Owen — Hybrid Parts of Speech. 155 
junct of the special type regarded as an adverb. This adverb, 
however, hardly shows a trace of the promised verbal’ function. 
To exhibit this, let (5) “The singing was plaintive” of page 
152 he replaced by another (&) “The singing rent hearts”—the 
expression of a lateral thought, which is to cooperate with the 
central thought expressed by (a) “Catherine sang a song,” in 
forming a larger centro-lateral total. 
In the usual way, then, let the singing of the one and the 
other judgment be once thought only. That is, of lateral thought 
the first term shall be also mid-term of the central thought. 
As in the case presented by the preceding section, lateral first 
term still is followed by lateral mid-term, which in turn is also 
followed by lateral last term. That is, the lateral thought is, 
so to speak, stretched out, becoming a lateral’ and a plus-quam 
lateral, much as if the elements of the centro-lateral total 
were 
(a) Catherine sang a song. 
( b ) Singing was rending (disruptive). 
(c) Rending affected hearts. 
Accordingly, combining (a) and (b) as indicated, I obtain 
“Catherine sang a song rending.” As, however, in this shape 
“rending” might be taken as an adjunct of either “Catherine” 
or “song,” the ending “ly” shall be added, to make it certain 
that the rending is adjunctive to the singing. 32 
Accordingly “Catherine sang a song rendingly.” 
The combination of this total with ( c ) is analogously ef¬ 
fected. The rending is once thought only; its element “ing,” 
though ambiguous, will succeed in suggesting the relation ex¬ 
pressed by “affected.” The presence of this relation will be 
somewhat emphasized by compounding “hearts” with “rend- 
32 Strictly, the recognition of ‘‘rending” as adjunctive to “singing” 
is the recognition that the latter is to the former in the relation of 
cause to effect (compare page 201) as if the statement were made that 
“singing occasioned rupture.” In linguistic practice, however, this re¬ 
lation is, in the use of adjuncts, not distinguished from the relation 
of action to its own actee or object, nor even from that of quality to 
its substance. E. g., “provocative” (or causing provocation) is ad- 
jectively ranked on a par with “carnivorous” (or eating meat), and 
both are classed with “blue” and “heavy.” 
11—S. & A. 
