so hardly walkyng by the weye, That with hir dorste rage or elles pleye (CHAUC. C. T. 3955.). Halfsax.: Næs per nan swa priste cniht under criste pat durste pene king fræine (Lazam. III. 13.). þat nan neoren swa kene pat heom neh comen (III. 33.). The analogy of these dependent sentences with similar ones with such is evident. Comp. p. 477. 3. Both in the literary and in conversational language the elliptical mode of expression is diffused, which arises through the suppression of the relative pronoun. This ellipsis, with which the relative subject and object, also the case to be construed with a preposition after it, may be omitted, has gained importantly in extent in the course of time. The omission of the relative subject appears less natural to modern grammarians.

There be some sports are painful (SHAKSP., Temp. 3, 1.). There is a devil haunts thee (I Henry IV. 2, 4.). The hate of those love not the king (Rich. II. 2, 2.). There's sir Moth, your brother, Is fallen into a fit of happyplex (BEN JONS., Magnetic Lady 3, 3.). I have a grief admits no cure (SOUTHERN, Oroon. 2, 1.). I know a charm shall make thee meek and tame (SHELLEY, Cenci 1, 3.). 'Tis faith disarms destruction (YOUNG, N. Th. 4, 726.). 'Tis Rome requires your tears (ADDIS., Cato 4, 4.). I know not what it is makes me so restless (LONGFELLOW I. 166.). 'Tis distance lends enchantment to the view (TH. CAMPELL, Pleas. of Hope 1.). I know that of him will hang him (SCOTT, Heart of Mid. Loth. 2, 6.). All he could, he graced him with her (SPENS., F. Qu. 6, 9, 39.). When I forethink the hard conditions Our states must undergo (BEN JONS., Catiline 1, 1.). I found the grapes I had hung up were perfectly dried (DE FOE, Rob. Rob. Crus. p. 85. Tauchn.). I'm not that abject wretch You think me (OTWAY, Venice Preserv. 1, 1.). And all our church can teach thee shall be taught (BYRON, Manfr. 3, 1. What hideous thought was that I had even now? (ib.) He thought of that sharp look, mother, I gave him yesterday (TENNYS. p. 131.). The minstrel . . might. . substitute corruptions for words he did not understand (SCOTT, Minstrelsy I. 21.). Her face seemed whiter than the white dress she wore (WARREN, Diary 2, 1.). And meet the liberty you oft have wish'd for BEN JONS., Catiline 1, 1.) He dispatched those three . . and all the rest he could come up with (DE FOE, Rob. Crus. p. 197.). The realm thou shouldst be parent to (TALFOURD, Ion 2, 3.). The race of him my arm hath dealt with (4, 2.). My lips seemed rigid as those I looked at (WARREN, Diary 2, 1.). See Prepositions Vol. II. p. 485.

Where a prepositional relation is wanting one may in part think of the omission of the conjunctional that, which may also be absent with actions of time. See p. 432. Off with the traitor's head, And rear it in the place your father's stands (SHAKSP., III Henry VI. 2, 6.). As well appeareth by the cause you come (Rich. II. 1, 1.). And all we can absolve thee shall be pardon'd (BYRON, Manfr. 3, 1.).

The omission of the relative pronoun perhaps proceeds from the neglect of the relative pronoun as a subject; at least this ellipsis did not extend further in the earliest times. The omission of the relative subject was also subsequently predominant. Old-Engl.: Herkne to my ron .. Of

