'We are weak and fallible'; we are of yesterday'; 'we are doomed to dissolution.' Here have we no continuing

city, but we seek one to come.'

"It is not unfrequent to have in one sentence, or in close proximity, both the editorial and the representative meaning, the effect being ambiguity and confusion. 'Let us [the author] now consider why we [humanity generally] overrate distant good.' In such a case the author should fall back upon the singular for himself, 'I will now consider-.' 'We [speaker] think we [himself and hearers together] should come to the conclusion.' Say either ‘I think,' or 'you would.'

"The following extract from Butler exemplifies a similar confusion: 'Suppose we [representative] are capable of happiness and of misery in degrees equally intense and extreme, yet we [representative] are capable of the latter for a much longer time, beyond all comparison. We [change of subject to a limited class] see men in the tortures of pain—. Such is our [back to representative] make that anything may become the instrument of pain and sorrow to us.' The 'we' at the commencement of the second sentence'We see men in the tortures' could be advantageously changed to 'you,' or the passive construction could be substituted; the remaining we's would then be consistently representative.

66

From the greater emphasis of singularity, energetic speakers and writers sometimes use 'I' as representative of mankind at large. Thus: 'The current impressions received through the senses are not voluntary in origin. What I see in walking is seen because I have an organ of vision.' The question of general moral obligation is forcibly stated by Paley in the individual form, 'Why am I obliged to keep my word?' It is sometimes well to con

fine the attention of the hearer or reader to his own relation to the matter under consideration, more especially in difficult or non-popular argument or exposition. The speaker, by using 'I,' does the action himself, or makes himself the example, the hearer being expected to put himself in the same position."-Bain's Composition Grammar. Pronouns of the Second Person. Anomalous usages have sprung up in connection with these pronouns. The plural form has almost wholly superseded the singular—a usage more than five centuries old.*

"The motive is courtesy. The singling out of one person for address is supposed to be a liberty or an excess of familiarity; and the effect is softened or diluted by the fiction of taking in others. If our address is uncomplimentary, the sting is lessened by the plural form; and if the reverse, the shock to modesty is not so great. This is a refinement that was unknown to the ancient languages. The orators of Greece delighted in the strong, pointed, personal appeal implied in the singular 'thou.' In modern German, 'thou' (Du) is the address of familiarity and intimacy; while the ordinary pronoun is the curiously indirect 'they' (Sie). On solemn occasions we may revert to 'thou.' Cato, in his meditative soliloquy on reading Plato's views on the immortality of the soul, before killing himself, says: Plato, thou reasonest well.' So in the Commandments, 'thou' addresses to each individual an unavoidable appeal: 'Thou shalt not―.' But our ordinary means of making the personal appeal is, ‘You, sir,' 'You, madam,' ' My Lord, you-,' etc.; we reserve 'thou' for the special case of addressing the Deity. The application of the motive of courtesy is here reversed; it would be

* "The use of the plural for the singular was established as early as the beginning of the fourteenth century."-Morris, p. 118, § 153.

irreverent to merge this vast personality in a promiscuous assemblage.

"You' is not unfrequently employed, like 'we,' as a representative pronoun. The action is represented with great vividness, when the person or persons addressed may be put forward as the performers: There is such an echo among the old ruins and vaults, that if you stamp a little louder than ordinary [ordinarily] you hear the sound repeated'; 'Some practice is required to see these animals in the thick forest, even when you hear them close by you.'

There should not be a mixture of thou' and 'you' in the same passage. Thus, Thackeray (Adventures of Philip): So, as thy sun rises, friend, over the humble house-tops round about your home, shall you wake many and many a day to duty and labor.' So, Cooper (WaterWitch): 'Thou hast both master and mistress? You have told us of the latter, but we would know something of the former. Who is thy master?' Shakespeare, Scott, and others might also be quoted.

"'Ye' and 'you' were at one time strictly distinguished as different cases; 'ye' was nominative, 'you' objective (dative or accusative). But the Elizabethan dramatists confounded the forms irredeemably; and 'you' has gradally ousted 'ye' from ordinary use. 'Ye' is restricted to the expression of strong feeling, and in this employment occurs chiefly in the poets."-Bain's Composition Grammar.

Proof. This word is much and very improperly used for evidence, which is only the medium of proof, proof being the effect of evidence. "What evidence have you to offer in proof of the truth of your statement?” See also EVIDENCE.

Propose-Purpose. Writers and speakers often fail to discriminate properly between the respective meanings

of these two verbs. Propose, correctly used, means, to put forward or to offer to be considered by others; hence, a proposal is a scheme or design offered for acceptance or consideration, a proposition. Purpose means, to attend, to design, to resolve; hence, a purpose is an intention, an aim, that that one sets before one's self. you purpose to do in the matter?" that we shall do in the matter?" purpose doing, or to do."

Examples: "What do "What do you propose "I will do" means I

"I purpose to write a history of England from the accession of King James the Second down to a time which [that] is within the memory of men still living."-Macaulay. It will be observed that Macaulay says, “I purpose to write," and not, "I purpose writing," using the verb in the infinitive rather than in the participial form.

"On which he purposed to mount one of his little guns."

"The various street railway companies that propose [purpose] to profit by the provisions," etc.-Evening Telegram.

"The three gentlemen named have hired the Bijou Opera House for four weeks, and propose [purpose] to put on English opera in particularly good style."—N. Y. Times.

"I don't propose [intend] to be imposed on." See INFINITIVE; also INTEND.

Proposition. This word is often used when proposal would be better, for the reason that proposal has but one meaning, and is shorter by one syllable. "He demonstrated the proposition of Euclid, and rejected the proposal of his friend."

Correctly used: "Unless we are going to dispute the fundamental proposition that two and two make four," etc. Prosaist. Dr. Fitz Edward Hall is of opinion that this

is a word we shall do well to encourage. It is used by good writers.

Proven. This form for the past participle of the verb to prove is said to be a Scotticism. It is not used by careful writers and speakers. The correct form is proved. “An irregular form, confined chiefly to law courts and documents."-Standard Dictionary.

Providing. The present participle of the verb to provide is sometimes improperly used for the conjunction provided, as in this sentence from the London Queen: "Society may be congratulated, . . . providing that," etc.

"Mr. Keene is now graciously permitted to send the trophy back to England providing [provided] he does so within thirty days from July 2d.”—N. Y. Herald.

"The vox populi is the vox Dei providing [provided] the voice of the people . . . can be heard.”—N. Y. Sun.

...

"This interesting young woman may accept gifts from married friends providing [provided] both husband and wife participate."-N. Y. Sun.

"He offered to provide a stable and supply the necessities of the company providing [provided] the control of the board should be turned over to him."-N. Y. Sun.

Provoke. See AGGRAVATE.

Punctuation. The importance of punctuation can not be overestimated; it not only helps to make plain the meaning of what one writes, but it may prevent one's being misconstrued. Though no two writers could be found that punctuate just alike, still in the main those that pay attention to the art put in their stops in essentially the same manner. The difference that punctuation may make in the meaning of language is well illustrated by the follow. ing anecdote;