It is seldom really necessary to use any one of these adverbs; but if they are used, they should not be used in the adjective form.

Procure. This is a word much used by people that strive to be fine. "Where did you get it?" with them is, "Where did you procure it?"

Profanity. The extent to which some men habitually interlard their talk with oaths is disgusting even to many who, on occasion, do not themselves hesitate to give expression to their feelings in oaths portly and unctuous. If these fellows could be made to know how offensive to decency they make themselves, they would, perhaps, be less profane.

Promise.

This word is sometimes very improperly used for assure; thus, “I promise you I was very much astonished."

"I shall get into Parliament this time, I promise [assure] you."

66

Promote. Should not be used when the thing advanced is evil. He argues that pernicious reading promotes crime and should be excluded from libraries."

Pronouns of the First Person. "The ordinary uses of 'I' and 'we,' as the singular and plural pronouns of the first person, would appear to be above all ambiguity, uncertainty, or dispute. Yet when we consider the force of the plural 'we,' we are met with a contradiction; for, as a rule, only one person can speak at the same time to the same audience. It is only by some exceptional arrangement, or some latitude or license of expression, that several pers ɔns can be conjoint speakers. For example, a plurality may sing together in chorus, and may join in the responses at church, or in the simultaneous repetition of the Lord's Prayer or the Creed. Again, one person may be the au

thorized spokesman in delivering a judgment or opinion held by a number of persons in common. Finally, in written compositions, the 'we' is not unsuitable, because a plurality of persons may append their names to a docu

ment.

“A speaker using ‘we' may speak for himself and one or more others; commonly he stands forward as the representative of a class, more or less comprehensive. 'As soon as my companion and I had entered the field, we saw a man coming toward us'; 'we like our new curate'; 'you do us poets the greatest injustice'; 'we must see to the efficiency of our forces.' The widest use of the pronoun will be mentioned presently.

"We' is used for 'I' in the decrees of persons in authority; as when King Lear says:

'Know that we have divided

In three our kingdom.'

By the fiction of plurality a veil of modesty is thrown over the assumption of vast superiority over human beings generally. Or, 'we' may be regarded as an official form whereby the speaker personally is magnified or enabled to rise to the dignity of the occasion.

"The editorial 'we' is to be understood on the same principle. An author using 'we' appears as if he were not alone, but sharing with other persons the responsibility of his views.

"This representative position is at its utmost stretch in the practice of using 'we' for human beings generally; as in discoursing on the laws of human nature. The preacher, the novelist, or the philosopher, in dwelling upon the peculiarity of our common constitution, being himself an example of what he is speaking of, associates the rest of mankind with him, and speaks collectively by means of ‘we.'

'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.

"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