sidered an exceptional departure from the general law. Such figures should be drawn entire whenever the extent of the enclosed phrase or sentence does not forbid.

In several cases, as in the following diagram, and in

others on page 270, these substantive figures are drawn in dotted lines. This is an irregularity which the learner should not imitate. It is entirely inconsistent with both the laws of the diagrams, and the general practice of the Grammar.

5. IN CONNECTING LINES.

Fifthly. Lines for oblique connection are sometimes, (see Grammar, page 237, diagram at the bottom,) drawn as oblique right lines, instead of taking the waved form according to Rule sixth, page 71, and as exemplified on page 73.

Such lines are utterly objectionable. They are ungraceful, are bad practice in drawing, and encourage a careless, unsystematic habit in constructing diagrams, than which nothing can be more to be deprecated.

6. DOTTED LINES OF CONNECTION.

Sixthly. In one case, (see Grammar, page 42,) a dotted line of connection is used, which is objectionable. Such lines, if used at all, should be employed only to indicate semi-grammatical relations, that is, those which are neither purely logical, or independent, nor yet strictly grammatical, or dependent.

II.-Errors in Attachment.

1. ADJUNCT WORDS AND PHRASES.

Again there are errors in the attaching or connecting of elements. First. Adjunct words and phrases, instead of being conformed to the third rule, page 65, are attached quite indiscriminately to any portion of the superior figure, left, middle, or right; see Benevolent, always, low, beneath, &c., scaling, &c, wheeling, &c.*

This mode of attaching adjuncts is neither systematic nor safe. In constructing diagrams, there must be a fixed place for every element, and it must be in its place, or the work will sooner or later become utterly confused and unintelligible.

In the example below, the adverb most must not be regarded as alike faulty with the foregoing adjuncts. It relates to true, and while attached centrally below, is yet at the extreme left of the adjective section of the predicate figure, where it belongs.

* This error is probably due to consulting convenience or economy in engraving.

2. ATTACHING CONNECTING LINES.

Secondly. In the case of the lines of connection for relative, or conjunctive adjectives, and for conjunctive adverbs, while the general waved form is preserved, the line is incorrectly attached below the connecting term, instead of to its upper side, or where that is impracticable, to one of its extremities. See whose, below; also, diagram, page 64 of the Grammar. For a correct connection, see where, second diagram, page 66, of the Grammar.

This mode of attaching the line to whose, is not only improper in form, but also implies a false construction, since attaching the line below, is affirming that whose is itself attended by a modifier. The line is also false in being dotted, instead of being continuous, for there is a complete grammatical dependence.

III-Faulty Use of Supernumerary Lines.

Thirdly. A final error in figures is to be found in the use of supernumerary lines of circumscription, employed to give a species of comprehensive connection of adjunct phrases and sentences, to the terms they modify. Examples will be found on pages 33, 36, 57, 62, 253, 254, and 269, of the Grammar.

The use of these lines, whether dotted or continuous, is wholly objectionable. They are not necessary; and if employed in every case, as they should be if they are used at all, they can only render the more extended diagrams utterly confused and unintelligible. The teacher may temporarily resort to them, to impress on the pupil the collective unity of the elements concerned; but he should peremptorily forbid their use by the pupil.

IV.-Errors involving the Analysis.

1. LINE OF SEPARATION.

Fourthly. We notice errors involving a faulty analysis. First. The line of distinction or separation between the parts of the predicate or of the verbal subsequent, is often either improperly omitted or inserted. Examples of a faulty omission will be found in the following: see is sleepy, is love, and waxed deadly and chill.

The following are examples of a faulty insertion of the line of separation see is reading, might have been respected, and having left.

Boat

having left wharf

The following is of a mixed character. The line is wrongly inserted between the participles having been, but is rightly employed between the participle been and the noun soldier.

This treatment of the line of separation is not only in violation of the seventh rule, page 73, but is also inconsistent with the better usage of the Grammar elsewhere. The following exemplify that better usage: see for correct omission, having arrived, will improve, have taken, for correct insertion, tasted sweet, waxed strong, and is true.