where the division of Syntax into that of the simple and that of the complex proposition is insisted on, they may, on a superficial view, appear to take undue prominence. In all grammars, however, they are important: although in some their importance is disguised. Both the Latin and the Greek philologues write largely upon the syntax of the Subjunctive Mood; and, it cannot be added, that what they thus write is either the easiest or the most fascinating portion of the works wherein it appears. It appertains, however, to the department of Mood, and, so doing, comes under the notice of the Verb. Yet where is there a Subjunctive Mood without either a conjunction or a Relative Pronoun? I do not say that this distribution of the functions of the Conjunctions is wrong. I only say that it disguises much of their character. That the Syntax of a certain Mood, whether Subjunctive or Conjunctive, depends, largely, upon Conjunctions is clear. § 622. Conjunctions connect Terms. Sometimes the terms these connect lie in one and the same proposition —as, all men are black or white. Sometimes they lie in different ones, as

The day is bright

because

The sun shines.

Of these two connections the former is so scarce that it needs only to be noticed. The latter is proportionally common. Practically speaking, it gives us ninty-nine hundredths of our Syntax. This enables us to treat Conjunctions as if they connected Propositions only. At any rate, nearly all our rules apply to such as do so.

§ 623. To know the number and nature of all possible Conjunctions we must know all the different ways in which two propositions can be related to one another. Thus, the sun may shine, and the heat of the weather may result from its so doing. In such a case the two pro

positions (1) the weather is hot and (2) the sun shines are linked together as cause and effect. But this union is double; inasmuch as we may infer the cause from the effect or the effect from the cause; saying, in the first

Again, of two propositions one may contain an objection to the other; as

The weather is warm to-day,

but

It will not be so to-morrow;

or, one proposition may announce an act, and the intention with which it was done: as

I do this

that

I may succeed.

There are several such relations, and several such links that connect them. The number, however, is, by no means, great; neither has it been uninvestigated. On the contrary, the Conjunctions have been classified, and named-those that connect causes and effects having one name, those that imply objections another-and so on.

EXAMPLES. I am pleased, because

This has happened;

but

I should have been disappointed,

if

It had fallen out otherwise.

and

I think

that,

Even now, some of my real

or

Supposed friends will be more surprised

than

Satisfied with the arrangement.

§ 624. Conjunctions which connect two or more Terms are called Copulative; as and.

Conjunctions which connect one of two Terms are called Disjunctive; as or. Disjunctives are either true Disjunctives or Subdisjunctives. A true Disjunctive separates things. When we say the sun or the moon is shining, we separate two different objects, one of which shines by day, the other by night. Subdisjunctives separate names. When we say Victoria, or the Queen of England, is our sovereign, we speak of the same object, under different names.

§ 625. The idea expressed by a Copulative may be strengthened and made clearer by the addition of the words each, both, all, or the like. Thus, we may say both sun and moon are shining, and Venus, Jupiter, and the Dogstar are all visible.

The idea expressed by a Disjunctive may be strengthened and made clearer by the addition of either. We may say, either, the sun or the moon, is shining.

The idea expressed by a Subdisjunctive may be strengthened and made clearer by the phrase in other words. We may say Queen Victoria, in other words, the Queen of England, &c.

In all these cases, the words both, &c., either, &c., and in other words, &c., are no true Conjunctions. They strengthen the Conjunction. The Conjunction, however, exists without them.

§ 626. Or and either have their corresponding Nega

tives-nor and neither. I will either come or send is right. So is I will neither come nor send. But I will

neither come or send is wrong. When a question is either asked or implied, whether takes the place of either. Words like either, &c., are generally treated as Conjunctions. This, however, they are not. The most that can be said of them is, that they form part of certain Conjunctional expressions. They never stand alone. Meanwhile, the words with which they correspond can, as a general rule, do without them. We say this or that, mine or his, quite as correctly as either this or that, neither mine nor his. If, then, they are not conjunctions, what are they? Both is decidedly a Pronoun. Either, however, neither and whether, seem to be both Pronouns and Adverbs. When either means one out of two, it is a Pronoun. When it means in the way of an alternative, it is an Adverb.

§ 627. Other Conjunctions are Causal, Illative, Final, and Conditional.

Causals give the cause of a given effect.

The day is warm

because

The sun shines.

Illatives give the effect of a given cause.

The sun shines,

therefore

The day is warm.

Finals give the object for which a given action is effected.

Than implies Comparison. But is Adversative.

§ 628. The Syntax of the Causals and Illatives re

quires no special notice. Not so, that of the (1) Copulatives, (2) Disjunctives, (3) Comparatives, (4) Adversatives; and, above all, the Conditionals.

§ 629. And, in such expressions as the sun and moon shine.-As a general rule, the Copulative Conjunctions give compendiums of the sort in question. Copulatives require the Plural, Disjunctives the Singular, number.

§ 630. The concord of persons.-A difficulty that occurs frequently in the Latin language is rare in English. In expressions like ego et ille, followed by a verb, there arises a question as to the person in which that verb shall be used. Is it to be in the first person in order to agree with ego, or in the third in order to agree with ille? For the sake of laying down a rule upon these and similar points, the classical grammarians arrange the persons (as they do the genders) according to their dignity, making the word agree with the most worthy. In respect to persons, the first is more worthy than the second, and the second more worthy than the third. Hence, they said

Ego et Balbus sustulimus manus.

Tu et Balbus sustulistis manus.

Now, in English, the plural form is the same for all three persons. Hence we say I and you are friends, you and I are friends, I and he are friends, &c., so that, for the practice of language, the question as to the relative dignity of the three persons is a matter of indifference. Nevertheless, it may occur even in English. Whenever two or more pronouns of different persons, and of the singular number, follow each other disjunc-, tively, the question of concord arises. I or you, you or he,—he or I. I believe that, in these cases, the rule is as follows:

1. Whenever the word either or neither precedes the pronouns, the verb is in the third person. Either