<h2 name="CHAPTER_VII">CHAPTER VII</h2>
<h3>ERRORS</h3>
<h4>Mistakes—Slips of Authors—Examples and
Corrections—Errors of Redundancy.</h4></center>
<p>In the following examples the word or words in parentheses are
uncalled for and should be omitted:</p>
<ol>
<li>
<p>Fill the glass (full).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>They appeared to be talking (together) on private
affairs.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I saw the boy and his sister (both) in the garden.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He went into the country last week and returned (back)
yesterday.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The subject (matter) of his discourse was excellent.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>You need not wonder that the (subject) matter of his discourse
was excellent; it was taken from the Bible.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>They followed (after) him, but could not overtake him.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The same sentiments may be found throughout (the whole of) the
book.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I was very ill every day (of my life) last week.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>That was the (sum and) substance of his discourse.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He took wine and water and mixed them (both) together.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He descended (down) the steps to the cellar.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He fell (down) from the top of the house.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I hope you will return (again) soon.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The things he took away he restored (again).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The thief who stole my watch was compelled to restore it (back
again).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>It is equally (the same) to me whether I have it today or
tomorrow.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>She said, (says she) the report is false; and he replied, (says
he) if it be not correct I have been misinformed.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I took my place in the cars (for) to go to New York.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>They need not (to) call upon him.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Nothing (else) but that would satisfy him.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Whenever I ride in the cars I (always) find it prejudicial to my
health.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He was the first (of all) at the meeting.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He was the tallest of (all) the brothers.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>You are the tallest of (all) your family.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Whenever I pass the house he is (always) at the door.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>The rain has penetrated (through) the roof.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Besides my uncle and aunt there was (also) my grandfather at the
church.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>It should (ever) be your constant endeavor to please your
family.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>If it is true as you have heard (then) his situation is indeed
pitiful.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Either this (here) man or that (there) woman has (got)
it.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Where is the fire (at)?</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Did you sleep in church? Not that I know (of).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I never before (in my life) met (with) such a stupid
man.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>(For) why did he postpone it?</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Because (why) he could not attend.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>What age is he? (Why) I don't know.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He called on me (for) to ask my opinion.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I don't know where I am (at).</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I looked in (at) the window.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>I passed (by) the house.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>He (always) came every Sunday.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Moreover, (also) we wish to say he was in error.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>It is not long (ago) since he was here.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p>Two men went into the wood (in order) to cut (down)
