C H a P T E R Xxxviii
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CHAPTER XXXVIII. INTERROGATIVE PRONOUNS. FORM. 1. The interrogative pronouns are who, what, which and whether. Only who is declined: Nom. who, Gen. whose, Obj. whom. For the declension of whoever, whosoever and whoso, and for details about the use of these compounds see Ch. XLI. 2. Obs. I. The genitive of the word-group who else is formed in three ways: whose else, who else's, whose else's. The first form is grammatically the most correct, else being an adverb. It is also the oldest and is still preferred when no noun follows. Who else's is now the common form when a noun follows, and whose else's, like other cumulate forms, may be considered as vulgar. Compare JESPERSEN, Progress, § 233. i. MAR. IS this Mr. Hardcastle's house, child? — Miss HARD. Ay, sure. Whose else should it be? GOLDSMITH, She Stoops, IV, (212). ii. Yes, wAo else's daughter should I be? GOSSE AND ARCHER, transl. of Ibsen's Master Builder, 51.i) iii. 'His blankets?' asked Joe. — "WAose else's do you think?" replied the woman. DICK., Christm. Car.s, IV, 94. II. In Present Spoken English whom is often replaced by who, except in the rather uncommon construction when the pronoun is preceded by a preposition. Thus the literary Of whom are you speaking? answers to the familiar Who are you speaking of ? Numerous instances of this substitution of who for the strictly grammatical whom occur in SHAKESPEARE, and the practice sesms to have been prevalent in all stages of Modern English. See SWEET, N.E. Gr., § 1086; JESPERSEN, Progress, §171; STORM, Eng. Phil.2, 680; A.SCHMIDT, Shak. Lex., s. v.who; ELLINGER, Verm. Beitr., 51; FRANZ, Shak. Gram.2, § 333; ABBOT, Shak. Gram.3, § 274; FLUGEL, Diet., s.v. who, 2, b. HOR. My lord, I think 1 saw him yesternight. — HAM. Saw? who? Haml., I, 2, 190. Have you no guess wAo I mean? SHER., School for Scand., IV, 3, (412). WAo does it (sc. the letter) come from? GOLDSMITH, She Stoops >) JESPERSEIV,N ,(225) P r .o g r., § 233. INTERROGATIVE PRONOUNS. 945 Who should 1 tell it to? DICK., Barn. Rudge, Ch. Ill, 14a. Who does that bust put you In mind of? LYTTON, Night and Morn., 63. Who had we better ask first? Mrs. BELLOC LOWNDES, Jane Oglander, Ch. VII, 116. Compare: Good, yet remember whom thou hast aboard. Tempest, I, 1,20. Whom are you talking to? DICK., Cop., Ch. VII, 48a. If It were a kingdom, I know whom Mr. Warrington would make queen of it. THACK., Virg., Ch. XX, 205. Whom shall I ask to come to my help? Ib., Ch. XLVI, 473. The following anecdote cited by HODGSON (Errors8, 158) may find a place here: THACKERAY, having been requested to write in a lady's album, found, on scanning its contents, the subjoined lines: — "Ment Blanc is the monarch of mountains — | They crown'd him long ago; | But who they got to put it on | Nobody seems to know." Under these T. speedily wrote the following: — "A HUMBLE SUG GESTION: I know that Albert wrote in hurry; 1 To criticize I scarce presume; | But yet methinks that Lindley Murray, | Instead of who, had written whom." It may be added that in his numerous writings THACKERAY himself seems to use whom regularly when required by the grammar. Sometimes we find whom where the grammar would require who. Compare ELLINGER, Verm. Beitr., 51; STORM, Eng. Phil.2, 680; FLiiGEL, Diet., s.v. who, 2, a. Whom say the people that I am? Bible, Luke, IX, 18. Some one was close behind, 1 knew not whom. STEVENSON, Treas. Is land, Ch. XXI, 111. III. Instead of word-groups consisting of a preposition and the interro gative wAaf, earlier English also had pronominal adverbs, such as whereby, wherefore, etc. These have now well-nigh disappeared from the language. For a detailed discussion see a subsequent chapter. USE AND MEANING. 3. a) The nominative and objective cases of who are used substantively: Who told you this? Whom did you see? The nominative is also used predicatively: WAo is that gentleman ? b) The genitive whose is used: 1) conjointly: Whose son are you? CH. KINOSLEY, Westw. Hoi, Ch. I, 3A. 2) absolutely: Whose fault is it that I have not done so too? — wAose but the devil's and yours? SCOTT, Bride of Lam., Ch. V, 65. 