Page images
PDF
EPUB

“To create a House of Lords was a less easy task. Democracy does not require the support of prescription. Monarchy has often stood without that support. But a patrician order is the work of time. Oliver found already existing a nobility, opulent, highly considered, and as popular with the commonalty as any nobility has ever been." (Macaulay, H. of E. i. 133–6.)

In the above passage several paragraphs are compressed, but without the omission of anything material to the construction. The writer starts with the use of the most simple and natural designation-Cromwell. The same subject is next denoted, during a number of minor predications, by the ordinary third personal pronoun—he, his, him. The mention of Monk's name necessitates the re-introduction of that of Cromwell, by way of antithesis; immediately after which, as the use of the pronoun "he" would have been ambiguous, the writer finely introduces a designation-"the great regicide "-which not only makes it plain of whom he is speaking, but at the same time supplies the ground of his statement. Thereupon follow, as before, several sentences in which the simple pronoun is used; and it is not till after mention of the full title assumed by Cromwell, that he employs the synonym "the Protector; while the name Cromwell is again used in comparing his system of parliamentary reform with that of" Mr. Pitt" (see above where "Cromwell" is mentioned in antithesis to " Monk"). Once more, when the writer is describing Cromwell as exercising a royal prerogative in the assembling of houses of legislature, he not inappropriately designates him by the name by which he would naturally have been known had he been a legitimate sovereign--" Oliver," rather than "Cromwell " or "the Protector."

وو

§ 29. This, that. The same general remarks apply to the use of the Demonstrative pronouns this, that; especially of the former. The following passage may serve as an example of the confusion which results from their careless use:

"A capital sentence was indicated by a line traced with an arrow across the portrait of the accused. In Tezcuco, where the king presided in the court, this, according to the national chronicler, was done with extraordinary parade." (Prescott, Mex. i. 26.)

Query, what was done? At a first glance, apparently, the "tracing of the arrow across the portrait of the accused." Yet the historian can hardly have meant to say

"this tracing of the arrow across the portrait of the accused was done with extraordinary parade." The sense is too trivial, and almost ridiculous. The delineation referred to would in all probability be the work of a scribe, and appears to have been simply a mode of recording the issue of the trial. Excluding this reference as inappropriate, the only other possible antecedents are:-(1) the capital sentence, and (2) the presiding of the king. Between these two it is perhaps impossible to decide with certainty: but as the writer appears to be referring to some one signal act, it is probable he meant to say, that "capital sentence was passed with extraordinary parade."

§ 30. The pronouns this . .. that are sometimes used as equivalent to "the latter" and "the former." Pope is fond of this way of speaking, and it harmonizes with his antithetic style. The following instances are from the Essay on Man:

"Two principles in human nature reign;
Self-love to urge, and reason, to restrain;

Nor this [reason] a good, nor that [self-love] a bad we call,
Each works its end, to move or govern all."

[ocr errors]

(ii. 53-56.)

"At best more watchful this [reason], but that [self-love] more strong."

"And reason raise o'er instinct as you can,

In this [instinct] 'tis God directs, in that [reason] 'tis man."

"Fortune her gifts may variously dispose,
And these be happy called, unhappy those;
And Heaven's just balance equal will appear,

(ib. 76.)

(iii. 97, 98.)

While those [the unhappy] are placed in hope, and these [the happy] in fear."

(iv. 67-70.)

But this is a way of speaking which often produces confusion; and if employed at all, it should be confined to verse. In the last of the examples from Pope, "those" is equivalent to "the latter," and "these" to "the former." Only a study of the poet's meaning enables us to pair pronoun and antecedent properly. The "unhappy" have the consolation of "hope," while the "happy" have the drawback of "fear."

§ 31. Besides the uncertainty of reference, this usage has an unpleasant air of stiffness and formality about it. It is certainly better in prose to say, "the one" and "the other "; or "the former" and "the latter"; or better

still-when there is any risk whatever of confusion or ambiguity-frankly to repeat the antecedent.

Such a paragraph as the following, for example, is open to objection:

"The chief difference between this fleet and that commanded by Sir C. Napier was, that whereas one division of the latter was composed chiefly of sailing line-of-battle ships, the former was entirely composed of vessels propelled by steam. The latter, too, was without floating batteries and mortar vessels, with which the former was provided. It was followed by a flotilla of gun-boats, while Sir C. Napier's fleet was attended by only one." (Moles. H. E. iii. 53.)