trees.</p>
</li></ol>
<p>Further examples of redundancy might be multiplied. It is very
common in newspaper writing where not alone single words but entire
phrases are sometimes brought in, which are unnecessary to the
sense or explanation of what is written.</p>
<h3>GRAMMATICAL ERRORS OF STANDARD AUTHORS</h3>
<p>Even the best speakers and writers are sometimes caught napping.
Many of our standard authors to whom we have been accustomed to
look up as infallible have sinned more or less against the
fundamental principles of grammar by breaking the rules regarding
one or more of the nine parts of speech. In fact some of them have
recklessly trespassed against all nine, and still they sit on their
pedestals of fame for the admiration of the crowd. Macaulay
mistreated the article. He wrote,—"That <i>a</i> historian
should not record trifles is perfectly true." He should have used
<i>an</i>.</p>
<p>Dickens also used the article incorrectly. He refers to
"Robinson Crusoe" as "<i>an</i> universally popular book," instead
of <i>a</i> universally popular book.</p>
<p>The relation between nouns and pronouns has always been a
stumbling block to speakers and writers. Hallam in his
<i>Literature of Europe</i> writes, "No one as yet had exhibited
the structure of the human kidneys, Vesalius having only examined
them in dogs." This means that Vesalius examined human kidneys in
dogs. The sentence should have been, "No one had as yet exhibited
the kidneys in human beings, Vesalius having examined such organs
in dogs only."</p>
<p>Sir Arthur Helps in writing of Dickens, states—"I knew a
brother author of his who received such criticisms from him
(Dickens) very lately and profited by <i>it</i>." Instead of
<i>it</i> the word should be <i>them</i> to agree with
criticisms.</p>
<p>Here are a few other pronominal errors from leading authors:</p>
<p>"Sir Thomas Moore in general so writes it, although not many
others so late as <i>him</i>." Should be <i>he</i>.—Trench's
<i>English Past and Present</i>.</p>
<p>"What should we gain by it but that we should speedily become as
poor as <i>them</i>." Should be <i>they</i>.—Alison's
<i>Essay on Macaulay</i>.</p>
<p>"If the king gives us leave you or I may as lawfully preach, as
<i>them</i> that do." Should be <i>they</i> or <i>those</i>, the
latter having persons understood.—Hobbes's <i>History of
Civil Wars</i>.</p>
<p>"The drift of all his sermons was, to prepare the Jews for the
reception of a prophet, mightier than <i>him</i>, and whose shoes
he was not worthy to bear." Should be than
<i>he</i>.—Atterbury's <i>Sermons</i>.</p>
<p>"Phalaris, who was so much older than <i>her</i>." Should be
<i>she</i>.—Bentley's <i>Dissertation on Phalaris</i>.</p>
<p>"King Charles, and more than <i>him</i>, the duke and the Popish
faction were at liberty to form new schemes." Should be than
<i>he</i>.—Bolingbroke's <i>Dissertations on Parties</i>.</p>
<p>"We contributed a third more than the Dutch, who were obliged to
the same proportion more than <i>us</i>." Should be than
<i>we</i>.—Swift's <i>Conduct of the Allies</i>.</p>
<p>In all the above examples the objective cases of the pronouns
have been used while the construction calls for nominative
cases.</p>
<p>"Let <i>thou</i> and <i>I</i> the battle
try"—<i>Anon</i>.</p>
<p>Here <i>let</i> is the governing verb and requires an objective
case after it; therefore instead of <i>thou</i> and <i>I</i>, the
words should be <i>you</i> (<i>sing</i>.) and <i>me</i>.</p>
<p>"Forever in this humble cell, Let thee and I, my fair one,
dwell"—<i>Prior</i>.</p>
<p>Here <i>thee</i> and <i>I</i> should be the objectives
<i>you</i> and <i>me</i>.</p>
<p>The use of the relative pronoun trips the greatest number of
authors.</p>
<p>Even in the Bible we find the relative wrongly translated:</p>
<p>Whom do men say that I am?—<i>St. Matthew</i>.</p>
<p>Whom think ye that I am?—<i>Acts of the Apostles</i>.</p>
<p><i>Who</i> should be written in both cases because the word is
not in the objective governed by say or think, but in the
nominative dependent on the verb <i>am</i>.</p>
<p>"<i>Who</i> should I meet at the coffee house t'other night, but
my old friend?"—<i>Steele</i>.</p>
<p>"It is another pattern of this answerer's fair dealing, to give
us hints that the author is dead, and yet lay the suspicion upon
somebody, I know not <i>who</i>, in the country."—Swift's
<i>Tale of a Tub</i>.</p>
<p>"My son is going to be married to I don't know <i>who</i>."
—Goldsmith's <i>Good-natured Man</i>.</p>
<p>The nominative <i>who</i> in the above examples should be the
objective <i>whom</i>.</p>
<p>The plural nominative <i>ye</i> of the pronoun <i>thou</i> is
very often used for the objective <i>you</i>, as in the
following:</p>
<p>"His wrath which will one day destroy <i>ye both</i>."