3) predicatively: Whose was the subtle wit that induced the local coroner to appear in the Farnham Pageant? Westm. Gaz., No. 5376, 3o. Note a) The interrogative whose is, most probably, used as freely as the possessive pronouns (Ch. XXXIII, 7) to denote the objective relation. Unfortunately, practically no documentary evidence has turned up to substantiate this presumption. H. POUTSMA , A Grammar of Late Modern English. II. 60 946 CHAPTER XXXVIII, 3. Whose is this image and superscription? Bible, Matth., XXII, 20. fi) Instances of whose being replaced by its analytical equivalent of whom seem to be chiefly confined to the case that the noun modified expresses how one person is related or disposed to another, i. e. when of is a variant of to. See Ch. XXIX, 36. Also this point must unfortunately remain unsettled for the time being, owing to lack of illustrative material. Compare, however, Ch. XXXIX, 4, b. i. Can any of your readers tell me of whom Miss Fairbrother, the celebrated actress, was the daughter? Notes <£ Queries, 1897, April 3, 267. ii. Of whom is this portrait? BIRRELL. !) "Carries he a portrait say you?" — "Certainly." — "You know not who 'tis of'?" BRIDGES, Hum. of the Court, 11,2,1397. c) What is used: 1) substantively: What are you reading? 2) conjointly: WAaf book are you reading? 3) predicatively: IVAaf is he? is he a lawyer? SWEET, N. E. Gr., § 2119. "WAaf do you call this?'' said Joe. "Bed-curtains!" DICK., Christm. Car.5, IV, 93. For further examples see 5, b. Note a) What is sometimes found as part of a parasynthetic com pound. "And now," quoth Oxenham, "my merry men all, make up your minds what mannered men you be minded to be before you take your bounties." CH. KINOSLEY, Westw. Hoi, Ch. I, 3b. fi) The conjoint what can stand with no other adnominal modifier than an adjective. Such an adjective is mostly a positive, occasionally a comparative, and rarely a superlative. i. What great man found out this fundamental truth? ii. What greater sacrifice has ever been made by man ? iii. For the twentieth time he consulted his "Bradshaw" to see at what earliest hour Dr.'Grantly could arrive from Barchester. TROL., The Warden, Ch. XVI, 207. d) Which is used: 1) substantively: Yet both are near, and both are dear, I And which the dearest I cannot tell. TEN., The Victim, V. I don't know ivAi'cA is right, Peachum or Lockit. THACK., Pend., I, Ch. XXXI, 340. 2) conjointly: Which train shall we go by to-morrow? SWEET. 3) absolutely: Which is the shortest way? SWEET, N. E. Gr,, § 2120. 4) predicatively: Which is he, a military or a civil officer? e) Whether, now obsolete, is used: 1) substantively: One knows not whether most to admire, the men or the machines. Truth, No. 1800, 1685A. 2) conjointly: While thus the case in doubtful balance hung, | Unsurejo whether side it would incline. SPENSER. ^) 3) absolutely: Whether of them twain did the will of his father? Bible- Matth.NTH., ,Man. XXI,, 31§495. 2) MASON, Eng. Gram ^, § 155. INTERROGATIVE PRONOUNS. 947 4. Who, like the Dutch wie, is used in inquiries that are made to find out or establish the identity of fhe person(s) concerned in the action or state expressed by the predicate. Who broke that window? MASON, Eng. Grara.s* § 255. Who can have told you this puzzles me. Ib., § 250. Who's in fault? PINERO, Mid-Channel, 1,(48). Note the idiom in: i. With these admirable moralists it was who should fling the stone at poor Pen. THACK., Pend., H, Ch. XIII, 138. It was who should reach his hat, and who should bring his coat, and who should fetch his umbrella, and who should get his last kiss. (?), Wolves, 138. (In the same position we also find which: The three ladies all look up at the ceiling. They will reclaim the dear prodigal. It is which shall reclaim him most. THACK., Virg., Ch. XLV, 467.) ii. * Who should presently come up but the Right Hon. Edmund Preston. Id., Sam. Titm., Ch. Ill, 31. ** Whom but Maud should I meet | Last night? TEN., Maud, I, VI, II. 5. What is used: a) in questions analogous to the above: substantively, only regarding things, conjointly, also regarding persons. I. What are promises, what the hopes of mortals? SCOTT, Abbot, Ch. XXXVI, 408. What will they think of me? ib. WAaf has he done wrong? TROL., The Warden, Ch. XI, 143. ii. * WAaf time shall I wake you fellows? JEROME, Three Men in a Boat, Ch. IV, 47. WAaf animals are man's most dangerous enemies? ** WAaf king of England took part in the third Crusade? b) in inquiries that are made regarding the nature, qualities or properties either of persons or things. I. THES. WAaf are they that do play it? — PHIL. Hard-handed men that work in Athens here. Mids., V, 1, 71. Who, and wAaf are you? DICK., Christ. Car.&, 11, 34. I soon found out wAaf Mr. Tidd was, and what he was longing for. THACK., Sam. Titm., Ch. VH, 75. Some read (i. e. scanned) the King's face, some the Queen's, and all | Had marvel wAaf the maid might be, but most | Predoom'd her as unworthy.