Year: 1869


than sthe house is being built?" 1t matters
very little, inasmuch as speaking either way
there can be no mistake as to what we mean.
But shall we say ''the man is robbing" and
''the woman is washing" when we mean, not
that the man is robbing or the woman wash
ing, but that some one is robbing the man and
some one washing the woman; in short, when
we mean as nearly as possible the direct con-
trary of what our words would import. To
speak thus would be to defeat the very object
of speech, which, epigrams apart, is to convey
Impressions exactly from one mind to another.
Yet we are asked to do this-to say "the
woman is washing" when we mean that she Is
being washed-because the latter phrase vio-
lates some rules Of grammar. We are asked,
in short, to violate the first principle of speech
and sacrifice perspicuity to fantastical sense
Of propriety.


One of the magazines devoted to sup
plying the public with original matter has
lately laid before its readers digest of dis
cussion that fills several pages Of Gould
Browns Grammar of English grammars on the
form els Being Done" Siding with the
weight Of authority against the expression,
the writer in the magazine contributes no idea
of his own and furnishes no new argument,
unless we accept as an argument the declara-
tion that his grandmother disliked this locution.
The most notable points of reasoning presented
are those that have been in use these twenty
years. They are of the sort that have been
happily called fictitious examples, imagined
on purpose to make usage seem wrong. One
of the examples starts from the assumption that
the verbs ''to be" and ''to exist" are perfect
synonyms. Were this true it would follow
that sis being done" is equivalent to "exists
existing done;" and it is held by the writer
before us that the supremely ridiculous sound
of this must be an unanswerable reason against
the first form. Again, the expression Is said
to be inadmissible because, as It associates
present and past participle, it ''brings pre-
posterously together" words that cannot have
sumption as to synonyms. To be and to exist
are not synonymous. They are very far from
it. They have quite different points of signif-
canoe, are still more widely different in their
uses, and are as far as the poles apart in
grammatical character, inasmuch as one is
especially an auxiliary verb and the other Is
not. The writer who does not recognize the
peculiar character Of the auxiliary verbs, and
who for q moment supposes that he can put
any other verb in the place Of one Of these, is
ignorant Of our language. Apply the maga-
zine arguments strictly and we cannot say
s'the man is dead" though we hold that such
an expression would be nevertheless good
English. For instance, ''the man is" argues
the magazine, is equivalent to ''the man
exists" and you cannot add s'dead" to such
form, since this would ''bring preposterously
together" inconsistent terms; for man dead
no longer exists.


If we trace to its real source this difficulty
in regard to ''Is Being Done" we find that we
are discussing the philosophy Of grammar in
regard to active and passive voices. Active
and passive voices are in the very nature Of
the primary actions Of the human intellect ;
and if language does not possess forms Of
CApi oooaOu 0uoquaeO w sho AAeOiAOSeu1A 0pSio-
tions of the people that use it this is certain
indication that the forms 1t has must be de-
veloped or wrested to the occasion that arises.
How can we in English, where the voice is pas
sive and the time the present, associate such at
tributes as the participle conveys? How can we
do this without ambiguity in the voice9 Can
we do it by any use Of the present participle j?
The difficulty is that the most essential charac-
teristic of this form Of speech is that it ex-
presses action. To whatever word this terminal
'ing" is affixed it adds to the previous sens Of
that word the idea of activity-as watching,
walking, running. And it is ignoring the very
nature and growth Of our language not to
consider this; for the particle is the addition
to the word Of another word expressing action.
1t is as IL we should say of man that he Ia
work doing, talk doing, eat doing, and then,
for convenience and facility Of utterance, drop
the do. If, then, we use this active for pas
sive-if we take q class of words that In their
nature express action and use them for the
direct contrary, it Is an abuse in language and
must lead to that reproach Of speech-ambi-
guilty.


If we say the house Is building, storm is
brewing, there is but little fault to find, because
there is no danger Of doubt. From the nature
Of the case but one Interpretation can be put
on the words, a. storm does not brew ale
nor house build ITSELF Yet this expression
only stands on sufferance and for want Of q
better, since, after all, the house Is doing
nothing, and so cannot be build doing.
But there are many more instance 9
in which the expression must mislead. Sup
pose, to slightly modify an expression In
Shakespeare, we should say Polonius Is at
supper, mot where he eats. but where he Is
eating, who would guess what is meant II
was because Of difficulties like this that so
aound a reasoner and clear writer as Dr.