—<i>Milton</i>.</p>
<p>"The more shame for <i>ye</i>; holy men I thought
<i>ye</i>."—<i>Shakespeare</i>.</p>
<p>"I feel the gales that from <i>ye</i>
blow."—<i>Gray</i>.</p>
<p>"Tyrants dread <i>ye</i>, lest your just decree Transfer the
power and set the people free."—<i>Prior</i>.</p>
<p>Many of the great writers have played havoc with the adjective
in the indiscriminate use of the degrees of comparison.</p>
<p>"Of two forms of the same word, use the
fittest."—<i>Morell</i>.</p>
<p>The author here in <i>trying</i> to give good advice sets a bad
example. He should have used the comparative degree, "Fitter."</p>
<p>Adjectives which have a comparative or superlative signification
do not admit the addition of the words <i>more</i>, <i>most</i>, or
the terminations, <i>er</i>, <i>est</i>, hence the following
examples break this rule:</p>
<p>"Money is the <i>most universal</i> incitement of human
misery."—Gibbon's <i>Decline and Fall</i>.</p>
<p>"The <i>chiefest</i> of which was known by the name of Archon
among the Grecians."—Dryden's <i>Life of Plutarch</i>.</p>
<p>"The <i>chiefest</i> and largest are removed to certain
magazines they call libraries."—Swift's <i>Battle of the
Books</i>.</p>
<p>The two <i>chiefest</i> properties of air, its gravity and
elastic force, have been discovered by mechanical
experiments.—<i>Arbuthno</i></p>
<p>"From these various causes, which in greater or <i>lesser</i>
degree, affected every individual in the colony, the indignation of
the people became general."—Robertson's <i>History of
America</i>.</p>
<p>"The <i>extremest</i> parts of the earth were meditating a
submission."—Atterbury's <i>Sermons</i>.</p>
<p>"The last are indeed <i>more preferable</i> because they are
founded on some new knowledge or improvement in the mind of
man."—Addison, <i>Spectator</i>.</p>
<p>"This was in reality the <i>easiest</i> manner of the
two."—Shaftesbury's <i>Advice to an Author</i>.</p>
<p>"In every well formed mind this second desire seems to be the
<i>strongest</i> of the two."—Smith's <i>Theory of Moral
Sentiments</i>.</p>
<p>In these examples the superlative is wrongly used for the
comparative. When only two objects are compared the comparative
form must be used.</p>
<p>Of impossibility there are no degrees of comparison, yet we find
the following:</p>
<p>"As it was impossible they should know the words, thoughts and
secret actions of all men, so it was <i>more impossible</i> they
should pass judgment on them according to these
things."—Whitby's <i>Necessity of the Christian
Religion</i>.</p>
<p>A great number of authors employ adjectives for adverbs. Thus we
find:</p>
<p>"I shall endeavor to live hereafter <i>suitable</i> to a man in
my station."—<i>Addison</i>.</p>
<p>"I can never think so very <i>mean</i> of him."—Bentley's
<i>Dissertation on Phalaris</i>.</p>
<p>"His expectations run high and the fund to supply them is
<i>extreme</i> scanty,—<i>Lancaster's Essay on
Delicacy</i>.</p>
<p>The commonest error in the use of the verb is the disregard of
the concord between the verb and its subject. This occurs most
frequently when the subject and the verb are widely separated,
especially if some other noun of a different number immediately
precedes the verb. False concords occur very often after
<i>either</i>, <i>or</i>, <i>neither</i>, <i>nor</i>, and
<i>much</i>, <i>more</i>, <i>many</i>, <i>everyone</i>,
<i>each</i>.</p>
<p>Here are a few authors' slips:—</p>
<p>"The terms in which the sale of a patent <i>were</i>
communicated to the public."—Junius's <i>Letters</i>.</p>
<p>"The richness of her arms and apparel <i>were</i>
conspicuous."—Gibbon's <i>Decline and Fall</i>.</p>
<p>"Everyone of this grotesque family <i>were</i> the creatures of
national genius."—D'Israeli.</p>
<p>"He knows not what spleen, languor or listlessness
<i>are</i>."—Blair's <i>Sermons</i>.</p>
<p>"Each of these words <i>imply</i>, some pursuit or object
relinquished."—<i>Ibid</i>.</p>
<p>"Magnus, with four thousand of his supposed accomplices
<i>were</i> put to death."—<i>Gibbon</i>.</p>
<p>"No nation gives greater encouragements to learning than we do;
yet at the same time <i>none are</i> so injudicious in the
application."—<i>Goldsmith</i>.</p>
<p>"<i>There's two</i> or <i>three</i> of us have seen strange
sights."—<i>Shakespeare</i>.</p>
<p>The past participle should not be used for the past tense, yet
the learned Byron overlooked this fact. He thus writes in the
<i>Lament of Tasso</i>:—</p>
<p>"And with my years my soul <i>begun to pant</i> With feelings of
strange tumult and soft pain."</p>
<p>Here is another example from Savage's <i>Wanderer</i> in which
there is double sinning:</p>
<p>"From liberty each nobler science <i>sprung</i>, A Bacon
brighten'd and a Spenser <i>sung</i>."</p>