a mody mon, Highte Maxumon (WRIGHT A. HALLIW., Rel. Ant. II. 119.). He smot a duyk hatte Currend (ALIS. 3243.). Dauid had doultres pre, were gyven to pre lordynges (LANGT. II. 249.). And had a wif was queint and fair (SEUYN SAGES 2205.). And sent yt to a lady gent, Was born in Cornewayle (SIR CLEGES 376.). Was there any with Campanyus dyd fight? (IPOMYDON 908) With him ther was dwellyng a pore scoler, Had lerned art (CHAUC., C. T. 3190.). Ther was no man for perel durst him touche (3930.). Ther is no wyn byreveth me my might (7641.). His childre angred hym amang, Caym slo Abelle was hym fulle dere (Town. M. p. 35.). Here is the chylde this werde hath wrought (Cov. MYST. p. 151.). Blyssyd be that body of the xal be bore (p. 76.). Went to an hul they cleputh Celion (ALIS. 6161.). Mony is the riche lond, Thou haste y-wonne into thyn hond (7492.). Thi waryson shalle thou have forthy By hym me boght (Town M. p 128.). Thus he gettes many fees of theyme he begyles (p. 192.). The leste drope 1 for the blod Myght clens the soyn (p. 261.). To one putte wes water inne (WRIGHT A. HALLIW., Rel. Ant. II. 273.). The place thou standes in there Forsoth, is halowd welle (Tows. M. p. 58.). This body let us take, And, wyth alle the worschepe we may, ley it in the grave (Cov. MYSт. p. 397.). In Halfsax. and Anglosax. we frequently meet with sentences without a subject, requiring the resumption of a preceding substantive. Halfsax.: per hefde Brutus enne mai haihte Turnus (LAZAM. I. 73.) [pe h. T. mod. text.]. An preost wes on leoden, Lazamon wes ihoten (I. 1.), and thus often with the supplementary quoting of proper names. (I. 24. III. 18. 27. 102. pa fond he per ane quene quecchen mid hafde, heor-lockedc wif, weop for hire wei-sis (III. 25.). Anglosax.: Mid heora cgningum, Radgota and Eallerica væron hâtene, Române burig âbræcon (BOETH. 1.). Se fäder hire sealde âne peovene Bala hâtte (GEN. 29, 29.). Geaf hit pâ his ân munac, Brihnôs väs gehâten (SAX. CHR. 963.). He ne sparode his âgenne broder Odo het (1087.). Férde fram his an castel, Belmunt het (1124. cf. MARC. 5, 22.); frequently likewise in the naming of proper names: Hêr on pisum geâre geför Alfred, väs on Baðum gerefa (SAX. CHR. 907.). This omission is peculiar to Middle-Highdutch. Diu gôtinne der wisheit ein vrouwe sî hiez Pallas (BARLAAM. 258, 31. ed. Pfeiffer). In einen walt, was wit (M. ALTSWERT 14, 27. ed. Holland and Keller) See Weinhold, Alemann. Gr. p. 295. Where in Anglosax. the relative be is wanting with the demonstrative, we find an attraction, as in: Svâ hvâ svâ gebyrgde päs on pam beáme geveóx (Cædм. 480.).

4. Sentences beginning with relative pronouns referred to the same substantive notion are coordinate adjective sentences. But sometimes instead of such a coordination of relative sentences the transition from the relative sentence into one not relative is chosen, in which the substantives is resumed by a personal (demonstrative) pronoun.

He whom next thyself, Of all the world I loved, and to him put The manage of my state (SHAKSP., Temp. 1, 2.). He held a pouncetbox, which ever and anon He gave his nose, and took't away again (I Henry IV. 1, 3.). There is a thing. . which thou hast often heard of, and it is known to many in our land by the name of pitch (2, 4.). One Almighty is, from whom All things proceed, and up to him return (MILT., P. L. 5, 469). The workers of iniquity, which speak peace to their neighbours, but mischief is in their hearts (Ps. 28 3.). He . . In whose eyes a vile person is contemned; but he honoureth them that fear the Lord (15, 4.). So too a substantive pronoun may be resumed by one not relative:

Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost (JOHN 1, 33.). The interchange of the single relative sentence with another is, however, different: Not Mexico could purchase kings a claim To scourge him, weariness his only blame (CowPER, p. 102.). This succession of sentences, in part called forth by the interchange of of the case with or without a prepositon, is in disfavour with the moderns, who prefer uniformity of the sentences. In former times it is found more frequently. Old-Engl.: For the grete love that he hadde to us, and we nevere deserved it to him (MAUNDEV. p 2.). Oure Lord that naylyd was on the rode, And betyn out was his bodyes blode, He is aresyn (Cov. MYST. p. 357.). Even the transformation of the relative sentence, to be prospectively attached, does not appear offensive. "Had I wist" is a thing it servys of noght (Town. M. p. 100.). In Anglosax. transitions of that sort are not uncommon: Se pe þeóf gefehʊ ôðde him mon gefangene âgyfð and he hine ponne âlate.. forgylde pone peof his vere (LEGG. InÆ 36.). Se pe frióne forstäle and he hyne bebycge.. svelte tô deade (LEGg. Æler. 15.). Ofer pone pe pu gesyhst nyder-stigendne Gast, and ofer hyne vunjende, pät ys se pe fullad on Hâlgum Gâste (JOH. 1, 33.). Comp. also: Manige Francisce and Englisce þær heora stafas and rice forluron pe hî mid unrihte begeáton ôde mid vôge par on lifedon (SAX. CHR. 1102.). 5. To adjectives also belong sentences with the adnominal pronouns which and what.

a. We have already mentioned the adnominal which p. 238. The substantives with which this pronoun appears are certainly always drawn in such a manner into the dependent sentence that the adjective sentence also yields the determination of the substantive contained in it. Yet which, in the cases cited, refers at the same time to a substantive or a sentence. An attraction of the substantives, when no reference of the relative takes place, rarely occurs in these sentences, which then attach themselves to the use of generalized pronouns.

Lead me which way you please (SHERID. KNOWLES, Virgin. 5, 1.). Whichever road you take, it will conduct you to town (WEBST. V. Whichever.).

This which, approaching what, rests upon while, whule. Old-Engl.: 3our abyndynge xal be with your maydenys ffye, Whyche time as ze wole have consolacion (Cov. MYST. p. 86.). Halfsax.: Whule riche mon per at-fleh in to castle he abeh (LAZAM. I. 222.). Wule mon swa wurs dude pene pe king hafde iboden, he wolde hine ifusen (II. 505.). Anglosax.: Svá hvylce daga ic pe deórne cige, gehŷr me (Ps. 137, 4). The Anglosaxon used sva hvyle or svá hvylc svâ in generalizing hvylc.

b. The adjective what chiefly stands with its substantive without reference backward, by exercising the attraction just mentioned upon the substantive to be determined by the dependent sentence. It likewise attaches itself originally to the use of the pronoun in generalizing the notion, and also appears adjectively in the amplified forms expressly denoting this generalization. But the pronoun thus includes, as it were, a demonstrative besides the relative.

He it was, whose guile deceiv'd The mother of mankind,

what time his pride Had cast him out from Heav'n ((MILT., P. L. 1, 34.). Full to the utmost measure of what bliss Human desires can seek or apprehend (5, 517.). There, my mistress used to rise what time she now lies down (SHERID. Knowles, Hunchb. 2, 1.). It is well known that the entertainer provides what fare he pleases (FIELD., T. Jon. 1, 1.). What fear he feels his gratitude inspires (CowPER, p. 44.). Let the reader pronounce what judgment of it he thinks fit (LEWES, G. I. 13). May I not employ what banker I please? (WARREN, Diary 2, 5.). Discarding Whatever original words or phrases time or fashion had (SCOTT, Minstrelsy I. 21.) Whatever honours be awarded to me, should be extended also to the Vicar of the Pope (BULW., Rienzi 2, 8.).

A further application of this use of what is the reference back to a substantive, remaining to be added to it in thought, so that what in fact approaches a purely relative pronoun, although it is essentially distinct from it in not immediately representing a substantive notion, but in being capable of being resolved into that (those) which, for which reason a predicate, referred to the identical object named, does not always appear in the dependent

sentence.

I hope there is not dissatisfied person but what is content (SHERID., Riv. 5, 2.). With joy beyond what victory bestows (COWPER p. 3.). I rather impute what you say to your secrecy, a very commendable quality, and what I am far from being angry with you for (FIELD., J. Andr. 1, 5.). A scene so different from what last night's journey had presaged (SCOTT, Guy Manner 4.). Neither were the congratulations paid to Sophia equal to what were conferred on Jones (FIELD., Tom. Jon.). But Winter has. yet brighter scenes, he boasts Splendours beyond what gorgeous Summer knows (BRYANT p. 24.). How comes this hair undone? Its wandering strings must be what blind me so (SHELLey, Cenci 3, 1.).

