The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-04-01
4 last word on tho Neminative Alb
sO1ute.
To the Editor of the Dispatch:

prise 10 find that we had furnished youi
readers so long chapter on grammar fol
their Easter mcditatlons; the other was q
feeling of kindness towards you for youi
evident purpose TO treat me with perfec;
respect. l heartily thank you for your
courtesy; and beg little more space In
your paper, which will try TO use in such
way as not 10 weary your readers or to
diminish that cordial goodwill which ex-
lists between us. For the sake OF breyity
and clearness permit me to number my
paragraphs.
4. Since NV last was written / have met
with DIR. Hcdgson's book on Errors in
The Use OF English j suspect that DIR.
Hodgson suggested DIR. Ryland's original
bit OF criticism; and that but for him you
would not have thought OF abiding 10 our
.amicablc controversy" The book is not
what expected to find il. II is not a
grammar, or a scientific treatise on the
principles OF the English language. 1t is
simply collection OF errors arranged I'M
der different heads with very brief eX-
plantations. II Is the result OF thirty years
OF plodding mechanical work. The author
read with pencil and notebook In hand,
and whenever he saw what he took to be
a mistake he jotted il down. As might he
expected, looking for mistakes and re-
jo;cipg to find them, he has gathered many
that do not belong to the company in which
be has placed them. In O word, DR.. llodg-
son seems 10 have been one OF those useful
literary dabblers in small things whom
men OF broader views could not very wei
do without, and yet can hardly help des-
pising. SO much l thought your readers
ought 10 know about DR.. HodgsoD.
2. The question between DIR. Ryiand and
~ nhgnlIltp
with the nominative suppressed, and that,
TOO, is the question between us. For IL
there Is such thing the sentences TO
which you object can be explained. and
have q respectable grammatical standing.
Dr.Ryland was right when he felt that IL
the nomina,ive Of the nomiUatiye abso-
Lutte may be suppressed he had no case,
and was bound TO confess judgment.
2. In the examples OF faulty grammar
which Hodgson quotes, and which you
quote from him, there are two kinds OF
sentences apparently alike, but really very
different. Hodgson calls one OF these
classes participles absolute, Qhe old nomi-
native absolute or independently the other
participles in opposition. In the latter the
nominatiye case to the verb must arrays
agree ,oih the participle; in the former 1t
nerer does or can do so. With such broad
difference between the two we ought to be
able easily to distinguish them. "Being
hungry, we ate our dinner" is an example
OF the participle I'm opposition. In this
case the IRE refers, and must refer, to the
Being. "Haying waded through 1t, the
water was muddIed." This is case of
the participle absolute. The water did
not, could not wade; the word u0ter,
therefore, does not and cannot refer to
having ,rdded. Who did wadel The pass
age as il stands does not tell us: it is in
complete; the nominative is 10 be sup |
piled; and not knowing who waded, we
cannot change the sentence and put it into |
the particlple in opposition. Supply the |
horse and we have both perfect sense and |
complete case Of the participle absolute.
In the Use OF such sentence the context
must suggest the needed word.
4. Having demonstrated that there are
cases of the participle absolute with the
nominative suppressed. my next point is
that such cases are allowable. U IIodgson
furnishes proof OF it. In a note to p. 1903 |
he mentions that there are ga few partici-
Piles which may be used absolutely that
is, without an expressed nominative agree
ing with them. He mentions "concern-
ing. regarding, &C." The &c. is a part of
the quotation. (2J Other grammarians en-
n 'ge his list 10 include considering, sup
posing, allowing" &c. Bailey, in Rule V.
of his grammar, says: "A noun Joined
with participle. and disioned from the
rest OF the sentence, is the nominatiye case
He gives one example, and
adds: .'Generally speaking, virtue has its
reward even in this life. e., speaking
We, understood. is nominativc
independent with speaking" p. 1872. (See,
n i. \
~ The best and most careful writers in our
language use the partciple absolute with
the nOminative suppressed. The reader
may consult Merivale's Romans Under the
Empire, vol. 7, PIP. $3.50, 362, 3S9; Everett's
Grafton at Cambridge, July 4, 1926; IT,
Wings Philip OF Pokanokes, &c. He may
also see the quotations which have already
furnished during this correspondence.
D. NV next point is that the particlple
absolute with the nominatye suppressed is
not necessarily ambiguous. / Yesterday
received letter from a learned Nirginian,
in Which he says: "iaving attended the
Congress at Lynchburg, and having re-
flected some on what saw and heard there,
my impression is that it was a good thing
and l don't mean either that my impress
sion attended the Congress-" IIe adds
" When will folks learn that language in
the hands OF masters is a bigger thing than
technical GRAMMAR The most sensible
thing in most sensible book, Glider !
sleeves Latin Grammar, is the remark that .
merely formal ambiguity Is Of no conse- ,
quence." You begin You reply to me by ,
saying: "ilaying criticised last Sunday ,,
some OF Professor Longs utterances, he :
Is entitled to be heard in his own defence =
That sentence means OF course that DIR. :
L ono nff |
the other hand, that is exactly what it does
not mean. No sensible reader would ever
get that meaning from 1t, and it cannot !
mean what 1t cannot seem TO mean TO any =
sensible man; and grammatical rule that '
seeks to force an impossible meaning on a
sentence whose real meaning is unmistaka-
Die must be false in itself or false in its APP
plicaton. /
u. The casa absolute with the nomina- S
i've suppressed sometimes produces sen- 1
Lenccs OF the greatest precision, compact n
ness, vigor, and elegance. Take the eX- =
ample from Jeter's Life OF Andrew Broad n
dus. Speaking of Mr.. Broaddus he says o
. Placed bmong a thousand men, his APP t
pearanee would at once have enlisted at C
tention." An excellent writer, but fetter-
ed by Hodgson's rule, proposes toimprove
this sentence thus: n Andrew Broaddus,
placed among thousand men, would, by
his appearance, have enlisted attention."
Compare the two sentences. The one .
moves with firm, rapid steps; the other
rrawls like wounded snake. Ii ms gram
par taught me to prefer the second SEN
teuce should burn my grammar. s
3 VIII say no more; DO more is REQUIRED. 5
have shown that there is such q thing as y
the' ease absolute with the nominatiye sup
pressed; that such cases are allowable ac- $
corQng to Hodgson. according TO other 5,
s,'siltsarians, and according TO the practice "