<p>Other breaches in regard to the participles occur in the
following:—</p>
<p>"Every book ought to be read with the same spirit and in the
same manner as it is <i>writ</i>"—Fielding's <i>Tom
Jones</i>.</p>
<p>"The Court of Augustus had not <i>wore</i> off the manners of
the republic "—Hume's <i>Essays</i>.</p>
<p>"Moses tells us that the fountains of the earth were <i>broke</i>
open or clove asunder."—Burnet.</p>
<p>"A free constitution when it has been <i>shook</i> by the
iniquity of former administrations."—<i>Bolingbroke</i>.</p>
<p>"In this respect the seeds of future divisions were <i>sowed</i>
abundantly."—<i>Ibid</i>.</p>
<p>In the following example the present participle is used for the
infinitive mood:</p>
<p>"It is easy <i>distinguishing</i> the rude fragment of a rock
from the splinter of a statue."—Gilfillan's <i>Literary
Portraits</i>.</p>
<p><i>Distinguishing</i> here should be replaced by <i>to
distinguish</i>.</p>
<p>The rules regarding <i>shall</i> and <i>will</i> are violated in
the following:</p>
<p>"If we look within the rough and awkward outside, we <i>will</i>
be richly rewarded by its perusal."—Gilfillan's <i>Literary
Portraits</i>.</p>
<p>"If I <i>should</i> declare them and speak of them, they should
be more than I am able to express."—<i>Prayer Book Revision
of Psalms XI</i>.</p>
<p>"If I <i>would</i> declare them and speak of them, they are more
than can be numbered."—<i>Ibid</i>.</p>
<p>"Without having attended to this, we <i>will</i> be at a loss,
in understanding several passages in the classics."—Blair's
<i>Lectures</i>.</p>
<p>"We know to what cause our past reverses have been owing and
<i>we</i> will have ourselves to blame, if they are again
incurred."—Alison's <i>History of Europe</i>.</p>
<p>Adverbial mistakes often occur in the best writers. The adverb
<i>rather</i> is a word very frequently misplaced. Archbishop
Trench in his "English Past and Present" writes, "It <i>rather</i>
modified the structure of our sentences than the elements of our
vocabulary." This should have been written,—"It modified the
structure of our sentences <i>rather than</i> the elements of our
vocabulary."</p>
<p>"So far as his mode of teaching goes he is <i>rather</i> a
disciple of Socrates than of St. Paul or Wesley." Thus writes
Leslie Stephens of Dr. Johnson. He should have written,—" So
far as his mode of teaching goes he is a disciple of Socrates
<i>rather</i> than of St. Paul or Wesley."</p>
<p>The preposition is a part of speech which is often wrongly used
by some of the best writers. Certain nouns, adjectives and verbs
require particular prepositions after them, for instance, the word
<i>different</i> always takes the preposition <i>from</i> after it;
<i>prevail</i> takes <i>upon</i>; <i>averse</i> takes <i>to</i>;
<i>accord</i> takes <i>with</i>, and so on.</p>
<p>In the following examples the prepositions in parentheses are
the ones that should have been used:</p>
<p>"He found the greatest difficulty <i>of</i> (in)
writing."—Hume's <i>History of England</i>.</p>
<p>"If policy can prevail <i>upon</i> (over)
force."—<i>Addison</i>.</p>
<p>"He made the discovery and communicated <i>to</i> (with) his
friends."—Swift's <i>Tale of a Tub</i>.</p>
<p>"Every office of command should be intrusted to persons
<i>on</i> (in) whom the parliament shall
confide."—<i>Macaulay</i>.</p>
<p>Several of the most celebrated writers infringe the canons of
style by placing prepositions at the end of sentences. For instance
Carlyle, in referring to the Study of Burns, writes:—"Our own
contributions to it, we are aware, can be but scanty and feeble;
but we offer them with good will, and trust they may meet with
acceptance from those they are intended <i>for</i>."</p>
<p>—"for whom they are intended," he should have written.</p>
<p>"Most writers have some one vein which they peculiarly and
obviously excel <i>in</i>."—<i>William Minto</i>.</p>
<p>This sentence should read,—Most writers have some one vein
in which they peculiarly and obviously excel.</p>
<p>Many authors use redundant words which repeat the same thought
and idea. This is called tautology.</p>
<p>"Notwithstanding which (however) poor Polly embraced them all
around."—<i>Dickens</i>.</p>
<p>"I judged that they would (mutually) find each
other."—<i>Crockett</i>.</p>
<p>"....as having created a (joint) partnership between the two
Powers in the Morocco question."—<i>The Times</i>.</p>
<p>"The only sensible position (there seems to be) is to frankly
acknowledge our ignorance of what lies beyond."—<i>Daily
Telegraph</i>.</p>
<p>"Lord Rosebery has not budged from his position—splendid,
no doubt,—of (lonely) isolation."—<i>The Times</i>.</p>
<p>"Miss Fox was (often) in the habit of assuring Mrs.
