Saul hath slain his thousands, and David his ten thousands.

XIII. Words placed out of their natural position in the sentence are often followed by a comma.

(1) The object is usually placed after the verb; when placed at the beginning of the sentence, it should be separated from the subject by a comma, unless the meaning would otherwise be perfectly clear and be readily seized.

The proportions of belief and of unbelief in the human mind in such cases, no human judgment can determine.

There is the same reason for inserting the comma in such cases as there is for inserting it after a long subject. Moreover, there is often need of some device to remove the ambiguities that are caused by inversion. In English, the meaning of words is so greatly determined by their position that, in altering the usual arrangement of a sentence, there is risk of being misunderstood. The danger of inserting the point in this case is that the object may be read with the words going before, and not with its own verb. If there is a possibility of this, the point should not be used.

Of course no point should be placed after the object in such a sentence as the following:--"One I love, and the other I hate."

(2) An adverbial phrase, that is a phrase used as an adverb, is usually placed after the verb; when it begins the sentence, a comma follows it unless it is very short.

From the ridge a little way to the east, one can easily trace the windings of the river.

In order to gain his point, he did not hesitate to use deception.

In ordinary circ.u.mstances I should have acted differently.

No point would be used in the above sentences, if the adverbial phrases occurred in their usual position.

He did not hesitate to use deception in order to gain his point.

Nor is any point used when, as often happens in such sentences, the verb precedes the subject.

Not very far from the foot of the mountain lies the village we hope to reach.

(3) An adjective phrase, that is a phrase used as an adjective, is usually placed immediately after the word which it qualifies; when it appears in any other place, a comma is often usefully placed before it.

A question was next put to the a.s.sembly, of supreme importance at such a moment.

The phrase "of supreme importance at such a moment" is to be taken along with "question"; the comma shows that it is not to be taken along with "a.s.sembly." There is here a further reason for the point, inasmuch as the phrase acquires from its position almost the importance of an independent statement. But, where the connexion between the adjective phrase and the substantive is very close, and where there is no risk of ambiguity, no point is to be used. "The morning was come of a mighty day"--such a sentence needs no point.

Observe also that co-ordinate adjective phrases take a comma before them, wherever they are placed. (See next rule.)

XIV. Adjective clauses and contracted adjective clauses are marked off by commas, if they are used parenthetically or co-ordinately; no point is used if they are used restrictively.[1]

The "Religio Laici," which borrows its t.i.tle from the "Religio Medici" of Browne, is almost the only work of Dryden which can be considered as a voluntary effusion.

That sentiment of homely benevolence was worth all the splendid sayings that are recorded of kings.

The advocates for this revolution, not satisfied with exaggerating the vices of their ancient government, strike at the fame of their country itself.

The ships bound on these voyages were not advertised.

Chapter VII., where we stopped reading, is full of interest.

The chapter where we stopped reading is full of interest.

We must explain this distinction at some length; for, on the one hand, it is hardly ever observed, and, on the other hand, almost every sentence that we write furnishes an example of it.

[Footnote 1: To distinguish the different kinds of adjective clauses, different names have been used: "co-ordinating" and "restrictive"

(Bain); "continuative" and "definitive," or "restrictive" (Mason).]

Examine the first sentence which we have quoted. It contains both a co-ordinate clause, "Which borrows its t.i.tle," &c., and a restrictive clause, "Which can be considered as a voluntary effusion." In distinguishing them we may begin by applying tests of almost a mechanical nature.

(_a_) The first clause may be thrown into the form of an independent statement; the second cannot. Thus: "The 'Religio Laici' borrows its t.i.tle from the 'Religio Medici' of Browne. It is almost the only work," &c.; or, "The 'Religio Laici' (it borrows its t.i.tle from the 'Religio Medici' of Browne) is almost the only work," &c. We cannot in the same way destroy the close connexion of the second clause with "the only work of Dryden."

(_b_) The first clause may be omitted and still leave a complete and intelligent sentence; if we were to omit the second clause, the sentence would cease to have any meaning.

These tests may be practically useful; but they are rough and by no means infallible. Let us see the reason for the distinction.

The name "Religio Laici" of itself tells us what thing is spoken about. It is the name of one thing, and only of one thing. The clause that follows informs us, indeed, of a fact concerning the poem; but the information is given purely as information, not in order to keep us from confounding this "Religio Laici" with some other "Religio Laici" that did not borrow its t.i.tle. "Work of Dryden," however, is the name of a cla.s.s, for Dryden wrote many works. Now the whole cla.s.s is not here in question; it must be limited, narrowed, or restricted, to one part of it, namely Dryden's voluntary effusions; and it is thus limited, narrowed, or restricted, by the relative clause "which can be considered as a voluntary effusion."

Take another example, where the name in both cases is that of a cla.s.s, and note the difference of meaning which results from different pointing:--"The houses in London which are badly built, ought to be pulled down." "The houses in London" expresses a cla.s.s of objects; the relative clause limits the name to a smaller cla.s.s, the badly built houses; and the meaning is, that houses of this smaller cla.s.s ought to be pulled down. Now insert the comma:--"The houses in London, which are badly built, ought to be pulled down." The cla.s.s is not narrowed; and the meaning is, that all houses in London, seeing they are badly built, ought to be pulled down.

The difference between the two kinds of relative clauses being understood, there will be no difficulty in applying the rule where an adjective clause is contracted. Compare the fourth example given under the rule with the following sentence:--"People not satisfied with their present condition, should strive to alter it." In this sentence "not satisfied" limits the general name "people"; the advice is given only to one section of the people: the dissatisfied as distinguished from the satisfied people.

So a single adjective may be used co-ordinately:

"What!" replied the Emperor, "you do not see it? It is my star, brilliant."

This is a case where a dash would be more expressive.

Note that the rule applies only where the adjunct immediately follows the substantive. If the adjunct is placed elsewhere, different considerations apply. See Rule XIII. (3).

Neither can any man marvel at the play of puppets, that goeth behind the curtain and adviseth well of the motion.

XV. Words in apposition are generally marked off by commas.

James Watt, the great improver of the steam-engine, died on the 25th of August, 1819.

But where the words in apposition are used in a limiting or distinguishing sense, the principle of Rule XIV. applies, and no point is used. Thus we should write "Burns, the poet," "d.i.c.kens, the novelist"; but, if we wished to distinguish them from another Burns and another d.i.c.kens, we should omit the comma.

It is of Pliny the naturalist, not of Pliny the letter-writer, that we are now speaking.

Again, where the general name precedes, we should in most cases use no point, for the special name will be restrictive: "the poet Burns,"

"the novelist d.i.c.kens."

There is, perhaps, not much authority for the consistent carrying out of this distinction; but it seems useful and logical. Some cases, such as "Paul the Apostle," "William the Conqueror," "Thomas the Rhymer,"

"Peter the Hermit," present no difficulty. The name and the descriptive t.i.tle are blended together, and form as distinctly one name as does "Roderick Random."

XVI. A conjunction marks a transition to something new--enforcing, qualifying, or explaining, what has gone before, and is therefore generally preceded by some point. The proper point before a conjunction is determined by many circ.u.mstances: among others, by the more or less close connexion of the things joined, by the number of words, and by the use of points for other purposes in the same sentence. To deal with the different conjunctions one by one, would involve a repet.i.tion of much that is said in other rules. For instance, _if_, _unless_, _though_, _for_, _because_, _since_, and the like, will be pointed in accordance with Rule IX. It will be well, however, to lay down separate rules for the pointing of the common conjunctions, _and_ and _or_.

1. _AND._--(a) Where "and" joins two single words, as a rule no point is used.