2. Gorgias was a sophist, BUT not a philosopher; 3. Plato was a philosopher, BUT Hippias was a sophist.

The comparative adversative marks the equality or excess of the same attribute in different subjects; as, Burke was more studious THAN Sheridan; Byron was as great a poet as Canning was an orator. These relate to substances and their qualities.

The other sort of adversatives relate to events, and their causes or consequences. HARRIS applies to these latter the terms Adequate and Inadequate. Thus, Troy will be taken UNLESS the Palladium be preserved. Here the word unless implies that the preservation of the Palladium will be an adequate preventive of the capture of Troy. On the other hand, when we say, Troy will be taken ALTHOUGH Hector defend it, we intimate that Hector's defending it, though employed to prevent the capture, will be an inadequate preventive.

The above classification has been brought forward, not so much for the purpose of commending its accuracy as for exhibiting the fact that conjunctions show the different relations of sentences.

THE COMMON CLASSIFICATION.

§ 377. I. The COPULATIVE. And, as, both, because, even, for, if, that, then, since, seeing, so, but.

II. The DISJUNCTIVE. Although, but, either, neither, except, lest, or, nor, notwithstanding, provided, than, though, whereas, whether.

This classification, though it has no great logical accuracy to recommend it, is convenient, especially for young pupils. Some of these conjunctions can be arranged in pairs which are Correlative; as, As—as; as—so; if—then; either-or; neither-nor; whether— or; although or though—yet. The one conjunction in each couplet is correlative to the other.

THE OFFICE OF CONJUNCTIONS.

§ 378. It is a question among grammarians whether conjunctions connect words as well as sentences. HORNE TOOKE objected that there are cases in which the words commonly called conjunctions do not connect sentences, or show any relation between them. "You AND I AND Peter rode to London, is one sentence made up of three. Well! so far matters seem to go on very smoothly. It is, You rode, I rode, Peter rode. But now let us change the instance, and try some others, which are full as common. Two AND two make four; AB AND BC AND CA form a triangle; John AND Jane are a handsome couple. Are two four? Does AB form a triangle, BC form a triangle, CA form a triangle? Is John a couple? Is Jane a couple?"

This objection of Mr. ToOKE's seems to have induced LINDLEY MURRAY, after defining a conjunction as "a part of speech chiefly used to connect sentences," to add, "it sometimes connects only words."

Now, even if it could be shown that the word and, generally used as a conjunction, was occasionally used with a different force and effect, that circumstance would not make it less a conjunction when used conjunctionally. In the instances cited, however, by TooKE, the word and serves merely to distribute the whole into its parts, all which bear relation to the verb; and it is observable that, though the verb be not twice expressed, yet it is expressed differently from what it would have been had there been only a single nominative. We say "John is handsome," "Jane is handsome;" but we say "John and Jane are a handsome couple." In this particular the use of the conjunction varies the assertion, and thus does, in effect, combine different sentences; for though AB does not form a triangle, yet AB forms one part of a triangle, and BC forms another part, and CA the remaining part, and these parts are the whole. Since the first publication of this passage, I have been glad to see the view here taken confirmed by the authority of Dr. LATHAM. He says: "Although the statement that conjunctions connect, not words, but propositions, and that exclusively, is nearly coeval with grammar, it is not yet sufficiently believed or acted upon. What, I have frequently been asked, are we to do with such expressions as 'John and Thomas carry a sack to market;' 'three and three make six?' Surely this does not mean that John carries one sack, and Thomas another; that one three makes one sum of six, and a second three makes another sum of six.

"The answer to this lies in making the proper limitation to the predicates. It is not true that John and Thomas each carry a sack; but it is true that they each carry. It is not true that each three makes six, but it is true that each three makes (i. e., contributes to the making). As far, then, as the essential parts of the predicate are concerned, there are two propositions; and it is upon the essential parts only that a grammarian rests his definition of a conjunction."-Sir JOHN STODDART's Philosophy of Language, p. 200.

ORIGIN OF CONJUNCTIONS.

379. Conjunctions are generally derived from some other part of speech; frequently from verbs in the imperative mode. HORNE TOOKE, indeed, asserts that they all are traceable to some other part of speech. He says, "There is not such a thing as a conjunction in

any language which may not, by a skillful herald, be traced home to its own family and origin.'

AND, a principal copulative, has the force of add. I rode AND Peter walked I rode ADD Peter walked. Its origin is not well known.

EKE is another copulative, Anglo-Saxon eac, also, and eacan, to add to. It seems to be related to the Latin ac. In Danish the conjunction is og, and the verb ager. In Swedish the conjunction is och, and the verb oka. In Dutch the conjunction is ook, and the verb auchan. In Maso-Gothic the conjunction is auk, and the verb aukan. In English the conjunction is eke, from Anglo-Saxon eacan. But, on the other hand, the Latin ac differs from augeo; and the Greek av wants the characteristic of avşɛiv; and the Icelandic og differs from the verb auka.

