The-Grammar-of-English-Grammars-800

Prévia do material em texto

defines	a	"Bracket,	in	printing,"	as	Johnson	does	a	"Crotchet"	by	a	plural	noun:
"hooks;	thus,	[	]."	Again,	in	his	grammars,	Dr.	Webster	rather	confusedly	says:
"The	parenthesis	()	and	hooks	[]	include	a	remark	or	clause,	not	essential	to	the
sentence	in	construction."—Philosophical	Gram.,	p.	219;	Improved	Gram.,	p.
154.	But,	in	his	Dictionary,	he	forgets	both	the	hooks	and	the	parenthesis	that	are
here	spoken	of;	and,	with	still	worse	confusion	or	inaccuracy,	says:	"The
parenthesis	is	usually	included	in	hooks	or	curved	lines,	thus,	()."	Here	he	either
improperly	calls	these	regular	little	curves	"hooks,"	or	erroneously	suggests	that
both	the	hooks	and	the	curves	are	usual	and	appropriate	signs	of	"the
parenthesis."	In	Garner's	quarto	Dictionary,	the	French	word	Crochet,	as	used	by
printers,	is	translated,	"A	brace,	a	crotchet,	a	parenthesis;"	and	the	English	word
Crotchet	is	defined,	"The	mark	of	a	parenthesis,	in	printing,	thus	[	]."	But
Webster	defines	Crotchet,	"In	printing,	a	hook	including	words,	a	sentence	or	a
passage	distinguished	from	the	rest,	thus	[]."	This	again	is	both	ambiguous	and
otherwise	inaccurate.	It	conveys	no	clear	idea	of	what	a	crotchet	is.	One	hook
includes	nothing.	Therefore	Johnson	said:	"Hooks	in	which	words	are	included
[thus]."	But	if	each	of	the	hooks	is	a	crotchet,	as	Webster	suggests,	and	almost
every	body	supposes,	then	both	lexicographers	are	wrong	in	not	making	the
whole	expression	plural:	thus,	"Crotchets,	in	printing,	are	angular	hooks	usually
including	some	explanatory	words."	But	is	this	all	that	Webster	meant?	I	cannot
tell.	He	may	be	understood	as	saying	also,	that	a	Crotchet	is	"a	sentence	or	a
passage	distinguished	from	the	rest,	thus	[];"	and	doubtless	it	would	be	much
better	to	call	a	hint	thus	marked,	a	crotchet,	than	to	call	it	a	parenthesis,	as	some
have	done.	In	Parker	and	Fox's	Grammar,	and	also	in	Parker's	Aids	to	English
Composition,	the	term	Brackets	only	is	applied	to	these	angular	hooks;	and,
contrary	to	all	usage	of	other	authors,	so	far	as	I	know,	the	name	of	Crotchets	is
there	given	to	the	Curves.	And	then,	as	if	this	application	of	the	word	were
general,	and	its	propriety	indisputable,	the	pupil	is	simply	told:	"The	curved	lines
between	which	a	parenthesis	is	enclosed	are	called	Crotchets."—Gram.,	Part	III,
p.	30;	Aids,	p.	40.	"Called	Crotchets"	by	whom?	That	not	even	Mr.	Parker
himself	knows	them	by	that	name,	the	following	most	inaccurate	passage	is	a
proof:	"The	note	of	admiration	and	interrogation,	as	also	the	parenthesis,	the
bracket,	and	the	reference	marks,	[are	noted	in	the	margin]	in	the	same	manner
as	the	apostrophe."—Aids,	p.	314.	In	some	late	grammars,	(for	example,	Hazen's
and	Day's,)	the	parenthetic	curves	are	called	"the	Parentheses"	From	this	the
student	must	understand	that	it	always	takes	two	parentheses	to	make	one
parenthesis!	If	then	it	is	objectionable,	to	call	the	two	marks	"a	parenthesis,"	it	is
much	more	so,	to	call	each	of	them	by	that	name,	or	both	"the	parentheses."	And
since	Murray's	phrases	are	both	entirely	too	long	for	common	use,	what	better
name	can	be	given	them	than	this	very	simple	one,	the	Curves?
OBS.	9.—The	words	eroteme	and	ecphoneme,	which,	like	aposteme	and
philosopheme,	are	orderly	derivatives	from	Greek	roots[460],	I	have	ventured	to
suggest	as	fitter	names	for	the	two	marks	to	which	they	are	applied	as	above,
than	are	any	of	the	long	catalogue	which	other	grammarians,	each	choosing	for
himself	have	presented.	These	marks	have	not	unfrequently	been	called	"the
interrogation	and	the	exclamation;"	which	names	are	not	very	suitable,	because
they	have	other	uses	in	grammar.	According	to	Dr.	Blair,	as	well	as	L.	Murray
and	others,	interrogation	and	exclamation	are	"passionate	figures"	of	rhetoric,
and	oftentimes	also	plain	"unfigured"	expressions.	The	former	however	are
frequently	and	more	fitly	called	by	their	Greek	names	erotesis	and	ecphonesis,
terms	to	which	those	above	have	a	happy	correspondence.	By	Dr.	Webster	and
some	others,	all	interjections	are	called	"exclamations;"	and,	as	each	of	these	is
usually	followed	by	the	mark	of	emotion,	it	cannot	but	be	inconvenient	to	call
both	by	the	same	name.
OBS.	10.—For	things	so	common	as	the	marks	of	asking	and	exclaiming,	it	is
desirable	to	have	simple	and	appropriate	names,	or	at	least	some	settled	mode	of
denomination;	but,	it	is	remarkable,	that	Lindley	Murray,	in	mentioning	these
characters	six	times,	uses	six	different	modes	of	expression,	and	all	of	them
complex:	(1.)	"Notes	of	Interrogation	and	Exclamation."	(2.)	"The	point	of
Interrogation,?"—"The	point	of	Exclamation,!"	(3.)	"The	Interrogatory
Point."—"The	Exclamatory	Point."	(4.)	"A	note	of	interrogation,"—"The	note	of
exclamation."	(5.)	"The	interrogation	and	exclamation	points."	(6.)	"The	points
of	Interrogation	and	Exclamation."—Murray,	Flint,	Ingersoll,	Alden,	Pond.	With
much	better	taste,	some	writers	denote	them	uniformly	thus:	(7.)	"The	Note	of
Interrogation,"—"The	Note	of	Exclamation."—Churchill,	Hiley.	In	addition	to
these	names,	all	of	which	are	too	long,	there	may	be	cited	many	others,	though
none	that	are	unobjectionable:	(8.)	"The	Interrogative	sign,"—"The	Exclamatory
sign."—Peirce,	Hazen.	(9.)	"The	Mark	of	Interrogation,"—"The	Mark	of
Exclamation."—Ward,	Felton,	Hendrick.	(10.)	"The	Interrogative	point,"—"The
Exclamation	point."—T.	Smith,	Alger.	(11.)	"The	interrogation	point,"—"The
exclamation	point."—Webster,	St.	Quentin,	S.	Putnam.	(12.)	"A	Note	of
Interrogation,"—"A	Note	of	Admiration."—Coar,	Nutting.	(13.)	"The
Interrogative	point,"—"The	Note	of	Admiration,	or	of	vocation."—Bucke.	(14.)
"Interrogation	(?),"—"Admiration	(!)	or	Exclamation."—Lennie,	Bullions.	(15.)
"A	Point	of	Interrogation,"—"A	Point	of	Admiration	or
Exclamation."—Buchanan.	(16.)	"The	Interrogation	Point	(?),"—"The