(1) A collective noun is a number of individuals or things regarded as a whole; as, _cla.s.s regiment_. When the individuals or things are prominently brought forward, use a plural verb; as The cla.s.s _were_ distinguished for ability. When the idea of the whole as a unit is under consideration employ a singular verb; as The regiment _was_ in camp. (2) It is sometimes hard for the ordinary individual to distinguish the plural from the singular in foreign nouns, therefore, he should be careful in the selection of the verb. He should look up the word and be guided accordingly. "He was an _alumnus_ of Harvard." "They were _alumni_ of Harvard." (3) When a sentence with one verb has two or more subjects denoting different things, connected by _and_, the verb should be plural; as, "Snow and rain _are_ disagreeable." When the subjects denote the same thing and are connected by _or_ the verb should be singular; as, "The man or the woman is to blame." (4) When the same verb has more than one subject of different persons or numbers, it agrees with the most prominent in thought; as, "He, and not you, _is_ wrong."

"Whether he or I _am_ to be blamed."

(2) Never use the past participle for the past tense nor _vice versa_.

This mistake is a very common one. At every turn we hear "He done it" for "He did it." "The jar was broke" instead of broken. "He would have went"

for "He would have gone," etc.

(3) The use of the verbs _shall_ and _will_ is a rock upon which even the best speakers come to wreck. They are interchanged recklessly.

Their significance changes according as they are used with the first, second or third person. With the first person _shall_ is used in direct statement to express a simple future action; as, "I shall go to the city to-morrow." With the second and third persons _shall_ is used to express a determination; as, "You _shall_ go to the city to-morrow,"

"He _shall_ go to the city to-morrow."

With the first person _will_ is used in direct statement to express determination, as, "I will go to the city to-morrow." With the second and third persons _will_ is used to express simple future action; as, "You _will_ go to the city to-morrow," "He _will_ go to the city to-morrow."

A very old rule regarding the uses of _shall_ and _will_ is thus expressed in rhyme:

In the first person simply _shall_ foretells, In _will_ a threat or else a promise dwells.

_Shall_ in the second and third does threat, _Will_ simply then foretells the future feat.

(4) Take special care to distinguish between the nominative and objective case. The p.r.o.nouns are the only words which retain the ancient distinctive case ending for the objective. Remember that the objective case follows transitive verbs and prepositions. Don't say "The boy who I sent to see you," but "The boy whom I sent to see you." _Whom_ is here the object of the transitive verb sent. Don't say "She bowed to him and I" but "She bowed to him and me" since me is the objective case following the preposition _to_ understood. "Between you and I" is a very common expression. It should be "Between you and me" since _between_ is a preposition calling for the objective case.

(5) Be careful in the use of the relative p.r.o.nouns _who_, _which_ and _that_. Who refers only to persons; which only to things; as, "The boy who was drowned," "The umbrella which I lost." The relative _that_ may refer to both persons and things; as, "The man _that_ I saw." "The hat _that_ I bought."

(6) Don't use the superlative degree of the adjective for the comparative; as "He is the richest of the two" for "He is the richer of the two."

Other mistakes often made in this connection are (1) Using the double comparative and superlative; as, "These apples are much _more_ preferable."

"The most universal motive to business is gain." (2) Comparing objects which belong to dissimilar cla.s.ses; as "There is no nicer _life_ than a _teacher_." (3) Including objects in cla.s.s to which they do not belong; as, "The fairest of her daughters, Eve." (4) Excluding an object from a cla.s.s to which it does belong; as, "Caesar was braver than any ancient warrior."

(7) Don't use an adjective for an adverb or an adverb for an adjective.

Don't say, "He acted nice towards me" but "He acted nicely toward me,"

and instead of saying "She looked _beautifully_" say "She looked _beautiful_."

(8) Place the adverb as near as possible to the word it modifies. Instead of saying, "He walked to the door quickly," say "He walked quickly to the door."

(9) Not alone be careful to distinguish between the nominative and objective cases of the p.r.o.nouns, but try to avoid ambiguity in their use.

The amusing effect of disregarding the reference of p.r.o.nouns is well ill.u.s.trated by Burton in the following story of Billy Williams, a comic actor who thus narrates his experience in riding a horse owned by Hamblin, the manager:

"So down I goes to the stable with Tom Flynn, and told the man to put the saddle on him."

"On Tom Flynn?"

"No, on the horse. So after talking with Tom Flynn awhile I mounted him."