ALSO, Anglo-Saxon eal, all, and swa, so, is a copulative with a still more specific meaning, inasmuch as it implies something of similitude with what went before.

IF, a suppositive or conditional conjunction, is in signification. equivalent to grant, being an imperative form from the Anglo-Saxon gifan, to give. It was anciently sometimes spelled gif and yif.

AN is also a conditional conjunction, from annan, to grant: “An you had any eye behind you, you might see more detraction at your heels than fortune before you."-SHAKSPEARE.

noun.

As, a causal conjunction (compare German als), is a contraction of also. This will account for its being sometimes used as a proSo is a relative to the antecedent as, or as is an antecedent to the relative that, which is also a pronoun, used as a conjunction. BECAUSE, a causal conjunction, was originally a combination of words, by and cause. Some of the older writers say by cause that. SINCE, also a causal, is from Anglo-Saxon sith or sithen-since. THEREFORE, a collective or illative conjunction, is a compound word, pronominal in one of its elements, and equivalent to the Latin Quam ob rem. It has two applications: first, when we state effect as a matter of fact; and, secondly, when we state it as a matter of reasoning; as, 1. "He is guilty, therefore he blushes;" 2. "He blushes, therefore he is guilty." In the first we state a fact, in the second a conclusion.

It is a circumstance which often occasions error and perplexity, that both these classes of conjunctions (the causal and the illative) denote not only cause and effect, but premiss and conclusion; e.g., If I say this ground is rich because the trees on it are flourishing, or, the trees are flourishing, and therefore the soil must be rich, I employ these conjunctions to denote premiss and conclusion; for it

is plain that the luxuriance of the trees is not the cause of the soil's fertility, but only the cause of my knowing it. If, again, I say the trees flourish because the ground is rich, or, the ground is rich, and therefore the trees flourish, I am using the very same conjunctions to denote the connection of cause and effect; for, in this case, the luxuriance of the trees being evident to the eye would hardly need to be proved, but might need to be accounted for.

WHEREFORE is analogous to therefore in origin and force.

THEN, an illative conjunction, is of pronominal origin. See § 308. It is also used as an adverb.

EITHER, NEITHER, OR, NOR, are simple disjunctives. They might be called alternatives, either and or being taken affirmatively, and neither and nor negatively. Either is in origin a pronoun. See § 314. Or is a contraction of other, which is also a pronoun. Neither and nor are simply either or or with a negative particle prefixed. Or is frequently followed by else, as nor is by yet.

ELSE, a simple conjunction, related to Anglo-Saxon elles, and the Latin alius.

THAN, pronominal in its origin, is reckoned by HARRIS among adversatives of comparison.

UNLESS, from Anglo-Saxon onlesan, to loose, called by HARRIS an adversative adequate, with reference to the prevention of an event, is called by CROMBIE an exceptive.

EXCEPT appears to have the force of unless in sentences like the following: "This realme is like to lacke bothe stuffe of artillery and of artificers of the same, except a provision of due remedy in this behalf be the more spedily founde."

THOUGH has already been mentioned as, according to the scheme of HARRIS, an inadequate adversative: it is sometimes called a concessive. It is the Anglo-Saxon peah. It is an antecedent to the relative conjunctions YET and STILL; e.g.:

"Though Birnam Wood be come to Dunsinane,
Yet will I try the last."-SHAKSPEARE.

"Though I do condemn report myself
As a mere sound, I still will be so tender
Of what concerns you in all points of honor,
That the immaculate whiteness of your form
Shall never be sullied."-MASSINGER.

THE TWO WAYS IN WHICH SENTENCES ARE CON

NECTED.

§ 380. Conjunctions show the relation of sentences one to another.

Two sentences are connected either by way of subordination or by way of co-ordination. They are connected in the way of subordination when one of them can be considered as standing in the place of a substantive, adjective, or adverb; as, “He reported that the king died" (=death of the king); "the foreigner who travels” (=traveling foreigner); "he was at work before the sun rose” (=early). Conjunctions, when used to connect subordinate sentences, may be called subordinative conjunctions.

Two sentences are, on the other hand, connected in the way of co-ordination when they are not thus dependent one upon another; as, "He is ill, and he has called a physician;" "he goes to France, but he can not speak French." Conjunctions which express a connection of this description may be called co-ordinative conjunctions. See § 537.

QUESTIONS UNDER CHAPTER IX.

1. Give the two definitions of a conjunction, and the derivation of the term.

2. What is the distinguishing characteristic of conjunctions?

3. Give HARRIS's classification of conjunctions, with examples of the several kinds.

4. Give the common classification, with instances of copulative, disjunctive, and correlative conjunctions.

5. State HORNE TOOKE's opinion of the office of conjunctions, with examples and illustrations.

6. Give MURRAY's definition of conjunctions.

7. Give Sir JOHN STODDART's opinion of the office of conjunctions, with examples and illustrations.

8. What is said of the origin of conjunctions?

9. In what two ways are sentences connected?

10. Give examples of a sentence connected in the way of subordination,

and of a sentence connected in the way of co-ordination.