will show, also, that the whole is so in harmony with the diagram system, that it is only strange that it has not appeared before.

(2). TRANSITIVE MIXED VERBS IN PREDICATE.

(2) But this distinction in transitive verbs leads to another fact, and gives rise to another form. Some transitive verbs are mixed in their nature, being, in certain cases, both active and relative.

He taught me,

He taught grammar,

He taught me grammar,
It cost him a dollar, and

I envy you your pleasure,

Thus,

is transitive active,

transitive relative,

transitive mixed.

are similar in their construction. For such examples, the following figure appears at once as the proper symbol.

Here me is presented as the direct object of the transitive active force of taught, and grammar as the indirect object of its transitive relative force, and precisely in accordance with the facts in analysis. And, not only is the true construction thus shown, but the simple stupidity of the old mode of parsing those terms, as in the distorted paraphrase, He taught grammar to me, is also clearly exposed and condemned.

VI.—Complex Method for the Infinitive Phrase Objective.

Sixthly. The way is now open for the final disposition

of the infinitive phrase objective to which reference was made on page 104. Take once more the sentence,

I ordered him to go.

In the light of the foregoing, it will be seen that ordered is a mixed transitive verb having both a transitive active and a transitive relative force. I ordered him actively; I, also, ordered the going relatively; for it was concerning that act, that I ordered him. Thus far the diagram just given, is clearly applicable to the sentence,

I ordered him to go,

him being the direct object of action, and to go being the indirect phrase object of relation. But to go, it must be observed, is a complex element, having a double office. It is, not only a relative object of ordered, but is also a verbal adjunct of him, its logical agent. To meet this double condition, the diagram must be distinctly adapted; and how easily it may be thus adapted, the following will show for itself.

VII.-For Imperative Verbs in Predicate.

(1). ORDINARY IMPERATIVE.

Seventhly. For the peculiar phases of the imperative mode, insufficient provision has been made in the diagrams. In the case of the ordinary imperative, there is no difficulty. In examples like the following,

See thou to that,

My son, give me thy heart,

the subjects thou and son, are disposed in diagram like the subjects of the other modes. Where both the nominal and pronominal subject are given, the Grammar provides for the construction of the nominal subject as an independent word, logical adjunct of the subject, see page 230, NOTE 1, Obs. 1. It may be questioned, however, whether the case is not more nearly one of a direct and indirect subject, identical, like the following:

to which, excepting in the mode, this next is not unlike. John (indirect subject), go thou (thou direct subject).

(2). HORTATORY IMPERATIVE.

(2) In the hortatory form of the imperative, as seen in the examples,

Let us go.

Let us not do evil that good may come;

there is this peculiarity that let has no grammatical subject, and that its logical subject us is also its grammatical object. The ordinary diagrams do not indicate this peculiarity. The following is better,

let

us

go

In this, while a subject is suggested, it is marked, not as understood (which is a common and absurd method of treating it,) but as grammatically, though not logically, wanting. Go is here drawn as it is used, without a leader.

(3). IMPERATIVE ABSOLUTE.

(3) The case is similar, though stronger, in relation to the absolute imperative, as seen in the examples, Let there be order,

And God said, Let there be light.

Here, as there is simply the enunciation of a sovereign volition, or fiat, no subject is possible, either grammatical or logical. Hence, the proper diagram is,

Eighthly. There are two cases in which adjunct forms may be made to symbolize both the nature and relations of the modifying terms more accurately.

(1) Adjectives used independently as logical adjuncts, instead of being drawn in complete figures, which misrepresent them, as substantives, should retain the distinct adjunct figure, as in the following:

(2). SUBSTANTIVE ADVERBS.

(2) There is an important class of adverbs which, with their adjunct office, combine a substantive nature, not usually represented in the diagrams, but which should be properly distinguished in figure as well as connection. Take the examples,

He went yesterday, arrived there to-day, and will return to-morrow.

He went home last week, and has written three times since.

In these examples, the words yesterday, to-day, to-morrow, home, week, and times, either from absorbing the preposition or altogether rejecting it, come, although substantives, to be used as adverbs. In the diagram, then, they should retain the substantive figure, thus,

(1). RELATIVE AND ADJUNCTIVE.

Ninthly. Auxiliary elements, while clearly enough set forth in the general rules, are not adequately illustrated in the diagrams. The following will, in part, meet the principal want.

An example of a pure adjunctive auxiliary, will be found in the first diagram, page 66; see first (and) third.

(1) The following exhibits a mixed auxiliary, partly adjunctive and partly relative; as but