REGJMEN. 



;urm wlncli llic iiiliuilivc vtib (lioulil have. A lew examples 

 may illultiatt thcle polilioiis. If I widi to fignify, that I 

 rejoiced at a particular time, in recollefting tlie fight of a 

 friend, fome time having intervened between the fcnng and 

 the rejoicing., I ftiould exprefs inyfelf thus : " I rejoiced to 

 have Jeen my friend." 'Y\\t feeing, in this cafe, was evidently 

 antecedent to the rejoicing ; and therefore the verb which cx- 

 prefles the former, mull be in the perfect of the infinitive 

 mood. The fame meaning may be cxprefFed in a different 

 form: " I rejoiced that I hail fcen my friend;" or, " in 

 having fcen my Iricnd :" and the lludent may, in general, try 

 the propriety of x doubtful point of this nature, by con- 

 verting the phrafe into thefe two correfpondent forms of ex- 

 preffion. When it is convertible into both thefe equivalent 

 phrafes, its legitimacy mud be admitted. — If, on the con- 

 trary, I widi to fignify, that I rejoiced at the fight of my 

 friend, that my joy and his prefciice were contemporary, I 

 Ihould fay, " I rejoiced to fee my friend ;" or, in other 

 words, •' I rejoiced in feeing nij .nend." The correftnefs 

 of this form of the infinitive may alfo, in moft cafes, be 

 tried, by converting the phrafe into other phrafes of a fimi- 

 lar import. 



The fubjeft may be Itill further illuflrated, by additional 

 examples. In the fentcnce which follows, the verb is with 

 propriety put in the perfeft tenfe of the infinitive mood : 

 " It would have afforded me great pleafure, as often as I re- 

 flefted upon it, to have been the mefTenger of fuch intelli- 

 gence." As the meffage, in this inflance, was antecedent 

 to the pleafure, and not contemporary with it, the verb ex- 

 prefiive of the meflage muft denote that antecedence, by 

 being in the perfeft of the infinitive. If, on the contrary, 

 the meffage and the pleafure were referred to as contempo- 

 rary, the fubfequent verb would, with equal propriety, have 

 been put in the prefent of the infinitive : as, " it would 

 have afforded me great pleafure, to be the mefTenger of fuch 

 intelligence." In the former inltance, the phrafe in quef- 

 tion is equivalent to thefe words ; "■ if I had been the mef- 

 ienger ;" in the latter inftance, to this exprefiion ; " being 

 the mefTenger." 



To affert, as fome writers do, that verbs in the infinitive 

 mood have no tenfes, no relative diftinftions of prefent, pafl, 

 and future, is inconfiftent with jull grammatical views of the 

 fubjeft. That thefe verbs afTociate with verbs in all the 

 tenfes, is no proof of their having no peculiar time of their 

 own. Whatever period the governing verb affumes, whether 

 prefent, paft, or future, the governed verb in the infinitive 

 always refpefls that period, and its time is calculated from 

 it. Thus, the time of the infinitive may be before, after, 

 or the fame as, the time of the governing verb, according 

 as the thing fignified by the infinitive, is fuppofed to be be- 

 fore, after, or prefent with, the thing denoted by the go- 

 verning verb. It if, therefore, with great propriety, that 

 tenfes are affigned to verbs of the infinitive mood. The point 

 of time from which they are computed is of no confequence ; 

 fince prefent, paft, and future, are completely applicable to 

 them. 



It may not be improper to obfcrve, that though it is often 

 correft to ufe the perfeft of the infinitive after the govern- 

 ing verb, yet there are particular cafes, in which it would 

 be better to give the expreffion a different form. Thus, in- 

 ftead of faying, " I wifli to have written to him fooner," 

 " I then wifhed to have written to him fooner," " He will 

 one day wifh to have written fooner;" it would be more 

 perfpicuous and forcible, as well as more agreeable to the 

 praAice of good \vriters, to fay ; " I wifh that I had writ- 

 ten to him fooner," " I then wiflied that 1 had written to 



him fooner," " He will oi.e day wifli that lie had written 

 fooner." 



