line, what conjunction appears, or what is the difference between "horror" and "black despair." that the verb should be made plural?
"What black despair, what horror, fill his mind!"--Ib., ii, 183.
"What black despair, what horror fills his heart!"--Thomson.[395]
OBS. 2.--Besides the many examples which may justly come under the four exceptions above specified, there are several questionable but customary expressions, which have some appearance of being deviations from this rule, but which may perhaps be reasonably explained on the principle of ellipsis: as, "All work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy."--"Slow and steady often outtravels haste."--Dillwyn's Reflections, p. 23. "Little and often fills the purse."--Treasury of Knowledge, Part i, p. 446. "Fair and softly goes far." These maxims, by universal custom, lay claim to a singular verb; and, for my part, I know not how they can well be considered either real exceptions to the foregoing rule, or real inaccuracies under it; for, in most of them, the words connected are not nouns; and those which are so, may not be nominatives. And it is clear, that every exception must have some specific character by which it may be distinguished; else it destroys the rule, in stead of confirming it, as known exceptions are said to do. Murray appears to have thought the singular verb wrong; for, among his examples for parsing, he has, "Fair and softly go far," which instance is no more entitled to a plural verb than the rest. See his Octavo Gram., Vol. ii, p. 5. Why not suppose them all to be elliptical? Their meaning may be as follows: "To have all work and no play, makes Jack a dull boy."--"What is slow and steady, often outtravels haste."--"To put in little and often, fills the purse."--"What proceeds fair and softly, goes far." The following line from Shakspeare appears to be still more elliptical:
"Poor and content is rich, and rich enough."--Othello.
This may be supposed to mean, "He who is poor and content," &c. In the following sentence again, we may suppose an ellipsis of the phrase To have, at the beginning; though here, perhaps, to have pluralized the verb, would have been as well:
"One eye on death and one full fix'd on heaven, Becomes a mortal and immortal man."--Young.
OBS. 3.--The names of two persons are not unfrequently used jointly as the name of their story; in which sense, they must have a singular verb, if they have any; as, "Prior's Henry and Emma contains an other beautiful example."--Jamieson's Rhetoric, p. 179. I somewhat hesitate to call this an exception to the foregoing rule, because here too the phraseology may be supposed elliptical. The meaning is, "Prior's little poem, entitled, 'Henry and Emma,' contains," &c.;--or, "Prior's story of Henry and Emma contains," &c. And, if the first expression is only an abbreviation of one of these, the construction of the verb contains may be referred to Rule 14th. See Exception 1st to Rule 12th, and Obs. 2d on Rule 14th.
OBS. 4.--The conjunction and, by which alone we can with propriety connect different words to make them joint nominatives or joint antecedents, is sometimes suppressed and understood; but then its effect is the same, as if it were inserted; though a singular verb might sometimes be quite as proper in the same sentences, because it would merely imply a disjunctive conjunction or none at all: as, "The high breach of trust, the notorious corruption, are stated in the strongest terms."--Junius, Let. xx. "Envy, self-will, jealousy, pride, often reign there."--Abbott's Corner Stone, p. 111. (See Obs. 4th on Rule 12th.)
"Art, empire, earth itself, to change are doomed."--Beattie.
"Her heart, her mind, her love, is his alone."--Cowley.
In all the foregoing examples, a singular verb might have been used without impropriety; or the last, which is singular, might have been plural. But the following couplet evidently requires a plural verb, and is therefore correct as the poet wrote it; both because the latter noun is plural, and because the conjunction and is understood between the two. Yet a late grammarian, perceiving no difference between the joys of sense and the pleasure of reason, not only changes "lie" to "lies," but uses the perversion for a proof text, under a rule which refers the verb to the first noun only, and requires it to be singular. See Oliver B. Peirce's Gram., p. 250.
"Reason's whole pleasure, all the joys of sense.
Lie in three words--health, peace, and competence."
--Pope's Ess., Ep. iv, l. 80.
OBS. 5.--When the speaker changes his nominative to take a stronger expression, he commonly uses no conjunction; but, putting the verb in agreement with the noun which is next to it, he leaves the other to an implied concord with its proper form of the same verb: as, "The man whose designs, whose whole conduct, tends to reduce me to subjection, that man is at war with me, though not a blow has yet been given, nor a sword drawn."--Blair's Rhet., p. 265. "All Greece, all the barbarian world, is too narrow for this man's ambition."--Ibid. "This self-command, this exertion of reason in the midst of passion, has a wonderful effect both to please and to persuade."--Ib., p. 260. "In the mutual influence of body and soul, there is a wisdom, a wonderful wi
