110 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters. 



To the distinction between relative clauses^ informational and 

 restrictive, a parallel is found in the distinction between re- 

 strictive and informational adjectives. The latter type is il- 

 lustrated in ^'My sick wife." In a monogamic country, you 

 recognize that the sickness of my wife is quite unnecessary to 

 her differentiation from others possibly my wives. My purpose 

 in mentioning her illness being therefore not restrictive, you, 

 crediting me with some purpose, assume that purpose to be in- 

 formational, ^ow, informational relative adjuncts, as pre- 

 viously indicated, are treated like independent information ; 

 that is, they are asserted. It may therefore be said that with 

 *^sick wife" there is inferred an asserted relation of object to 

 its own quality. That is, ^^sick wife" means ^/wife, who is sick," 

 in which an assertion is present. 



On the other hand in "Perfect men do not exist," which il- 

 lustrates the restrictive adjective, the case is very different. Re- 

 placing "Perfect" by "who are perfect," I find in the latter no 

 assertion. For, if there be one I am in the untenable position 

 of denying by "do not exist" what I affirm by "are."^ ISTow, 

 such an exploit is beyond the daring of even a veteran liar. If 

 I am flatly to contradict myself, you may expect me to put my 

 conflicting statements well apart in time and also in space. You 

 may be quite sure that I will not invite their comparison by 

 putting them in a single sentence. You may safely infer that 

 my "are" is not designed to be taken assertively.^ So also, in 

 "'Apples (which) are ripe," restrictively taken, there is no as- 

 sertion. 



^I am aware that the non-existence or unreality of "men," coupled even with 

 that of "perfection." is not in itself a bar to an existent relation between the 

 two. Thus 1 may say, analogously, "Centaurs antedate sea-serpents," asserting 

 their time relation, while ready to deny the existence of either "centaurs" or 

 "sea-serpents," and without any feeling of contradiction. But, in "perfect men do 

 not exist," it is not such unreality that I have in mind. I do not commit my- 

 self to the denial of either "men" or of "perfection," but me'rely to the denial 

 of the combination, "perfect men." And this combination I deny, either rely- 

 ing on or at least implying the absence of a combining element, namely, a par- 

 ticular relation. In "Perfect men do not exist" I do accordingly vouch for the 

 unreality of qualitative relation between "men" and "perfection." If now, in 

 "Men who are perfect," the "are" be assertively taken,_ I am obviously made to 

 contradict myself. 



2 Such use of assertive forms instead of the solely proper unassertives may be 

 charged in English on the general renunciation of the effort to distinguish by In- 

 dicative and subjunctive between assertive and unassertive thought. The sub- 

 junctive being practically lost, both indicative and subjunctive duties fall to 