13. Participles have the fame government as the verbs 

 from which they are derived ; as, " I am weary with hearing 

 him," &c. It fhould be confidercd, however, that partt 

 ciples arc fometimes governed by the article ; for the prefent 

 participle, with the definite article the before it, becomes a 

 lubflantive, and muft have the prepofition of,ihi:r it. This 

 rule arifes from the nature and idiom of our language, and 

 from as plain a principle as any on wliich it is founded ; 

 namely, that a word which has the article before it, and tlie 

 poflefTiye prepofition t/aftcrit, muft be a noun ; and, if a 

 noun, it ought to follow the conltruflion of a noun, and not 

 to have the regimen of a verb. It is the participial termi- 

 nation of this fort of words that is apt to deceive us, and 

 make us treat them as if they were of an amphibious fpecies, 

 partly nouns and partly verbs. 



The fame obfcrvations, which have been made refpefting 

 the cffeil of the article and participle, appear to be appli- 

 cable to the pronoun and participle, when they are fimilarly 

 affociated. When a fubflantive is put abfolutely, and does 

 not agree with tEe following verb, it remains independent 

 on the participle, and is called the " cafe abfolute," or the 

 " nominative abfolute ;" but when the fubftantive preceding 

 the participle agrees with tlie fubfequent verb, it lofes its 

 abfolutenefs, and is hke every other nominative. 



14. Adverbs, though they have no government of cafe, 

 tenfe, &c. require an appropriate fituation in the fentence, 

 viz. for the moft part, before adjeftives, after verbs aftive 

 or neuter, and frequently between the auxiliary and the verb. 



15. Prepofitions govern the objeftive cafe. Under this 

 rule we may remark, that the prepofitions to and for are 

 often underftood, chiefly before the pronouns, as " give 

 me the book," for to me. Sec. The prepofition is often fepa- 

 rated from the relative which it governs ; as " whom will 

 you give it to ?" for " to whom will you give it ?" Some 

 writers feparate the prepofition from the noun or pronoun 

 which it governs, in order to conneft different prepofitions 

 with the fame word ; but this kind of conftruflion is always 

 inelegant, and fhould generally be avoided. Different re- 

 lations, and different fenfes, muft be expreffed by difTerent 

 prepofitions, though in conjunAion with the fame verb or 

 adjeiSive. Thus we fay, " to converfe nvith a perfon, upon 

 a fubjedl, in a iioufe. Sec." When prepofitions are fubjoined 

 to nouns, they are generally the fame that are fubjoined to 

 the verbs from which the nouns are derived. Many writers, 

 as Dr. Prieftley has obferved, affeft to fubjoin to any word 

 the prepofition with which it is compounded, or the idea 

 of which it implies, in order to point out the relation of the 

 words, in a more diftinft and definite manner, and to avoid 

 the more indeterminate prepofitions of and to .* but general 

 pra£lice, and the idiom of the Enghlh tongue, feem to op- 

 pofe the innovation. Thus many writers fay, " zverie from 

 a thing ;" but others ufe " averfe to it," which is more truly 

 Englifh : " Averfe to any advice," Swift. " The words 

 averfe aad aver/ion," fays Dr. Campbell, " are more pro- 

 perly conftrued with to than withyrom. The examples in 

 favour of the latter prepofition are beyond comparifon out- 

 numbered by thofe in favour of the former. The argument 

 from etymology is here of no value, being taken from the 

 ufe of another language. If, by the fame rule, we were to 

 regulate all nouns and verbs of Latin original, our prefent 

 fyntax would be overturned. It is more conformable to 

 Englifh analogy with to ; the words liifiiie and hatred, nearly 

 fynonimous, are thus conftrued." 



16. Conjuiiftions conneft the fame moods and tenfes of 



verbs. 