"What! mounted Tom Flynn?"

"No, the horse; and then I shook hands with him and rode off."

"Shook hands with the horse, Billy?"

"No, with Tom Flynn; and then I rode off up the Bowery, and who should I meet but Tom Hamblin; so I got off and told the boy to hold him by the head."

"What! hold Hamblin by the head?"

"No, the horse; and then we went and had a drink together."

"What! you and the horse?"

"No, _me_ and Hamblin; and after that I mounted him again and went out of town."

"What! mounted Hamblin again?"

"No, the horse; and when I got to Burnham, who should be there but Tom Flynn,--he'd taken another horse and rode out ahead of me; so I told the hostler to tie him up."

"Tie Tom Flynn up?"

"No, the horse; and we had a drink there."

"What! you and the horse?"

"No, me and Tom Flynn."

Finding his auditors by this time in a _horse_ laugh, Billy wound up with: "Now, look here,--every time I say horse, you say Hamblin, and every time I say Hamblin you say horse: I'll be hanged if I tell you any more about it."

SENTENCE CLa.s.sIFICATION

There are two great cla.s.ses of sentences according to the general principles upon which they are founded. These are termed the _loose_ and the _periodic_.

In the _loose_ sentence the main idea is put first, and then follow several facts in connection with it. Defoe is an author particularly noted for this kind of sentence. He starts out with a leading declaration to which he adds several attendant connections. For instance in the opening of the story of _Robinson Crusoe_ we read: "I was born in the year 1632 in the city of York, of a good family, though not of that country, my father being a foreigner of Bremen, who settled first at Hull; he got a good estate by merchandise, and leaving off his trade lived afterward at York, from whence he had married my mother, whose relations were named Robinson, a very good family in the country and from I was called Robinson Kreutznaer; but by the usual corruption of words in England, we are now called, nay, we call ourselves, and write our name Crusoe, and so my companions always called me."

In the periodic sentence the main idea comes last and is preceded by a series of relative introductions. This kind of sentence is often introduced by such words as _that_, _if_, _since_, _because_. The following is an example:

"That through his own folly and lack of circ.u.mspection he should have been reduced to such circ.u.mstances as to be forced to become a beggar on the streets, soliciting alms from those who had formerly been the recipients of his bounty, was a sore humiliation."

On account of its name many are liable to think the _loose_ sentence an undesirable form in good composition, but this should not be taken for granted. In many cases it is preferable to the periodic form.

As a general rule in speaking, as opposed to writing, the _loose_ form is to be preferred, inasmuch as when the periodic is employed in discourse the listeners are apt to forget the introductory clauses before the final issue is reached.

Both kinds are freely used in composition, but in speaking, the _loose_, which makes the direct statement at the beginning, should predominate.

As to the length of sentences much depends on the nature of the composition.

However the general rule may be laid down that short sentences are preferable to long ones. The tendency of the best writers of the present day is towards short, snappy, pithy sentences which rivet the attention of the reader. They adopt as their motto _multum in parvo_ (much in little) and endeavor to pack a great deal in small s.p.a.ce. Of course the extreme of brevity is to be avoided. Sentences can be too short, too jerky, too brittle to withstand the test of criticism. The long sentence has its place and a very important one. It is indispensable in argument and often is very necessary to description and also in introducing general principles which require elaboration. In employing the long sentence the inexperienced writer should not strain after the heavy, ponderous type. Johnson and Carlyle used such a type, but remember, an ordinary mortal cannot wield the sledge hammer of a giant. Johnson and Carlyle were intellectual giants and few can hope to stand on the same literary pedestal. The tyro in composition should never seek after the heavy style. The best of all authors in the English language for style is Addison. Macaulay says: "If you wish a style learned, but not pedantic, elegant but not ostentatious, simple yet refined, you must give your days and nights to the volumes of Joseph Addison." The simplicity, apart from the beauty of Addison's writings causes us to reiterate the literary command--"Never use a big word when a little one will convey the same or a similar meaning."

Macaulay himself is an elegant stylist to imitate. He is like a clear brook kissed by the noon-day sun in the shining bed of which you can see and count the beautiful white pebbles. Goldsmith is another writer whose simplicity of style charms.

The beginner should study these writers, make their works his _vade mec.u.m_, they have stood the test of time and there has been no improvement upon them yet, nor is there likely to be, for their writing is as perfect as it is possible to be in the English language.