Here the danger of confusion is aggravated by the fact that the "former" fleet was actually despatched before the " latter"; and the reader, if not on his guard, may easily hesitate between the double senses of the words. The student will notice that in the last point of contrast the writer has judiciously repeated one of the Subjects"Sir Chas. Napier's fleet." It would have been well if confusion had been guarded against with equal care throughout. The paragraph might be re-written thus:

"The chief difference between this fleet and that commanded by Sir C. Napier was, that whereas one division of Sir C. Napier's fleet was composed entirely of sailing line-of-battle ships, the present fleet was entirely composed of vessels propelled by steam. Sir Charles's fleet, too, was without floating batteries and mortar vessels, with which this was provided. It was followed by a flotilla of gun-boats, while Sir C. Napier's fleet was attended by only one."

§ 32. The following paragraph may serve to show how, in such a case, repetition may positively add to the energy of a passage:

:-

"If he [Cromwell] already aspired to be himself the founder of a new dynasty, it was plain that Charles the First was a less formidable competitor than Charles the Second would be. At the moment of the death of Charles the First, the loyalty of every cavalier would be transferred unimpaired to Charles the Second. Charles the First was a

captive: Charles the Second would be at liberty. Charles the First was an object of suspicion and dislike to a large proportion of those who yet shuddered at the thought of slaying him: Charles the Second would excite all the interest which belongs to distressed youth and innocence." (Mac. H. E. i. 125.)

Let the reader try the effect of substituting the expression, "the former" and "the latter" for "Charles the First" and "Charles the Second." He will probably come

to the conclusion that the result is a loss not only of distinctness but of force. The words "former" and "latter" though grammatically adjectives are in such cases virtually pronouns, and require similar care in their use.

[ocr errors]

§ 32. The antithetical use of this . . that, seems to be foreign, and borrowed from that of the Latin hic ille. But in Latin the pronoun hic retains its proper force"this of ours-this of which or of whom I am speaking"; and thus there is less risk of confusion than in English, the mind naturally resting first upon the object which is nearest. As an English prose idiom it may be pronounced obsolete.

[ocr errors]

§ 33. That of. The phrase that of (see E. Gr. § 81) is often loosely and incorrectly employed. Its proper use is to obviate the necessity of repeating a Noun which has another Noun dependent upon it, and connected with it by "of": as,

66

"The castle of Stirling is such another as that of Edinburgh," i.e. "as the castle of Edinburgh." (Smollett.)

But the phrase is sometimes used when there is no Noun preceding, for it to represent, so that it becomes a mere expletive. This must be carefully avoided.

EXAMPLES FOR CRITICISM.

"What Mr. Burke considers as a reproach to the French Revolution (that of bringing it forward under a reign more mild than the preceding ones), is one of its highest honours." (Paine, Rights of Man, p. 22.)

"the

The use of the phrase has here degenerated into a sheer vulgarism. It is clear the writer does not mean reproach," i.e. the disgrace "of bringing it forward," &c.; for he protests against such a notion. The words "that of" have positively no noun at all to which they can refer; and appear to have been foisted in to give a sort of completeness to the sentence, without contributing to the sense. It would read better thus:

[ocr errors]

the fact that

is one of its highest

"What Mr. Burke considers as a reproach it was brought forward under a reign honours." [There is an additional awkwardness in the original form of the sentence cited, in that a Verbal noun or gerund is introduced without any Subject for it to be referred to. Neither is the use of the Plural "ones" to be approved. It would be better to repeat the Noun, ": "reigns."]

Again, take the following example-from an author whose style is always vigorous and mostly correct :

"Another mode of spending the leisure time is that of books." (Cobbett, Advice, p. 79.)

Replace the pronoun "that" by its antecedent, and the faulty structure of the sentence is at once apparent :— "Another mode of spending the leisure time is the mode of books."

This is doubly wrong. In the first place, "books" are material things, not "a mode" of "spending time." It is the "reading" of books that is a mode of spending time. Besides this, the words "that of" are superfluous. Why not say, simply

"Another mode of spending the leisure time is reading—” or thus:

"Another mode of spending the leisure time is afforded by books." or perhaps even :—

"Another mode of spending the leisure time is by books"?

§ 34. The following example is also open to exception, though the fault is less glaring than in those previously cited:

:

"Before we come to the Poetry, we will give an account of the Prose into which the tendencies of the earlier years of Elizabeth grew. The first is that of theology." (Primer of E. Lit. p. 66.)

To what Noun does the pronoun "that" refer? Its antecedent should be some plural word, including the entire series, the "first" number of which the writer proceeds to discuss. Is it then the word "tendencies "?Hardly so; for the writer could scarcely mean to say :—

"The first tendency is the tendency of theology:"

-especially as he proceeds to say

66

-a state

"For a long time it" [referring apparently to the same antecedent]" seemed a literature of pamphlets ment which clearly cannot refer to a 'tendency" of whatever kind. It must then refer to the noun 66 Prose." But in this way, too, the sentence appears to be faulty;

« PreviousContinue »