Old-Engl.: Thei mai zeven hem to what man thei wole (MAUNDEV. p. 179.). Sche may eve it to what man sche list (p. 288.). Every man takethe what part that him likethe (p. 179.). The that often occurring in the train of the substantive is in the same case as the that added to interrogative and relative words in general. See p. 516. Loke also thou scorne no mon, Yn what degré thou syst hym gon (HALLIW., Freemas. 757.). What tyme thei offere there, Alle here 3ardys in thin hond thou take (Cov. MYST. p. 94.). The substantive which is accompanied by what is very often resumed by a pronoun after it, which however, is not in the same relation as the demonstrative to the relative, but falls under the category of the reduplication of the subject or object, or under that of the anacolouthon, as occurrs also with the adjective sentence used substantively (See it). That was the lawe of Jewes That what womman were in avoutrye taken. . With stones men sholde hire strike (P. PLOUGHM. p. 232.). What man in synne doth alle wey scleppe, He xal gon to helle ful deppe (Cov. MYST. p. 41.). What man for his mys Doth penawns here, i-wys, His sowle he dothe wel leche (p. 203.). One sees how the intergative what and the generalizing what which has become adjective (quis, quicunque) pass at the same time into the narrower notion of is qui. Its isolation with reference to a preceding substantive

belongs to a subsequent age. It is assmilated to the treatment of the substantive what.

The Adjective Sentence used substantively.

The adjective sentence used substantively, which is introduced in Modern-English by the absolute pronouns who and what and their amplified forms, by which the generalized notion is expressly denoted, answers to a personal or neuter substantive notion which is to be taken up into the principal sentence as the subject, predicative complement, object or prepositional case. If this substantive sentence is not taken up in such wise into the construction, an anacalouthon as it were, arises, as it does frequently where the generalized sentence becomes a concessive one. Who and what, supported by no preceding substantive notion (absolute) are not to be considered mere relatives where a pronoun follows them which resumes the substantive notion. They are in the same case as wer and was with der and das after them in German, and give the sentence the character of a whole, complete in itself, which may therefore represent the different cases and be construed with preposititions. The case of the pronoun appearing in the sentence used substantively is ordinarily determined by this sentence. The pronouns originally interrogative have made the transition through the notion of generalization to that of demonstrative relatives generally.

1. The sentences with who, whoever, whosoever, formerly also whoso, represent the personal substantive notion in the singular and plural.

On

Who alone suffers, suffers most i'the mind (SHAKSP., Lear 3, 6.). Who cheapens life, abates the fear of death (YOUNG, N. Th. 4, 65.). Who sent thee there requires to here (BYRON, Maufr. 2, 4.). March who will (MARLOWE, Edw. II. 1, 1.). Let who will be President (MACAUL., Hist. of E. III. 113.). Who venerate themselves, the world despise (YOUNG, N. Th. II. 355.). There be who say That splendid lies are all the poet's praise (BYRON, Engl. Bards p. 327.). But whom thou hat'st I hate (MILT., P. L. 6, 734.). whom we send, The weight of all and our last hope relies (2, 415.). Go.. ethereal messenger, Sent from whoso sovran goodness I adore (8, 646.). Bliss is the same in subject or in king, In who obtain defence, or who defend (POPE, Essay on M. 4, 58.). Their love Lies in their purses; and whoso empties them, By so much fills their hearts with deadly hate (SHAKSP., Rich. II. 2, 2.). They. were but too ready to believe that whoever had incurred his displeasure had deserved it (MACAUL., Hist. of E. I. 33,). In defence of their common freedom every where, and against whosoever shall aspire to be prince (BULW., Rienzi 2, 1.). An attraction of the case by the principal sentence is seldom found. Vengeance is his or whose he sole appoints (MILT., P. L. 6, 808.). That the gates and bridges of the State should be under the control of whomsoever should be elected Chief Magistrate (BULW., Rienzi 2, 6.).