Chick."—<i>Dickens</i>.</p>
<p>"The deck (it) was their field of
fame."—<i>Campbell</i>.</p>
<p>"He had come up one morning, as was now (frequently) his
wont,"—<i>Trollope</i>.</p>
<p>The counsellors of the Sultan (continue to) remain
sceptical—<i>The Times</i>.</p>
<p>Seriously, (and apart from jesting), this is no light
matter.—<i>Bagehot</i>.</p>
<p>To go back to your own country with (the consciousness that you
go back with) the sense of duty well done.—<i>Lord
Halsbury</i>.</p>
<p>The <i>Peresviet</i> lost both her fighting-tops and (in
appearance) looked the most damaged of all the ships—<i>The
Times</i>.</p>
<p>Counsel admitted that, that was a fair suggestion to make, but
he submitted that it was borne out by the (surrounding)
circumstances.—<i>Ibid</i>.</p>
<p>Another unnecessary use of words and phrases is that which is
termed circumlocution, a going around the bush when there is no
occasion for it,—save to fill space.</p>
<p>It may be likened to a person walking the distance of two sides
of a triangle to reach the objective point. For instance in the
quotation: "Pope professed to have learned his poetry from Dryden,
whom, whenever an opportunity was presented, he praised through the
whole period of his existence with unvaried liberality; and perhaps
his character may receive some illustration, of a comparison he
instituted between him and the man whose pupil he was" much of the
verbiage may be eliminated and the sentence thus condensed:</p>
<p>"Pope professed himself the pupil of Dryden, whom he lost no
opportunity of praising; and his character may be illustrated by a
comparison with his master."</p>
<p>"His life was brought to a close in 1910 at an age not far from
the one fixed by the sacred writer as the term of human
existence."</p>
<p>This in brevity can be put, "His life was brought to a close at
the age of seventy;" or, better yet, "He died at the age of
seventy."</p>
<p>"The day was intensely cold, so cold in fact that the
thermometer crept down to the zero mark," can be expressed: "The
day was so cold the thermometer registered zero."</p>
<p>Many authors resort to circumlocution for the purpose of
"padding," that is, filling space, or when they strike a snag in
writing upon subjects of which they know little or nothing. The
young writer should steer clear of it and learn to express his
thoughts and ideas as briefly as possible commensurate with
lucidity of expression.</p>
<p>Volumes of errors in fact, in grammar, diction and general
style, could be selected from the works of the great writers, a
fact which eloquently testifies that no one is infallible and that
the very best is liable to err at times. However, most of the
erring in the case of these writers arises from carelessness or
hurry, not from a lack of knowledge.</p>
<p>As a general rule it is in writing that the scholar is liable to
slip; in oral speech he seldom makes a blunder. In fact, there are
many people who are perfect masters of speech,—who never make
a blunder in conversation, yet who are ignorant of the very
principles of grammar and would not know how to write a sentence
correctly on paper. Such persons have been accustomed from infancy
to hear the language spoken correctly and so the use of the proper
words and forms becomes a second nature to them. A child can learn
what is right as easy as what is wrong and whatever impressions are
made on the mind when it is plastic will remain there. Even a
parrot can be taught the proper use of language. Repeat to a
parrot.—"Two and two <i>make</i> four" and it never will say
"two and two <i>makes</i> four."</p>
<p>In writing, however, it is different. Without a knowledge of the
fundamentals of grammar we may be able to speak correctly from
association with good speakers, but without such a knowledge we
cannot hope to write the language correctly. To write even a common
letter we must know the principles of construction, the
relationship of one word to another. Therefore, it is necessary for
everybody to understand at least the essentials of the grammar of
his own language.</p>
<center>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />