The northern and eastern boundary.

The northern and the eastern boundary.
The northern and eastern boundaries.

While the omission of a necessary article is a frequent grammatical error there are not wanting cases of its meaningless and erroneous insertion, as,

"A rare kind of an eagle," for "a rare kind of eagle."

By comparing "There are a few" and "There are few," we see that the second admits deficiency and is really negative in meaning. The before an adjective converts it into a noun of generic meaning, as "None but the brave deserves the fair." But the omission of the article sometimes gives a noun a wider generic meaning. Man is a wider term than “a man" or "the man. Most nouns, however, cannot be used abstractly in this way. Table and book, for instance, do not admit of this generic application.

66

If a noun is limited by both an article and another adjective, the article usually precedes. Yet there are idiomatic phrases containing pronominal adjectives where the article follows the other, as, "What a story," "Such an action," "Half an hour," "Both the hands," "Many a man." Although a usually follows many, the phrases a great many,' a good many, are in comWhen an adjective is modified by an adverb

mon use.

66

99 66

here al acter

ating

menta

唱

of degree it often precedes the article, as, "So difficult a task.'

There are words that resemble articles, whose unlike character should be recognized. In "Daddy's gone a-hunting," a is an old preposition, a contracted form of at. In "The more the merrier," the is an adverb, though the idiom is said to be derived from the instrumental case of the old English inflection.

Latin differs from modern languages in having no article. The recognition of articles by grammarians led to the enumeration in the early English grammars of nine parts of speech. Later opinion, however, has relegated the articles to their true position as a small, though important, sub-class under adjectives.

XXVII

THE PERSONAL PRONOUNS

Venerable relics of language.-M. SCHELE DE VERE.

The pronouns are among the oldest parts of speech, and consequently have undergone much change, so that their original forms are greatly altered. Yet they have preserved more relics of the older inflections than any other part of speech.-MORRIS.

A pronoun is as instantly discredited by any doubt about what it represents as an ambassador.-ARLO BATES.

"Pronouns are the most general kind of name, and depend on the circumstances of the sentence for their meaning."

Pronouns in general are words which without being names and without being limited by an article are used in the relations of nouns. There is far less distinctiveness in pronouns as an entire class than belongs to the great divisions of pronouns taken separately.

The personal pronouns especially are a definitely marked class of words, and these are usually meant when one speaks of the pronouns. The other classes of pronouns-adjective pronouns, interrogatives and relatives-have a mixed character, and contain elements that ally them to other parts of speech.

The personal pronouns are so named because they have grammatical person, the only other English words that have this property being a few verbal forms that take personal agreements with their subjects.

We

of

per

A

They are used not so much to "avoid repetition of the noun," as to express personality. It is a marked step in a child's development, when he recognizes his own personality and begins to say "I." Although the personal pronouns are small in size and few in number, they seem to contain in themselves and in their agreements a most disproportionate part of the difficulties of grammar. There is no other group of words of equally diminutive size that require so full and careful treatment at the hands of grammarians, as the personal

pronouns.

Almost all that there is of case and of gender as well as of person belongs to the personal pronouns. It has been said that if five small words, she, her, hers, it and its, were blotted out of the language there would be no longer need to recognize gender in English grammar. He, his and him would then have a common sex signification, as is now the case with the plural pronouns and we should be saved all discussion of gender forms and agreements.

Each of the personal pronouns has some peculiarities of its own and requires separate treatment.

Writers on rhetoric sometimes object to the use of the first person in written composition as savoring of egoism. A good writer will usually veil his own personality and express his thoughts in an impersonal way. Yet in epistolary writings or when the writer's personal experience is the fitting theme, there is no reason for excluding the simple pronoun, and it is a false modesty that resorts to unnatural devices in order to avoid it.

e,

We is not exactly the plural of I, since there is usually but one I in the group referred to as we. We is sometimes used in a representative sense; as the editorial We, which expresses the sentiments of a paper rather than of an individual editor; or the royal We which refers to a king as the head of the nation rather than in his personal capacity. It is said that the royal We was first used by King John who "thus found out the art of multiplying himself." We is also used for human beings generally, as, "Here we have no continuing city but we seek one to come.' When a writer is expressing his individual sentiments I should generally be used.

The second person singular is not used in modern English except in the formal language of prayer or of poetry. Yet for these two purposes it ought to be thoroughly familiar to the English student. The Dutch language has gone even farther than the English in ignoring the second person singular and uses the plural form for both poetry and prayer.

The substitution of the plural for the singular in English began about the thirteenth century and seems to have been made at first for the monarchs and the nobility. The Quakers gave religious testimony to the equality of all men by retaining thee and thou. They would not render reverence to one and withhold it from others. Thus Charles Fox wrote in 1648, "When the Lord sent me into the world, I was required to thee and thou all men and women without respect to rich and poor, great or small.”