32 Wisconsin Academy of 8cien,ces, Arts, and Letters. 



show this, I expand my illustration as follows: "Through the agency of 

 whom was the glass broken? By me." In this expression it appears 

 that "by", though unable alone to suggest intended meaning, succeeds 

 In accomplishing the expressional purpose through the reinstatement 

 of the idea initiatively named by "through the agency of." That is, 

 "By" may be said to illustrate the possibility of reinstatement by a 

 preposition. 



The reinstative use of the intei'jection is also essentially theoretical. 

 Its possibility may be illustrated as follows: The isolated "Ah!" sug- 

 gests many possible emotional S/tates. If the extra-verbal aid of vocal 

 tone, facial expression, etc., be excluded, "Ah" alone is unable to ex- 

 press a particular emotion. But by the aid of initiative words it may 

 do so. Thus "Brown alasl is dead. Ahl" The emotional status, ex- 

 pressed by "ah!" unaided, might be that of joy, or sorrow. As a re- 

 instater of what was meant by "alas!" the word "ah!" is entirely ade- 

 quate. Again, to your "Hallo!", meaning "I want your attention", I 

 answer "Aye!", meaning "You have my attention". That is, the in- 

 terjection al "Aye!", in part at least, reinstates what was expressed 

 initiatively by "Hallo!" 



The vicarious use of the conjunction is clearly sho\\Ti in 

 French by one of the uses of ''que." While no doubt this word 

 may often imply an ellipsis (as of ^'lors/' when standing for 

 '%rsque"), and while it may strictly even imply a new con- 

 struction (as vvdien taking the place of "si"),^ nevertheless the 

 grammars no doubt are right in claiming that, to the average 

 mind, the value of ''que'' is merely that of a repeater, that is, 

 a reinstative, bringing in a second time an idea initiatively ex- 

 pressed by another word. 



X. EXTENT OF VICARIOUS USAGE. 



Under this caption I invite a moment's attention first to several 

 strict!}" vicarious uses of words which Grammar has ranked as 

 personals. Of these the words "I" and "thou," as indicated later, 

 commonly stand directly for the person intended, without the aid 

 of any initiative presentation. In written or, say, epistolary 

 language they may, however, be regarded as vicarious. Thus, 

 in a letter which you have written, finding the word "thou," 

 I do not know whom it intends, unless I read the preliminary 

 "J. B. Smith, Dear Sir." It is possible, therefore, in this case 

 to rank your "thou" as vicarious and of the retrospective type. 



^Conf. "Si vous venez et (suppose) que je ne sois pas cliez moi." 



