical rather than the historical subjunctive
We have made this long DEPRESSION only to return to
the same point from which set out We sum up our
argument in the words Of Latham:
ITO show that writer's, generally correct,
have used particular expression is to show that they
speak in few instances the vulgar in many To show
that the vulgar expression for another 70 show
that ideas sufficiently allied to be expressed in
the manner; in other words the htorcd! fact IS
accompanied by logical explanation, and the historical
deviation is measured by logical standard"
Some grammarians," Mr.. Bailey states, have en-
countered difficulty in the Of the of the sub
junciirs mode This difficulty, in fact has always been
pretty formidable one and though our author speaks
rather lightly Of it, confess that still find room
for further explanation and arrangement after
fully studying all that he has written the subject
we understand correctly Mr.. Baieys explanation of this
"Tere Alexander would accept the TERMS" he sees
the proprety Of employing the indefinite past tense
arere IT, because "pas Gme must be employed to make
supposition differing from the fact in the case" On
the contrary the propriety Of this form only in
the circumstance that it is the suanctVe mood and
therefore implies futury. "Wpe 4 now sick would
take some medicine" This, to US, to imply an
instant future "Wtre ever sick, would take medi-
cine" This seems imply indefinite future; and the
futurity in either example resides in the 'une0y Of
ers for neither implies that the speaker
either now is or ever has been sick Here, them have
suppositions' made not necessarily in past time" as